Planning in Cranfield

Minutes of the planning committee of the parish council held on Wednesday 6 February. Subject to confirmation at full council tonight: See the comments from members of the public at the meeting, in blue, below.

In attendance:   R J Davey-Hunt (Clerk).  5 members of the public.

Apologies for absence:  PCllr/ (CBCllr]:

Declarations of interest:  CB/PCllr Mrs Sue Clark declared a personal interest                  

Before the meeting started members of the public outlined their concerns regarding the Wind Energy Project, which although titled as Brogborough, will have the greatest effect on Cranfield.  Included in their concerns is noise.  The impact of the noise emitted from the turbines – which have a span equal to the wing span of a jumbo jet – is not fully understood.  It has been reported that it can travel through objects such as windows, allowing the noise to be heard inside buildings; a house in Lincolnshire one kilometre away from a turbine has been awarded a large amount of money because of the noise.  The distance limit in Scotland is two kilometres.  If turbines were to be sited two kilometres away from Cranfield, this would affect all houses in the village.   A further concern is the visual impact on the village. 

1.     General Planning Matters.  There were no planning applications.

2.     Proteus Public Relations - Wind Energy Project, Brogborough – pre application consultation.  A pre-application consultation is being carried out from November 2012 {which was originally to be run until the end of January 2013.}  In light of comments made by members of the public, and the need for further exploration of the proposed development, it was RECOMMENDED that a working party is established to gather information, and to produce a report on its findings.  The report to be circulated to all Members by the end of February 2013 so that the matter can be brought to Committees in March.  It was further RECOMMENDED that the working party should include PCllrs Mrs Sue Clark, R Baker, and members of the public:  Mr Diamond, Peter Gardner, Emma Turner and Anita Beal.

3.     Core Strategy – Consultation on Main Modifications.  It was agreed that no comment will be put forward.

4.     The Development Strategy for Central Bedfordshire (pre-submission version).  Comments by 25^th February 2013. Documents circulated to all Members.  It was RECOMMENDED that PCllr J Savill formulates a response to the consultation to put to the Full Council on 20^th March for approval.

5.     The Community Infrastructure Levy (draft Charging Schedule).  Comments by 25^th February 2013.  It was RECOMMENDED that PCllr R Baker formulates a response to the consultation to put to the Full Council on 20^th March for approval.

6.     Central Bedfordshire Council Draft Guidance Note 1: Wind Energy Development.  CBC is publishing guidance in respect of wind energy development in Central Bedfordshire. This is the first of a series of notes (yet to be produced) on renewable energy which will eventually become Supplementary Planning Documents. It outlines what the main planning considerations will be in assessing applications and also aims to assist all interested parties in identifying the most appropriate locations for wind energy development in Central Bedfordshire. The analysis is based largely on landscape impact but other issues are also discussed. The closing date for feedback is 11th February 2013.  It was RECOMMENDED that this Council should respond, the drafting of the response to be agreed.

7.     Reports:   

7.1.   PCllr P Meadows reported that the consultation on Luton Airport has been published, and asked if this council should respond.  PCllr A Bastable undertook to contact Cranfield Airport to ask what implication the project will have on Cranfield.

7.2.   PCllr/CBCllr A Bastable reported that at a meeting of the Executive Committee on 5^th February, it was agreed that the Flitt Leys Development Brief will not be put to Central Bedfordshire Full Council, but will be put back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 6^th March, which voted in favour of the Brief.  The reason for the decision is that it was not made clear to members of the committee exactly what they were voting for.  CB/PCllr Mrs Sue Clark advised the meeting that PCllr R Baker, who attended the meeting of the Executive, spoke well at the meeting and that the decision to put the matter back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was unprecedented.   PCllr L Pollock asked if there will be clarification on all matters by the 6^th March meeting; PCllr A Bastable confirmed that there will.  PCllr A Bastable left the meeting at 8.45pm.

8.     Correspondence:  There was no correspondence.

9.     Agenda Items:  Home Farm.