Three sites in Haringey earmarked for new waste plantsThe plan is designed to co-ordinate management of the boroughs’ waste from 2021 to 2036
Three sites in Haringey have been earmarked as suitable for new waste plants under a 15-year waste-management plan.
Two sites in Tottenham and one at Pinkham Way, on the border of Muswell Hill and Bounds Green, have been confirmed as “priority areas” for waste in the North London Waste Plan (NLWP).
Produced by seven London boroughs – Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Hackney, Haringey, Islington and Waltham Forest – the plan, which has been ten years in the making, is designed to co-ordinate the management of the boroughs’ waste from 2021 to 2036.
None of the Haringey sites have been identified as suitable for a new waste incinerator, and any waste plants proposed for the sites would need to obtain planning permission. A new incinerator planned for Edmonton EcoPark in Advent Way, Enfield, has already won planning approval and forms part of the seven boroughs’ waste management plans.
In October last year, a government planning inspector found the NLWP to be sound after changes were made in response to feedback from residents, and it was discussed by Haringey Council’s strategic planning committee on Tuesday.
Bryce Tudball, the council’s interim head of planning policy, transport and infrastructure, told the committee the Haringey sites had been identified as suitable for “recycling uses”.
The decision to include the site at Pinkham Way in the NLWP met with strong local opposition because of its status as a site of importance for nature conservation (Sinc) and its close proximity to Metropolitan Open Land.
Bryce said that “significant modifications” had been made to the Pinkham Way proposals in response to feedback from residents, with a “smaller area” deemed suitable for waste uses and guidelines added to lessen the impact of any development on the environment.
The two “priority areas” for waste in Tottenham, on sites surrounding Brantwood Road and Watermead Way in Northumberland Park ward, are already earmarked for industrial use.
Bryce told the committee only parts of these “substantial” areas would be used for waste plants, and measures would be taken to reduce the impact on neighbouring residential areas and the environment.
Labour committee member Matt White said he had trouble fully understanding predictions set out in the NLWP for how much waste would be recycled and suggested the target to recycle 50% of household waste by 2025 was not ambitious enough.
He added that the council talked about reducing the amount of waste that is incinerated, but the report included figures showing the percentage going to incineration was unchanged between 2020 and 2036.
Rob Krzyszowski, the council’s assistant director of planning, building standards and sustainability, said the figures came from either targets set by the Mayor of London in the London Plan or by North London Waste Authority (NLWA), which is an organisation established by the seven boroughs to manage waste.
He told the committee that the council could not shape the targets but wanted to be “ambitious on recycling and sustainable waste”. Rob added that the government planning inspector had “heavily scrutinised” the NLWP to ensure it did not plan for too much waste.
Yvonne Say, another Labour member, drew attention to part of the report stating that a planning application for development at Pinkham Way “should demonstrate how public access to an undeveloped part of the site could be achieved”. She said the site should be kept separate for wildlife, adding: “I don’t see why we need public access there at all”.
Rob responded that the two aims were “not totally incompatible” if the site was “managed in the right way”. He added: “The detail of that would be looked at as part of any planning application to make sure it is compatible.”
Labour’s Ajda Ovat raised concerns over the impact of extra traffic at the Brantwood Road site in Tottenham, warning there was a “particular issue with HGV [heavy goods vehicle] traffic around that area”.
Rob responded that the council could “really scrutinise” the impact of extra traffic “if and when proposals come through”, adding that the “latest environmental controls” could be used to lessen the impact on residents.
The committee agreed to refer the NLWP to cabinet and full council for adoption, along with its comments.