SHEFFIELD city council failed to impose its own planning regulations on the ill-fated fourth and fifth hole projects at Hillsborough Golf Club according to the findings of an independent inquiry.
The report says 28,000 tonnes of unidentifiable demolition spoil were tipped on the course during the remodelling of the holes when only topsoil should have been used - but no records were kept of what was dumped.
Fears that the rubble may have co
ntained asbestos or other toxic material could force a police investigation and the digging up of the two holes - alongside which runs a popular public footpath - and fairways.
Around 1400 lorryloads of unknown material were taken to the site between August 2000 and July 2001 without control or monitoring, says the report which slams City Council planning officials for not upholding planning conditions despite visits to the site.
The improvements were to be 'self-financing' in that fees for tipping on the golf course would pay for landscaping, but when the council turned down previous planning applications which would involve the bringing in of landfill, Mr Timms submitted an application that would use topsoil only.
In a key passage the report outlines complaints from various parties regarding non-compliance with planning limitations.
A planning department official visited the site and found that: "the requirement that no material other than pure topsoil should be brought onto the site, has proved to be inflexible and again in practise, incapable of being fully compied with."
The report identifies this relaxation of the council's planning limitations as a turning point in the whole saga. "This paragraph alone represents the golden gate through which the project drove, not just a cart and horses, but a whole wagon train."
But the council insists that it did nothing wrong.
A spokesman for the City Council Planning Department said: "Following allegations of contraventions of the planning conditions at Hillsborough Golf Course in 2001, an investigation took place and the Inspector found that, although there had been technical breaches of the conditions, it was considered that no demonstrable harm was done to the environment and there was no scope for enforcement action.
"We have no reason to believe that any dangerous substances have been used on this site.''
READ MOREBack to main story.The full article contains 386 words and appears in Sheffield Star newspaper.
