don_71

UK Environment Agency - "Composting and potential health effects from bioaerosols". There are other EA docs relating to Open and closed composting operations both of which reiterate the 250m. Studies on the problems of industrial composting since 2008 has determined this 250m and other standards depending on the process used e.g. HSE, Sheffield University, German authorties, Parlimentary review, National Aspergillosis Centre, etc. Note: Germany now follows an increased standard of 300-500m. Again, I don't believe the proposed former Norton Aerodrome site is suitable for this activity particularly in light of it being atop one of the highest hills around Sheffield. Hilltop locations have found to increase the spread of biaerosols. The EA are tightening their permit regulations and increasing licensing costs hence Green Estates desire to close its other sites and create a super site - as indicated at their presentation 19th July. Many applications around the country have been rejected for several reasons but their locality to residential and workplace property being the most common for public health. To comply with EEC requirements on reducing landfill the government is under pressure to increse recycling, the green waste recycling was seen as the quickest answer but the health risks were not then well known or advertised as is the suspicion. Recently the Mirror newspaper reported on the 17th June 2011 "young woman has made medical history after a double world-first operation to cure her lung condition" following 'multi-resistant Aspergillus'. Alas there has also been a fatality believed to have been caused by the spores from composting. Evidence is growing on the health affects so operation standards are therefore being increased. The legal fight is that the improvements are not being done fast enough in the UK.

The land is owned by the NHS. They want a use for it so they don't have to pay the mainetenace fee to keep the site secure. The NHS never bought the land it was given to them when the MOD left. The land is Green Belt to stop Sheffield expanding in to the Moss Valley. I've lived in London and Manchester where it can take an hour to reach the countryside. Sheffield is a great place to live because we can quickly reach the countryside. Either side the site are the last remnants of the ancient woodlands of Sheffield. If this site is used for industrialisation or housing we'll loose the chance to join the woodlands together for our desendents as well as the welfare of the residents who live and people who work around the site. Mustn't forget the site is polluted with dangerous chemicals left from the RAF. These will need clearing, at great expense, and dumped at some landfil site which is what the council is mandated to drastically reduce before the EEC start to fine us - the council tax payers. Vote no to the proposal.

Green Waste recycling has known health problems that particularly impact the young and the old. The nearest residential places to the proposal is a specialist Nursing home and a Junior school. Green Estates who plan to run the site denied knowledge of health problems associated with green waste recyling. Quite amazing since this process has Environment Agency and Health & Safety Executive set-up and operation standards based on medical findings - no location within 250m of residential property. Whoever denies this wants to hood wink you into thinking all is safe. The Green Estates presentation at the meeting in July at Valley Park started with the indication to eventually turn the whole site in to the industrialisation waste recycling so they can shut down al their other sites. All Sheffield green waste would then be brought to Norton Aerodorme. There are better sites around Sheffield. The residents don't want it! To those who don't believe in green belt, once the land has been reutilsed you don't get it back. Commercial desires win over the local populous again. Vote against it.