A reminder: The NLWA's views on the 'London Plan' and Haringey planning policies, June 2010

Click above for
FULL NLWA DOCUMENT,
June 2010

WASTE PLANNING MATTERS

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report updates Members on a number of planning matters including:

• the Examination in Public (EiP) of the London Plan, the spatial strategy for the capital
• progress on the North London Waste Plan (NLWP), the joint waste development plan document for North London, which will allocate land for waste facilities across North London, and 
• latest consultation opportunities on the more local Enfield and Haringey Core Strategies, to which Authority officers have responded, subject to Member approval.

Implications for the Authority

(2.6) The Examination in Public will include discussion about 'Solid Recovered Fuel' and how this is treated within the Plan. This is helpful, in the light of the Authority’s previous written comments on the matter.

(2.7) The deadline for further written statements to be received by the Panel Secretariat is noon on Monday 16th August 2010. It is proposed that the Authority:

• submits a written statement, providing comment on recent waste tonnage information and trends, as evidenced in North London
• includes further explanation and comment regarding 'solid recovered fuel', and 
• expands upon concerns already raised, regarding the provision of sites for hazardous waste management. [The NLWA does not just deal with domestic waste.]

All the above issues are relevant to the Authority, as they affect the amount of land that will be allocated for waste facilities going forward.

4.0 LOCAL PLANNING - BOROUGH WASTE PLANS

Click above for Haringey's
'Core Strategy'

note:

"Examination in Public (EiP) 

provisionally scheduled for 28 June 2011"!

(4.3) Haringey Core Strategy

(4.3.2) The Core Strategy is at the pre-submission stage, and has been issued for a period of public consultation that closed on 21st June 2010.

(4.3.6) Figure 5.1 of the Haringey Core Strategy confirms that the majority of the Pinkham Way site is a Local Employment Area (LEA), along with the Bounds Green Industrial Estate to the east.

(4.3.7) ...  The Authority response urges specific reference to the Pinkham Way site as a potential site for waste facilities, and also requests that it notes the protection that would be afforded within the London Plan, once facilities were built.

Implications for the Authority
(4.3.8) Authority officers are broadly supportive of the Haringey Core Strategy, but believe that additional references to the development of the Pinkham Way site, the use of waste and waste derived fuels in future decentralised energy facilities and the status of waste facilities as ‘community infrastructure’ need to be updated and clarified in order to protect the position of waste management sites within the overall plan and the Pinkham Way site in particular.

 Click above for Haringey's
'Development Management Policies'

note:

OPEN TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION

IN "SUMMER 2011"!

(4.4) Haringey Development Management Policies DPD

(4.4.1) The Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) has been published for a period of public consultation that also closed on 21 June 2010. This DPD is considered to be of particular importance for the Pinkham Way site, which is included in the Authority’s Outline Business Case, as it will establish the primary policies against which any planning application will be determined. 

 [The 'Outline Business Case' was submitted to the government (Defra) to seek approval of the NLWA's PFI financial deals. Later in 2010, Defra rejected the NLWA's proposals (details are here).

Defra was trying to cut government committed expenditure, and stated it could meet EU environmental targets by choosing more developed schemes from elsewhere in the UK, instead. NLWA staff at the Pinkham Way exhibitions said this came as "a bit of a shock!"]

(4.4.2) Section 3 of the DPD confirms the Council’s aspiration to reduce CO2 emissions from the Borough by 40% by 2020 and states that new development should be as close to zero-carbon as possible to help achieve this.

(4.4.3) Development should be located where it can be best served by walking, cycling and public transport. High trip generation development should be located where public transport accessibility is high.

(4.4.4) Policy DMP10 – Access Roads states ‘The Council will only promote access roads to commercial and industrial premises if the premises:

1. are located advantageously in relation to main roads and railways, to accommodate the generation of heavy freight; 
2. are provide [sic] facilities for the handling of freight, to secure efficient distribution; 
3. are located to reduce the movement of vehicles on roads not suitable for them; 
4. are located to encourage the use of rail and water to carry freight traffic; 
5. are located and designed to minimise any adverse impact on the strategic road network’. 

The policy seeks to minimise environmental damage associated with HGV movements.

(4.4.14) The first part of Policy DMP28 is broadly consistent with UDP Policy OS6 – Ecologically Valuable Sites and their Corridors, and confirms that development will not be permitted on Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation 

‘(a) unless there will be no adverse effect on the nature conservation value of the site; and (b) unless the importance of the development outweighs the nature conservation value of the site. Both criteria (a) and (b) above must be met before any development will be considered’.

It will be necessary to demonstrate how these criteria are met, in the emerging proposals for Pinkham Way, to inform discussion with London Borough of Haringey officers. The policy goes on to refer to:

• the protection and enhancement of green corridors and their ecological value; 
• respecting and enhancing biodiversity; and 
• protecting existing trees and improving the contribution of trees to local landscape character. 

The proposals for Pinkham Way will have to demonstrate how these requirements have been met.

(4.5.4) Authority officers are broadly supportive of the Haringey Site Allocations Development Plan Document, but wish to protect the Authority’s position in relation to potential redevelopment of parts of Tottenham Hale and Pinkham Way, linking these to the emerging North London Waste Plan and the revised London Plan. Accordingly, the initial response makes comment on each of the sites listed above.