Following a Hearing held on 13th February 2007 planning permission has been granted for a recycling/waste transfer and recycling station (including crushing and screening) 24 hour, 7 day a week operation in Edmonton, North London (L/ENF/312).

The chosen Inspector considered the main issues in this case were the effect of the development on the flow of floodwater and the storage capacity of the floodplain in the vicinity of the site and the effect of the use of the land on the character and appearance of the area.

With regard to the first issue the Inspector stated the following:

"However it is has been argued for the appellant that there are fundamental flaws in the Environment Agency's flood risk modelling for this area and that the site is not likely to flood or cause flooding elsewhere if the proposed use were to be allowed. The appellant has shown that the model used by the Environment Agency, from which the flood risk maps are derived, appears to be unstable and gives inconsistent results in this area both in calculations at different points along Salmons Brook and in different return periods. It is therefore unfortunate that the Environment Agency chose not to attend the Hearing to defend its position."

The Inspector concluded that the continued use of the site, if subject to appropriate planning conditions, should not in this instance result in a material reduction in the storage capacity of the flood plain or pose an increased reisk of flooding in the wider area.

With regard to character and appearance the Inspector stated the following:

"The Council's other objection is to the effect that the use has on the character and appearance of the area. However I noted that there are limited views of the site, and then the main view is of stockpiles which are being reduced. This is a long-established industrial area and although I understand the Council's desire for new investment and upgrading it seems to me that there is no fundamental reason as to why such a use should not be sited in this location."

Overall the Inspector concluded that the use would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area.