This article in the Cambridge News caught my eye because it is very topical right now as people in Caldecote and Bourn Wards campaign to Stop Bourn Airfield Development plans. Hundreds of Cambridge city residents are opposing the proposed construction of 430 homes either side of Worts’ Causeway, warning the project would destroy beautiful countryside and vital wildlife habitats, and ruin the green belt.
According to CN, Cambridge City planning chiefs have refused to drop proposals for hundreds more houses in the green belt south of Cambridge – which now look set to go ahead. The article also goes on to say that when it came to a vote, just two city councillors voted against it.
The argument being used by Cambridge City Council and indeed South Cambridgeshire District Council is that if the councils don’t provide a minimum of 5-year land supply, then there is a risk that the councils would be overruled in appeal decisions, leading to a free-for-all for developers. Whilst that pressure “may” be real, it does not in my opinion, give the council reason to sacrifice the rural character of the A428 corridor nor the amenity of the people of Bourn or Caldecote on the altar of expediency.
In Cambridge city, the figure of 14,000 homes is quoted as being needed for the next plan period, whilst in South Cambridgeshire, the figure is higher at 19,000. Considering the fact that a lot of those who will be living in the 19,000 homes in South Cambs will be working in Cambridge city, it rather begs the question as to whether more homes should not be built in Cambridge itself!!
The reasons given by the campaigners against Worts Causeway is that there would be a loss of habitat for rare species such as skylarks and yellowhammers, and they questioned whether the 14,000 homes target was so scientific that the 430 in Worts’ Causeway were definitely needed. Fair question, but perhaps habitats could be recreated …….
Several other residents complained the Worts’ Causeway site was too far from shops, jobs and facilities, forcing residents to get into their cars – adding to congestion on Hills Road.
One point that should be noted is that Independent Cllr John Hipkin proposed an amendment to the local plan which would delete the Worts’ Causeway sites, arguing the green belt was vital to “prevent urban sprawl and preserve the landscape character of the city”. He said: “If this goes forward it will be ruinous to the landscape on that side of the city.”
The theme of the green belt and “urban sprawl” was also taken up by Cllr Tim Ward, the executive councillor for planning, who said that there had been pressure for much greater green belt development but that the city had to remain “compact”.
This for me is the crux of the matter – and the impact on South Cambridgeshire!! And my question is this: Why does Cambridge City have to remain “compact”??
Cambridge is a successful city, creating lots of job opportunities. It HAS to grow, and it MUST take its share of the housing for the jobs that are created within and around its borders. To argue that the city must stay compact for the sake of staying compact is a complete nonsense. If Cambridge wants to stay compact, then it should stop attracting new businesses, simples!!
Cllr Jean Swanson at least recognised the need with a qualified statement when she said: “While I dislike the idea of building on 18 hectares of green belt land and don’t want it to happen, if it is not released a planning inspector could delay the whole process, leading to a planning vacuum.” The focus being on “not delaying the planning process” – another tail wagging the dog!!
The fact that Cambridge City wants to remain compact means that the pressure to build in South Cambridgeshire is rather high. Who knows, perhaps that is the deal that has led to the proposal by the South Cambridgeshire District Council for the 3,500 homes Bourn Airfield Development and the 1,500 homes West Cambourne Development. This proposal is of course being opposed by residents in the area in the StopBAD campaign, and frankly is bonkers primarily because it breaks a fundamental rule of planning – you do not create ribbon developments, and especially not in rural areas.
The issue of the green belt is an emotive one, and no-one likes to go where angels fear to tread (so to speak). No one likes the idea of building on or encroaching on green belt. But perhaps its time to put those emotions aside and take a pragmatic view of the needs and requirements of a growing and rich city.
A city is an urban sprawl anyway, so let Cambridge City sprawl its way to keep up with itself. The councillors should recognise that Cambridge city is a victim of its own success and should not dump its housing problems on us in South Cambridgeshire for the sake of expediency. Whilst the argument can be made for the green belt, we should be asking ourselves what long standing impact will be created by concreting over the green belt in South Cambridgeshire, to provide homes for people who will commute into Cambridge city and increase carbon footprint over the decades to come.
At a time when the buzz word is “sustainability” are the plans for Bourn Airfield Development and West Cambourne sustainable, green or energy efficient or guaranteed to reduce carbon footprint? The answer is obvious! Put the homes next to or in the same area where the jobs will be. It is not rocket science is it?
You can read the full CN article here.
.