wpaa8fe3e8.png
wp503ba0e6.png
wpf37b07ee.png
wp06400bc3.png
wp1dac3a43.png
wp6573f861.png
wp82d5a483.png
wpc4e870f5.png
wpaa8fe3e8.png

Copywright © 2003 West Hallam Environmental Group [WHEG].  All rights reserved.

wp74b4f359.gif
wp6981b5c7.png
wp12cd3617_0f.jpg
wpfe218011.png
wp45a82364.png
wp1df5c364.png

The decision to allow the appeal for opencast mining at Lodge House can only be viewed as an appalling betrayal of local communities.  This decision is all the more disturbing considering that the final judgement rested with the Secretary of State for the same Labour Government which introduced the current planning framework.  This framework was designed to prevent areas such as ours from more environmental damage at the hands of opencast mining.

 

The travesty of this decision is all too apparent when the fundamental facts of the application are considered against this planning framework.  Opencast mining at Lodge House is opposed by the vast majority of local residents, all affected Parish Councils, Borough Councils, County Council and MPs.  It proposes mining a green field, Green Belt site, adjacent to and surrounding parts of a country park visited by 500,000 people per year – an opencast constraint area given to local residents as compensation for previous mining and not as an excuse for more.  It is surrounded by the local communities who oppose it and is in an area that has a 65 year history of previous cumulative environmental damage from opencast mining schemes.  In short, it ticks all the boxes that would mean that it should not go ahead.

 

The magnitude of the precedent set by this decision cannot therefore be underestimated; it now means that there is no area with shallow coal reserves secure from potential opencast mining.It should also be noted that UK Coal would not enter into an agreement not to extend the mining at Lodge House to the larger surrounding Mead site.

 

This and other recent decisions elsewhere in the UK demonstrate that the current planning guidance, meant to protect environment and communities, has clearly been emasculated behind closed doors.

 

On behalf of local residents and the wider community and, after inspecting the ruling, we will consider what course of action is now available to contest the decision - as has been exercised elsewhere.

 

 

 

wpfc37918f.png
wp09d46bc6.png