Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
London Concrete are back for more - Public Meeting
In March 2017 London Concrete submitted a planning application to lift restrictio...
A consultation letters sent to residents had very little details on the extent or impact the application would have.
Consultation Ends on the 18th April 2017
Submit Your Comments
Public Meeting
This Wed 12th April 2017 7:30
Honsey Vale Community Centre
London Concrete got planning permission after an appeal public enquiry with over 40 conditions imposed on the development including included caps of the level of operations Vehicle movement, number of trucks on site, number of cement deliveries, level of noise dust and more. Now 6 years after they start operating their batching plant in Cran...
In their application London Concrete admits they’ve been operating at the capacity they are applying for, for some times. Find out what is the current level of traffic generated by London Concrete, What is their growth rate and what can we expect it to be by 2020 if this goes unchecked
| Total Truck movement at % yearly growth rate | ||||
| Year | Measured traffic | 50% | 75% | 100% |
| 2011 | 70 (permitted) | |||
| 2017 | 220 (current level) @50% growth a year | 220 | 220 | 220 |
| 2018 | 330 | 385 | 440 | |
| 2019 | 495 | 674 | 880 | |
| 2020 | 740 | 1179 | 1760 | |
Read All about it here
- What are the changes London Concrete applies for?
- Does London Concrete abide by the conditions put on them so far?
- What is the current level of traffic generated by London Concrete?
- When enough is enough?
- Complaint Department
- Consultation
Consultation Ends on the 18th April 2017
Submit Your Comments
Tags for Forum Posts: Application, Concrete, GreenN8, London, Planning
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Adrian Hackney on
-
Those growth figures need some justifying. 70 - 220 is in 6 years is only about 22% p.a.
50% p.a. would have taken you to about 800 this year. And what justification is there for including 100% p.a. Who is claiming this rate of growth. Certainly not London Concrete.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Soper on
-
Well we wouldn't know what their growth rate is because they didn't even comply with original requirement to notify Haringey of the number of vehicles operating out of their plant. The legal limit was 5, when Haringey went to investigate they discovered 11 - a 220% increase - as London Concrete won't admit and Haringey only investigate when prompted these figures are as reliable as any other
-
Permalink Reply by GN8 on
-
The growth rate is calculated at 300% over 6 years since the plant opened - by their own admission on the application.
I make that average yearly growth rate of 50%
Projecting 3 years forward to 2020 with growth rate of 50% is modest estimate in my view.
The 100% as top end possibility is presented because the expected construction growth in both Haringey and London as a whole with demolition and rebuild of whole wards of estates could very easily push their growth to that level! See haringey #HDV plans to demolish and rebuild Northhumberland park parts of Tottenham and Wood Green. However Haringey is not unique - the same is happening everywhere else.
London Concrete is not just operating in Haringey they can and probably do deliver concrete to anywhere in a 2hr drive radius!
I am sorry to say 100% growth is unfortunately a very realistic prospect.
But even if they only grow at current rate of 50% a year in 2023 6 years from now if permitted we can see 1760 vehicle movement a day!
Attending the public meeting were over 50 local people 95% of whom where NOT part of the original campaign. All were complaining of a variety of impacts which GreenN8 warned about in 2006 during the public inquiry.
Before the public meeting I went back to read the appeal decision with the 43 conditions put on the permission of this development - I am sorry to have to say this but London Concrete DO NOT ADHERE TO ANY OF THEM!
If anyone in interested in the details and want to read it for themselves please visit http://greenn8.org.uk/category/campaigns/london-concrete
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
I agree it's excessive but your figures are wrong. The average growth has been 35 trips per year. 35 is 50% of the base (70 trips), but that's not the same as a 50% growth rate over 6 years. The growth may well continue at 35 per year if unchecked, but there is no evidence that the number of trips could increase from current level (220) by 50% (110) in one year. The capacity for growth will also presumably be capped by other factors such as the size of the factory, ability to take raw material deliveries, no of lorries that can physically be located on site etc.
-
-
Well illustrated JoeW, a neat lesson in the difference between simple and compound percentages.
Plus, if London Concrete are not allowed to use the rail depot, all that concrete will pass through the area anyway but from much further afield, thereby actually increasing the number of concrete-lorry-miles and making the situation even more worse.
-
-
There is nothing to stop LC using the rail depot - the issue is ensuring that they either operate within the original limits set by the Planning Inspector or protecting local roads from the effects that are already being felt thanks to LC breaking the limits and Haringey seemingly unable (or unwilling?) to police their use of the depot. The concrete factory is already there and operational but the Hornsey Vale Roads are seeing these oversized vehicles taking shortcuts whenever there are traffic problems on the main road network and whenever the drivers, who are NOT LC employees but 'franchisees' want to maximise their earnings by taking more loads than are permitted or indeed sensible.
-
-
I will be interested to know:
- Why in your view a planning inspector bothered to place 43 conditions on this application?
- Are you aware what they are and what are they supposed to mitigate?
- Are you aware whether or not, any of them are followed?
When this application went through the public inquiry, critics of GN8 arguments regarding potential future growth and impact, claimed we exaggerate and no impact would be felt as a result of LC operating here.
I am sorry to say it, but every predication we made in our presentations throughout this past campaign, has come to pass!
The reason we knew what is coming down - was because we researched what LC were doing elsewhere!
You can poke holes in what I am saying all you like - I guess we will revisit this discussion in 3 years time when a repeat performance is enacted yet again.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
