Celebrities living in "Millionaires' Row", Hove, could be spared the noise of an extra 100 lorries a day thundering past their doors.

Sir Paul McCartney, actor Nick Berry and husband and wife DJs Zoe Ball and Fatboy Slim opposed plans for a giant peat-processing plant close to their exclusive seafront homes in Western Esplanade.

Adur District Council approved plans for the plant last month.

However, the decision sparked claims by the Green Party that the council had breached European Union (EU) rules.

Dr Caroline Lucas, Green MEP for the South-East, called for an official investigation into Adur's decision on the site in Basin Road South at Shoreham harbour.

European Commissioner Margot Wallstrom has now given her permission to bring a formal complaint against Adur for alleged breach of EU environmental guidelines.

She will ask the council to provide the Commission with details of how it dealt with the application.

Dr Lucas said: "I am very concerned about the granting of permission for this massive peat processing plant.

"I am calling for a formal investigation into a possible breach of EU regulations.

"There was no formal environmental assessment into the impact of this development and I think there should have been.

"There would be an immediate impact of an extra 100 lorries per day using the port and the surrounding road network, which is already at full capacity.

"I am also worried about the damage caused by peat extraction itself, which the EU seeks to limit by offering special protection to peat boglands.

"There are alternatives to peat in the horticultural industry which are renewable. To build a massive plant processing peat is both unsustainable and unnecessary.

"We need to make sure existing policies to protect the environment are observed."

A council spokeswoman said Adur was confident that it was not in breach of the regulations.

She said: "Adur's view is that the proposed peat terminal does not require an environmental impact assessment under the definitions contained in the relevant regulations.

"The reason is the site is already a trans-shipment terminal and the erection of a building for processing peat does not fall within the regulations.

"As a result of a previous planning appeal and court case the site has lawful use for port operational purposes.

"The inspector accepted that it was reasonable to expect the site to generate almost double the amount of traffic estimated to arise from the proposed peat terminal."

Friday August 15, 2003