Forum topic: Sign a petition to protect a local nature conservation site

8th November - Haringey Cabinet have deferred looking at the new North London Waste Plan at this month’s meeting. That consideration will now take place on 22nd January 2019, to give them time to properly consider the recommendation of their own Regulatory Committee who concluded that the Grade 1 Site of Nature Conservation (SINC), commonly known as “Pinkham Way”, be removed as a site available for waste dumping or waste processing.
“Pinkham Way” is between the north circular and Muswell Hill golf course (forming part of a wider green corridor) on the left after you pass under the mainline railway bridge heading west on the north circular. The mainline railway forms its eastern boundary, housing and a park to its west.
Your signature to the current petition can only assist in stopping the extraordinary haemorrhage of unnecessary public sector cash this exercise has caused over the last eight years. Enfield Cabinet meets to approve, or otherwise, the same plan next week (14th).
www.pinkhamwayalliance.org/

As a little background to anyone thinking of signing the PWA petition but still making their minds up: At the start of the plan period, the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) are planning to deal with a staggering 140% of the amount of waste required of them by the Mayor as their share of London’s total waste, and even more by the end. To manage this, they reckon they need up to 9 hectares of new land (a figure that is going to be hard to justify) and so, to be on the safe side, they have identified 93.45 hectares, more than ten times the amount. This land would then be waste protected, ie not available for other use. All of it is (rightly) classified as Industrial land. But it seems even that is not enough, so on top of all that, they make a grab for a Site of Nature Conservation, “Pinkham Way”, of close to 6 hectares, making a total of 99.35 hectares. Nothing like a margin of error!

Why? Why have they spent ballpark £35m so far on buying it (about £12m) and then fees to consultants, lawyers and such on top to get this far?

Every previous iteration of the plan suggested on analysis that they needed no extra land at all. We will wait for the detailed numbers this time, but expect no change in that position.

Without looking, I’ve little doubt I’ll find councils spelling out how committed they are to protecting the environment. Well, let’s see how committed Enfield Cabinet is this week when they shouldn't be signing off this plan with Pinkham Way included.