Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for the Prior Approval for the erection of a building to enclose a new Carriage Wash Machine (CWM). The CWM building would be located on a section of track linking the two separate north and south yards of the Cambridge Rail depot, which are divided by Mill Road bridge.

 

The Senior Planner updated his report by referring to revised condition and recommendation wording on the Amendment Sheet and to amended wording of Condition 3 in his presentation.

 

The Committee received representations in objection to the application from the following:

·       Resident of Eastern Street.

·       A representative from Quash the Trainwash Community Organisation.

 

The representations covered the following issues:

      i.          An industrial facility does not belong in a residential area that is itself in the centre of a conservation area. More appropriate land for its location at Cambridge North was sold, with only transport organisations consulted; not the community or Councillors. Even when the Mill Road bridge works were proposed in 2018, this facility was largely obfuscated. Had it been raised then, the community would have asked many more questions.

     ii.          This application has come before the Committee due to the effort and expense of residents. Even then, approval is sought only for two buildings rather than the industrial facility with which they are interdependent. It is not just two buildings. Residents were being asked to accept continuous noise, vibration, and chemical outputs. Plus the visual blight of a 35m metre long and 8.5m metre high building and associated plant, lit up all night, just metres from their back fences.

   iii.          This was a significant change. twelve carriage trains would arrive constantly to be cleaned 24/7, 365 days a year. Cleaning would peak with four trains an hour being cleaned at  anti-social times of between 3:30am to 6am. While lorries were no longer allowed to idle in streets, residents were expected to tolerate  trains idling in the depot 24/7. Residents accepted that living alongside the railway brought noise and they wanted an efficient railway. Residents felt like collateral damage in the railways’ strategic plan. 

   iv.          Railways need to respect the communities they serve, and so residents objected to the application and proposed conditions as set out in their written representations.

    v.          Asked for the following:

a.    Visual alignment with the surrounding built environment - brick-effect walls and slate coloured roofs; dark brown or green fencing.

b.    Maximum physical noise attenuation of the buildings, and acoustic fences at entrance and exit especially along the whole length of the sidings. Following the precautionary principle, this should be done now, and should not await post-operation tests.

c.    On-going noise assessments to hold the operators to the claimed 44dB during cleaning and 38dB background.

d.    O-ngoing vibration assessments of the integrity of foundations and walls of houses.

e.    Operations should be limited to Monday – Friday, with a maximum of two trains per hour.

   vi.          Residents already suffered from almost seven day a week construction noise from both this and Ironworks, exacerbated by working from home during a pandemic. This facility raised the prospect that at no point in the future residents would be assured of a rest from noise, vibration, visual, light, and chemical pollution. Residents appealed to the Committee to impose reasonable conditions and not allow this facility to operate at the long-term cost of injury to the community.

 vii.          Expressed particular concern that chemicals/spray from train cleaning operations would be spread (by wind) to residents’ gardens. This and train cleaning operations would impact on residents’ amenity space. The situation would be exacerbated by lockdown where residents were forced to stay at home and so would be frequently disturbed by day and night time train cleaning work.

viii.          GTR had repeatedly been asked to confirm what chemicals would be used in train cleaning but they had not engaged with residents on this issue.

   ix.          Re-iterated that:

a.    Residents’ sleep could be interrupted.

b.    Residents wanted maximum mitigation of cleaning processes to avoid impact on their amenity.

 

Councillors Bird and McQueen temporarily left the meeting due to a disruption in their receipt of the remote meeting delivery. They participated in the discussion, but  did not vote on the recommendation.

 

Councillor Porrer proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation that prior to the full operation of the CWM that further noise monitoring and washing vapour assessments are undertaken.

 

This amendment was carried by 6 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved by (6 votes to 0) to grant the application prior approval  in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, subject to:

      i.          the planning conditions set out in the Officer’s report and the Amendment Sheet;

     ii.          an additional Condition: Prior to commencement of development of the CWM building above slab level, the colour and finish of the external materials to be used in the construction of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The building shall be built in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure the appearance of the building does not harm the visual amenity of the area (Cambridge Local Plan 2018, policies 55 and 61);

   iii.          an additional Informative: The applicants are recommended that prior to the full operation of the CWM that further noise monitoring and washing vapour assessments are undertaken to establish the operational noise levels of the CWM and its vapour impacts.  They utilise reasonable endeavours to implement any additional mitigation as appropriate; and

   iv.          delegated authority to Officers to draft the conditions and informatives in consultation with the Chair, Vice Chair and Spokes.