By Anna Whittaker, Local Democracy Reporter
The leader of Broxtowe Borough Council told an appeal hearing he has a “genuine fear” if plans for 240 new homes next to the site of an old tip go ahead on appeal.
Contentious plans for the new properties off Braemar Avenue, Eastwood, by housebuilder Gleeson Homes were unanimously refused in December 2022.
Council officers originally recommended the plans be approved, but Broxtowe Borough Council rejected them after 1,000 objections were received.
Councillors and residents have raised concerns over the site’s proximity to ‘Matkin’s Tip’, a former landfill site which closed in 1985.
A campaign group opposing the plans fear if the land is disturbed, it could relase toxicity from the landfill site into the air.
The developer appealed against the council’s decision to refuse the development.
Around 40 residents attended an appeal hearing by the Government agency the Planning Inspectorate on February 13 at Broxtowe Borough Council.
Cllr Milan Radulovic (Lab), leader of Broxtowe Borough Council, said during the hearing that the tip was a “real terrifying spectre”.
Documents show the land is contaminated with methane and C02, although one expert told the hearing the levels are insignificant.
The applicant says the homes would not actually be built on top of the former tip site, but the residents argue that the gases could migrate if the land is disturbed.
As part of the plans, Gleeson also said it would fit a “gas resistant membrane” and floor ventilation to all homes to mitigate any gas which could emanate from the former landfill site.
At the hearing, the council argued that the land poses “a risk to human health and safety” and argued there is “insufficient evidence that the mitigation measures are sufficient”.
The developer argued that although risks are present, they will be mitigated and the development will not disturb the waste on the land.
Planning inspector Mel Middleton will decide on the appeal in the coming weeks.
Cllr Radulovic told the hearing: “Nobody knows the full extent of the tip site.
“I have a genuine fear about what was put into that tip. If this goes ahead it is likely to uncover all the fears we had.
“We’re expressing our concern that this tip is a real terrifying spectre which lies in our background.
“We are totally concerned about what will be concerned if this goes ahead.”
Darren Henry, MP for Broxtowe, said: “There is an ever-growing housing crisis in this country that needs addressing. For too long we have not built enough houses to keep up with demand.
“I have always supported developments which will aid our communities.
“However, there is an unacceptable risk of harm to the public. While the full extent of the contaminated land remains unknown, the risk to health and safety cannot be considered zero.
“I would argue that any risk whatsoever should be considered unacceptable.”
Ron Jones, resident and Greasley parish councillor, added: “There are very real anxieties for their future health and the protection of their homes.
“Who will take ultimate responsibility if their fears are realised?”
Planning inspector Mr Middleton responded: “Maybe your fears are ill-founded.”
Paul Eastwood, Regional Director for land quality at Hydrock, a firm which has undertaken investigations into the land, said: “The presence of methane and C02 is not uncommon at all in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.
“The ground gases are potentially hazardous there is no disputing that.
“It is extremely common in the UK for ground gas measures to be installed in properties nowadays.
“There are concentrations of gases in the ground still, but not volumes.
“It will continue to degrade but it has gone way past its peak production for gases. My view is the levels are insignificant from the point of view of the development of the site.”
Richard Sagar, Solicitor representing Gleeson Homes, requested for Broxtowe Borough Council to pay its costs in full for what it said was “unreasonable behaviour” in rejecting the original planning application.
“It remains the case that there is no evidence, none at all, other than the vague assertion of a level of risk that nobody can pin down”, he said.
He added: “The application is consistent with the development plan. It was supported by technical information and received no objections from statutory consultees at the time of determination.
“The application received a recommendation for approval by the professional officers of the council, none of whom have been in attendance or spoken.
“The council refused the application for one reason, related to the potential effects of the adjacent landfill site and the adequate mitigation.
“The refusal was in disagreement with the council’s own technical officers qualified in this subject area.
“The council has failed to produce evidence to substantiate the reasons for refusal.”
Kevin Leigh, acting for the council, said: “Everyone in the audience from the MP to residents, to the leader of the council, fear the consequences. That is a very strong word.
“If you don’t need to take a risk that might impact on human life, then don’t take it.
“Housing is always lovely but that’s not the gold star. Planning is about the balance of humans, nature and the environment.
“In this particular case, the risk is realistic, it is not fanciful.
“What we did [in rejecting the original application] was completely reasonable. This is a badly made costs submission.”
A decision on the appeal will now be published by the Planning Inspectorate in the coming weeks.
