Bourn Airfield, the former World War II airfield sandwiched between Highfields Caldecote and Cambourne was granted outline planning permission at the South Cambridgeshire Planning Committee meeting held on Friday 19th February 2021.
I was there in the beginning in 2012 when the Conservative administration at South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC) decided to include Bourn Airfield in the draft Local Plan that it was creating. So ahead of the planning committee set up to determine the application, I sent the following thoughts as I knew I would not have enough time to express all of this at the meeting.
Background History
Today, is one of mixed emotions. It sees the next stage in the tumultuous journey of Bourn Airfield within the context of housebuilding in the district. It is a site that has caused a lot of controversy right from May 2013 when the Conservative Administration at the time, selected it as a development site in the now current adopted local plan. Many today still ask why it was selected, especially when the traffic light site analysis scored it as amber, with 2 positive and 3 negative points.
The neighbouring villages of Bourn, Caldecote and Hardwick objected and continued to do so up to and including the Public examination of the Plan in 2015. Following the 2017 main modifications that were submitted, including those for Bourn Airfield, the Planning Inspectors in August 2018 eventually found the Local plan sound as stated in Para 211 and 212 of the final Inspectors report. At that point, we knew its fate was sealed and it would eventually be built on.
My concern about the inclusion of Bourn Airfield policy SS/6, and those of local residents has always centred on the creation of a ribbon of development from Caxton Gibbett to Hardwick, as well as the paucity of infrastructure in the area and what was proposed. The only transport infrastructure proposed for this corridor was the “High Quality Public Transport (HQPT”), to be delivered by the Greater Cambridge Partnership. A glorified busway as we saw it then, and in the face of known serious traffic congestion along the A1303 (Madingley Rise), it seemed barmy to say the least.
Although acknowledging the local opposition to Bourn Airfield, the Planning Inspectors stated in Para 87 (below) of the final inspection report that the harm caused by the development could be mitigated.
Your Challenge
The question before you now is this: “Are you as the Planning committee today, satisfied that all the concerns raised by the neighbouring communities and acknowledged by the Planning Inspectors have been addressed satisfactorily by the proposal in front of you?”
If not, you have no choice but to reject it and send it back to the drawing board.
My Concerns with the Proposal
Coalescence – Separation from Highfields.
When the site was selected, Highfields residents were promised a separation of at least 200meters from the developed area of the airfield. What you may not be aware of is that it turns out most of that separation is actually private land, the very long gardens of the houses on West Drive, Highfields Caldecote. That in itself is an anomaly, but the explanation given to the Inspectors was that the council had “planning control” of the land, classed as countryside because majority is outside the village framework. We were had. Below is what the A428 corridor will look like with Bourn Airfield policy SS/6.
There is a huge gap in the existing tree belt on the eastern boundary of the airfield with Highfields, which needs filling in. At the moment it is clear view from between 56-58 West Drive straight into the Airfield and looking at the array of building cranes stored there. Parameter Plan Green Infrastructure RG-M-56-1 Rev Q shows it as proposed planting.
Whilst I thank Countryside for finally putting that in, there must be confidence that this strip of woodland will indeed be planted, and right now, I do not have that confidence. I would therefore request that if permission is granted, the planting must begin as soon as work starts on the site. This will give a headstart in ensuring the privacy of the neighbours and their amenity is protected.
Furthermore, that belt of woodland must remain in perpetuity, and all informal recreation space along that eastern edge must not have floodlights on it that would cause light pollution and harm to neighbours on West Drive.
In addition, the farthest South Eastern part of the airfield currently marked as meadows and semi-natural green space must remain so in perpetuity to avoid and building on it that could cause coalescence with houses along Strympole Way, Highfields Caldecote.
You should also note that there is currently a development of 58 houses being built to the west of Grafton Drive which will bring houses in Highfields right to the boundary of the Airfield. This piece of land was granted planning permission at appeal due to a lack of 5 year housing land supply.
Finally, to the area at the top North East corner of Bourn Airfield that sits and frames the entrance to Highfields Caldecote. This time I refer to Drawing Parameter Plan – Land Use RG-M-54-1 Rev S and Parameter Plan – Density and Building Heights RG-M-57-1 Rev P. Again, I want to acknowledge and thank Countryside for finally listening and removing the Residential block R17 that up to December 2020 had been proposed to sit at that top of that parcel, contrary to the Bourn SPD and the Caldecote Village Design Guide. That would have blocked in Highfields and made coalescence a reality whilst damaging the setting of Highfields itself which has remained open since the village was established. The harm caused would have been incalculable. However, I would ask that this area be kept open in perpetuity by condition rather than informative. It is essential that the Council removes the risk of harm from Highfields and its residents.
Transport, Traffic and Roads
This is a major concern of all the residents in the neighbouring communities of Bourn, Caldecote and Hardwick, as well as Knapwell, Toft and Comberton. The lack of a proposal for any road enhancements will in our opinion give rise to cars from the new development rat running through these villages.
The only solution proposed, the HQPT or Cambourne to Cambridge C2C as it is now called was the only transport solution proposed by the Cambridgeshire County Council in its Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire (TSCSC). The intention being to achieve a modal shift from the use of cars to active forms of travel. See 5.23 to 5.25 of the strategy at https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/asset-library/imported-assets/Transport-strategy-and-high-level-programme-for-Cambridge-and-South-Cambridgeshire-March-2014.pdf
Once again, I refer you to the Planning Inspectors final report of August 2018 which states:
The inspectors were of the mind that the C2C could be completed during the plan period. That is sufficiently vague as to give room for interpretation. And that is what is happening with the proposal before you.
Paragraph 489 of the committee report states that the County Council as Highways Authority is recommending that the development proceed on a “monitor and manage” approach. And in so doing is recommending that up to 500 dwellings can be accommodated on the site before the C2C strategic busway is delivered. Whilst this is a pragmatic approach to enabling the development to commence, it is fraught with difficulties and may be contrary to the spirit of the requirement for a strategic infrastructure that will enable this new development to achieve some level of sustainability.
I note the transport package that has been proposed, and whilst I hope it works, the reality and experience is that for a development this far away from the main centres of employment, the car is still going to be the main form of transport. I welcome the promise of cycleways to the neighbouring villages and would hope that the final routes would be agreed with representatives of local communities who know the best routes!
Para 493 to 495 of the committee report goes on to give opportunity for additional houses to be built over and above the threshold of 500 without the C2C being delivered. In my view and that of the residents I represent, para 495 it leaves the door wide open for manipulation of an assessment to show that more houses can be built without the busway.
This is NOT acceptable to us, in any shape or form. It is especially unacceptable when there is no proposal to re-configure Childereley roundabout which is the main access into the new development. The traffic impacts, even up to 500 dwellings as well as construction traffic, and the number of trips that would cause, would be extremely harmful indeed.
The busway has been delayed due to many factors including unhelpful interference from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority Mayor. The GCP is envisaging potential delivery between 2026-2028 if everything goes smoothly from now on. But why should we think it will, when so far, it has not gone smoothly. Any further delay will mean that there will be no strategic traffic intervention till near the plan end, and this is not acceptable.
Therefore, I am asking that
- the option to go above 500 houses even if the C2C is not delivered be removed. The current local plan period extends to 2031, and the busway must be delivered much earlier in order to ensure that the significant harm that Bourn Airfield will cause to its neighbours will be mitigated as the Planning Inspectors envisaged.
- The planning committee should ask for a definitive time-table based on the current status of the C2C project be provided to the Council, and put in place sufficient monitoring to ensure timely delivery.
Drainage and Sewerage
The Bourn Water Recycling Centre has been undergoing repairs in the past 6 weeks, and it does not have capacity for the new development as stated in Para 250.
How is the Council proposing to ensure that capacity will be built in time to accommodate the proposed 500 houses in the initial phase?
Conclusion
Bourn Airfield development will cause significant harm to neighbouring villages of Caldecote and Bourn as immediate neighbours, and Hardwick as near neighbour due to traffic and rat running issues.
The planning harm due to potential coalescence and harm to character and amenity (Caldecote), heavy traffic and rat running through all the nearby villages must be mitigated to a sufficient level to not harm the character and amenity of these existing communities.
The proposals in my view have addressed some of the concerns raised but not all, especially the transport and traffic concern.
If you as the planning committee are not satisfied that the concerns that I and the parish councils have raised cannot be sufficiently mitigated by the proposal before you, then you must refuse this application.
However if you are satisfied and should you be minded to approve the application, then I ask that the conditions I have requested be imposed.
Thank you
Pingback: Bourn Airfield Gains Outline Planning Approval at Committee -