Hello everyone. I know we set up this email group to fight the train wash.
However I am aware of what a strong community feeling we have already created
in the process. I am wondering whether there is some way in which as a street
we can support one another at a time when lots of people are anxious about the
virus. In particular it would be great to support vulnerable people who are
needing to self isolate. Perhaps some of you younger people who are more
technically Adroit than I am might have suggestions about ways of doing this.
From Sian at 79
Sent from my iPad
On 12 Mar 2020, at 11:14, Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks Harriet!
Until anon, Sean
Get Outlook for iOS
From: cambtrainwash-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cambtrainwash-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Harriet Riches <harriet.riches@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2020 10:36:46 AM
To: cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [cambtrainwash] Re: Great Eastern Street train wash development
concerns
Hi, yes you can count me in. Harriet (no. 55).
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 09:02, Info Quashthetrainwash
<info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Cheers Peter!
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Touching Health <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2020 9:00:54 AM
To: Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
celiakenney@xxxxxxxx <celiakenney@xxxxxxxx>; ediestuart@xxxxxxxxx
<ediestuart@xxxxxxxxx>; giumorse@xxxxxxxxxxx <giumorse@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
philip.howell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <philip.howell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Anne-Sophie
Bretonnet <abretonn@xxxxxxxx>; Dave Baigent <Dave.Baigent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
Hannah Fromageau <hannahfromageau@xxxxxxxxx>; Louis T Koehorst
<ted@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Martin Kulander <martin.kulander@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
Hi Sean,
Thanks very much for this. Sian and I are interested in being part of that
initial fact finding or case investigation.
Doing a rough headcount I reckon that there could be at least 10 other GES
residents who would come in on this. So this of number would make it less
weighty on those involved.
Best wishes, Peter at 79
From: Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 11 March 2020 19:59:14
To: cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; celiakenney@xxxxxxxx; ediestuart@xxxxxxxxx;
giumorse@xxxxxxxxxxx; philip.howell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Anne-Sophie Bretonnet;
Dave Baigent; Hannah Fromageau; Louis T Koehorst; Martin Kulander; Touching
Health
Subject: Fwd: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
G'day everyone,
We had a response from a solicitor about potential action today. The upper
bound of the cost would be £2700 + VAT to determine whether we could proceed
with a case. If you're interested in being part of that initial fact finding,
you can let me know personally. You don't need to disclose what you can put
in yet, just let know if you want to be involved.
Until anon, Sean
From: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 3:43:48 PM
To: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Shield, Gillian <GillianShield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Hannah Norman
<hnorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
Dear Sean and Gillian
I write further following our call yesterday evening as to whether Network
Rail and/or the train operating companies (TOCs) can rely on permitted
development rights in the General Permitted Development Order (GDPO) to
construct and operate a carriage wash facility on NR land adjacent to
Cambridge Mainline station. In our call we established that very little
detail is known about the development in part because pre-app advice has not
been disclosed by Cambridge City Council (CCC) to you or other local
residents. You explained the general parameters of the scale of development
and the intended hours of operation and have subsequently sent us an email
chain containing an email from a Chris Penn on behalf of Govia Thameslink
Railway (GTR) (set out below) that provides more detail as to the nature of
the development and hours of operation etc. This information will be used in
briefing counsel and in his advice on the legal issues but it is likely that
we may need to seek further clarification on the proposed development or
update the barrister if further information is provided, as Mr Penn suggests.
Fees
I have now heard back Andrew Parkinson’s clerk and set out fees for initial
advice on the issues we discussed yesterday evening as follows:
Richard Buxton Solicitors fees to brief Andrew Parkinson and discuss his
advice with him and discuss next steps in a tel con (or meeting here in the
office) with you/other residents - £850-£1,200 + VAT.
Barrister’s fees to review what documentation (such as there is and anything
Mr Penn provides) and to review the relevant parts of the Railway Act and
GDPO to ascertain if Mr Penn is correct that GTR is fully entitled to rely on
permitted development rights – £850-£1500 + VAT.
Please appreciate that this will cover our initial advice on the legal issues
and is not a full budget for ongoing work. Once we have the barrister’s
advice, we can discuss ongoing steps and fees.
If you want to proceed I will need to have Sean or another resident become
our client and to do that we need you to sign the terms of business and
provide ID docs (scan copy of passport or photo driver’s licence and proof of
address) – and then we can send you a client care letter confirming
instructions as set out above.
If you have any questions please let me know.
Lisa
Lisa Foster
Partner
Richard Buxton Solicitors
19B Victoria Street
Cambridge CB1 1JP
Tel. (01223) 328 933
Mobile 07970 097 402
email: lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: www.richardbuxton.co.uk
Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
From: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 10 March 2020 19:02
To: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Shield, Gillian <GillianShield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Hannah Norman
<hnorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
G’day Lisa,
Thank you for your call just now. Below is the most recent mail we have had
from GTR, on 06 March 2020, which includes Network Rail’s response to the
Cambridge City Council declining to apply for planning approval of any kind.
You can read all the community’s concerns and about our campaign at
https://quashthetrainwash.org
Specific issues:
The planning issues: https://quashthetrainwash.org/planning/ and ;
https://quashthetrainwash.org/a-trainwash-is-for-cleaning-except-when-it-isnt/
Our concerns about threat the amenity of the community:
https://quashthetrainwash.org/threat-impact/
And all of our questions about GTR’s published FAQ about the facility:
https://quashthetrainwash.org/what-the-faq-our-questions-about-gtrs-answers/
Our concerns about the siting:
https://quashthetrainwash.org/location-location-location/
I look forward to hearing back from you with a quote for the initial
investigation and letter fees.
Until anon, Sean
--
Sean Rintel PhD | Senior Researcher, HCI, Future of Work, Microsoft Research
Cambridge UK | Pronoun: He
---
From: Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 10 March 2020 18:50
To: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Fwd: Cambridge Depot Upgrade Latest
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: Cambridge Depot Upgrade Latest
To: Chris Penn <Chris.Penn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Chris,
I acknowledge receipt of your email and appreciate the additional updates and
detail. We also look forward to further details on your website. That’s what
will help most here.
The community will discuss our response tonight with Daniel Zeichner, MP for
Cambridge.
With respect to the next meeting, I’d like to reiterate our request that a
Network Rail representative attends. We would also like an contact details
for a specific person at Network Rail to further address some questions about
this response and the site location.
Sincerely,
Sean Rintel
From: Chris Penn <Chris.Penn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 2:38:17 PM
To: Info Quashthetrainwash <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Cambridge Depot Upgrade Latest
Dear Sean,
Hope you are well.
Thank you for your patience. I wanted to give you the latest update on the
back on last week’s meeting.
Network Rail have sent the following to Greater Cambridge Planning in the
response to the request for a Certificate of Lawful Development:
I write in respect of the works to provide Carriage Wash facilities to the
east of Mill Road Cambridge, as shown in planF535-GTR-DRG-CV-000081 Rev P01.
The works is part of the wider Thameslink Project, which aims to upgrade and
increase existing Depot facilities at Cambridge Depot.
I note that there have been a number of questions from local residents and
other interested parties as to whether planning consent is required for the
works. This email is to provide clarification on the nature of the works and
confirmation of the utilisation of permitted development.
Proposed Works
The proposed works consist of:
· Removal of existing life expired carriage wash plant and provision of
a twin rotor side brush carriage wash including protective enclosure
· Provision of associated plant and machinery with water recycling
facility including protective enclosure
· Provision of access road to maintain the Carriage Wash, plant and
machinery
Refer to attached general arrangement drawing F535-GTR-DRG-CV-000081 Rev P01
for proposed overall site arrangements.
Permitted Development
The works comprise a railway operational development for which Network Rail
has statutory powers and planning permission is therefore granted by virtue
of permitted development.
These works do not require planning permission and are permitted by virtue of
Part 8 (Transport Related Development) and Part 18 (Miscellaneous
Development; Class A – development under local or private Acts or Order) of
the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015.
Part 8 relates to ‘A. Development by railway undertakers on their operational
land, required in connection with the movement of traffic by rail’. The
proposed works clearly represent works that are required in connection of the
movement of traffic by rail, and are to be undertaken on railway operational
land.
A.1 of Part 8 details where development is not permitted. Development is not
permitted if it consists of ‘the construction or erection otherwise wholly
within a railway station of - …a building used for an industrial process’. As
the proposed carriage wash is for the cleaning of trains within a railway
depot, it is not considered that this represents an ‘industrial process’ and
therefore does not meet the definition. The proposed development does not
fall into any of the categories listed within these exceptions and is
therefore clearly permitted by Part 8.
In respect of Part 18, the works meet the definition of ‘A. Development
authorised by— (a) a local or private Act of Parliament,’. Importantly, the
proposed works do not meet the criteria set out within A.1 of Part 18, and an
application for Prior Approval is not required.
The railway in this location was authorised by the Eastern Counties Railway
(Brandon & Peterborough Extension) Act 1844. The subsequent Great Eastern
Railway Act 1862 was to apply the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845
(RCC Act 1845) general provisions to all of the Great Eastern Railway.
Section 16 of the RCC Act 1845 enlarges upon the works which may be carried
out and this includes the power, stating ‘They may erect and construct such
houses, warehouses, offices, and other buildings, yards, stations, wharfs,
engines, machinery, apparatus and other works and conveniences as they think
proper;’. A copy of Section 16 of the Act is attached for your information.
Based on the information above Network Rail is firmly of the view that the
work is permitted development and no planning permission is required.
Certificate of Lawful Development
I understand that the question of whether a Certificate of Lawful Development
(CLD) is required has been asked. Network Rail utilises permitted development
on a daily basis to deliver much needed work required to operate the railway
in a safe and efficient manner. The intention of permitted development is to
allow for works to take place without needing to seek permission from the
Local Planning Authority, and to allow for the works to take place without
having to wait for the completion of the application process.
If Network Rail were to apply for a CLD for all work that is permitted
development, or even a small proportion of work, it would result in
significant additional cost, delay to projects and need for significant
additional resource. Furthermore, it also sets a precedent whereby CLD
applications may be requested by other Local Authorities. This is not
something that Network Rail can commit to.
Given that the work is clearly permitted development it is considered that a
Certificate of Lawful Development is unnecessary on this occasion.
I also wanted to share you the latest with the other issues that were raised
at the meeting on 24th February.
Further measurement taking
As requested we are undertaking shade measuring which we will share with you
once we have the results. In addition, we are planning to conduct further
noise modelling once the design of the enclosure is concluded. This will be
an output from the ongoing discussion regarding the look and noise mitigation
of the carriage wash.
In regards to vibrations, we will be sharing the railway standards – which we
will be adhering to throughout this development.
Visuals
We are changing the 3D visuals ahead of the next meeting.
Train movements
In regards to the typical train movements into and out of the depot for our
May to December timetable, see this link:
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/detailed/CAMBDCS/2020-05-20/1800-0700?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt
. This is in-keeping with what we said at the meeting, with up to 33 trains
coming into the sidings between the main hours of operation (18:00 – 06:00).
We are working closely with Greater Anglia to visually illustrate the typical
train movements.
Actual Train wash design
SNC Lavalin – who are our principle designer, are pulling together high-level
details that we can share with you. In the meantime, I have attached two
diagrams to give an idea on layout and specification.
Environmental impact and health
The train wash will adhere to all environmental and railway laws and
regulations, as mentioned at the previous meeting. We are pulling together a
list of key regulations as requested and will share these in advance of the
next meeting.
In addition, at the next meeting we will be referencing other enclosed train
washes across our network to address your concerns around spray dispersion.
Next steps
We are continuing to update our webpage,
https://www.cambridgeraildepotupgrade.co.uk/ with latest information ;
regarding the depot upgrade.
The next residents meeting will be held on Tuesday 24th March at the
Salvation Army Building, 3 Tenison Rd, Cambridge CB1 2DG. Invitations will be
going out early next week.
If you have any follow up questions then please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Best regards,
Chris
Christopher Penn
Stakeholder Manager
Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR)
2nd Floor, Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London, EC3R 8AJ
www.thameslinkrailway.comwww.greatnorthernrail.comwww.southernrailway.com
From: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 10 March 2020 19:00
To: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Shield, Gillian <GillianShield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Hannah Norman
<hnorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
Dear Sean and Gillian Following our call this evening I write to confirm I
have written to the clerk to Andrew Parkinson Landmark Chambers and asked
about fees for advice on the use of the Part 8 GDPR. He was our barrister on
the Mawby case I mentioned – CoA judgment attached – different issue but
similar question
Do send me the email from NR
Lisa Foster
Partner
Richard Buxton Solicitors
19B Victoria Street
Cambridge CB1 1JP
Tel. (01223) 328 933
Mobile 07970 097 402
email: lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: www.richardbuxton.co.uk
Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
From: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 10 March 2020 13:49
To: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Richard Buxton <rbuxton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
G’day again Lisa,
I will also be available after 5:15pm.
Until anon, Sean
From: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 10 March 2020 13:23
To: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Richard Buxton <rbuxton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
G’day Lisa,
Thanks for getting back to me.
I could talk between now and 15:00. My mobile number is +447896839168, or if
you prefer we can use Microsoft Teams or Skype.
Until anon, Sean
—
Sean Rintel PhD | Senior Researcher
https://aka.ms/seanrintel
From: Lisa Foster <lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 12:37 pm
To: Sean Rintel
Cc: cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Richard Buxton
Subject: RE: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
Dear Sean
Is there a convenient time to speak today. I have been in contact with others
in the neighbourhood concerned about this issue so Richard Buxton forwarded
your email to him on to me to deal with.
Lisa Foster
Partner
Richard Buxton Solicitors
19B Victoria Street
Cambridge CB1 1JP
Tel. (01223) 328 933
Mobile 07970 097 402
email: lfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: www.richardbuxton.co.uk
Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
From: Sean Rintel <serintel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 09 March 2020 20:56
To: Law <law@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: cambtrainwash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Great Eastern Street train wash development concerns
Dear Richard and Co.,
You may have seen in the local news that GTR, Network Rail, and Greater
Anglia are building a train wash facility on the sidings backing on to the
odd-numbered backyards of Great Eastern Street - including our backyard.
Residents are concerned about various kinds of pollution (noise, vibration,
visual, chemical), not to mention the likely negative effect on property
values. We have a website at https://quashthetrainwash.org/ where you can ;
find more information.
The residents are looking to have the project stopped or at least go through
the full scrutiny of a Certificate of Lawful Development so that the reasons
for citing an industrial facility in a residential area can be understood, as
well as the likely injury to the amenity of the community. As you may know in
this situation, the railway and contractors are proceeding on the basis that
this is Permitted Development (per the Railways Act of 1845 and the GDPO
2015) and does not require a Certificate of Lawful Development. We dispute
this, and having raised this issue in the media and with the City Council, we
are now also wanting to look into legal options.
We are seeking a quote for the time of an experienced transport/construction
lawyer investigating our position. Would you be the right kind of firm for
this, or could you find us such a person, and on what cost basis?
Sincerely,
Sean Rintel on behalf of the Residents of Great Eastern Street
--
Sean Rintel PhD | Senior Researcher, HCI, Future of Work, Microsoft Research
Cambridge UK | Pronoun: He
