Councillors in Derbyshire are standing by their concerns that Ineos shale gas plans for the village of Marsh Lane would have an unacceptable impact on local roads and highway safety.
A small group of councillors met for an emergency session in Matlock this afternoon to reconsider this reason for opposing the scheme when it goes to a public inquiry next month.
Officials had recommended this objection should be dropped as the county council prepares its case for the inquiry. The council said independent experts had not found sufficient evidence to support the case on highway grounds.
But the planning sub-committee, made up of three councillors, voted by two to one to maintain this reason for objection.
The council will also argue at the inquiry that the proposal would harm the open nature of the greenbelt and result in unacceptable night time noise.
The council said this afternoon’s meeting had been held at short notice to meet the deadlines of the inquiry.
Ineos wants to drill a 2,400m vertical well, using a 60m rig, on land off Bramleymoor Lane. The company has said the well would help to identify the best place to frack for shale gas. The current scheme does not include hydraulic fracturing.
- The public inquiry opens at 10am on Tuesday 19 June 2018 at the Market Hall, Assembly Rooms, Soresby Street, in Chesterfield. It is being held because Ineos appealed against what it described as unacceptable delays in deciding the application.
This will be fun! An official enquiry who will be fed a story that is not supported by those feeding it!
Don’t pity the poor soul who will have to try and argue the case. Short straw job, perhaps? At least they can take two Christmas cards off their list.
Heavens to betsy martin, how desperate are you to inject your….what is it?…..has a bitter aftertaste? Looks like sour grapes? A bit slimy to the touch? Smells like bitter almonds perhaps?
Well done the Derbyshire planning sub-committee for standing up for your constituents and being counted, we could only wish that more would be so forthright. You have our thanks for this decision.
Dear dear martin 66.66% against? Looks like that 2/3rds is against you after all?
Oh well, another header for that awkward corner anyway?
Have a great bank holiday weekend everyone, especially those council planning sub committee members who opposed the ineos railroading attempt at Bramleymoor Lane.
To stubborn to go back on what they said when they clearly had no legal ground for objection.
This stubbornness will end up costing the council should INEOS go for costs after they win.
hopefully lessons learned for next planning.
Obviously they know something you don’t? Wouldn’t that be unusual?
something they clearly don’t understand is the trouble they’ll get in financially should INEOS, and other companies with similar proposals, go for costs against them.
And why shouldn’t they go for costs? They caused serious delays and serious costs of lawyers etc.
‘Reconsider their reasons for rejection’ what an absolute joke. “let’s change our reason for refusal after we’ve already said one thing”
What is embarrassing is that all the industry has to offer any more, and to justify its bullying actions, is threats of financial attacks and abuse if the councillors should fail to roll over and play dead to frackmail.
No science, no logic, no reason, no common sense, just foot stamping temper tantrum threats from overbearing school playground bullies?
Such attitudes belong more in some dark black crass resurrected totalitarian dream that should have been put to rest seventy years ago, not in a planning committee council chamber in twenty first century England?
Now that! For a supposedly upstanding industry, is embarrassing!
It is hardly bullying behaviour. If anything the councils are being bullied and pressured into voting against these plans by their constituents.
Which is why these decisions should absolutely NOT be given to them. It is far above what they are capable of understanding.
Leave it to the professionals and not those that are mainly worried about minor housing extensions that would obstruct the amount of daylight their east facing property would receive.
Maybe this way the UK might actually progress at a decent speed and not snail’s pace.
There is only one thing standing between the people who live breath and eat and drink and spend their lives protecting their environment left, and that is the council and the protectors of this countries environment and wildlife,
No one else will do it,
Not the government who’s tax payer paid for job it is to do just that,
Not the industry who don’t give a damn for anything but profit and offshore tax haven bank accounts,
Not the banks who only care about their profit margins,
And it seems, not you either or the rest of the anti antis.
Not anyone else, but the environment protectors and protesters and the councils and councillors who will and do have the sheer bravery and courage to stand up and be counted for preserving the lives and the health and the peace and quiet of the peoples living space.
They get my vote and support any day of the week.
That’s all you get today, i am going to sit down after a long day and watch Copenhagen, its a dramatised play about Nils and Magdalene Bohr and Werner Heisenberg last meeting in the 1930’s occupied Denmark and talks of another mystery of mans crazy need to create technology that he has no understanding of the consequences that result from it?
I recommend it if you want to understand just how close we got to blowing ourselves off the face of the planet for mere political bullying gain and totalitarian insanity. It seems to me those times have returned.
Have a nice bank holiday weekend.
agree to disagree
have a nice holiday weekend:)
…capable of understanding… and giving a fair assessment of
Pretty straightforward really i.e. the local determination that “Ineos shale gas plans for the village of Marsh Lane would have an unacceptable impact on local roads and highway safety”. This will be about local officials applying national guidelines to support and maintain planning objectives according to their remit.