Forum Topic

Not well enough to attend ward forum.  Could someone deal with the following?

The only ward councillor who appears to be active on the pollution issue is Abdullah.We have to keep the pressure on and make sure the residents get what is their right for cleaner air and less noise.I hope to visit the Japanese Nursery School which is an ethical issue.Has Abdullah done this?  If so could we have some feed back!As we know, the Crawfords are not interested in the pollution issue and Kate is on record as saying:If we did not pass the retrospective planning application, the Planning Inspector would have do so on appeal.How does she know this?  Explanation required!Hansons say they have difficulties in implementing the conditions in the planning approval.They cannot enclose the conveyor belt transporting the aggregate and the tree screening, just to mention two points. (a) the dust is still allowed to pollute the area and (b) they are unable to contain the noise nuisance emitting from the conveyor belt.These two factors should be reason to retract the planning application.After nine years of monitoring, the EA cannot define who the polluters are. G&P Hansons or others.  I understand that G&P have moved, yet the pollution levels remain high.  Aggregates have put measures in place to contain dust, while Hansons have done nothing to reduce PM 10 emissions.  Who's the culprit?  If we can work it out, how come the EA are baffled!What do the councillors from Acton central and east Acton intend doing about the pollution issue that blights our lives and health.  We have the same bunch we had four years ago, and nothing was done, what do they intend to do now?  Our councillors need to push home the pollution issue.  If they are not prepared to tackle this issue, WHY NOT?Could Ealing council carry out more spot checks on the Industrial site.  Could they explain why, when there are high levels of pollution, the site does not shut down, until the levels drop down to a safe level.  Is this about money that the operators do not shut down, or a breach of conditions?  Why do Ealing council refuse to implement the rules and regulations and impose fines on perpetrators?I'm sure there are other questions that require answers, and pressure needs to be put on our less than active councillors.  Could someone put the feed back on the forum.Apologies for my absence, but my health comes first. 

Nikki Howard ● 4458d4 Comments

Nikki Howard ● 4458d

From an e-mail I received.The lack of side panelling on Hanson's conveyor belt is probably of no interest to people regarding noise nuisance, however, side panelling is an absolute requirement to contain dust escape out the sides from sand & gravel & cement on its travel along the belt upwards to the hoppers.  It's a major "escape" route for the dust as it is then high into the air already for wide dispersal.Hanson's claim that it is now "difficult to fit" is not our problem, it is a requirement that must be rigorously enforced. Hansons should have applied for Planning Permission before building of course.I have a very bad feeling that Ealing Planning are going to roll over on this requirement simply because Hansons are whingeing that it's "difficult to fit".  Planning will, as usual, accommodate them.Stuff the local community and their health, Hansons are more important.

Nikki Howard ● 4458d

Nikki The ward forum was well attended and the Chair was Councillor Gulaid who takes an active interest in Horn Lane. I would say that the other Councillors contributed also. Councillor Walker suggested that progress could be made by appealing to the Health and Wellbeing Board of which Councillor Bell is now a member.  Rosco  and Don made some very good points which I am sure they would prefer to repeat themselves. For me, the issue is that monitoring has now gone on for nine and a half years without any action being taken. Wheels are just spinning.

Maire Lowe ● 4457d

Nick O’Donnell gave a talk and slide display about Acton Main Line Station and Cross Rail plans for the future upgrade Longer platforms to accommodate 10 carriage trains and a new ticket office having various layout’s etcI asked him about the 18t MGW limit on the bridgehis short answer was its down to the policeI told the meeting that the Police say it’s down to Ealing Council.So who is responsibleEaling Council posted Legal notices which appeared in The Ealing GazetteLONDON BOROUGH OF EALINGHORN LANE RAILWAY BRIDGEThe Ealing (Weight Restriction) (No.*) Traffic Order 201*1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the London Borough of Ealing Council, propose to make the above-mentioned Order under sections 6 and 124 of and Part IV the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as amended by the Local Government Act 1985.2. The general effect of the Order would be to prohibit vehicles the maximum gross weight of which exceeds 18 tonnes from entering or proceeding in that length of Horn Lane which comprises the bridge over the railway (between the northern kerb-line of Friary Road and a point opposite the southern wall of The Leamington No.222 Horn Lane).3. The Order, other documents giving more detailed particulars of the Order, are available for inspection at Customer Services Reception, Percevat House, 14-16 Uxbridge Road W5 2HL between 9:00am and 4:45pm on Monday to Friday, until 6 weeks have elapsed from the date on which either the Order is made or the Council decides not to make the Order.4. Enquiries about the proposal can be made by telephoning the Ealing Council Project Engineer on 0208 825 7664 or by e-mail to Highwayservices@ealing.gov.uk.5. Any objections or other representations about the proposed Order should be sent in writing to the Highways Service, Perceval House, 14-16 Uxbridge Road W5 2HL quoting reference ORD 3756/djc until the 20th September 2013. All objections must specify the grounds on which they are made.Dated 30Th August 2013Roger JonesDirector of Environment and Leisure(The officer appointed for this purpose).LONDON BOROUGH OF EALINGHORN LANE RAILWAY BRIDGEThe Ealing (Weight Restriction) (No.1) Traffic Order 20131.NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the LondonBorough of Ealing Council, on the 12thDecember 2013 made the above-mentionedOrder under sections 6 and 124 of and PartIVthe Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 asamended by the Local Government Act 1985.2. The general effectof the Order will be toprohibit vehicles the maximum gross weightof which exceeds 18 tonnes from enteringor proceeding in that length of Horn Lanewhich comprises the bridge over the railway(between the northern kerb-line of Friary Roadand a point opposite the southern wall of TheLeamington No.222 Horn Lane).3.The Order, which will come into operation on16th December 2013, other documents givingmore detailed particulars of the Order, areavailable for inspection at Customer ServicesReception, Perceval House, 14-16 UxbridgeRoad WS 2H1 between 9:00am and 4:45pm onMonday to Friday, until the 23rd January 1014.4.If any person wishes to question the validityof the Order or of any of its provisions onthe grounds that it or they are not withinthe powers conferred by the Road TrafficRegulation Act 1984, or that any requirementOf that Act or of any instrument made underthat Act has not been complied with, thatperson may, within six weeks from the date onwhich the Order is made, apply for the purposeto the High Court.Dated 13th December 2013Roger JonesDirectorof Environment and Leisure(The officer appointed for this purpose).I also said the dust/pollution on Horn Lane being brought out by vehicle’s leaving the goods yardWho is responsible for that mess. 

Don Kelly ● 4456d