The Northstowe and New Communities Portfolio Holder agreed
1) To support the changes relating to the updating of the information on the A14 improvements
2) To question why the site allocations for borrowpits are ‘areas of search’ rather than remaining as site allocations
3) To support the inclusion of borrowpits within the SSPP to provide for any future improvements to the A14 but that a hierarchy of these site should be included in the final SSPP to reflect which should be utilised first in the event that they are not all needed.
4) To require that any future use of the identified borrowpits should be restricted to use on A14 improvements.
5) To support the changes proposed for the Cottenham Site Profile.
6) To agree the responses to the minor changes as set out in Appendix B.
The Portfolio holders for Planning and New Communities AGREED the responses to the Minerals and Waste Development Plan consultation as contained within the report to their 2 March 2010 meeting and in Appendices 2, 3 and 4.
The New Communities portfolio holder
AGREED
A) That the Council respond to the proposed mineral sites as laid out in table 1 of the report, with the exception of Land at Hinxton (South of A505 near Whittlesford Bridge) which the Council should object to, due to the additional traffic it would place on roads that were already busy.
B) That the Council respond to the proposed waste recycling and recovery sites as laid out in table 2.
C) To request the County Council to review whether the Minerals and Waste Development Plan is the appropriate vehicle for providing borrowpits for the A14 upgrade and consider how the borrowpits should be restored after the A14 work has been completed.
D) That the Council should object to the proposed Railhead at Waterbeach, due to the proximity of the access road to Denny Abbey and the extra traffic that it would add to the A10.
Cabinet
AGREED the responses to the Minerals and Waste Development Plan consultation contained within the report and in Appendices 1 and 2, subject to the following amendments, approval of the final wording being delegated to the New Communities Portfolio Holder.
By-passing villages
A Haul road was required to ensure that Northstowe’s construction traffic by-passes Willingham. The route of Northstowe construction traffic to the A10 should by-pass the villages of Cottenham and Landbeach.
Hazardous waste
Amend response on page 65 regarding the selection of the Cottenham Business Centre as the location of a hazardous waste facility, to “no recommendation”, as the advice from the Environmental Health and Conservation services states that the available information is insufficient to support or reject the proposal.
Cabinet AGREED the responses to the Minerals and Waste Development Plan consultation as contained in Appendices 2 and 3 to the report, with the inclusion of comments made by members at the meeting.
Cabinet AGREED to respond to the Minerals and Waste Issues and Options consultation 2 as follows:
(a) To object in principle to the consultation being conducted without a Core Strategy and policy framework against which to assess the sites specified;
(b) To express concerns about the apparent lack of consultation with local residents and Parish Councils;
(c) To comment that it is unsuitable to locate Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities in residential areas; and
(d) To comment that:
“There is no clear strategy included in the Waste Local Plan or proposed in the issues and options report for provision of major waste management facilities. A strategy is essential to provide a clear framework for site specific allocations for all scales of waste management facilities, from major waste management facilities to household waste recycling centres, and also any supporting uses such as waste transfer stations. This should made clear the number, nature and scale of uses proposed and their intended catchment. It should also identify the broad locations for such facilities to meet the objectives of the strategy. This will enable a more detailed site selection process to be undertaken within the context of clear strategy.
“It is understood that the County Council intends that the next stage in the Waste Local Development Framework process will include preferred options for specific sites. The District Council is concerned that this is a big step from the general approach being explored here without an intermediate consultation stage on both the overall strategy and site options. The District Council would hope to be consulted on both the strategy and options for site specific allocations before preferred sites are identified that affect South Cambridgeshire, including the major developments.
“Whilst fully endorsing the proposal to carry out a full sustainability appraisal of this plan in the future, all environmental impacts should be considered and any potential health impacts identified so that mitigation measures can be implemented where appropriate.
“As a waste collection authority the District Council would wish to ensure that the sites are suitably located in order that South Cambs can deliver its waste collection responsibilities with minimal additional cost to the authority.
“The Plan should include a sufficient number of sites as is appropriate and those sites are located to enable effective delivery of the PFI contract.
“Combined Heat and Power plant using waste derived fuel from a local source, in line with government policy, has not been identified as a possible additional option. We would welcome the addition of this option in the growth areas within the policy.
“There is concern that this consultation on specific sites is taking place in the absence of a clear strategy for minerals and waste, making comments on the suitability of some sites difficult. Also, these sites are put forward by the industry and there is no commentary from the minerals and waste authority to help provide a context for consultees to provide their comments.”
Cabinet thanked Members for the time and effort they had put into researching the issue and preparing reports.
To agree the Council’s response to the County Council’s consultation on the issues and options arising from the preparation of the new local development framework for minerals and waste.