INFORMATION SHEET FOR FEN DITTON VILLAGE SOCIETY MEETING

9 JUNE 2006

Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan

Summary of Key Points:

• At this stage the County Council has made no proposal for the relocation of the Milton Waste Water Treatment Works nor has it identified any particular site.
  
  
• The Council has consulted on a potential area of search for the relocation of the Works at Honey Hill in order to give local people and other stakeholders an early opportunity to express their views.
  
  
• The need to consider an alternative location for the Works arises from pressures for housing development in the Cambridge Sub-Region and proposals for redevelopment on the Cambridge Northern Fringe contained in the Cambridge City Local Plan.
  
  
• The County Council will need to assess options for the relocation of the Works, or retention on its current site, as part of the waste development plan process taking place over the next 3 years. All realistic options need to be considered.
  
  
• There will be several opportunities for the public to express their views and register objections to the Council. The waste development plan will be carefully considered through the Council’s member processes. It will be subject to scrutiny by an independent planning inspector.
  
  
• No development can take place without a planning application, which will also be subject to public comments and objections.
  

1.0 Background to Re-Siting of the Milton Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTWs)

• Milton Waste Water Treatment Works lies in the eastern part of the Cambridge Northern Fringe (CNF) lying between the A14 and the edge of Cambridge. The majority of the area, including the Milton Waste Water Treatment site, is in Cambridge City; and the remainder (mainly Chesterton Sidings) lies in South Cambridgeshire District.

• The CNF has been identified in the Cambridgeshire Structure Plan (the statutory strategic land use planning document) as a reserve of land for future growth and redevelopment since 1989. This is consistent with longstanding Government policy to bring new housing close to existing jobs, services and public transport.

• The CNF was subsequently identified as an Area of Major Change in Cambridge City Council’s Cambridge Local Plan (adoption due in 2006); and for ‘sustainable mixed use development’ in the South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Local Plan 2004.

• A steering group of local authorities and landowners commissioned consultants Llewelyn-Davies to outline a framework for development of the CNF. This included consultation with stakeholders. This work has resulted in the Cambridge Northern Fringe Illustrative Master Plan. This Plan has no formal status, but shows how the site could accommodate mixed uses, primarily residential.

• At the public inquiry into the Cambridge Local Plan, the Inspector considered whether or not the Plan should keep open the option of a more compact and environmental friendly facility within the current site of the Works, enabling redevelopment on the remainder of the site.

• However, in the light of evidence from Anglian Water on costs, on operational risks and on the amount of land which could be released for development by a more compact Works, the Inspector concluded that the only realistic options were either complete relocation or retention of the current site. The Inspectors findings are binding.

(Note on relocation costs – the funding of the scheme is still the subject of discussion. However, if relocation were to proceed, it is expected that the great majority of the costs would be met from the value generated by the development on the CNF, not from the public purse.)

2.0 Minerals and Waste Plan (M&WP)

• The redevelopment of the CNF could not fully go ahead unless the Works are relocated. As this is a waste facility, any replacement site for the Works must be found through the County Council’s Waste Development Plan process. The Council must consider all realistic options.

• The Council are in the early stages of preparing a waste development plan. The process is set out below, and there will be several opportunities for you to make you views known and register objections to any aspect of the plan with which you disagree. These are marked with an asterisk *.

• Even after adoption of the plan, no development can take place without a planning application, which will also be subject to public comments and objections.

M&WP Issues and Options June / July 2005 Jan / April 2006	Public consultation* Asked for views on issues / options in relation to planning policy matters and suggested sites for consideration within the Plan.
ß	WE HAVE REACHED THIS STAGE
M&WP Preferred Options Plan Nov / Dec 2006	Six week public consultation* The stage at which the County Council identifies its ‘Preferred Options’ in terms of its favoured land use planning policies and allocations for minerals and waste uses. Public views will be invited.
ß
Submission to SoS Sept / Oct 2007	Six week public consultation* Following consideration of views on the Preferred Options, the Plan is revised and then published as a draft Plan. A copy of the Plan is sent to the Secretary of State for his consideration. Formal objections may be made at this stage.
ß
Examination May 2008	Public Inquiry* When an independent Planning Inspector will consider unresolved objections. Detailed submissions can be made in writing or in person.
ß
Inspector’s Report Dec 2008	When the Planning Inspector publishes the result of the Inquiry. The Inspectors recommendations are binding.
ß
Adoption Feb 2009	Adoption of the Plan amended as required by the Inspector.

Issues & Options Stages & Moving towards Preferred Options

• In June / July 2005 the Council published its first Issues and Options Paper. This highlighted the need to find a potential site for the relocation of the Milton and canvassed views on the range of criteria that would need to be considered in selecting such a site.

• These were:

o proximity to the River Cam – any site must be close to the River Cam to allow the efficient discharge of treated effluent

o area of site – any site should be around 20 hectares

o road access – any site must have good road access

o distance from residential areas – any site must be away from residential areas and access to any site should not be via residential areas

o site characteristics – any site should not have unusual ground conditions or characteristics

o a maximum distance from existing wastewater treatment works at Milton – any site should be a suitable distance from the existing site at Milton, avoiding the need to pump effluent over a long distance to the point of discharge

o space for expansion – any site should have space to allow the expansion of the wastewater treatment works in the future for the accommodation of growth

· Following representations the criteria were refined as follows:

o a site of 20 – 30 hectares to include landscaping areas

o good access from the existing highway network which would entail easy access from the A or B class road network

o Avoiding the use of access for lorries through villages

o Avoiding the need to access the site by way of a level crossing over the main line railway

o Presumption against using land in the flood plain of the River Cam unless this can be achieved without the risk of pollution from flooding, extending the flooding pattern to additional areas and that the engineering feasibility of building subsurface structure and low relief buildings is not compromised

o Having a stand-off of not less than 400 metres from residential property

o Minimise the risk of residential property in the vicinity being in a ‘high risk’ area for exposure to any potential odours, given the direction of the prevailing wind

o Use of land for the development and related infrastructure (e.g. pipeline) that would not prejudice the survival of any nationally protected nature conservation areas e.g. SSSI’s

o Ability of the site to minimise impact on the Green Belt by being able to support mitigation measures to minimise visual intrusion through land re-contouring and additional landscaping

o Avoidance of any Schedule Ancient Monuments and to consider the risk to accommodating the development associated with any known areas of high archaeological potential

o Relative proximity to the River Cam to allow efficient discharge of treated effluent

o Proximate to the existing infrastructure to permit the efficient conveyance by pipeline to the new works.

• These criteria were then applied by officers to identify the most promising areas of search. This resulted in the area of Honey Hill, Horningsea being identified as a suggested Area of Search. This suggestion was included in the Issues and Options Paper 2, published in January 2006 in order to gauge public opinion.

• Additional sites have been suggested by respondents to the recent consultation, and these will also be considered in the Plan process. These sites are:

o on land north of the A14, adjacent to Milton landfill site

o on land north of Milton village / south of Landbeach

o retention on existing site

· At this stage no proposals have yet been considered or endorsed by the County Council’s Members. The Preferred Options Plan will be considered by Members during September at the following Member Groups:

o Development Control Committee

o Environment, Waste And Business Service Development Group

o Cabinet.

Agendas and meeting arrangements can be viewed on the County Council’s website www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk .