We all remember this wonderful pub. In 2020, and until the current owners, it was an extremely successful pub. On a weekly basis , everyone for miles would meet up there for drinks. No need for social media then, just pop up to the “shoes”, haylage making dates, pony club news, fencing, you name it your man was at the pub friday, sat or sunday. At the week end, during the day, the locals were joined by walkers and others taking advantage of the Chiltern’s. Then came in 1916 a new owner who liked big expensive cars from london in the car park, reservations: “have you booked”. The bill seemed to be designed for Londoners on expense accounts. This Pub is viable as a local amenity as it was until the Mash Inn.

Now we need your help. Take the time to write in: 1) write the Council to object 2) write us or bethany.mullett@hotmail.com and yg@11-racing.com to support our position that this pub has always been a mixed use as a community facility.

Planning – Application Summary

(opens in a new window)

23/06000/FUL | Change of use of the existing restaurant with guest accommodation, associated single storey detached outbuilding and land (use class E(b)) to form 1 x 5-bed detached dwelling together with parking, outbuilding and hard/soft landscaping to create residential amenity space (use class C3) | The Mash Inn Horseshoe Road Radnage Buckinghamshire

Details

Summary Further Information Contacts Important Dates

Comments Documents (13) Related Cases (1) Map

Reference

23/06000/FUL

Alternative Reference

PP-12094708

Application Received

Mon 17 Apr 2023

Application Validated

Mon 17 Apr 2023

Address

The Mash Inn Horseshoe Road Radnage Buckinghamshire

Proposal

Change of use of the existing restaurant with guest accommodation, associated single storey detached outbuilding and land (use class E(b)) to form 1 x 5-bed detached dwelling together with parking, outbuilding and hard/soft landscaping to create residential amenity space (use class C3)

RADNAGE: CHANGE OF USE/ THE MASH INN

ROR 2023

A challengingly fun off road trail run through the Chilterns in Buck, through AONB and Greenbelt.

Half marathon, 10K, children’s 1K

Race entries online via Eventbrite, let’s do this and run Great Britain.

WWW.Ridgeoffroader.co.uk

21/05/23

Speeding in Bledlow Ridge:

Check out the Parish Council site on the subject & sign the e petition by 5th of May. Lets do it, before tragedy

strikes, please.

Bledlow-cum-saunderton Parish Council

:ePetition – Bledlow Ridge Traffic Calming – Modern Council (moderngov.co.uk)

ePetition – Bledlow Ridge Traffic Calming – Modern Council (moderngov.co.uk)

A NEW CHAPTER IN OUR STORY:

The Defunct Wigans Lane HRC

It has reopen

Instead of seing signs saying welcome to the AONB

you see HRC Signs

felled trees, a fierce looking metal fence,

The new AONB look

£350 000 expected annual cost to the tax payer for the HRC if not more.

Bledlow Ridge School needs £12,000.

I cannot resist putting the £12 000 in perspective: It would be a very a small drain on the public purse compared to the lavish spending on Wigans Lane HRC.

£20 000 (in addition to town and parish councils’ donations) to C. Etholen’s CIC and the annual running costs of at least £350 000.

BR residents could unite, be " bold "and ask for a grant from the Council in view of the current cost of living crisis.

I believe that if people knew the amounts of money involved they would prioritise school over dump, but they have no idea. Maybe I am wrong.

Re : C. Etholen email Sent: 12 January 2023 10:15

..” appreciate that you are opposed to the re-opening of the Bledlow Ridge Household Recycling Centre next Monday 16th January , but I would add that this

facility has been an HRC since 1974 and prior to that a landfill site for many years.”

Dear all,

In my opinion, the reopening of the HRC is a tragedy for the local AONB and greenbelt area.
I believe access to green spaces for all should be a priority for the Chilterns AONB and Wigans lane in particular, not just words.

Wigans lane is the portal to some outstanding walks in sites of national and international importance. It has also been a stage on the cycle tour of Britain, the London Revolution ride and many more cycling events.
It should, by all accounts, enjoy multiple layers of protection, both within the statutory planning regime and the Environmental Permitting Regs.

Rather than the government policy of leaving the AONB in a better state than we found it, the Council is degrading the AONB.

Lets face it, using a very old licence issued under redundant and less stringent legislation, with lower environmental standards circumvents modern regulations. Local residents are not allowed such leeway by the Council Planning Authority, far from it. The Council is setting a poor example in that respect. Some might say it shows institutional contempt for its prescribed duties as a regulator.

This reopening will be remembered by future generations as a heinous acts of state-sponsored environmental vandalism, not just a missed opportunity.

There is and has been considerable amount of housing development locally. The need of the many for HRC’s, is not to be ignored. However, it might well be better served closer to population centres, especially with ongoing fuel and energy pressures. This would involve political will and long term planning.

I believe the reopening of an outdated site in an unsuitable location, thereby adding another 100 000 vehicles to the estimated 200 000 cars already using wigans lane is:

1) absolutely opposed to modern environmental standards and policies
2) dangerous in terms of traffic accidents

I believe that because of the low density of population in AONB and Greenbelt areas, these areas can NOT be protected by the residents’ voting power. This is an excellent example of it. Rural areas will be sacrificed again and again to the voting power of towns and cities. It is foolhardy to think that is not the case.

Question: How does the Council intend to address the site’s failure to satisfy the visual splay requirements of its 1983 planning consent ?

Answer from: FOI request at access2information@buckinghamshire.gov.uk

The Household Recycling Centre does not meet the all of the vision splay requirements as listed in the 1983 planning consent. We can find no evidence of the site meeting those requirements historically. As such, the failure to meet the consent would not be enforceable, as the vision splays have been in their current form for more than 10 years.

We will be submitting a certificate of lawfulness application to bring the records up to date. We are confident on the safety of the access and exit of the site for users, given the injury related accidents in the vicinity of the site, the 35 plus years of operation previously and the Highways Authorities lack of objection to reopening the site.

Note: Some would like the speed limit on Wigans Lane to be reduced in order to mitigate any increase in accidents related to the enormous increase in traffic,( like 1/3 to 1/2 again the existing traffic) on what is a small windy country lane with cars parked along the verges by walkers with their dogs and children. The lane is also used by families for school runs and other children’ activities everyday. It seems unnecessary to increase the danger to these local users, when a lower speed limit might help .

Question: environmental and other risks ?

What, if any, analyses of environmental and other risks have been undertaken by the Council (or others) to ensure that the site and its surrounds are safe for use? This is par%cularly important in light of the Environment Agency's explicit warning rela%ng to changes to the site. (NB This question was also submitted ed to the Cabinet meeting but not answered.)

Answer from: FOI request at access2information@buckinghamshire.gov.uk

The Household Recycling Centre was in operaAon for over 30 years before its closure in 2019 and the then County Council maintained the site to a good and safe standard. Since it closed it was monitored regularly as part of the existing Environmental Permit requirements. After the site was approved for reopening we have worked on-site including small repairs, cleaning and vegetation management. The works undertaken and small changes to the site are not substantial and will not affect the historic landfill site.

Felled trees

6th December 22

Looking up Wigans Lane
Healthy tree trunk, glasses are 5 1/2 inches/11 cm
Healthy trunk of previous stump
felled healthy trees

SALES MANAGER
mountains of wood chip (healthy) and marked trees
another stump of the many felled trees

Xmas Card

From: Subject: Date: To:

Andrew Jenkins andrew.jenkins@buckinghamshire.gov.uk Bledlow HRC - Weekly Update
23 November 2022 at 21:48

Good Evening,

You have received this email as an interested party in the opening of Bledlow Ridge Household Recycling Centre. If you do not wish to receive weekly updates in future then please reply to this email and I will remove you from the mailing list.

The aBached document is a weekly update, first issued on Monday 14th November. The new updates are highlighted in yellow to make reviewing the document easier. We hope the informaJon included is useful to you as an interested party. I will highlight a key update that the site will not open un3l the New Year, with an exact date s3ll to be confirmed.

We are also, as referenced in the Cabinet Decision Paper, looking to engage with residents and businesses in the immediate vicinity of the site. The exact format will depend on how much interest is expressed, but we would be hoping to further understand the impacts of the site opening and what, if any, miJgaJon can be applied. If you are interested in taking part in this please reply to this email with your name, email address and interest in the site (neighbour, local business etc.)

Kind regards

Strategic Waste Management and Enforcement CommuniJes Directorate – Neighbourhood Services Buckinghamshire Council

Andrew Jenkins (he/him) Waste PrevenJon Team Leader

01296 387195 / 07860 429833 Andrew.jenkins@buckinghamshire.gov.uk

Walton Street Offices, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP20 1UA

November 14, 2022

14/11/22 NO response to the FOI put to the Council a month ago, despite an answer being due by November 12, 2022

see below for the information requested

OCTOBER 17, 2022

It now turns out that BucksCouncil has decided to reopen the HRC site on Wigans lane within the next 6 weeks.

This haste is alarming for several reasons;

The need for a consultation has been denied.
Stakeholders'desire for a focus group to work on the very real problems attached to the reopening (traffic hazards, local congestion and environmental impact) is being resisted ,not to say stonewalled.

At the time of the BRPC Meeting Monday October/ 10 /2022 absolutely none of these unresolved questions were found to have answers available to those present. (see below for details of all the unresolved issues )

On the traffic front:
Ignoring hazards and local congestion linked to the HRC

reopening is worrying not least for local users.
1)There were 92,000 vehicles attending the site in 2019. Given the planning inspectorate determined that the need for the site had not been established, you must be anticipating that "need" will increase and so it is a reasonable assumption that there will be more cars using the site when it opens, with pressure on the access roads.
2) The Highways traffic report taken as reference is erroneous talking about a flow through, in out, arrangement. The site is on two levels, not one, and very small.
3) The privately commissioned traffic report spelling out the illegal splays, the unsuitable approach roads etc is ignored.

The haste to reopen the site, coupled with the absence of consultation and consideration of these issues is likely to result in poor decision making and the creation of significant problems.

On 11 March 2020, a £20 000 grant of public money from a contingency fund was made to the Bledlow Ridge HRC CIC. This CIC was set up and is now solely controlled by conservative Councillor C. Etholen , member and controlling Director. He is a vocal supporter of this quick reopening.

“A condition of the grant is that it becomes refundable (interest free) by the Bledlow Ridge HRC CIC to Buckinghamshire Council in the event that the household recycling centre at Bledlow Ridge ceases to operate within five years of the grant being made.”

WE ARE ASKING FOR A PUBLIC CONSULTATION TO INCLUDE:

There was a major consultation about CLOSING the old HRC.

There also needs to be a public debate about REOPENING it.

TRAFFIC OUTSIDE

In 2017, there were an estimated 93,000 visits to the old HRC. With the rapid growth of housing in the Princes Risborough area, and neighbouring Oxfordshire, what should be expected in terms of volume growth ?
TRAFFIC INSIDE

The defunct and OUTDATED, Wigans Lane HRC site DOES NOT and CANNOT meet design and safety standards.
EXTRA CHARGES

Charging for green waste is to be introduced throughout the Wycombe area and is expected to generate £1.1 million, which will be partly offset by additional HRC facilities within the Princes Risborough area.
LAND POLLUTION

Methane, Asbestos & No Capping of the old landfill.
Any changes to the site have the potential to mobilise pollution” 27/2/2020 The Environment Agency to David Periam, (PLANNING) ref WA/ 2020/127648/01-L01
GREENBELT & AONB

The reopening of the old HRC on Wigans lane contravenes several requirements of the Buckinghamshire Mineral and Waste Local Plan, as well as any number of the safeguards attached to AONB and Greenbelt land.
METHANE & WILD FIRES

Description goes here

Date: End of September 2022

BCC decided to reopen the HRC at the recent Cabinet meeting. It is now going into an implementation phase with the site likely to reopen in about 2-3 months.

To watch the Cabinet meeting click on the link below:

Cabinet - Thursday, 22nd September 2022 at 9:00am - Buckinghamshire Council Webcasting (public-i.tv)

Feed back received:

Some have been dismayed that the Cabinet considered and discounted or ignored the various issues they raised. These issues can be best summarised as follows;

Reopening is contrary to the stated policies on waste management development, AONB/Greenbelt, and biodiversity;
There was a failure to have a consultation despite assurances being given that there would be;
The planning consent is not "live";
Past and planned housing development plus the new charging arrangements would cause further traffic and road safety issues;
Unlawful visibility splays;
Fire safety.

Date: September 2022

BC’s Cabinet meeting entitled”Change to the Household Recycling Center (HRC) service model from nine to ten sites” has been rescheduled for the 22 September.

The report supporting the proposal, ( which was not made available to the public till midweek last week September6/7), broadly ignores the issues and concerns attached to this proposal:

1)Traffic inside (outdated & outgrown) and outside (queues) and access (splays do not meet required standards) = safety & liability

2)Land contamination & pollution, & highly combustible methane gas & wild fires risks, ( following this summer’s drought and the local field fires)

3) and indeed the contravention of often stated council policies regarding the AONB and Greenbelt, as well as the national panoply of laws which endeavour to protect their environment and ecology.

Our group of local

residents and stake holders

are concerned by the following

unresolved issues:

Residents and stake holders, let the Parish Council know your thoughts about asking for a consultation on all aspects of the possible reopening of the defunct HRC. The Parish council works ceaselessly and let’s face it mostly thanklessly for the community and you can help by sharing your views with you local councillors. email: clerk@bspc.org.uk

The old HRC site on Wigans lane was closed following a formal public consultation which considered the viability of the site. It determined that the local “need” could be met from the remaining sites, with our area being well served against the national average and County spread. (No Bucks household is more than …. from an HRC.)

The position was also supported by the planning inspector in his decision to reject the planning application-he found that it did not meet with BCC’s policies on the need for development. It is worth noting that the Director of Planning for Bucks submitted a position statement in the planning appeal against the grant of the permission, saying that the site did not meet with BCC’s waste policy in addition to it being detrimental to the greenbelt and AONB.

Is BCC seriously considering turning full circle ?

Following is a list, (not exhaustive) of serious concerns:

1) Is there going to be a public consultation?

This is on two grounds. Firstly, it is a general duty on a public authority to consult on such matters. Secondly, under Aarhus Convention which is implemented into UK law, BCC may be required by law to provide information and consult with those affected by a waste management proposal.

2) What is going to be done about traffic ?

We know that there has been a lot of housing development in Chinnor and Longwick and a further 2 500 houses are planned in the Risborough development. Clearly traffic volumes will increase and with the sites antiquated design and introduction of charging for some forms of waste, through traffic will slow increasing the queues on Wigans lane at a dangerous corner just below the summit of the ridge.

A privately commissioned report by Create Consulting Engineers Ltd concluded:

(Engineers from that firm visited the HRC site and all access routes to it. The firm also conducted both traffic and topographical surveys around the site).

The Wigans lane site is unsuitable for use as and HRC because:

1) existing access points do not meet past or present visibility standards required for safe access:

2) additional traffic flows, for which many of the approach roads are “completely unsuitable”, will lead to greater risk of accidents;

3) conversion to pay-to-use will cause regular queues along Wigans Lane and a significant increase in the risk of further accidents.

Create Consulting Engineers also states: “it seems entirely feasible that the accidents recorded at this location are associated with limited forward visibility in the vicinity of this HRC access”.

Click here for Engineers Report

3) What is going to be done about the antiquated, totally unsuitable and dangerous site layout ?

The current site layout, is well below national standards, let alone Buckinhamshire’s more recent HRC’s.

These standards require proper onsite traffic management and pedestrian protection.

HRC should have a flow through arrangement like High Heavens, (see below) with a separate entrance and exist and clear, protected walkways for users. The constraints on the current site prevent this. The entrance/exit visibility spalls also do not meet current legal requirements. Regarding possible changes, the Environment Agency’s statement to David Periam, (Planning), on 27/2/2020, (ref WA/2020127648/01-L)I) is most relevant: : “Any changes to the site have the potential to mobilise pollution.”

More details regarding guidance for waste management facilities can be found here:

WASTE-09-pdf (wish forum.org.uk).

Looking at Bucks HRCs, a comparison:

The benchmark: Beaconsfield HRC

Safe highway entry/exit- off-road queuing - one way system - correct angle parking bays - separated hardcore area - designed for health and safety - 240 000visits 2017/2018

Burnham HRC

good design - off highway queuing - correct angle parking bays - separate hardcore area - good health and safety - 116,000 visits, 2017/2018

Amersham HRC
off road queuing - two way system with sizeable vehicle turning area - location suitable for expansion- - health and safety can be improved - 161,000 visits 2017/2018

When comparing Bledlow Ridge, (Wigans lane) defunct HRC’s areal view with other Bucks HRC sites it is clear, the Wigans lane site is not fit for purpose.

PROBLEMS WITH WIGANS LANE DEFUNCT HRC LAYOUT;

Queuing on highway
Tight two way system, with constricted turning around
Parking bays at the wrong angle
Recycling areas and vehicle areas intermix
HGV’s enter both areas
Poor health and safety
97,000 visits (estimated) 2017/2018
Access points do not meet past let alone modern required visibility standards
Access through steep twisted B roads

4) Are there better (brown field) locations that can be developed in the Risborough plan ?

Most of the support for the reopening comes from princes Risborough, Chinnor and Thame. Indeed , the site on Wigans Lane might be renamed the “Princes Risborough HRC”.

If the desire is to service Risborough and Oxfordshire development there must be scope to have a modern, better sited facility built into the expansion which is future proofed to cope with the demand.

The Bledlow Ridge Local Plan makes it clear the special character of the villages is to be protected. A government spokeswoman said (Times Monday 1/2/22) action was being taken”to ensure the planning system protects and enhances the natural environment.”

There are 3 SSSI sites( Lodge Hill and 2 Ancient Woods) , a few hundred meters away from the Wigans lane site. In addition, it is in AONB and Greenbelt. Altogether common sense would indicate the site should benefit from special environmental and biodiversity protection . However, “Planning rules allow developers to “weave around” conditions designed to protect wildlife” according to RSPB. (Times, March 2022)

Two Ancient Woods on the Natural England map surrounding the defunct HRC, both Frenches wood & Neighbours Wood (Routs Green) are within 500m or less.

Neighbours wood, (Routs Green), Natural England map, within 500m of defunct HRC

Frenches wood, Natural England map, within less less than 400m of defunct HRC

5) Contamination: methane, asbestos, carbon dioxide & no capping of the old landfill surrounding the defunct HRC

The historic Landfill site data indicates that Bledlow Ridge’s first input was 31 December 1956.

The landfill site still appears to be operating on 03 April 1978 since a licence (EPA 1974) was issued.

The landfill accepted a whole range of hazardous waste, unimaginable by modern standards.

The licence was surrendered on 31 December 1993 immediately before the 01 May 1994 deadline (EPA 1990) after which it could only be surrendered when the site no longer posed a risk to the environment or human health.

‘The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990) introduced a new scheme of waste management licensing and more stringent controls were imposed on the surrender of licences. From 1 May 1994, operators could only surrender waste management licences under EPA 1990, Pt II when the site no longer posed a risk to the environment or human health. Consequently hundreds of CPA 1974 licences were surrendered before 1994’

Please take a look at the comparison between Wigans Lane, High Heaven and Beaconsfield HRCs

Learn more

“Any changes to the site have the potential to mobilise pollution”

27/2/2020 The environment Agency to David Periam, (Panning) ref WA/2020/127648/01-L01

Questions:

1) Why has no environment survey been undertaken ?

2) Why has a contaminated land assessment not been done ?

3) Why has the landfill site not been capped ?

4) Why was the former HRC allowed to operate with these risks ?

5) Are Bucks and the parish Councils potentially liable for claims arising from asbestos and environmental risks ? The site is located directly above a main water aquifer. The Council has recently been criticised (Denham) for failing to manage old landfill sites and the risk of noxious materials.

6) Why has the landfill not been capped ?

Note about not capping:

The published DEFRA map indicates a ‘historic landfill’ site of around 4 acres surrounding the closed HRC in our Chilterns AONB. Planting trees on containment landfills is generally forbidden in developed countries as tree roots can penetrate through the capping material and allow the escape of unhealthy landfill gases into surrounding neighbourhoods. With regard to the closed HRC (which I understand has no Pollution Prevention and Control) it would appear that a contaminated land assessment has not been undertaken after
16+ years of root growth on the landfill.

6) AONB & GREENBELT ISSUES

Three points, non exhaustive by a long shot:

15/2/21 The Service Director of Planning and Environment, BCC, filed a formal notification with the planning inspector …… that the permission to reopen the site would have been refused if determined by BCC because:

1) The development contravened policy 22 of the Bucks Mineral and Waste Local Plan (MWLP) and policy DM30 (The Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) of the Wycombe District Local Plan:

2) The location of the site did not fall within an identified primary or secondary area of focus for new waste management facilities and therefore would be contrary to policy 13 (Spatial Strategy for WasteManagement) and 14 (Development Principles for Waste Management Facilities) of the MWLP:

3) The proposed development would fail to deliver a net gain in biodiversity. As such it would be contrary to policies 18 (Natural Environment) & 24 (Environmental Enhancement) of the MWLP and policies CP (10) (Green infrastructure and the Natural Environment ) and DM 34 (Delivering Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Development in the Wycombe District Local Plan.

for more information see: 13) Various plans, and Green Belt, & AONB not properly considered

Click here for consultation paper of the Chilterns Conservation Board on the application.