WASTE NOT WANTed

2010-01-30T14:20:00.000Z

Yorkshire Evening Post
Saturday 30th January 2010

DELIGHT AT

WASTE SITE

VICTORY

CAMPAIGNERS today claimed a victory after controversial plans for a waste transfer facility in Leeds were shelved following months of protests.
School children from Kirkstall Valley Primary School in Burley were among hundreds of people objecting to the plans for the new expanded plant at Evanston Avenue in Kirkstall.

read full story here.

A New Hope

2010-01-29T12:42:00.001Z

VICTORY !!

Burley / Kirkstall woke up to a bright sunny day this morning, the air was fresh and people had a spring in their step. A great cloud had been lifted from the area allowing the process of cleaning the valley from its industrial past to move on. This coincided with the launch of the Kirkstall Vision document last night, of which one of the short term objectives was to oppose the Waste Transfer Station at Evanton Avenue.

Jubilation
At 17:32 yesterday afternoon the Leeds City Council press office issued the following press release:

Proposals for Kirkstall transfer station ‘not value for money’
Kirkstall should not be the home of a dedicated transfer site for Leeds’ new waste treatment facility, according to a recommendation being put to councillors.

Officials assessing bids by contractors looking to run the treatment facility for the city’s non-recycled waste are recommending to Leeds City Council’s Executive Board that plans to develop the Kirkstall waste site to include a dedicated transfer station are not good value for money and should be dropped.

The existing facility on Evanston Avenue, off Kirkstall Road, is currently a Household Waste Sorting Site as well as a transfer site for a range of recyclable materials and other specialist wastes.

Expanding the site to include a transfer station had been considered to provide another point for the delivery of black bin waste collected from households before being sent to the main treatment facility in east Leeds.

However, an independent analysis of the costs of redeveloping the site showed doing so did not represent good value for money and most of the city’s waste is already delivered directly to the Skelton Grange landfill site in south east Leeds, in close proximity to the two possible sites for the proposed treatment facility.

The Kirkstall site will, however, continue to receive waste and act as a sorting site for household waste. It currently handles around 26,000 tonnes a year

Councillor James Monaghan, Leeds City Council’s executive board member for environmental services, said:

“We have been able to look at the costs quoted by contractors in the running to develop the waste treatment facility and we can see it just wouldn’t be good value for money to put a further dedicated transfer station at Kirkstall.

“The process of finding a way to deal with our non-recyclable waste has been open to a whole range of different options that we have to examine one-by-one, from different sites to different kinds of technology.

“This is just one option we have looked at and rejected as not value for money.”

We don't need one after all

We of course welcome this decision and the council finally seeing sense, but do have to question why the proposals had come this far, with the council claiming to have scoured the whole of North / North West Leeds for an alternative site with out success, when the outcome is we don't need one after all. The question of the need for such a site had been put to Councillor Monaghan by the public and other elected members a year ago.

Surprise!

At a meeting with Council Officers less than 24 hours before the press release, the council were still maintaining their previous line, surely by then this was known? Perhaps we have nothing else to do in an evening!

BREAKING: Waste Transfer Plan Dropped

2010-01-28T18:52:00.000Z

News is breaking that officials assessing the bids for the Residual Waste Treatment contact are to recommend to the Leeds City Council Executive Board that it be dropped from the plans.

More soon....

Waste Not Wanted - The Movie

2010-01-08T16:05:00.001Z

As previously reported the children of Kirkstall Valley Primary School have expressed their concerns about proposed Waste Transfer Site, you can see them for yourself in the following video clip.

The video was filmed and produced by Interplay Theatre Group, based in Armley.

"Life near the dump" - Living by a modern Waste Transfer Station

2009-12-14T13:29:00.000Z

This the Waste Transfer Station at Roundhill, Brighton and Hove is a modern facility run by one of the companies tendering for the Leeds contract. The following link will take you to an account of their experiences living next to a modern waste transfer station.

http://www.roundhill.org.uk/main.php?sec=planning&p=Life_near_the_Dump

Worst smell on record in Princes Road

The Waste Transfer Station and Materials Recovery Facility have proved, even in the early months of operation, to be far noisier and smellier neighbours. On 4th August, the day before my summer holiday, I photographed yet another breach of The Waste Transfer Station's operating conditions. On my return, I found a message from residents living on the south side of Princes Road, drawing my attention to the dreadful odour of rubbish in Princes Road on 11th August. The day after my return on 13th August, the whiff of stale rubbish hit me as I opened my front door. It was being carried in gusts of wind. I experienced this nuisance from several vantage points in Princes Road. Previously, I had told the Council's Environmental Health Officer that the main nuisance was noise, having only experienced isolated instances of disagreeable odour. The strength and prevalence of the smell which I experienced on 13th August have convinced me that there are two major nuisances which need to be addressed.

2009-12-08T00:29:00.000Z

Thursday 10th December, 7pm

Woodhouse Community Centre

Woodhouse Street, LS6 2NY

Kirkstall Vally Primary School Governors have a delegation to hte Leeds North West Inner Area Committee on Thursday. This meeting is open to the public, a good turnout will show the strength of feeling over this issue in the area.

Turn up to show the council that their waste is not wanted in Kirkstall!

Sign the Petition.

Follow the campaign on Facebook

A65 Kirkstall Road Traffic Assessments

2009-11-28T23:43:00.004Z

One item that will have to be considered for any planning application is the effects of traffic generated by any development and the capacity of the road network to accomodate that traffic.

In the last couple of years the Council have conducted at least two studies of traffic flows on the A65: the A65 Transport Assessment May 2005 and A65 A660 Traffic Flows Feb 2007.

The 2005 study
This comes to some pretty daming conclusions about the ability of the A65 to take more traffic, the additional demand on the road in this study DOES NOT include: The Kirkstall Forge Development; the BHS/Alders development; the Kirkstall District Centre or the Waste Transfer Site (the previous site had burnt down before the study):

5.0 Conclusion
the A65 is at capacity, 1950 vehicles per hour at the cordon, 1000 elsewhere

there is evidence of peak spreading with more trips travelling outside the peak periods

public transport opportunities have been studied and are considered unlikely to result in a significant mode shift to either buses or trains. Potentially 590 trips have been identified

future growth at the Airport has been assessed and will worsen conditions on the A65 and surrounding network. An additional 1260 car trips per day have been identified.

developer generated trips have been assessed and these will worsen conditions on the A65 and surrounding network. 3310 additional 2 way peak hour trips have been identified from developments with traffic generations available

few opportunities to improve highway capacity have been identified. The possible improvements to the Outer Ring Road were not available to this study. There are plans for a quality bus corridor. One junction at Menston has been identified as providing additional capacity.

the A65 does not have the capacity to carry all the identified additional trips in the peak periods

The 2007 study
This shows week day 'peak spreading' with the hours between 07:00 to 10:00 and 16:00 to 19:00 now almost reaching the capacity of the road. The weekend figures show significantly fewer traffic movements , however anyone that lives near or uses the A65 Kirkstall Road at a weekend knows that it is often at the point of gridlock, so not alot will move!

So where does this leave the Waste Transfer Site?
Any developer would have to demonstrate how their plans comply with Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10), including:

21. In deciding which sites and areas to identify for waste management facilities, waste planning authorities should:
(i) assess their suitability for development against each of the following criteria:
the extent to which they support the policies in this PPS;

the physical and environmental constraints on development, including existing and proposed neighbouring land uses (see Annex E);

the cumulative effect of previous waste disposal facilities on the well-being of the local community, including any significant adverse impacts on environmental quality, social cohesion and inclusion or economic potential;

the capacity of existing and potential transport infrastructure to support the sustainable movement of waste, and products arising from resource recovery, seeking when practicable and beneficial to use modes other than road transport.

We feel the last two are going to be a pretty tall order.

Kids' Waste Plant Fears

2009-11-28T20:46:00.003Z

On Friday 27th November pupils at Kirkstall Valley Primary School held a demonstration against the proposed Waste Transfer Site at Evanston Avenue and made the front page of Saturdays YEP - Well Done!

The councils comments in the article are the predictable dismissal that the concerns are unfounded with Councillor Monaghan referring to his beloved reference site near Shrewsbury located well away from houses and schools. The people of Battlefield, Shrewsbury aren't so happy with what the council is doing there, see SafeWasteShrewsbury.

Read the full YEP story here.

Every picture is worth a 1000 words

2009-11-03T15:25:00.006Z

The Leeds City Council "Education" pack includes the photograph shown below of a modern Waste Transfer Station at Battlefield, Shropshire.

Battlefield WTS, Shorpshire

52°44'35.28"N, 2°43'41.25"W

The site of this Waste Transfer Station appears to have been carefully chosen:

Located at the edge of an industrial park
Close to Battlefield bypass, no traffic movements needed through residential areas
Number of residential properties within 400 - Zero
Number of Primary Schools within 400 meters - Zero
Approximate population within 400 meters - Zero
Nearest River - 1.8 km (although there is a beck running past the site)
Nearest Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) - 1.7 km

Leeds City Councils 'preferred' site at Evanston Avenue:

Located between food and leisure facilities and Kirkstall Valley Park
Only access via one of the most congested roads in Leeds
Nearest residential property - 44 meters
Number of residential properties within 400 meters ~ 1,000
Number of Primary Schools Schools with 400 meters - 2
Approximate population within 400 meters ~ 2,000
Nearest River - 40 meters
Nearest Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) - 300 meters (if the site were within 200 meters of an SSSI it would not be straight forward to obtain an Environmental Permit for <25,000 tonnes per year, let alone >75,000 tonnes)

Unearthed: The 2004 plan to close Evanston Avenue as a Waste Transfer Station

2009-11-03T00:39:00.003Z

An email has been unearthed from a Senior Council Officer in February 2004 to local Elected Member(s) outlining the plans to relocate the Waste Transfer / Transfer Loading Station (TLS) from Evanston Avenue to a newly identified site.

The text of the email, shown below, implies the plans were near completion with the new site and funding for the project identified, including the redevelopment of the Evanston Avenue site as a smaller Household Waste Sort Site (HWSS).

So what happened to these plans? We are awaiting a response from Leeds City Council.

The present position is developing in line with our previous discussions:

The Site at Evanston Avenue continues to be used as a Household Waste Site and a Waste Transfer Station for the citywide green Sort bin material ( Dry Recyclables only). We need to continue to use it for these purposes until alternatives / replacements are available.

With regard to the Sort Waste Transfer Station we will be developing the replacement TLS at the rear of 155 Kirkstall Rd. Funding via prudential borrowing has now been identified for this scheme as part of the MRF and SGP development. We are currently going through the tendering process to appoint the MRF/SGP partners. Once in place (March/April 2004) we can start to draw up the development plans for that site with a view to removing the activity from Evanston Avenue.

The Evanston Avenue site will be reshaped to offer a brand new Household Waste Sort Site and then remainder of the site released surplus to requirements. Colleagues in Development Department ( Asset Management ) will be involved in dealing with the site disposal arrangements. I expect to be submitting the development plans for the new HWSS early in the summer. Funding for the scheme has now been identified in the 2004/05 capital programme.

A shambles which ever way you look at it

2009-09-17T22:56:00.003+01:00

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

2009-09-14T23:35:00.001+01:00

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?

2009-09-13T20:11:00.001+01:00

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.

2009-09-07T14:33:00.000+01:00

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

2009-09-03T10:45:00.005+01:00

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.

United Utilities list of pollution convictions

2009-08-31T23:43:00.002+01:00

United Utilities is another bidder for the Leeds Waste contract, here is a list of convictions for polution we have found.

List of United Utilities convictions for pollution

WasteNotWanted is not responsible for the content of external lints.

You were supposed to put the bloody doors on

2009-08-31T23:15:00.003+01:00

Another site run by out friends 'Veolia', the supposedly sealed facility went live before the doors were installed...

Lawrence Marzouk, Local Government Correspondent, Hove and Brighton Argus...

A controversial “dump” has attracted criticism in its first week.

The waste sorting station in Hollingdean, Brighton, started receiving bin loads at the end of last week.

The multimillion-pound facility was supposed to be sealed so waste was not visible and bad odours avoided but neither problem has been prevented, campaigners claim.

Neighbours are also angry that rubbish was stored at the depot last weekend.

Waste firm Veolia, which is running the centre for Brighton and Hove City Council, said doors would be installed today.

Veolia fined £26,737 for failure to control odours

2009-08-31T22:55:00.002+01:00

Veolia one of the bidders for the Leeds Waste contract was fined £26,737 in July 2009 by the Environment Agency for failing to control odours at a facility in High Wycombe despite the installation of an odour suppression system.

Stinks to high heaven says the Environment Agency press release..

The UK.s leading waste management provider was ordered to pay 26,737 yesterday (Monday, 20 July) for a breach of odour conditions.

Veolia was fined for a consistent breach in conditions at the High Heavens composting facility in High Wycombe between June and December 2006. Thames Water Services Limited operated the business at the time of the breaches, but Veolia took over management of the site and responsibility for the breaches in November 2007.

Thames Water Servicing Limited did use measures to try and manage the problem. These included adding a chemical enzyme to reduce the smell, not turning the compost ,removing the maturing compost and installing an odour suppression system around the site. However, none of these measures eradicated the smell.

There's something in the air

2009-08-30T09:54:00.006+01:00

Kirkstall dumped on again

In mid August the foul odours from the waste site returned to plague the residents and businesses in the area.

It appears the small was caused by rotting garden waste from Brown Bin collections diverted from a transfer site next to a sewage works in Dewsbury due to concerns expressed by the Environment Agency over odours emitting from the Dewsbury site. This waste was less noxious and smelly than the non-recyclable domestic refuse which the council is proposing could be stored there if the new transfer station opens.

This was done without the knowledge of the local councillors and despite the recent concerns expressed at Leeds City Councils proposals to re-open the site as a waste transfer station. 60,000 residents of Leeds have a Brown Bin collection, but most of Kirkstall does not.

Councillor Bernard Atha commented: "It is wrong to subject people to this kind of problem. It would quite rightly not be tolerated near houses in Wetherby, Otley or Guiseley Adel or Bramhope who will be sending their waste to Kirkstall. It is wrong that the people of Kirkstall should be subjected to this disgusting smell and clouds of insanitary black flies."

What are the issues FAQ

2009-08-27T11:33:00.000+01:00

What problems where there in the past?
The site was used for waste transfer for a number of years until a serious fire in 2002. While the site was operating as a waste transfer station residents and businesses frequently endured noxious odours, plagues of flies, as well as movement of heavy traffic and waste spillage on to the surrounding roads.

What is being proposed?
The Council is proposing the site is suitable to again be considered as a waste transfer station to be operated by a private company to handle waste that can not be recycled: food waste; nappies; etc. collected from the North West side of the city, Guiseley, Horsforth, Rawdon, Otley, Adel, Kirkstall and elsewhere, to be transferred from bin collection vehicles to Heavy Goods Vehicles for transport to the proposed incinerator site at Cross Green.

Why do we think it is an unsuitable site, is it just ‘not in my back yard’?
Since the original transfer station was first operated the area around the site has changed considerably over the years, from industrial estate under the shadow of a coal fired power station, to the landscape of today of retail and leisure. We believe it would be incredibly difficult to find a site that is closer to a combination of dense residential housing, local schools, restaurants and leisure. Kirkstall Road is already one on the most congested roads in the city, the latest council reports describe it as ‘saturated’. Waste has to be handled somewhere, but we believe there are other more suitable sites, such as ex-industrial land which is well away from residential housing, retail, and leisure facilities.

At the Kirkstall/Burley Forum in July the Council Officers were asked, “If, in their professional opinion, there had not previously been a waste transfer station on the site would they consider it a suitable location?” The answer was it would be a matter for a planning committee. Surely Council Officers would have an opinion as to whether it would be worth submitting a planning application, so we have to take the answer as either they have no professional opinion or more likely that they would not consider it a suitable site.

What do the council say?
The Council Officers are saying that the advanced modern technology the odours, flies etc. can be contained and controlled by operating a sealed building at a lower air pressure inside than out.

What do we say?
With such an investment of a new building, let’s put it somewhere more appropriate where the disturbance from traffic and effects of any emissions on businesses and residents are minimised. Advanced modern technology will not protect us against mechanical breakdowns, human error and political decisions elsewhere. The fire in 2002 and the smells in recent weeks prove this. When things go wrong, and they certainly will go wrong, then there will be huge piles of stinking rubbish outside.

What would we do with the site?
The site currently serves a useful purpose as a Household Waste Recycling Centre, this should be modernised with operating restrictions put in place to minimise noise disturbance that is currently affecting local residents.

Kirkstall Burley Forum - 8th September

2009-08-06T00:26:00.001+01:00

The next Kirkstall Burley Forum will be held on Tuesday 8th September at 7pm, Greenhow / Haddon Community Centre, Haddon Road. The main topic will be the Waste Transfer Site proposal. Officers from Leeds City Counil will be present to 'listen' to residents concerns.

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.

View Waste Not Wanted in a larger map

MVV Umwelt GmbH pulls out of tender

2009-07-22T11:21:00.000+01:00

Leeds City Council has announce MVV Umwelt GmbH, (MVV) has decided to withdraw from the Leeds Residual Waste Treatment project.

This leaves 3 bidders still in the tender process:

• Aire Valley Environmental;
• Veolia ES;
• United Utilities.

LCC Press Release

2009-07-21T10:21:00.002+01:00

Waste Not Wanted

Leeds City Council is planning to re-open the derelict waste transfer station between Evanston Avenue and Redcote Lane, next to the Leisure Park. Residents may remember that previous waste transfer site that afflicted the surrounding area with foul smells, plagues of flies and additional heavy traffic Kirkstall Road.

View Waste Not Wanted in a larger map