Wind Energy and Central Motors - Alert

See the agenda for a very important meeting on Wednesday (March 6), 2pm at Central Beds (Chicksands).  Click on the link for the agenda for The Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee agenda and the draft  wind energy guidance document being devised by CBC and for the revised proposals for the development brief at Central Motors. 

These two documents will both be discussed by the OSC.

Ward councillors Alan Bastable and Ken Matthews are members of the committee.


http://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/modgov/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=648&MId=4340

OK because an officer says its OK

Central Motors (Flitt Leys Close Lower School)  is coming back to CBC's Overview and Scrutiny Committee. I have written as follows to the head of sustainable communities at the Council Gary Alderson:


Dear Mr Alderson
I believe that the proposed development brief, for the 135-homes plus a school scheme at Central Motors in Cranfield, has been referred back to the Council’s Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee, by the Executive.

It was originally passed by them, after significant misgivings, after officers stated that with a traffic management scheme the Flitt Leys Close access would be capable of handling the traffic including school buses. You will know from my previous correspondence that there is widespread scepticism about this contingency in the village.

We are regularly told by our ward councillors that the officers have confirmed that this solution is workable and therefore it is hard to oppose the development brief.

If I was sitting on OSC I would be asking for more detail about the type of traffic management scheme that would be introduced and for professional examples of where it has been used before and what the evaluation has been. Please accept my apologies if you have already supplied councillors with this information. I would also like to see some citations and examples regarding the ‘on-off’ parking proposals outlines at the meeting in January and how this fits with disability and access protocols.

I, personally, and I believe many in the village, cannot simply accept that everything will be OK because an officer says it will. I am sure your decision has been based on considerable professional expertise and it would be good for local democracy if you shared that with those likely to be affected by the decision.

Traffic management scheme in Court Road?

I think some direct appeal to decision makers is needed over the Flitt Leys Close proposals. I have written to the head of Central Beds Sustainable Communities  (planning in pounds, shillings and pence)below
 






Dear Mr Alderson:
I am writing in a personal capacity as a Cranfield Parish Councillor and as a resident of the village. You will be aware that the 17 January Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee's approval of the development brief for the "Central Motors" site, 135 houses plus a school,  off Flitt Leys Close in  Cranfield is highly controversial.
I attended the meeting and heard a mixture of incredulity and scathing criticism from members. My fellow parish councillor Roger Baker addressed the committee and pointed out the "frenzied jostling" for parking and drop off points that already takes place outside the current lower school (Cranfield Church of England Academy) site in Court Road. Despite this, the committee subsequently approved the brief following an amendment proposed by ward councillor Ken Matthews that a traffic management scheme should be introduced in the event of an application for a school. We heard assurances from officers that this was practicable along with the possibility of allocated parking spaces for Flitt Leys residents authorising parking on the footpath ("on-off" parking). You will; be aware that a proposed health centre will also use Flitt Leys as an access.

This news has been met with consternation in Cranfield. I am not surprised, therefore, to learn that the Central Beds Council Executive has sent the proposal back to Suscomms OSC for a second look. One of our ward councillors, at last week's parish council, explained that this had occurred because there was confusion about whether members were voting  for a "school"  or a "school site".
Personally I cannot see what difference this will make. I hope officers will reconsider their earlier advice and remove the school from the development brief. The only feasible outcome of a second look is to reject the development brief if it contains provision for a school or site without alternative access.
Then Central Beds; Learning and Children Services needs to take a step back and start thinking about the desperate needs of the Academy; for expansion on-site or relocation. Sooner or later Cranfield will host another 500 plus houses with a significant impact on school places. We need a strategic plan with different arms of the council (planning and education) talking to each other. The Academy needs  a range of relocation options which factor in accessibility. Neither the school nor the community needs a major public service for small children  with a single access  through a narrow residential corridor.

And, in the meantime, perhaps we could have a traffic management scheme introduced to Court Road to show how effective this is, as a solution.