Get involved: send your pictures and news by texting Hillingdon Times to 80360, or email us
Victory for waste plant campaigners: planners reject Yiewsley scheme
YEARS of protest and petitioning paid off for residents after plans for a recycling plant in Yiewsley were firmly rejected this week.
More than 100 campaigners gathered in the council chamber at Uxbridge Civic Centre on Tuesday to hear the planning application discussed.
The proposal, submitted by waste management company Powerday, was for an industrial waste recycling plant in Tavistock Road.
The plant would have the capacity to deal with 950,000 tonnes of waste per year, two-thirds of which would be transported via the high street.
Garden City Estate Residents Association (GCERA) was a driving force behind the campaign, collecting almost 4,000 signatures on nine petitions over a six-week period.
Each petition highlighted a different issue with the application, including constant noise and disruption, traffic congestion and financial loss for local businesses.
The first of the five petitioners who spoke against Powerday’s application was Jan Sweeting, secretary of GCERA, who said the development would make the area a “business and residential black-spot.”
Residents’ opposition was supported by MPs John Randall (Con, Uxbridge and South Ruislip) and John McDonnell (Lab, Hayes and Harlington), who were also present.
Adrian James, from planning consultants Barton Willmore, who spoke on behalf of Powerday, said they would reduce the 950,000-tonne capacity to 450,000 tonnes, in response to opposition from residents.
Mr James urged the committee to reconsider the application at a later date, taking into account these amendments, but his plea was rejected.
Cllr Dominic Gilham (Con, Yiewsley) was due to be on the planning committee but resigned his position so he could be more vocal in his opposition to the application.
“I wanted to make sure the views of local people were heard. I was proud to represent the people of Yiewsley and West Drayton and speak out against this application,” said Cllr Gilham.
“The committee refused an unwanted, unneeded and unwelcome application, not because of the overwhelming public outcry but purely on planning matters. This pleases me greatly as any appeal by the applicant now would be futile.”