The Friends of Parkwood Springs have issued a response sharing their views on the Viridor consultation on the Landfill restoration in March 2014. This is what they had to say:
It is welcome news that, despite the lower volumes of rubbish received, Viridor plan to comply with the existing planning permission and stop tipping at the end of 2018. Under that existing planning permission they must have the site restored by the end of 2020.
We are pleased to see that Viridor also say that they will provide an amenity that will be an asset to the local community, fitting in with the wider Parkwood Springs plans and with the wider environment.
We are also pleased to see the opening up in the first five years of restoration of an area that has not been tipped, (part of Area D)and some improvements at the same time to north-south footpaths. This includes moving the site boundary fence to improve the path running north-south at the back of the Standish estate (SHE162). (As part of this, concerns of local residents about one of the access-points may need to be addressed.)
Continuing concerns
We continue to be very concerned about the slow pace of opening up the rest of the site to the public.
We recognise and support the need to make sure that it is safe for the public to have access.
However, we note that the public consultation document says that in Phase 2 – ie some time after 5 years of restoration:- only after the majority of the gas and leachate infrastructure has been removed will Viridor provide access to the pathways and space.
We have visited the closed Beighton tip in Sheffield, and have seen there how the public have access on a managed basis to a network of excellent paths covering the whole site, even though gas and leachate infrastructures are in place and operational. (Methane gas is being collected and used for electricity generation there in just the same way as it is at the Parkwood Springs landfill site.)
Tipping stopped at Beighton in 1999, and capping took place between 2005 and 2008, Public access was allowed after that. In 2012 the main gas field was enclosed within field areas, with agricultural-style fences, which seems to provide adequate security. A network of pleasant paths, including a section of the Trans-Pennine Trail, now criss-crosses the site, even though gas collection, leachate treatment, and electricity generation continue to take place. This is all in an area with housing and estates nearby.
We recognise that no two landfill sites are identical. However we consider that a much more positive approach needs to be taken to access by the public.
We recognise that a programme of reviews every two years is proposed, to allow for possible public access to be considered. (We need to know who will be involved in these.) However, this is not sufficient on its own. There needs to be much more learning from experience of places such as Beighton. There, full access has been allowed within 4 years of the capping being completed – rather than the decades that Viridor seem to have in mind for Parkwood Springs.
Specifically we would strongly oppose any reference or presumption in the revised planning permission that access should only be allowed when gas and leachate infrastructure has been removed. The Beighton experience would provide no support for such a requirement.
Other concerns made by the Friends of Parkwood Springs
We are concerned whether sufficient attention has been paid to footpaths and cycle-paths. The key to the map shows primary and secondary routes but does not say who they are for. We would like to see separate paths for people on foot and with push-chairs and wheelchairs on the one hand, and cyclists on the other. (Provision for horses may also be needed.)
We note the contours and planting proposals. We support the use of native species, the provision of a wetland area and the plans for wetland planting. We also support the plans for an area of heathland.
We believe that there are fewer areas of tree-planting than in previous plans. We would like to know why. The restoration is a good opportunity to increase the number of trees in the area. After restoration the area needs to be interesting and attractive. Therefore we would like consideration to be given to more tree-planting, along the lines of earlier plans. The Friends Group hope to be kept in touch with planting developments (including the wetland) as restoration takes place.
We are concerned that sufficient attention is paid to the planning of surface water collection and disposal, as well as leachate.