A residents’ campaign group has thanked supporters across the community after councillors refused a controversial proposal to expand waste processing at Saxon Pit, Whittlesey.
The application by Johnsons Aggregates Recycling Ltd was rejected by Cambridgeshire County Council’s planning committee on 4 March after a meeting that lasted almost six hours. Councillors voted five to three against the proposal, overturning a recommendation from planning officers that it should be approved.
Following the decision, Saxongate Residents Group issued a detailed statement thanking residents, councillors and public officials who supported their campaign.
“After a meeting that ran for nearly six hours and swung more than once, the committee refused the application by five votes to three. We are grateful for that outcome. But a three-to-five split on a proposal carrying these health and environmental risks should give us pause,” the group said.
Campaigners say decision reflects strength of community support
The proposal, first submitted in August 2024, had spent around 18 months moving through the planning system before reaching committee.
Residents say the outcome was only possible because of the level of engagement from people across the local community.
“None of this would have reached Wednesday’s committee in the condition it did without the sustained effort of many people,” Saxongate said.
“Thank you to every resident who travelled, who wrote, who signed, who shared, and who stayed engaged throughout this process.”
The group said the presence of residents at the meeting itself played an important role in demonstrating the scale of local concern.
Coach provided so residents could attend meeting
One of the most visible shows of support came when local councillor Roy Gerstner organised and paid for a coach so residents could attend the planning meeting in person.
“Thank you to Cllr Roy Gerstner, who provided and paid for a coach so that residents could attend in person,” Saxongate said.
“That gesture meant more than logistics. It meant the committee saw a community that had shown up.”
Campaigners said the turnout helped ensure councillors understood the depth of feeling among residents about the potential impacts of the proposed expansion.
Concerns centred on health, dust, noise and traffic
Throughout the planning process, residents raised concerns about increased waste throughput at the site and the potential consequences for nearby communities.
Among the issues highlighted were the risk of increased dust and noise, higher levels of heavy goods vehicle traffic and the processing of incinerator bottom ash.
Saxongate argued that health concerns were sometimes framed within the planning process as matters of perception rather than evidence.
However, the group praised the county council’s public health team for recognising the importance of properly examining complaints from residents.
“Thank you to the Public Health team at Cambridgeshire County Council for taking their responsibilities seriously when others sought to characterise those same concerns as perception rather than evidence,” the statement said.
Councillors praised for supporting refusal
Saxongate also thanked councillors who supported the decision to reject the proposal, saying their stance ensured the concerns raised by residents were reflected in the final outcome.
“Thank you to Cllr Samantha Hoy and Cllr Chris Boden for standing up for what was right, and for ensuring the grounds for refusal reflect the genuine concerns of this community,” the group said.
The group also acknowledged the involvement of North East Cambridgeshire MP Steve Barclay, who had previously raised objections to the proposal and supported a call-in request to the Secretary of State.
Planning decision based on two main concerns
The planning committee refused the application on two main grounds.
First, councillors concluded that the proposed increase in waste throughput and longer operating hours would intensify noise and dust problems and harm the health and wellbeing of nearby residents.
Second, the committee determined that the development had not demonstrated it would avoid unacceptable impacts on highway capacity and air quality when considered alongside other developments in the area.
Both reasons were judged to conflict with policies in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Local Plan and the Fenland Local Plan.
Recognition for local media coverage
Saxongate also thanked journalists and local media outlets who reported on the planning process and the issues raised by residents.
“Lastly, thank you to those in the local press who are reporting this accurately and including the detailed information,” the group said.
“The devil here really is in the detail.”
Campaigners have argued throughout the process that technical and regulatory questions surrounding waste processing and environmental impacts required careful scrutiny.
Residents say campaign will continue
While welcoming the planning refusal, Saxongate said the decision does not end wider concerns about the site or environmental regulation.
“The refusal is significant,” the group said. “It is also a moment, not an endpoint.”
The residents’ group says it will continue monitoring issues connected to the site, including water quality, containment and cumulative environmental impacts.
Campaigners are also preparing for the possibility that the applicant could appeal the decision.
“The applicant may appeal, and we will need to keep each other informed,” the group said, encouraging residents to stay connected through its mailing list.
For now, however, the group says the decision represents a major moment for community action.
“This result reflects a community that showed up, stayed engaged and made its voice heard.”
