A shambles which ever way you look at it

Words escape me to describe the conduct of the Leeds North West Inner Area Committee meeting tonight. If they don't want the public to attend then say so, but don't treat them with utter contempt when they do want to engage.

Item 10, was the primary area of interest to this campaign, a paper on the consultation process for the Leeds Residual Waste Management Project. Officers from the Council played a poor quality video presentation on what the project was about. Cllrs Atha and Illingworth spoke well against the proposed Waste Transfer Site at Evanston Avenue, Kirkstall. What did come to like from the Video presentation is that Kirkstall in now expected to take 100,000 tonnes per year, that is an increase of 20% on the figures previously presented.

However only one member on the public was allowed to speak, who, rather than asking questions, made a generalised statement of his view on dealing with waste. No further members of the public were allowed to speak. and the meeting was hurried to the next item on the agenda.

The paper before the committee outlining the consultation process was neither discussed, agreed or even noted by the committee in the haste to move on. The chair dismissed any pleas to speak by suggesting comments can be submitted under consultation. However, we wanted to raise concerns about the methods of consultation which is what the paper before the committee was about.

So where do we go from here, who do we approach about the meeting, the Leeds City Councils Chief Executive, Standards, the Press?

Leeds North West Inner Area Committee

Leeds North West Inner Area Committee meeting 

West Park Centre, Spen Lane, Leeds LS16 5BE

Thursday, 17th September, 2009 at 7.00 pm

We note Agenda Item 10:

"RESIDUAL WASTE TREATMENT PFI PROJECT UPDATE AND PRESENTATION (COUNCIL FUNCTION) (10 MINS)

To consider a report of the Head of Waste Management providing an update to the Committee on the programme of communications activity supporting the Residual Waste Treatment PFI project."

It is not clear whether this report on consultation of 'the two sites' includes the Evanston Avenue site, or if it is referring just to the proposed sites for the associated Incinerator.

Get the report RWT_NWIAC_17Sep09.pdf

Pop along if you can., full agenda and reports pack can be found here.

The writing on the wall?

Have waited a few days to gather my thoughts on the Kirkstall / Burley Forum held on Tuesday.

The forum was well attended with standing room only for those arriving close to the start. It was a heated meeting, many members of the community voiced their concerns, at times frankly and with considerable passion. The council officers appeared as if rabbits caught in the full beam of car headlights.

It is envisaged Leeds will produce 180,000 tonnes of residual waste per year, the Kirkstall site is listed to process 80,000 tonnes, 44% of the total residual waste for the city, this will mean additional traffic movements including HGVs.

The officers from were clearly of the opinion that it will go ahead and we should just accept it. The site has been used for transfer in the past, is still to some extent, so its fair game to continue to the end of time.

The planning outline in the 1990 Consultation was dismissed by the officers as never adopted, shame the Council didn't tell the community that the result of the consultation had met with the shredder, perhaps it didn't come up with the right answer. The officers referred to the UDP (Unitary Development Plan) for justification of use of the site, a large complex document that turned in to a lawyer’s goldmine at the public inquiry (‘public’ as in 'public school’)

Council: Initial Road Assessments show no problems

Well that is strange, a detailed assessment for the A65 presented to the Inner North West Area Committee, “A65 and A660 Corridors – Traffic Flows and Vehicle Speeds” [February 2007], showed average speed during the peek periods from Bridge Road to the City Centre as 10 – 20 mph, significantly less than the designated speed limit due to congestion, and the peek period was ‘spreading’, morning peek is now 3 hours either way, how long will it be before the morning peek hours meets the evening peek hours. The paper records 45,800 vehicles a day on Kirkstall Road (A65), that’s compared with 24,470 on Woodhouse Lane (A660).

Accidents and pollution in the waste industry are a fact of life!

The officers from the council tried to convince the meeting that a modern facility will solve all the problems, no odours, no flies, no rats, however when challenged about the track record of some of the companies on the shortlist they gave the impression that in the waste industry some accidents and pollution are a fact of life ...... ok, very reassuring.

What happens next?

It will probably go a bit quiet, but we need to keep the momentum of public awareness and outrage at this proposal going, as well as putting together the technical and planning case against it.

Kirkstall Burley Forum

Tuesday 8th September at 7pm

Greenhow/Haddon Community Centre, Haddon Rd.

RUBBISH

The main topic will be the Waste Transfer Site proposal. Officers and Councillors from Leeds City Counil will be present to 'listen' to residents concerns. The views of Kirkstall Ward Councillors on the proposed Waste Site can be found here http://www.kirkstallward.net/waste/index.htm

If you have an opinion about this proposal it is important you attend, this can only be stopped by people being prepared to stand up and be counted.

UK Without Incineration Network

While the UK Without Incineration Network covers the wider question of incineration, there is a wealth of information collated on the dark and seedy world of the companies involved, including those bidding for the Leeds Residual Waste Treatment Project contract.