Template/Example for Objecting to the unlawfully built Hanson Cement plant in Horn Lane:-
OK folks, whilst the Consultation End date has been passed, the Planning Department will still accept Objections up until the decision goes before Planning Committee. *** If you use this example please tailor it somewhat to suit your own style.I don’t profess the following to be particularly good as I have only quickly knocked it out, (with acknowledgement to a SHLAP Member from whom I have copied & tailored this!) however you will get the gist. And I’ve not posted my Full Objection because it’s “War and Peace”, about 12 pages long!eMail TO: planning@ealing.gov.uk ; leep@ealing.gov.uk (with your name, address etc of course)ORLodge via Planning Website Portal:- http://www.pam.ealing.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=161503======================================================================*** PLEASE Confirm receipt and lodging of this Objection *** I OBJECT to the above application and request that Ealing Borough Council “Refuse” the Application and order the immediate dismantling and removal of this unlawfully built cement plant. I also question the validity of the submitted noise assessment when the assessment report was compiled by URS, the same firm who are the Agents for the Hansons Planning Application. (URS Infrastructure & Environment) My Reasons for Objecting include:- 1. Contravention of Original Planning Permission. The external appearance of the new Hanson plant is highly obtrusive and materially different from the old as well as being sited in a completely different location. Hanson have also not provided a plan showing the original plant location nor copies of the original drawing/s. I request that these are provided before any Planning Decision is made. From my home the plant is significantly larger in size and much closer to my home because it is now in a different place entirely to the original. This new plant is far more visually intrusive. The old, original plant was in two sections with the silo section being considerably further away. In this regard I note that it was a clear condition of the November 1965 Certificate in relation to the old plant that the plant be “located at the southern part of the site so as to reduce the risk of injury to the amenities of residential properties to the north of the site in Horn Lane and Noel Road.” This directive, when Councils had a more “caring” attitude towards residents, has been completely ignored. 2. Pollution issues – Air and Noise. This pocket estate of industrial sites, of which this plant forms part, is known as the most regularly polluted location in London (Ref: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7012351.stm ) Statistics from the Environmental Research Group at Kings College London show that this site has consistently breached EU and National requirements by significant amounts (the EU Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC May 2008 and the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010). Accordingly, it also consistently fails to meet the targets of the National Air Quality Action Plan and the Ealing Air Quality Action Plan which implement these laws. The matter has been raised in the house of Commons by the local MP, Angie Bray ( Ref: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2010-12-15a.291.0 ), has been raised in the London Assembly by Murad Qureshi, Labour London Assembly member (Ref: : http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press_releases_assembly_member/news-murad-qureshi-dangerous-levels-air-pollution-horn-lane-exc ) and again recentlyb by Angie Bray Fresh concrete and cement are very alkaline and corrosive and can cause serious pollution, with particulate matter emissions and stormwater runoff being the primary pollutants. I am especially concerned about particulate matter emissions as a result of the transfer of material to silos, the transfer of sand and aggregate to the plant, truck loading and mixer loading etc. In addition to such pollution as the plant operation produces, I believe, from the Environmental Health Department, that there are about 200 heavy vehicle movements a day at the plant and this must lead to significant increases in particulate matter and, presumably, also nitrogen dioxide levels, particularly as the concrete mixer lorries are idling whilst being filled. A paper produced by Kings College Environmental Group (Particulate Matter Oxidative Potential from Waste Transfer Station Activity (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2854725/ ) notes that the highest particulate matter concentrations in London occur in proximity to waste transfer stations that experience high number of dust-laden, heavy-duty diesel vehicles transporting industrial and household waste. There is little difference in the profile for the cement batching plant which sees 200 heavy duty vehicle movements carrying aggregate and concrete. The Government's Air Quality Strategy notes that exposure to ambient levels of particulate matter is consistently associated with respiratory and cardiovascular illness and mortality. Nitrogen dioxide levels can cause inflammation of the airways and long term exposure may affect lung function and cause respiratory symptoms. Hanson Concrete get their aggregates from the adjoining aggregates rail depot and are transferred between the two sites by lorry. Cold starting of any vehicle gives rise to higher emissions initially and this applies particularly to vehicles equipped with catalysts. Therefore I do not accept that there is any reduction in pollution as a result of this proximity because all the cold start short journeys simply concentrates the pollution in a small residential area. The plant also creates an excessive noise nuisance and I understand that the Environmental Health Department has monitored the noise and determined that it does amount to a noise nuisance. Accordingly, the air and noise pollution that is produced by this plant contributes significantly to locally unacceptable levels in breach of legally binding EU and National requirements. It is completely inappropriate in what is a densely populated, residential area with many young families consisting of highly vulnerable infant & child lungs. The residential properties are in close proximity to this site on two sides and a children's nursery operates within The Shamrock Club adjacent to the batching plant. Whilst primarily a residential area, over the years inappropriate and unfettered development has taken place in this small pocket of activity next to the railway in the former goods yard, despite vigorous objections on numerous occasions. Hansons (and the other polluting firms) should be relocated to a more appropriate Industrial Estate which is not in the midst of a heavily populated residential area. Ealing Borough Council has a “Duty of Care” to protect the health and quality of life of the local residents and robustly prevent any further additions to the air and noise pollution blighting this part of Horn Lane. 3. Visual Appearance The structure is an extremely tall, ugly and visually intrusive industrial structure, sited close to my property with no attempts made to ameliorate its impact. As a consequence it detrimentally affects my quality of life. 4. Loss of Privacy Persons climbing to the silos overlook my property and invade my privacy. 5. Traffic/Highway Safety There are approx. 200 heavy vehicle movements a day which create a considerable amount of danger to pedestrians as these vehicles enter/leave the site onto Horn Lane and there have been issues with lorries parking inappropriately in local streets, no doubt because the site is too small to accommodate ………... Large cement trucks parked in the bus lane also make it very difficult for traffic exiting Noel Road to see oncoming traffic. It is an increasing safety concern crossing the access road to the site, which is very wide but has a sharp bend in it which obscures the large vehicles “thundering” into and out of the site until they are almost upon you. This is particularly dangerous for young children, the infirm and the elderly. There is also the aforementioned nursery based in the adjacent Shamrock Club. 6. Proposals in the Development Plan The local development plan envisages residential property development in the existing adjacent Gowing & Pursey site. It is unlikely that anyone would want to build or live next door to the cement batching plant (or even be allowed to do so on environmental grounds) so this development would be likely to prevent the local development plan being effective. Regarding Air Pollutiion, there has been NO significant reductions in PM10 emissions and I draw your attention to th efollowing “Air Quality Action Plan” from some SEVEN years ago:- “2.1.3.1 Action on Detailed Assessment Recommendations Following the recommendations made by Faber Maunsell in the Detailed Assessment Report, Ealing Council has continued monitoring PM10 in Horn Lane. Of the preventative and mitigative controls suggested as being employed to help reduce fugitive emissions by approximately 90% (an annual mean decrease of 49 µg/m3 to ensure both 2004 objectives are met), a wheel-washer was installed at the Gowing & Pursey site on 26th August 2006. Hanson Premix has not yet replaced their dry-batch concrete plant with a wet-batch system. As 2.1.3 shows, the objectives are still not being met. Ealing Council is currently investigating the reasons as to why PM10 levels remain high and will introduce schemes to tackle fugitive emissions from industrial sources in a revised Air Quality Action Plan, which is due to be published by the end of 2006. These measures are also in accordance with recommendations from the GLA (ref: LB10/LT/060810) and DEFRA (ref: DA-261; ref: USA3-045), received as part of their review of the 2006 Detailed Assessment report and DEFRA's review of the 2006 Updating and Screening Assessment report.” ======================================================================
Rosco White ● 4738d2 Comments ● 4734d