Karl Brown was in the public gallery to listen in during the examination in public of part of the Haringey Local plan dealing with the Pinkham Way nature conservation site (for background see this page on the Haringey Council website and this appeal from the Pinkham Way Alliance).
A full gallery heard from Haringey Council, the NLWA and Turleys acting for the PWA. Previously extensive written submissions, together with a call for more detail on some specific aspects (available on the PWA website), meant that this section of the multi-day hearing into the Soundness of Haringey’s proposed R19 Site Allocations and Development Management DPD was relatively short and focused, at least in terms of the annals of this long running story.
Haringey Council confirmed that while the land at PW was (partly) designated as Employment, it was not included in figures discussed at an earlier day’s DPD examination to meet the employment demands of their own strategic plan nor the employment requirements of the London Plan, rather they were viewing it as some form of contingency comfort-buffer given the pressure the London Plan is generally placing on levels of Employment designated land. Under questioning from the Inspector, who seemed puzzled why it was included in the submission in the first place, since they were proposing no change and had not counted any related employment figures, the Council indicated they would be content for the PW site to be removed from the submission, although as the overall discussion progressed it seemed this option was no longer left on the table by the Inspector.
The Waste Authority (NLWA) indicated in the clearest possible terms that while they had no idea what waste streams they intended to put on the PW site ("black bag" recyclate in a possible Edmonton incinerator replacement, or various functions related to recycling and/or bulking and on-transport) they "do intend to bring it forward in terms of development", ie concrete over at least part of it and build upwards. Their spokesman explained to the Inspector the difficulties that losing the site’s Employment designation would mean to this ambition. It was made clear by the NLWA that the PW site was included in the (overdue) R19 draft of the North London Waste Plan being prepared by the seven councils of North London (again) as a chosen waste processing location. PWA highlighted that the NLWA had no (publicly available) strategic plan to support PW as such a "strategic site" they could apparently not afford to lose.
PWA and Turleys argued strongly that as the only dual-designated Grade 1 SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) in London and with no employment rationale or any employment supporting technical-planning-evidence, its Employment designation should be removed. The PWA case built from the extensive written submissions, highlighted the number of ecologically favourable reports since the designation was first made and the evidence since that time of the dilution in its relevance to carry Employment status, including findings made by the Council’s own external consultants. Technically the Inspectors attention was drawn to apparent contradictions in Haringey’s approach to Policies in both the London Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework. PWA argued the definition emerging from these higher level planning guidelines and Policies indicted the site should be Open Space and the Employment designation should be removed.
After five years of huge ups and downs, experience suggests there will doubtless be more of the same. The Inspector will shortly be retiring to consider her report, which she indicates may require further specific written input, and after which, or perhaps before, we will see the R19 Draft NLWP, a document rewritten after the previous version failed to be Examined in Public a few years ago when the Inspector deferred the hearing on day 1 for the submitting Authorities to contemplate a revised approach fitting with national planning requirements. That NLWP was never resubmitted.
It has been a long, tortuous but to date very successful campaign. Previous PWA pressure leading to the termination of the Procurement alone is expected to save local ratepayers £900m over a three decade period. (NLWA’s own figures, PWA suspect the figure may be noticeably greater.) But for such successes PWA needs ongoing resident support and especially financial support for this long running matter. While the core team of local PWA experts have run up many thousands of hours of voluntary input over 5 years and while which has consistently proven to be the better of all comers, on public examination occasions such as this, the topping-off of that work with expertise from Turleys has proven to be invaluable – and inevitably costly for a voluntary campaign. Your support can be indicated through the web site by signing up for occasional mailings and ideally donations. The alternative may well be a waste incinerator about a mile upwind, as the NLWA have this week reminded.
(The PW site is immediately to your left having just passed under the large mainline railway bridge on the north circular road. The rail bridge itself is just after the old gas holder, BP garage and the two large blue sheds which are also visible from space, as may be any waste site developed on PW.)
