Apr 092017
 

In March 2017 London Concrete submitted a planning application to lift restrictions imposed on their operation by a 
planning inspector in 2006.

A consultation letters sent to residents had very little details on the extent or impact the application would have.

London Concrete Application HGY/2017/0874

Consultation Ends on the 18th April 2017 

What are the changes London Concrete applies for?

Documents attached to the application reveal the truth about what is really going on. The covering letter submitted by Vilna Walsh From FirstPlan on behaf of London Concrete gives details of what exactly this application is about:

Condition 3

Restricts the number of operational mixer trucks based on site to 5

Increase the number of operational mixer trucks based on site to 11

Condition 3 text
Condition 27

Restricts the number of operational mixer truck movements to 50 a day

increase the number of operational mixer truck movements to 180 a day

Condition 27 text
Condition 28

Restricts the number of private concrete vehicle movements to 10 per day

Increase the number of private concrete vehicle movements to 30 per day

Condition 28 text
Condition 29

Restricts the number of cement deliveries to 4 per day

Increase  the number of cement deliveries to 12 per day

Condition 29 text

London Concrete planing application 2017 here 

Does London Concrete abide by the conditions put on them so far?

The short answer is NO!  But that should not come as a surprise to anyone who was involved in the first and second rounds of that application. It is the main reason we fought so hard to stop London Concrete setting a batching plant within our community. We had plenty of evidence regarding London Concrete mode of operation in other communities and needless to say, we had very little confidence that London Concrete will abide by the conditions put on them, or that Haringey will have either the will or ability to enforce them.

We were very aware from the get go that the nature of such application is termed ‘incremental planning application’ in other words although the original application is for small operational capacity there is nothing in the planning rule book to limit a business growth and expansion. 

The application was granted on Appeal the decision included 43 conditions many of them are totally disregarded – London Concrete Appeal Decision Document is here Conditions starts on page 17

What is the current level of traffic generated by London Concrete?

In their application London Concrete admits they’ve been operating at the capacity they are applying for, for some times. In the transport report by Bellamy Roberts which was submitted with this application to very conditions we are given information of  A 12hour (0700-1900) count survey conducted on Thursday 19th January 2017 traffic movements associated with London Concrete identified 158 traffic movements of mixer trucks associated with the London Concrete Plant and 11 cement delivery movements. the survey did not include any Private mixer trucks movements.

“The 12hour survey conducted at the Cranford Way/Tottenham Lane Junction identified 158 traffic movements (i.e. 79 in and 79 out) by mixer trucks associated with the London Concrete Plant. In addition, there were 11 cement delivery movements (5 in and 6 out). On the day of the survey there were no private, third party, collections of concrete from the Plant. The Table at Appendix 6 sets out these movements by time of day.”

Read the transport report submitted with London Concrete application Appendix 3 – 6 show details of the above information

When enough is enough?

Although throughout this application the dates for this application is referenced as 2005 /2006, London Concrete only started building their batching plant in 2010 and as you can see from the picture above taken in May 2010, there was still no batching plant on site! So in reality London Concrete are operational from 2011.

London Concrete Site in Cranford Way 23rd May 2010

London Concrete Site in Cranford Way 23rd May 2010

Over a period of 6 years they have more then tripled their operational capacity – an average growth rate of  50% a year. This is not going to slow down any time soon, especially as Haringey is about to embark on a massive regeneration plans, which entail the demolition and rebuild of whole neighborhoods in Tottenham, NorthHumberland Park and WoodGreen and other smaller developments across other wards east and west.

Of course no one actually knows where those trucks movement lead to? Are those restricted only to Haringey, or does London concrete operate all their London plants in

tandem – meaning many batching plants deliver at their capacity to wherever concrete is needed within a 2 hour drive radius? Lets face it – London is one huge construction site and will be for the foreseeable future!

So what can we expect the future to look like? A modest estimate for 2020 (only 3 years away) considering current growth rate + construction acceleration could easily result in 75%- 100% growth rage per year. But even at a growth rate of 50% a year, by 2020 we could experience 740 London Concrete vehicle movement.

The table below projects this growth rates into the near future. The figures of below represent the sum total of vehicle movements per day, this includes; London Concrete and private concrete mixer trucks, and cement deliveries. 

Look at the numbers and ask yourself where is the limit?  

 
Total Truck movement at % yearly growth rate 
Year Measured traffic 50% 75% 100%
2011 70 (permitted)      
2017 220 (current level) 220 220  220
2018   330 385  440
2019   495 674  880
2020   740  1179  1760

Complaint Department

London Concrete claims that their increased level of operation has gone unnoticed and no complaints where made. Of course this is ludicrous – and plainly untrue! Despite Haringey assurances that this development will be controlled, they have done very little to deliver on those promises. With cuts to services the mechanism by which residents can make a complaint is ineffective at best.

If people know there is no efficient way to make a complaint and that enforcement of planning conditions is virtually none existent – is there any wonder it seems like there are no complaints? 

Latest events re-enforce this perception further – When people started raising the issue of traffic with Haringey, what was their answer? Did they check those claims? Did they enforce conditions? Did they fine London Concrete for disregarding those conditions? Oh no! what do they do? They ask London concrete to REGULATE their infringement by applying to change the conditions to fit their current level of operation! Read Paul S

Does that inspire confidence in our council or the process?

Consultation

A consultation letter sent to residents was thin in details. As one would expect, it was a box ticking exercise designed not to give information on the extent of the increases and the IMPACT it would have.

The consultation letter states:

“Proposal: Variation of conditions attached to Appeal reference APP/Y5420/A/05/1189822 (original Haringey planning reference HGY/2005/0007) as follows: to increase the number of operational mixer trucks that can be based at and operate from the site (variation of condition 3), to increase the number of operational mixer truck movements allowed per day (variation of condition 27), to increase the number of private concrete vehicle movements allowed per day (variation of condition 28) and to increase the number of cement deliveries allowed by road per day (variation of condition 29)”

Read the consultation letter about London Concrete application

Haringey claims they sent 1,075 consultation letters that includes:

Cranford Way

  • Firemens Flats Glebe Road
  • Rathcoole Avenue 
  • Rathcoole Gardens
  • Ribblesdale Road
  • few houses on Ridge Road
  • Chettle Court
  • Tottenham Lane
  • Uplands Road
  • one side of Wightman Road
  • Other public bodies and stake holders 

Full list of addresses consultation letters where sent to  

Consultation Ends on the 18th April 2017 

 

  No Responses to “London Concrete is Back for More”