A call has been made by Pete Wishart, MP for Perth and North Perthshire, for a company behind a £100 million waste incinerator to “pack their bags and go.”
Oxfordshire firm Grundon Waste Management were granted outline planning permission to build a waste-to-energy plant on the site at Shore Road, Perth, in 2006.
However, over the coming months it became evident the relevant permission had been granted without knowledge of senior management or councillors.
It was discovered outline planning permission had been passed in error by council planners and has never been rescinded. It has been estimated that to do so could cost hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The original plans would have seen an 80-foot chimney dominate the Perth skyline.
The council then rejected the reserved matters application and the Scottish Government similarly threw it out in terms which left little room for appeal in November.
Grundon recently submitted revised plans which have reduced the height of the chimney stack and a new advanced plasma power gasification technology, rather than the burning of waste.
The plans have raised the ire of some residents, with Bridgend, Kinnoull and Gannochy Community Council slamming the proposal.’They are not wanted’On Thursday Mr Wishart accused the company of trying to make a “silk purse out of a sow’s ear” and urged them to “pack their bags and go.”
“Grundon have to realise that the public opposition to their plans is not a question of aesthetics,” he told The Courier.
“They will not win us over by lowering the height of the stacks or altering the change of the buildings.”
He added, “As for Grundon themselves, I am appealing to them one more time to accept that this is the wrong scheme, in the wrong place and they are not wanted in Perth.
“It is time for them to recognise reality, pack their bags and go.”
Mr Wishart said, “They will not win any friends by trying to foist a development onto the people of Perth that is so manifestly not wanted.
“We need to make sure that the opposition to their plans is properly registered and I want everyone out there to be very aware that signing a petition is not enough.”
He added,”According to planning rules a petition against any proposal is only taken as one objection, regardless of how many signatures it might have.
“Petitions have their place as a campaigning tool but to have this application rejected we need the opposition to be heard in a meaningful way.
“We need to get individual letters of objection in to the council on this issue and I urge everyone who is concerned about these plans to get their representations in while there is still time.”‘Not an argument we can win’A Grundon spokeswoman said that the company do not “get involved” in responding to comments from politicians, whether from a local or national level.
“We have a difficult agenda and do not get involved in this,” she said.
“It is not an argument we can win.
“Our policy is to present the facts and let other people do the emotion.”
Robert Nicholson, Grundon’s director of estates, said the revised proposals will fit comfortably within the setting of the site and will not result in any unacceptable landscape and visual impact.
He claims that the designed development poses no significant adverse impacts on environmental resources or the local communities.
Mr Nicholson said, “We have gone out of our way to design a plant with minimal visual impact.
“In response to feedback on the previous application, the main change is the choice of the two-stage, advanced gasification technology for the 90,000 tonnes a year plant.”
Photo used under Creative Commons licence courtesy of Flickr user eastleighbusman.