County councillor for ten Cambridgeshire villages: Pampisford, Ickleton, Duxford, Fowlmere, Gt Abington, Thriplow, Whittlesford, Little Abington, Babraham, Hinxton.
District councillor for the communities of Whittlesford, Heathfield and Thriplow.
The proposal that south cambs district council has been working on for over a year was put to its tenants in early June. The result was:
Yes: 27.4% No: 72.6% Turnout: 73.4%
So the council remains the landlord rather than transferring properties to a housing association set up for the purpose - South Cambs Village Homes. Some people say too much money was spent on the exercise. But there was a lot of information to get across, and the methodology was laid down by the government. I think tenants took account of the current economic climate and decided to stay put - that was the impression I was getting in the last few months as the recession worsened.
The council's reason for doing this - which I supported - was that this was the only way to avoid having to pay half of every pound raised in rents to the Treasury, which is the current set up. I do think that the new organisation would have benefitted the tenants - certainly the independent members of the new board were impressive. I will continue to ensure that issues raised by council tenants in this area are dealt with by the council's housing team and resolved.
There is a planning application in from Network Rail to put a 15m high mast up near Whittlesford Parkway. It is a fair way from the houses in Station Road, near the track, but whether it will be visible or not remains to be seen. "X" marks the site on the map here. Click on it to enlarge.
I am on the planning committee at South Cambs and will find out more. The rail company say it is not a commercial mast, just for railway radio communications. Still a tall mast though.
I met with the IWM on Thursday morning and this is what I'll be recommending to the parish council in Whittlesford - a certain amount of support but suggesting perhaps a probation period is needed including seeing what happens next time - the museum are trying to see if sound baffles makes a difference, and some breaks in the testing:
"I have had two discussions with the environmental health officers at South Cambridgeshire District Council who have been monitoring the situation. They would be responsible for any enforcement action should that arise. I met with senior management representatives at the IWM on Thursday morning. I have a further meeting with Richard Ashton next Thursday.
Because of some miscommunication between the IWM and environmental services, there has not been any quantitative data collected by the District Council, though officers have visited the museum while the tests were carried out. The Museum itself has gathered such data on sound levels at various locations, and is discovering where there are noise tunnels – such as into Heathfield, and it is taking advice on how the mitigate the noise – such as by parking large vehicles to bounce the sound back.
South Cambridgeshire District Council will be monitoring the next racing day in June.
The factors that the environmental health officers will be taking into consideration in assessing the level of noise nuisance include duration, frequency, location: then they will decide whether any mitigation is needed, or, ultimately whether any statutory abatement is required - i.e applying the civil law of nuisance.
To date, the district council has received 15 complaints, while the IWM has had 32 – which is three times as many than the number of complaints received annually for aircraft.noise – although complaints levels have themselves come down considerably in recent years, from well over a hundred five years ago.
For those people opposed to the testing, the noise levels have been described as intolerable. A number of people made the point that while they accept the IWM’s flying schedule, the addition of race car testing is a new and different intrusion. For most but by no means all, the limit of activity to five days a year is a significant factor in whether this is in any way acceptable. The question that I put to the IWM on Thursday morning is whether the museum would entertain bids from other racing teams. Their response is that they will keep this at five days this season and then reassess, consulting with local communities in October at the end of the season. I also stressed that amelioration such as the intention to have a break during testing would demonstrate a willingness to try to reach an accommodation.
On the other hand there is clearly a great deal of support for the racing car testing locally, on the grounds that it brings prestige and excitement to the locality, and the recognition that the museum has to find new revenue streams. The proposed level of activity is generally deemed acceptable to this group.
In discussing this with the IWM, they recognise and apologise for their failure to communicate effectively with neighbouring villages. I urged them to consider how they were going to put this right, and I said that not attending at the parish council meeting next week to explain and to listen would not be well received.
My view, as a member of the parish council and as district councillor is:
·if the level of activity is kept to five days a year, and
·subject to IWM putting in place any mitigation recommendations made by the environmental services officers from South Cambs district council following their assessment of the June racing test day, and
·we see a genuine attempt by the IWM to resolve concerns and engage with local communities
then we should continue to work with the museum to manage this situation and we should assess again in October. We should resist any proposal to increase the number of days of testing.
Bit odd, but suddently out of nowhere comes the response from Number Ten to all those people who signed the petition last summer against Hanley Grange. You'd have thought Gordon had other things on his mind just now.
The response begins by giving an interesting interpretation of why the developers backed down:
"Since you submitted your petition on 17 April 2008 Hanley Grange has withdrawn from the eco-towns process, with the promoters deciding that they needed more time to develop their proposal."
No mention of the huge public opinion against it and the campaign last summer. (Here's a handsome chap running the petition stall in Sawston!).
And then goes on to say:
"While assessment of the location is included in the Sustainability Appraisal for Hanley Grange and Cambridgeshire published on 4th November 2008 the Government would not consider taking forward a scheme for this location before the next review of the East of England Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). The promoters would expect it to be considered as part of the planned review of the RSS."
It is that last sentence which calls for eternal vigilance...
I went with two directors from the Heathfield Residents Association to a meeting with South Cambs District Council's planning department.
The purpose of the meeting, which I arranged following on from the Thriplow Parish Council meeting last month where this came up, was to ensure that the planners have a full understanding of the views of residents' representatives regarding traffic access issues at Heathfield, the perennial problems of the drains and sewers there - in that further development will make a bad problem worse - and the need for a sensible approach to any proposed in-fill development. The planning officer was able to explain the relevant planning law, and in particular the issue of "materiality" in deciding planning decisions.
Whatever your politics, the county elections on Thursday are important because an awful lot of services are provided at county level: and the MEP elections too because we are part of Europe and we need people who can ensure our tax-euros are spent sensibly on things that matter here. So it is surprising how many people regard anything other than a national election as a non-event.
I've been out canvassing for other people, and leafletting, not least because I do believe that democracy and the democratic process is a very precious thing. I've lived in parts of the world, in the Middle East and China, where there was no franchise - you didn't have a vote.
On a lighter note, despite email and blogs and all the rest of it, elections still require knocking on doors and talking to people, and also delivering leaflets. If you are just leafletting, then to keep the pace going, an ipod and some trainers come in handy: of course if you are canvassing you can't run round, because people tend not to vote for sweaty breathless candidates.
Divided opinions continue in Whittlesford and Heathfield on the noise generated by the F1 racing car testing.
It may be a demographic thing, in that I spoke to two people living in the same road on Sunday afternoon, one man with a young son aged about nine, who thought it was great and people should stop complaining, and a retired man who said it was just an endless whining noise, and needed stopping - adding that while everyone knows Duxford and its flying, but he didn't sign up to living next to a race track. I see the Cambridge News letters page echoes this division of opinion.
This contract is big for Duxford, but they need to manage the communciations and PR better, beyond the racing aficionados. The reason why the first test took everyone by surprise was because no warning of the date was given. Even the District Council environmental people were caught on the hop, because their understanding was that the whole thing was off. So when they got phone calls from people saying what is going on, they were a bit taken back.
One thing is that villages like Whittlesford and Thriplow and Heathfield have a lot of people who work from home, either full time or from time to time. I'm told someone was trying to mark exam papers last week and couldn't focus. This is a district council issue, and the number for the environmental officers if anyone wants to call them to log a comment is :
08450 450 063
I talked to them yesterday: they explained that the issues they need to consider are around duration, frequency, location: the factors they need to take into account when considering whether statutory abatement is required - i.e applying the civil law of nuisance. They will be monitoring the next test day which is at the end of June. Again, some parents are saying it may disrupt GCSE revision ... one of my boys is doing his A levels and he is OK with the noise.
