DOCSLIB.ORG

Cory Riverside Energy: a Carbon Case’, the Carbon Footprint

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cory Riverside Energy: a Carbon Case’, the Carbon Footprint Riverside Energy Park Consultation Report Appendices APPENDIX: PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE NUMBER: EN010093 DOCUMENT REFERENCE: J SUMMARY OF RELEVANT RESPONSES November 2018 Revision 0 APFP Regulation 5(2)(q) Planning Act 2008 | Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Consultation Report Appendices Riverside Energy Park Contents J.1 Non-Statutory Consultation Comments and Applicant’s Response J.2 Section 42 Statutory Consultation Comments and Applicant’s Response (June- July 2018) J.3 Minor Refinements Consultation Comments and Applicant’s Response (July- September 2018) J.4 Section 47 and Section 48 Statutory Consultation Comments and Applicant's Response (June-July 2018) J.5 Technical notes issued to Greater London Authority Consultation Report Appendices Riverside Energy Park Appendix J.1 Non-Statutory Consultation Comments and Applicant’s Response Riverside Energy Park: Consultation Report Appendix J.1 – Non-Statutory Consultation Responses and Applicant’s Comments Non-statutory Consultation with the Local Community The tables below sets out relevant responses received from the local community during the Non-Statutory Consultation in May 2018 (see Section 3 of the Consultation Report). Table 1 provides relevant responses received in response to the Comments Form (see Appendix D.4 of the Consultation Report) made available on the Riverside Energy Park website and at the non-statutory public exhibitions held in May 2018. In order to retain the context of the responses received, they are grouped in Table 1 under the Comments Form question they were provided in response to. Table 2 below provides a relevant response received in response to the Non-Statutory Consultation in May 2018 which was emailed to the Applicant instead of using the Comments Form. Table 1 – Relevant response received in response to the Comments Form Date Response Change Consultee Consulted Deadline Summary of Response Y/N? Regard had to Response (s49) Question 1 - Please tell us your views about our proposals Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 I am very pleased with upcoming proposals to improve N The Applicant undertook statutory section and enhance non-recyclable waste in to carbon 47 consultation between 18th June – 30th energy. As a local resident, I am in favour of this July 2018 to give local people and proposal. I would like the local community to have stakeholders the opportunity to review more information about what Riverside Park does. As further details about the proposals, ask the you are proposing 85 new jobs could you decide project team questions and provide specific jobs to local residents. Particularly feedback. Further information on the unemployed young people (18-30yrs). Proposed Development was therefore provided at this stage, as requested in the response. During this phase of consultation, the Applicant also presented the preliminary findings of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in the Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR), which was available at the section 47 public exhibitions, as well as at Upper Belvedere Community Library, London Borough of Bexley Civic Offices and Dartford Library and on the website www.riversideenergypark.com/ Chapter 14 of the ES (Document Reference 6.1) includes an assessment of likely effects on the labour market and key 2 Riverside Energy Park: Consultation Report Appendix J.1 – Non-Statutory Consultation Responses and Applicant’s Comments Date Response Change Consultee Consulted Deadline Summary of Response Y/N? Regard had to Response (s49) economic sectors of relevance to the Proposed Development. As detailed in Section 14.12 of the ES (Document Reference 6.1), the Applicant is committed to generating local economic benefit from the Proposed Development and has a preference to recruit locally where possible. Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 I think the proposals are great, reducing environmental N The Applicant has noted this response. impact and maximising the need to fulfil the demand of energy consumption Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 Generally positive, however I still have reservations N Several comments received during the non- about construction disruption. statutory consultation raised concerns relating to potential disruption during the construction phase particularly from transport effects. As set out in Section 8.6 of the Consultation Report (Document Reference 5.1) the responses received during the non- statutory consultation informed the information presented at the statutory public exhibitions. The preliminary findings of potential effects during the construction phase were presented in the PEIR published during the statutory consultation. The final findings of potential construction impacts are contained within the ES that accompanies the DCO application. Temporary effects during construction will be mitigated as set out in Chapter 17 Schedule of Mitigation and Monitoring (Document Reference 6.1). 3 Riverside Energy Park: Consultation Report Appendix J.1 – Non-Statutory Consultation Responses and Applicant’s Comments Date Response Change Consultee Consulted Deadline Summary of Response Y/N? Regard had to Response (s49) An Outline Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) (Document Reference 7.5) and an Outline Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) (Appendix B.1) (Document Reference 6.3)) have been prepared and submitted with the DCO application, which provide a framework for detailed management plans to be prepared at detailed design stage, in order to minimise and mitigate any impacts and/or disruption that may arise during the construction phase. Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 Am concerned about air quality, environmental impact, N The final findings of the assessment of interference with river for leisure e.g. rowing, yachting, potential impacts, including air quality fishing, walking (along river bank), river cruising. effects and cumulative effects are Concerned about cumulative effects. contained within the ES (Document Reference 6.1). A Navigational Risk Assessment (NRA) (Appendix B.2 of the ES) has been prepared to assess navigational issues relating to the operational use of the River Thames. The NRA has identified that the additional movements associated with REP would have a Negligible impact upon navigational safety on the River Thames and these, in terms of the ES, are Not Significant. As such, there would be no impact or interference on use of the River Thames for leisure activities, such as those listed in the response. In addition, potential effects on tourism and recreation have been scoped out of the EIA on the grounds that any such effects are not likely to be significant in the context of the EIA Regulations 4 Riverside Energy Park: Consultation Report Appendix J.1 – Non-Statutory Consultation Responses and Applicant’s Comments Date Response Change Consultee Consulted Deadline Summary of Response Y/N? Regard had to Response (s49) It may be necessary for the footpath adjacent to the River Thames in this location to be closed temporarily to facilitate construction of REP (as shown on the Access and Rights of Way Plans (Document Reference 2.3)). However, such closures will be limited and of a temporary nature and will be managed in accordance with procedures set out in a Code of Construction Practice, an outline of which is provided with the Application (Document Reference 7.5) and compliance with which is secured by a requirement in the draft DCO. The air quality assessment presented in Chapter 7 of the ES (Document Reference 6.1) has demonstrated that the Proposed Development will not result in any likely significant environmental effects on air quality, either as a standalone project or cumulatively with other projects. Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 Very interesting and dynamic. Would like to see N A report prepared by the Carbon Trust - money being put in for environmental work. To offset ‘Cory Riverside Energy: A Carbon Case’, the carbon footprint. states that, ‘Energy generated at Riverside EfW was assumed to offset fossil fuels and thereby replace CO2 emissions. ‘ Cory Riverside Energy: A Carbon Case - https://www.coryenergy.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/01/Cory-Carbon- Report-v1.1.pdf 5 Riverside Energy Park: Consultation Report Appendix J.1 – Non-Statutory Consultation Responses and Applicant’s Comments Date Response Change Consultee Consulted Deadline Summary of Response Y/N? Regard had to Response (s49) Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 The proposal make sense with a view to the future. My N The ES (Document Reference 6.1) main concern is impact on the environment. presents the findings of the EIA, a summary is included in Chapter 16 and the Non- Technical Summary (NTS) (Document Reference 6.4). Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 As rubbish needs to be disposed of. We need to do N The Applicant has noted this response. The something about it. We think increasing capacity of need for the Energy Recovery Facility existing capacity is the best solution. (ERF) and Anaerobic Digestion facility components of Riverside Energy Park (REP) is described in the Project and its Benefits Statement (Document Reference 7.2). This document clearly demonstrates the need for additional capacity, in addition to that which already exists, and how the Applicant has maximised the efficiency of the existing site. Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 London needs more green energy production and this N The Applicant has noted this. Chapter 11 of proposal by Cory is welcomed by me, especially if the ES (Document Reference 6.1) details done sensitively to the crossness nature reserve. the assessment of likely significant effects on terrestrial biodiversity, and mitigation measures that will be employed to minimise impacts on Crossness Local Nature Reserve (LNR). No likely significant residual effects have been identified. Local Community 09.05.2018 29.05.2018 It will affect the open feel of the nature reserve to have N The Applicant has noted this response. A yet another development close by. It needs to be kept Townscape and Visual Impact (TVIA) as low as possible.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NLWA Annual Report 2020/21
    Annual Report 2020-21 1. Background 1.1 The Annual Report for the Authority is produced each year for the Annual General Meeting (AGM) in June. The report uses waste tonnage data which is still subject to final validation by the national waste data system, WasteDataFlow, so may be subject to further minor changes. Because this data validation is not completed until September each year the Authority usually also produces its annual Waste Strategy Monitoring Report, which includes the validated numbers, in December each year. 1.2 NLWA’s largest ever project – the North London Heat and Power Project, (NLHPP) continued as a key focus throughout the year. The NLHPP is the Authority’s project to replace the existing energy-from-waste facility at the Edmonton EcoPark with a new energy-recovery-facility (ERF) and to provide associated new assets which support recycling. Other recycling and waste prevention activities to manage and reduce the volume of residual waste are set out in the Residual Waste Reduction Plan 2020-2022 and were also implemented during the year. The remaining activities to deliver the 2004-2020 North London Joint Waste Strategy were also delivered. All of the targets within the joint waste strategy have now been achieved, with the exception of reaching a recycling rate of 50%. NORTH LONDON WASTE AUTHORITY / ANNUAL REPORT 2020-2021 2 2. Highlights of 2020/21 2.1 It was a year of strong progress despite the COVID-19 pandemic. 2.2.2 In terms of the amount of local authority collected residua The pandemic disrupted operational services and the Authority’s l waste disposed of by the Authority, (both from households waste prevention work.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-05-26 XR Rebuttal of NLWA Claims
    STATEMENT 26 MAY 2020 of Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Media contact: +44 7710 269195 Hackney, Haringey, Islington [email protected] & Waltham Forest, together with Extinction Rebellion London TIME TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT incineration The North London Waste Authority (NLWA) has responded to calls for a pause and review of its North London Heat and Power Project (NLHPP)—which includes plans to construct a new incinerator in Edmonton— with statements that include some questionable claims. These statements appear in a letter signed by NLWA chair Cllr Clyde Loakes and dated 21 April 2020, and in a Hackney Citizen article of 11 March 2020, which quotes Hackney Cllr Jon Burke.1 They reveal that the NLWA still is not taking recycling or climate breakdown seriously. In this document, Extinction Rebellion (XR) corrects the record with the intention of convincing North London councillors to pause and review the NLHPP so that the seven boroughs that constitute the NLWA may be free to pursue more sustainable waste management options and help London meet its circular economy policy objectives. The current incinerator is operational until 2027, so there is time for a rethink, as long as procurement and preparatory works are put on hold. This rebuttal is meant as a complement to a letter that XR sent to all North London councillors on 11 March 2020. That letter provides a thoroughly sourced rundown of the environmental, financial, and governance problems associated with the NLHPP, as well as details on proven alternatives to incineration. It is available at: https://stop-edmonton-incinerator.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2020-03-11-XR-incinerator-letter.pdf.
    [Show full text]
  • Delivering Heat Networks Understanding the Challenge
    Delivering Heat Networks Understanding the challenge District heating networks are a key component These challenges and complexities are best of a future low carbon London. They will addressed by bringing together engineering, provide the means to capture and distribute planning, finance and regulatory expertise into heat from a diverse mix of primary as well as an integrated project delivery unit. secondary heat sources to serve homes and businesses. Development of district heating Arup’s multidisciplinary approach to district networks at scale across the capital over the heating project delivery underpins our work next ten years is therefore essential for London in London and across the UK. We support to meet the Mayor’s target of meeting 25% public and private sector clients from early of London’s energy needs from decentralised stage resource assessments and policy advice sources by 2025. through to scheme design, business case and procurement. We work closely with clients at Thanks to previous mayoral programmes such each stage to scope the opportunities, analyse as the London Heat Map and Decentralised the fundamentals and develop practicable Energy Masterplanning (DEMaP), the solutions for bankable projects. challenge today is no longer knowing where the opportunities lie; it is understanding how to deliver them in the face of multiple barriers, including: - long investment horizons; - limited windows of opportunity; - an opaque regulatory framework; - a stigma of poorly performing schemes in the past; and - limited experience among local authorities and developers. 2 Understanding the challenge Delivering solutions The unique working philosophy at Arup – Through our global knowledge management founded on flexibility, transparency and systems, we are able to harness ideas and ability to deliver – is ideally suited to practical experience from projects worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract Leads Powered by EARLY PLANNING Projects in Planning up to Detailed Plans Submitted
    Contract Leads Powered by EARLY PLANNING Projects in planning up to detailed plans submitted. PLANS APPROVED Projects where the detailed plans have been approved but are still at pre-tender stage. TENDERS Projects that are at the tender stage CONTRACTS Approved projects at main contract awarded stage. Agent: Plan My Property, 1 Regent Street, Council of Kings Lynn & West Norfolk Norfolk Job: Detail Plans Granted for 4 Plans Granted for housing Client: Cambridge Ltd Agent: John Thompson & Partners Ltd, 17 Street, Skipton, North Yorkshire, BD23 1JR Tel: Fraisthorpe Wind Farm Limited, Willow Court, Finedon, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, Developer: Trundley Design Services, Salgate houses Client: Mr. David Master Developer: City Council Agent: Cambridge City Council, - 23 Calton Road, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH8 01756 700364 West Way, Minns Business Park, Oxford, OX2 MIDLANDS/ NN9 5NB Tel: 01933 383604 Barn, Islington Road, Tilney All Saints, King’s Peter Humphrey Associates, 30 Old Market, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 8DL Contractor: Keepmoat Homes Ltd, Land Adjacent, Halton Moor Road 0JB Tel: 01865 261300 NOTTINGHAM £4.8M Lynn, Norfolk, PE34 4RY Tel: 01553 617700 Town Centre, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, PE13 3QJ Contractor: Keepmoat Homes, 950 Regeneration House, Gorsey Lane, Coleshill, Halton £1m DURHAM £0.8M EAST ANGLIA Land South Of, Abbey Lane Aslockton LEICESTER £1.1M 1NB Tel: 01945 466966 Capability Green, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 Birmingham, West Midlands, B46 1JU Tel: Planning authority: Leeds Job: Outline Brancepeth
    [Show full text]
  • International Passenger Survey, 2008
    UK Data Archive Study Number 5993 - International Passenger Survey, 2008 Airline code Airline name Code 2L 2L Helvetic Airways 26099 2M 2M Moldavian Airlines (Dump 31999 2R 2R Star Airlines (Dump) 07099 2T 2T Canada 3000 Airln (Dump) 80099 3D 3D Denim Air (Dump) 11099 3M 3M Gulf Stream Interntnal (Dump) 81099 3W 3W Euro Manx 01699 4L 4L Air Astana 31599 4P 4P Polonia 30699 4R 4R Hamburg International 08099 4U 4U German Wings 08011 5A 5A Air Atlanta 01099 5D 5D Vbird 11099 5E 5E Base Airlines (Dump) 11099 5G 5G Skyservice Airlines 80099 5P 5P SkyEurope Airlines Hungary 30599 5Q 5Q EuroCeltic Airways 01099 5R 5R Karthago Airlines 35499 5W 5W Astraeus 01062 6B 6B Britannia Airways 20099 6H 6H Israir (Airlines and Tourism ltd) 57099 6N 6N Trans Travel Airlines (Dump) 11099 6Q 6Q Slovak Airlines 30499 6U 6U Air Ukraine 32201 7B 7B Kras Air (Dump) 30999 7G 7G MK Airlines (Dump) 01099 7L 7L Sun d'Or International 57099 7W 7W Air Sask 80099 7Y 7Y EAE European Air Express 08099 8A 8A Atlas Blue 35299 8F 8F Fischer Air 30399 8L 8L Newair (Dump) 12099 8Q 8Q Onur Air (Dump) 16099 8U 8U Afriqiyah Airways 35199 9C 9C Gill Aviation (Dump) 01099 9G 9G Galaxy Airways (Dump) 22099 9L 9L Colgan Air (Dump) 81099 9P 9P Pelangi Air (Dump) 60599 9R 9R Phuket Airlines 66499 9S 9S Blue Panorama Airlines 10099 9U 9U Air Moldova (Dump) 31999 9W 9W Jet Airways (Dump) 61099 9Y 9Y Air Kazakstan (Dump) 31599 A3 A3 Aegean Airlines 22099 A7 A7 Air Plus Comet 25099 AA AA American Airlines 81028 AAA1 AAA Ansett Air Australia (Dump) 50099 AAA2 AAA Ansett New Zealand (Dump)
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Flood Risk Assessment
    London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal First Review August 2014 Contents Page Updating the January 2014 Consultation Draft 3 Executive Summary 4 Chapter 1 - Introduction 1.1 Wider Policy Background 5 1.2 The London Plan 6 1.3 The Sequential Test 8 1.4 How to use this RFRA 9 Chapter 2 - Overview of Flood Risk to London 2.1 Tidal Flood Risk 10 2.2 Fluvial Flood Risk 15 2.3 Surface Water Flood Risk 23 2.4 Foul Sewer Flood Risk 27 2.5 Groundwater Flood Risk 28 2.6 Reservoir Flood Risk 29 Chapter 3 – Spatial Implications of Flood Risk 3.1 Introduction 32 3.2 Specific Development Areas 33 3.3 Main Rail Network and Stations 47 3.4 London Underground & DLR Network 48 3.5 Main Road Network and Airports 49 3.6 Emergency Services 51 3.7 Schools 52 3.8 Utilities 53 3.9 Other Sites 55 Chapter 4 – Conclusions and Look Ahead 56 Appendix 1 List of Monitoring Recommendations 57 Appendix 2 Glossary 59 Appendix 3 Utility Infrastructure within Flood Risk Zones 60 Appendix 4 Comparison of Flood Risk Data with 2009 RFRA 66 Appendix 5 Flood Risk Maps Separate Document London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal – First Review – August 2014 page 2 of 66 Updating the January 2014 Consultation Draft This document represents an update of the draft, that was published in January 2014, in the light of a three-month consultation. Alongside further assistance by the Environment Agency, this final version of the First Review was also informed by responses the Mayor received from TfL as well as the London Boroughs of Richmond, Havering and Southwark (see Statement of Consultation provided separately).
    [Show full text]
  • UK Windfarm Load Factors 2006 by Site
    UK Windfarm Load Factors 2006 By Site The most recent date of ROC issue on the Renewable Obligation Certificate Register available from the Ofgem web site included in the analysis was 25th April 2007. The two monthly figures shown are the actual number of ROC's issued and this figure expressed as a percentage of the the ROC's which could be issued if the output was continually at the at the maximum DNC value, without interruption, for the complete month. The cumulative annual figures are included, where the figures given against each location are the actual number of ROC's issued during the year, the possible number of ROC's which could be issued if the output was continually at the maximum DNC value and actual output expressed as a percentage of this figure. This is the annual load (capacity) factor of each location. Most recent ROC issue date 25 April 2007 For year 2006 Annual output by technology Actual Possible % Median of Individual MWh MWh Monthly % Values Biomass 985214 1759199 56.00 55.19 Co-firing of biomass with fossil fuel 2456733 230290215 1.07 0.91 Biomass and waste using ACT 11496 26114 44.02 48.59 Micro hydro 55815 121504 45.94 46.23 Hydro <20 MW DNC 2049389 4977685 41.17 37.68 Landfill gas 4168045 6718018 62.04 63.76 Waste using an ACT 1224 11529 10.62 11.44 Off-shore wind 685819 2503109 27.40 27.18 On-shore wind 3530914 13767395 25.65 26.58 Wind 4216733 16270504 25.92 Sewage gas 333578 655003 50.93 51.91 Wave power 9 1452 0.62 0.56 PV 131 1770 7.40 7.45 Contribution to annual total renewable energy generation Biomass
    [Show full text]
  • Decentralized Energy Master Planning
    Decentralized Energy Master Planning The London Borough of Brent An Interactive Qualifying Project Report submitted to the Faculty of WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science Submitted by Anthony Aldi Karen Anundson Andrew Bigelow Andrew Capulli Sponsoring Agency London Borough of Brent Planning Service Advisors Dominic Golding Ruth Smith Liaison Joyce Ip 29 April 2010 This report represents the work of four WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of completion of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its web site without editorial or peer review. Abstract The London Borough of Brent aims to reduce its carbon emissions via implementation of decentralized energy schemes including combined heat and power systems. The objective of this project was to aid Brent in the early stages of its decentralized energy master planning. By examining policies of other boroughs and studying major development areas within Brent, the WPI project team has concluded that the council must actively facilitate the development of decentralized energy systems through the use of existing practices and development of well supported policies. i Authorship Page This report was developed through a collaborative effort by the project team: Anthony Aldi, Karen Anundson, Andrew Bigelow, and Andrew Capulli. All sections were developed as team with each member contributing equally. ii Acknowledgements The team would like to thank our advisors from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Professor Dominic Golding and Professor Ruth Smith. The team would also like to thank the liaison Joyce Ip from the London Borough of Brent Planning Service and the entire Planning Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Infrastructure Delivery Plan Review (October 2018)
    Infrastructure Delivery Plan Review (October 2018) Contents Glossary 2 1. Introduction 1.1. Introduction 3 1.2. Context and Aims 3 1.3. Approach 3 1.4. Report Structure 4 2. Anticipated Growth in the Legacy Corporation Area 2.1. Introduction 5 2.2. Population and Economy 5 3. Social Infrastructure 3.1. Introduction 7 3.2. Primary and Secondary Education 7 3.3. Early Years 13 3.4. Primary Healthcare 15 3.5. Sports and leisure, open space and play space 17 3.6. Other community facilities 21 4. Transport 4.1. Transport 31 5. Utilities and Hard Infrastructure 5.1. Introduction 47 5.2. Energy 47 5.3. Waste Management 51 5.4. Sewage 53 5.5. Water 55 5.6. Flood Risk 57 6. Infrastructure Requirements and Funding 62 Appendix 1 – Draft IDP Long List of Projects 1 Glossary Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – The Community Infrastructure Levy is a levy on development that local authorities in England and Wales may put in place to help deliver infrastructure to support the development of their area. Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) – Identifies the existing social, transport and utilities infrastructure within the Legacy Corporation area over the period 2014 to 2031. It is based on publicly available information and consultation with the four boroughs and infrastructure providers. Legacy Corporation’s Legacy Communities Scheme (LCS) – The Legacy Communities Scheme sought permission for the long-term development of five new neighbourhoods within the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park. Planning Application Reference: 11/90621/OUTODA 2 1. Introduction 1.1. Introduction The Legacy Corporation adopted both their Local Plan and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule in 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • London Borough of Haringey
    London Borough of Haringey Community Infrastructure Study March 2010 CONTENTS SECTIONS PAGE Introduction – Why we need a community infrastructure study 3 Housing and Population Growth in Haringey 9 Health 12 Education 27 Social Care 44 Libraries and Museum 51 Open Space 56 Leisure Facilities 69 Emergency Services 75 Transport 83 Waste Management 98 Water Supply and Waste Water 102 Energy 105 Telecommunications 110 Community Facilities 111 Appendix 1 Cost Assumptions 114 Appendix 2 Key Infrastructure Projects 117 2 INTRODUCTION: WHY WE NEED A COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE STUDY The London Borough of Haringey 1.1 The London Borough of Haringey (hereafter referred to as Haringey) covers an area of 11.5 square miles. It is situated in north central London. Haringey is considered to be an outer London borough. However, its proximity and public transport access to Central London and its socio-economic make-up mean that it shares many characteristics with inner London boroughs. Haringey is strategically located in the London-Stansted- Cambridge-Peterborough Growth Area, and is therefore a focus for new housing growth by central government and the Greater London Authority. With strong links to the City, West End, the Upper Lee Valley and Stansted Airport the borough is very well placed as a business location and as a base for out-commuting. 1.2 Haringey is currently preparing its Local Development Framework Core Strategy – A New Plan for Haringey. This will guide growth in the Borough for the London Plan period to 2016 and beyond to 2026. Haringey has a target of 6,800 new homes for the period between 2006 and 2016/17.
    [Show full text]
  • Edmonton Ecopark
    LondonEnergy Ltd LondonEnergy, Temporary Bulky Waste Recycling Facility (TBWRF), Edmonton EcoPark Environmental Permit Application Site Condition Report Wood Group UK Limited – November 2020 2 © Wood Group UK Limited Report for Copyright and non-disclosure notice Tom Bateson The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright Sustainability and Environment Manager owned by Wood (© Wood Group UK Limited 2020) save to the London Energy Limited extent that copyright has been legally assigned by us to EcoPark another party or is used by Wood under licence. To the extent Advent Way that we own the copyright in this report, it may not be copied Edmonton or used without our prior written agreement for any purpose London other than the purpose indicated in this report. The N18 3AG methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to you in confidence and must not be disclosed or copied to third parties without the prior written agreement of Wood. Disclosure of that information may constitute an actionable Main contributors breach of confidence or may otherwise prejudice our Lynne Gemmell commercial interests. Any third party who obtains access to this report by any means will, in any event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below. Issued by Third party disclaimer ................................................................................. Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this Lynne Gemmell disclaimer. The report was prepared by Wood at the instruction of, and for use by, our client named on the front of the report. It does not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to access it by any means.
    [Show full text]
  • Ltd 8 Floor 210 Pentonville Road London N1 9JY Our
    Joanne Demetrius Our Ref: APP/M1900/V/13/2192045 Veolia ES (UK) Ltd 8th Floor 210 Pentonville Road 16 July 2015 London N1 9JY Dear Madam TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (SECTION 77) APPLICATION BY VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RECYCLING AND ENERGY RECOVERY FACILITY – LAND AT NEW BARNFIELD, HATFIELD APPLICATION REF: 6/2570-11 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, David Richards BSocSci Dip TP MRTPI, who held an inquiry on dates between 10 September and 25 October 2013 in relation to your application under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the demolition of existing library buildings and construction and operation of a Recycling and Energy Recovery Facility (RERF) for the treatment of Municipal, Commercial and Industrial Wastes together with ancillary infrastructure, including bulking/transfer facilities, administration/visitor centre, landscaping, habitat creation, drainage and highway improvement works (application ref 6/2570-11 dated 16 November 2011). 2. On 28 January 2013, the Secretary of State directed, in pursuance of Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, that your application be referred to him instead of being dealt with by the waste planning authority, Hertfordshire County Council (HCC), because the proposal involved matters giving rise to substantial cross boundary or national controversy. 3. The Secretary of State issued his decision in respect of the above application in his letter dated 7 July 2014. That decision letter was the subject of an application to the High Court and was subsequently quashed by order of the Court dated 22 January 2015.
    [Show full text]