Shore Road Incinerator plans to be put back

Mar 16 2010 by Gordon Bannerman, Perthshire Advertiser Tuesday

REVOCATION of outline planning consent for a controversial £100 million Shore Road incinerator is set to be put on the back burner.

Instead, councillors are being advised to put their faith in the appeals process to see off proposals for the vast industrial complex planned between the South Inch parklands and the River Tay.

Long-time incinerator opponent and ‘Revoke the Smoke’ supporter MP Pete Wishart yesterday insisted the council could still resort to Perth Common Good Fund ownership rights to see off a “polluting, smoke-belching monstrosity”.

Persuaded by the local authority stance, the MP said: “The council are quite right to see the incinerator off without having to make excessive payments to the developer.

“I’m sure everybody in Perthshire would rather see this money going on council services.”

But Brian Raine, of Bridgend Gannochy and Kinnoull Community Council, insisted: “We will not abandon our belief that revocation is the safest route.

“It is a great disappointment to learn that the officers have now concluded that the case for revocation is not strong and that their recommendation to the councillors will be to rely on defeating the appeal and using landlord's rights, with revocation as a measure of the last resort.”

Yesterday, it emerged that Grundon’s energy from waste plant plans will go under the spotlight again at a full meeting of Perth and Kinross Council on March 24.

With Grundon already lodging an appeal against the refusal of reserved matters in November, including the towering 80-metre chimney stack which triggered the PA's ‘Revoke the Smoke’ campaign, objectors have been urging the council to tug the original outline consent – even if it risks a six-figure claim for compensation from the English-based developers.

But a PKC report released yesterday maintains revocation is not considered “the correct way forward”.

Instead, senior officials are confident the local authority holds a winning hand in defending their stance at appeal.

It is claimed the council could prevent detrimental development without resorting to removing the 1996 outline consent which has paved the way for unprecedented public hostility.

Fight

Confirming the timetable, PKC’s depute chief executive and environment director Jim Irons said: “After careful consideration we are recommending that this is not the time to seek revocation.

“We are confident that we have strong grounds on which to fight the reserved matters appeal. We also have landlord rights over the land, which puts us in a strong position.

“We believe the decision taken by the development control committee in November, and the reasons for that decision, are sound.

“It is only right that we now stand by that decision, as we believe it is correct. We are confident that decision will be vindicated.

“It should also be noted that the outline consent has a limited life. Any further reserved matters applications would need to be submitted before June 14, 2010, or within six months of the dismissal of an appeal.

“If they are not, the outline consent will expire and will no longer exist.

“On the other hand, the final decision on any proposed application for revocation would be taken out of the council’s control and might result in the possible payment of compensation.

“Given our strong position, it is not expedient to expose the council to a compensation payment for a development that may never go ahead.”

Crucially, the council has a landlord interest in around half the Shore Road site, which is leased to Holden Environmental Limited.

The report cautions that any application to revoke outline consent would be directed to Scottish Ministers for confirmation.