Infant school objects to Barnet siting waste facility close by

From The View from Dollis Hill facebook

On behalf of Our Lady of Grace Infant School, we write to formally register our strong objection to the proposed siting of a Waste Transfer Station (WTS) on the Edgware Road within very close proximity to our school. Our children range from 3-7 years and our playground backs onto the Edgware Road. We are gravely concerned about the inevitable impact on air quality which our children will be exposed to. We are also concerned about the impact on the local infrastructure, traffic and adjacent land uses, including other environmental stressors that might already exist.

We believe that the very close proximity of this WTS to an Infant School of very young children is of grave concern. Its proposed site will undoubtedly have an adverse effect on the health and well being of the children. We are under an obligation to provide a safe environment for our children and strongly believe that the WTS would jeopardise this. It is our understanding that the pollution levels on this stretch of the Edgware Road already exceed European guidelines, any further contributing factor to the local area would be unacceptable.

We believe that a decision to site the WTS in its proposed site will impose a disproportionate burden upon low-income and minority communities who live in this local area and attend our school. The overburden on this community will have a negative impact on this community creating health, environmental and quality of living concerns.

As we have not been consulted in any way, which is not in keeping with the regulations for proposed new sites, we question whether the consequences of siting this WTS on the local community and local infant school have been weighed.

Patricia Geraghty - Acting Headtreacher
And
Lee-Ann Frampton-Anderson, Chair of Governors
Our Lady of Grace Catholic Infant School
Dolls Hill Avenue, London NW2 6EU

NWLA's 'totally inadequate' response on why they changed their mind on the Cricklewood dump

Further to the question posted in my last post regarding the Cricklewood dump and the North London Waste Authority’s original opposition to the resiting: ‘Has anything changed?’
Here is Alison Hopkins’ request to the NWLA asking why they had changed their position and the (‘totally inadequate’ according to Alison) response:

I am writing to you as a resident of Brent – Dollis Hill, to be specific – and the former ward councillor here.  I have also submitted evidence to the Public Inquiry held this week into CPO3.
The NLWA submitted a most comprehensive objection to the CPO orders. Your statement included many of the issues which we living here have with the proposed Geron Way site, including those related to traffic, environmental issues and very close proximity to an infants school and houses. 

I am told by the Clerk to the Inquiry that the NLWA has withdrawn its objection. If this is the case, then this is deeply disappointing and extremely worrying. Residents here have opposed the resiting since it was first proposed back in the early 2000s. 

Could you please inform us why the NLWA has withdrawn its objection? The problems with the proposed Geron Way/Selco site have not gone away, and as a public body, we believe the NLWA has a duty of care to Brent residents. Moving the current WTF to the proposed site directly conflicts with that duty and is not in the public interest. 

From NLWA:

NWLA and LondonEnergy Ltd have agreed terms with the London Borough of Barnet for the provision by the London Borough of Barnet of a new waste transfer station at Geron Way, NW2. Given that the Authority has now been offered an acceptable replacement, we have withdrawn our objection to the London Borough of Barnet’s application for a compulsory purchase order that included the current Hendon transfer station. It is currently expected that the new waste transfer station will be ready early in 2020.

Why NLWA originally opposed the resiting of the Cricklewood dump - has anything changed?

In her submission to Barnet Council on the proposed waste transfer facility on the Edgware Road LINK, Alison Hopkins mentioned the North London Waste Authority's orginal opposition to the resiting.

For information here is their original objection:

Ditch the Dump! Dollis Hill protests at being made a 'rubbish sandwich' by Barnet Council

148 residents have objected to the locating of a waste transfer facility on the Edgware Road near residential properties and a school. The 'dump' is just within the Barnet boundary but will affect Brent residents. There are no comments support the proposal on the Barnet Council planning portal. LINK

Alison Hopkins has submitted the following comment:

I object in the strongest possible terms to this damaging and wholly unnecessary planning application. This is on the grounds of proximity to housing and schools, vastly increased traffic and congestion, air pollution and noise and environmental damage. 

Over the decades, we in Dollis Hill and Brent have been ignore and side-lined by Barnet Council. Our objections to the disastrous changes to road layouts, the massive increase in traffic, both cars and lorries on our roads, and to the destruction of our community by Barnet Council have been ignored.
There is no benefit to anyone living in Brent of ANY of your plans. Using the word regeneration to describe them is laughable if it were not so tragic. 

Barnet and its Brent Cross development partners have carried out a few so-called consultation exercise here. These have not only been meaningless, but have also resulted in the production of documentation which has gone from misleading to outright lies. 

The dump – and let’s not call it a waste transfer facility, that’s camouflage – is not needed. The only reason that the current WTF is being moved from the eastern side of the railway line is so that Barnet and the Brent Cross partners can build expensive housing with a high return to overseas and other investors. The current WTF is in a non-residential area and waste is moved out to landfill by train. Barnet claim that it’s not as bad as the original plans, as it’s “smaller”. Well, it’s far worse than the current dump, which at least makes some pretence to environmental care by using rail. However, the current dump also emits pollution and is a source of considerable stink to residents. 

These plans call for a WTF – dump, let’s use the word again! – on the doorstep s of thousands of homes in Brent, and across from an infant’s school. These are less than fifty metres away. And of course, the dump is also directly next door to the Fellows Place development, a major housing development recently given consent by Barnet. 

There will be thousands of heavy refuse trucks entering, and thousands leaving. The processing and compaction will cause noise and dust and dirt. Nano particulate pollution has been proven to cause the most damage to small children - those small children who will be forced be neighbours of the dump. 

The Edgware Road is already at the highest pollution levels in London. The refuse trucks and lorries will add to this.

Barnet propose to site this dump as far as possible from their residents as they can and as close to Brent as they can. It will not be their voters who suffer, it will be us. 

And, given that this waste goes to landfill and recycling plants well outside London, why on earth does it need to be so close in? The answer is that it doesn’t. it is sited to suit the Brent Cross development – that regeneration that means we get messed up roads and ruined neighbourhoods. 

The current WTF already causes a stink in warm weather which can be smelled from some distance away – moving it to close proximity to homes and schools is utterly unacceptable. 

What is also horrifying is the fire risk: I quote from the Chief Fire Officers Association: “Waste fires are a consistent issue for the waste and recycling industry, with the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA) estimating that there have been around 250 incidents of waste fires per year for the last decade, with an estimated cost to fire and rescue services of around £16 million a year.” The proposed dump is directly opposite two petrol stations. 

The North London Waste Authority themselves originally opposed this site on the grounds of proximity of schools and houses. Those houses and schools haven’t moved, so why the sudden withdrawal of those objections? 

Between this dump and the massive aggregate crushing plant proposed for a few hundred yards further south, we in Brent are a rubbish sandwich. Barnet need to LISTEN to us, not ignore us!

 Another resident comments:

Yet another senseless proposal by Barnet Council for the creation of a rubbish dump, coincidentally located at the very edge of the council limits. The location of the planned waste dump is also just outside the Low Emission Bus Zones announced by the Mayor of London LINK. Just in time, improvements in air quality introduced by this low emission zone will be immediately counteracted by a step increase in the number of HGV coming in and out of the proposed dump. Good job Barnet Council, you are continuing to actively work against the best interest of your tax payers and those from neighbouring councils.

For these reasons, I object to this application. Hopefully the committee will have some common sense and will put the health of tax payers ahead of other interests.

To comment go to LINK

Will Brent's 'garden tax' lead to more Birmingham style fly-tipping?

Green waste dumped by the roadside in Birmingham

The KilburnTimes LINK is reporting that the Council's proposed charge for recycling green waste revealed on this blog last week will be an annual fee of £40.

Brent councillors and officers would be wise to look at what happened in Birmimgham in May when a £35 charge was introduced by that Labour Council.

Initially only 20,000 of the city's 400,000 households signed up to pay the charge and there were mile long queues of angry drivers at city recycling depots LINK

Green waste was fly-tipped by residents wanting to avoid the charge and it became an issue in the local elections. 

Just before the election bin men were allegedy told to clear up all the dumped green waste according to the Birmingham Mail LINK:

But now binmen have allegedly been told to clear the streets of ALL abandoned green waste this weekend, whether householders have paid for the controversial scheme or not.

Senior GMB shop steward Paul Langley, based at Perry Barr depot, told the Mail: “All the dumped garden rubbish is going to be picked up this weekend – just before the election.

“Our overtime has been cut and now our crews are being told to collect it all. It means the 40,000 people who have paid for a green waste bin and those who have simply dumped their rubbish are getting the same service.

“I have just spoken to a manager and he has confirmed it.”

The proposed charges follow the awarding of the multi-million Public Realm contract to Veolia which is due to take parks maintenance from next month in addition to recycling, residual waste collection, street sweeping and BHP grounds maintenance. Councillors claimed at the time that the new contract would save public money and there was no mention of introducing charges for basic services.

This opens the way for other charges for basic services in addition to what we pay in Council Tax.

At the same time as introducing this charge the Council is also considering landlord licensing which amongst other things is aimed at the 'anti-social' issue of untidy and poorly maintained front gardens. The £40 charge hardly seems an incentive to tackle this issue.

And of course we have the Council's anti-fly tipping campaign while this policy looks likely to increase the amount of illegal fly-tipping adding garden waste to the builders' waste currently common on our streets.

Cllr Perrin, new lead member for the environment needs to look at this again.