Over 50 reasons why Green Lane is the wrong site for a Recycling Plant (MRF)

In the latter stages of the run up to the Council panel meeting in June, Sky Properties finally provided an indication of who may be running the recycling plant in their planned facility. In fact, they even got a letter of support from JWS Waste and Recycling Services. JWS run another recycling plant in Fredrick Rd in Salford. You may remember this plant hitting the news recently, when mothers and children blocked the entrance to plant:

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1314043_human_barricade_in_living_hell_recycling_plant_row

Families referred to the plant as “a living hell” further claiming that people living nearby were plagued by noise and dust from the site and by flies in hot weather.

We have maintained since the original proposal for this plant, that this living hell would be the reality. Additionally, a recycling plant would be a serious safety hazard so close to homes and children’s play areas. The noise, smell and pests could be considered just one of the 50 reasons why Mr. Hirsch needs to rethink recycling at this site. Safety, however, trumps these and gives us our next 50. A quick search on Google reveals exactly how much of a problem fire safety in particular is a problem for MRF plants. In the last two years, Google shows the following incidents of MRF Fires:

Number Date Location
1 14 April 2009 Hartlepool
2 26 May 2009 Port Talbot
3 22 June 2009 Bolton
4 22 July 2009 Walsall
5 10 August 2009 Dewsbury
6 25 August 2009 Lincolnshire
7 05 March 2010 Derry
8 18 March 2010 Grantham
9 21 April 2010 Edmonton
10 10 May 2010 Doncaster
11 20 May 2010 Enderby
12 27 May 2010 Ford
13 19 June 2010 Kilmarnock
14 06 July 2010 Brent
15 14 July 2010 Neath
16 02 August 2010 Mill Hill
17 03 August 2010 Bolton
18 30 August 2010 Edinburgh
19 31 August 2010 Bolton
20 01 October 2010 Buckley
21 01 October 2010 Ilkeston
22 03 November 2010 Huntingdon
23 23 December 2010 Pontllanfraith
24 14 January 2011 Norton
25 19 January 2011 Norton
26 05 February 2011 Huntingdon
27 09 February 2011 Ellesmere Port
28 01 March 2011 Croydon
29 13 March 2011 Stourton
30 20 March 2011 Hetton-le-hole
31 20 March 2011 Southampton
32 23 April 2011 Lye
33 23 April 2011 Brighton
34 24 April 2011 Kingswinford
35 29 April 2011 Sunderland
36 29 April 2011 Telford
37 30 April 2011 Liverpool
38 02 May 2011 Tyneside
39 03 May 2011 Loughborough
40 03 May 2011 Suffolk
41 03 May 2011 Thirsk
42 04 May 2011 Caerwent
43 16 May 2011 St Albans
44 20 May 2011 Leatherhead
45 21 May 2011 Sunderland
46 31 May 2011 Hereford
47 03 June 2011 Sleaford
48 07 June 2011 Poole
49 09 June 2011 Haverhill
50 15 June 2011 Hereford
51 24 June 2011 Lincoln
52 30 June 2011 Tameside
53 05 July 2011 Orsett
54 12 July 2011 Oldham

Surprising that one of these is actually happening in Oldham on the day I decided to write this post.  There is clearly an issue here. One the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) need to investigate to a conclusion. Does Mr. Hirsch really think it’s appropriate to have one of these overlooking a children’s park?  These are some of many reasons that we continue to prepare to fight an appeal. Watch this space for updates.

Sky Ignorant To Views of Residents, Council and Salford.

  Sky Properties will be attending a meeting by the authority in charge of creating the joint waste strategy for Greater Manchester on Tuesday 28th June. Two weeks after Salford Council’s refusal of their proposal, they have ignored the decision and have begun to position for an appeal. You can find two documents submitted by their consultant (Entec) here: http://www.gmwastedpd.co.uk/doclib.html

The Green Lane Site was removed from the regional plan in July 2010. The site is neither suitable or required. There may even in fact be an over capacity in the region to process waste as Sky plans too. As we have always believed, Sky will need to source waste for their incinerator from outside of the area. Not only outside the local area, but outsid ethe region! If there is already enough capacity to deal with regional waste, where will their waste come from?  Hey, why not ship it in from Europe?

They are essentially trying to get the Green Lane site re-included into the regional waste plan. You can send your thoughts and objections here:
“Mrs. Blackston can be contacted by email via natalie.blackston@urbanvision.org.uk or by telephoning 0161 604 7791”

Please do.

VE Day – Victory in Eccles Day

On the 2nd June 2011, Salford Council rejected the Sky Properties proposal to blight the city with a waste burning incinerator.

Nearly 300 people packed out the Salford Suite at the Swinton Civic Centre to show their opposition to the application.  After representations from both objectors and the applicant, the Planning Panel debated the plans to finally come to the conclusion.. “Salford Council Unanimously Says No”.  We do not want it, we do not need it and we will not take it.

This is not only a victory for the city but also for democracy. The developers strenuous attempts to dupe both the public and Council into accepting this nightmare have categorically FAILED.

On behalf of the campaign group, I would like to thank everyone who has supported us in this struggle. Quality of life for the many has indeed overcome the greed of the few.  The community has remained united through-out this 18 month battle and we can now enjoy some short but welcome respite from this attack on our homes.

We are once again willing to extend the hand of reconciliation to Mr. Hirsch, so we may come to a compromise on an alternative use for the land, which would be of mutual benefit to both Sky and the community.  For the avoidance of any doubt, should he fail to accept that hand and decide to go to appeal as he as already indicated, we promise him this:

For every objection letter sent so far, we will send three.

For every petition signature so far, we will get four.

For every “truth” we have told, we will tell five.

The Council stood up for the people of Salford this week and should there be an appeal, we re going to do the same for them.

WE WILL NOT REST, WE WILL NOT STOP and WE WILL NOT LOSE.

Press Release: New report into proposed incinerator reveals shocking statistics on hazardous fumes

With a decision on the proposed Green Lane Incinerator looming this week, a new report reveals that levels of toxic pollutants in the area surrounding the planned site are already at or above legal limits set by the European Commission.

If the incinerator is given the go ahead, the addition of a further 1000 HGVs a week to local roads and emissions from the incinerator itself, will see those levels soar.
The pollutants -including PM10 -have been linked to asthma in children and increased risk of mortality in people with pre-existing heart or respiratory conditions. Local resident campaign group, ʻSay No to the Green Lane Incineratorʼ plan to use the results of this study to oppose the plans when the planning panel meet on Thursday 2nd June to make a decision on whether to allow the Incinerator to be built.

They will protest outside Swinton Civic Centre on Thursday morning ahead of the planning panel and several members of the group will speak at the meeting to voice their concerns. Opposition to the proposal has been overwhelming with more than 4000 petition signatures gathered and over 1000 letters of objection submitted to the council leaving them in no doubt about the strength of feeling within the local community.

During their 18 month fight to stop the incinerator, campaigners have raised concerns about the emission of dioxins which are linked to cancer and birth defects and say they are seriously worried about the safety of the plant. In addition to highlighting potential health risks, the group will also be objecting to the
increased traffic the plant will bring. There are already 750 HGV movements a day on Green Lane, if the plant goes ahead this number will rise to 1000 which equates to one every thirty seconds during a normal working day. Local roads are simply not equipped to deal with that level and type of traffic.

Other issues include the proximity of the proposed plant to local amenities and its effects on the local environment. If given the green light, the incinerator situated just 50m from a children’s park and 100m from a school -will process nearly a quarter of a million tonnes of waste per year, 80,000 tonnes of which will be incinerated in a “gasification chamber”.

Anthony O’Connor Application For Waste Transfer Station – REFUSED, Again

Today Salford City Council made the decision on Anthony O’Connors application to build a waste transfer station on the land next door to Sky Properties’ proposed Incinerator site.  O’Connors previously made pretty much the same application in 2010, resulting in a refusal from the Council. Trying their luck a second time, O’Connors made some minor changes to their application and resubmitted it. Today the Council Planning and Transport Panel “REFUSED” that second application.

 
The main grounds by which the applications were refused were:
  • Impacts on roads due to additional HGVs – including residential amenity and the type/size of vehicle.
  • Impact on Bridgewater canal, such as visual amenity and noise.

Acceptance of this application would have marked a change of direction on Green Lane. The surrounding area is currently regenerating and casting off it’s historical 1950’s heavy industrial background. It is becoming a vibrant residential community where people are choosing to locate with their families. In addition, an acceptance could have provided further fuel for Sky’s claims that the area is appropriate for waste processing and incineration. It is not.

This refusal continues to support the ongoing planning strategy for the area.  The old GUS site on the opposite side of the canal was recently refused permission to switch use to a similar heavy industry usage.  The owner’s of the GUS subsequently aligned their plans with the Council’s strategy and the Bridgewater Master Plan, by submitting an application for residential housing. The GUS  housing application was accepted.  If Sky are watching, let them develop the same good sense as the owners of the GUS site, by realigning their objectives with the Council’s strategy.

Sky’s incinerator application shares many parallels with the one rejected today.   We will be objecting in force on the 2nd of June, when the decision is made on their nightmare incinerator.

Anthony O’Connor Application To Be Heard This Thursday (19th May)

Last year, Sky’s next door neighbour Anthony O’Connor put an application in to the Council to change the use of their site to a Waste Transfer Station. This would involve bringing in a new giant crushing machine and the associated HGVs to bring waste to/from the site. This application was submitted with no consultation with the public, or any of the neighbours to the site.

As you can imagine, most of the same objections that the local community has towards the Sky application are equally applicable to this application. The first application Anthony O’Connor submitted was refused. He subsequently reapplied at a later date, with pretty much the same application, to which all of the community’s previous objections were resubmitted.

Late last week the Council gave notice to some of the residents that the application was to be decided by the planning panel on Thursday this week. We have been in contact with the Council both yesterday and today to request that this application decision be deferred until June the 2nd as both this application and the Sky application are clearly linked by location and nature. Therefore, any decision on the O’Connor application would be “prejudicial” to the Sky decision.

For whatever reason, the Council has refused to defer the O’Connor decision. Due to the very short notice and constantly shifting dates, we have had little time to react to the Council’s actions in this matter. This is clearly something that needs to be addressed by the Council and by us.

What To Do:

Contact your local councillors, the members of the planning panel and the council officers,  to ensure they understand the implications of this decision, and the implications of the scope given to objectors.  We remain opposed to the Anthony O’Connor application on the following grounds:

  • Traffic – HGVs. HGVs and more HGVs
  • It is “not in keeping” with the Bridgewater Master Plan
  • Site not suitable due to proximity to local school
  • Noise from the giant crushing machine
  • Prejudicial and linked to Sky application

If you can make it, turn up on Thursday at the Swinton Civic Centre to object to the application. There will be no organised demo outside, but you should still make best efforts to attend the Panel meeting as a member of the public. The panel meeting is scheduled to start in the afternoon. Please turn up at the Main Reception of the Civic Centre and ask for the exact meeting time and location.

Keep up the pressure people, fight for every inch.

Council Meeting Rescheduled – We Will Have Our Opportunity To Speak

UPDATE 29/05/2011: The Council planning panel will be meeting in the morning of the 2nd June. We will be demonstrating outside the main entrance of the civic centre from 8:30am. After this we will be heading into the Salford Suite, where the meeting will take place.

We urge everyone to make best efforts to attend both the demo and the meeting. To attend the meeting, please let the Council know that you intend to do this.

Fill in the following form to register:
www.salford.gov.uk/panel-meeting

Application Numbers: 10/59092/OUTEIA & 10/59093/FULEIA

Alternatively, you can call this number to register:
0161 793 2602

We will be there to state our grounds for opposition. We appreciate any and all support you can give. See you there on Thursday.

:END UPDATE

We have fantastic news.  The Council has decided that due to massive opposition to this application, it is necessary to reschedule the panel meeting where the final decision will be made.  We have learned that the format of the meeting will be changed, so that all those who want to speak at the meeting will be given an opportunity to do so.

You may remember that we recently complained that Sly Properties were given the opportunity to do a full presentation to the planning panel without any objectors present.  As a result we launched a barrage of calls, emails and letters to the council requesting that we also be given an opportunity to present our side of this argument in full. This request was denied.

Cllr Lisa Stone Hands 4000 Signature Petition to Derek Antrobus, Lead Member For Planning at Salford City Council

In what can only be seen as an about-turn  re-assessment of the situation, the date of the planning meeting has been moved to the 2nd of June and will occur in revised format.  It is yet to be confirmed, but the meeting may now be held for the full day and objectors will be given significantly more scope to state their case.

Well done to everyone who’s been calling, emailing and posting letters. Our opposition to the incinerator remains absolute. We do not want it, do not need it and will not take it.

NOTES ON DEMOS: SATURDAY’S RALLY IS STILL GOING AHEAD. PLEASE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OUR EFFORTS WITH YOUR ATTENDANCE.

THE CIVIC CENTRE DEMO HAS NOW BEEN TENTATIVELY  RESCHEDULED TO JUNE 2nd (We appreciate that people may have already booked time off work for this and will have to change dates again, but despite the Council’s seemingly unorganised operations, we really need your support, stick with us. We will only stop this together).

Breaking News: Sky Release Information That Changes Ever… erm.. well.. nothing.

CBI Backs Green Lane Eco Park

In Sky’s latest attempt to boost their applications chances of avoiding rejection, they have managed to get a statement from the CBI expressing support for the incinerator. Apparently, this is newsworthy information.  It is unfortunate that these organisations have been duped by Sky’s misleading claims, but did anyone really expect anything different? It’s a bit like businesses saying “making lots of money is a good thing” for businesses.

The representative from the CBI states: “I consider that there is an overwhelming case in support of this application..”. I beg to differ. Let’s put this into context. The total amount of letters to the Council supporting the application, somewhere in the region of.. 3. In opposition to the application have been 4,000 petition signatures and over 1,000 objection letters.

To sum this up in statistics (because we know Sky likes statistics):

For: 3 – Against: 5000

Our opposition to this application is absolute. We do not want it, do not need it and will not take it.

The Time Has Come – Final Chance to Protest

We have confirmation from 3 different sources that Salford Council will be making the decision on the incinerator application on Thursday May 19th 2011.  Now more than ever before do we need to show strength of opposition against Sky Properties and there plan to build this incinerator.

We will be holding two protests as follows:

  • Rally: 11am Saturday 14th May, at Shackleton St. Park – the press will be invited to speak to the community about our objections. Football fans, don’t worry you’ll be home with plenty of time for the final.

and

  • Demo: Thursday 19th May, outside the main entrance of Swinton Civic Centre (exact time to follow once confirmed) – the Council meeting will be a public one. This is your chance to hear the decision. UPDATE: THIS DEMONSTRATION IS NO LONGER HAPPENING.

Please feel free to download and print this flyer/poster. We will be putting them up around the area and also mailing them out where possible. A high quality flyer download is available here:

http://www.greenlaneecodump.org/May2011FlyerFrontHighQuality.jpg

The time has come to spread the word, this will be our last chance to express our views on this plant.  We need everyone, friends, families, colleagues and anyone else who cares about the future of the area. If there was one day to book off work this year, make it this one.  It’s been a long road to this point, let’s take those final few steps together.  If you need any more info, please email us here.  We hope to see you there for this final push.

The Best Joke I’ve Heard This Year

Apparently, it is possible to die from laughter, as I almost found out while reading Sky Properties latest press release:

http://salfordonline.com/localnews_page/27200-eco_park_developers_welcome_new_canal_side_homes.html

Sky Properties have “welcomed” the Council’s approval of an application to build homes on the old GUS industrial site, close to the Sky Incinerator location.  They go on to claim that the development of homes on the nearby site is complementary to their plans to build the waste incinerator.  Did you fall of your chair too?  As we have come to expect from the Sky PR machine, they have rolled out the old inaccurate claims that they hope will sway opinion towards acceptance of their nightmare proposal.

In Other News: Greengrocerers draft in Sky's PR company to help with surplus orange stocks.

I think my favourite tosh in this article was the, “homes could receive their heating and power from waste treated at the Eco Park”. Does anyone remember the public meeting when they tried to sell this idea to the community? They had a lovely green picture of some place in Norway where this supposedly happens. When asked if it could work on Green Lane.. It was clear that it would probably take 15-20years to develop the same kind of system, it would require massive reconstruction of the surrounding residential neighbourhoods  and that there weren’t even any plans to do that. In short, it wasn’t relevant or possible at this time. That discussion ended very quickly.

Now, to bring us back into the real world.. the development of the housing project on the GUS site does appear to be in line with the Bridgewater Master-plan for redevelopment of the area. It also displays a marked, but continued shift away from heavy industrial use in the area which is welcomed by the surrounding communities.  Certainly, from the GUS site’s point of view, would the owners of those new homes really want to sit in the shadow of this incinerator tower?

The decision on the application will now be after the May elections. We contniue to hope that common sense prevails and that the application is rejected.