A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Planning
Wednesday, 16th November, 2011 9.30 am

Venue: Committee Room 1 & 2 - Guildhall. View directions

Contact: James Goddard  Committee Manager

Items
No. Item

11/67/PLAN

Re-Ordering Agenda

Minutes:

Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chair used her discretion to alter the order of the agenda items. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the agenda. 

11/68/PLAN

Apologies

Minutes:

Councillors Dryden and Znajek.

11/69/PLAN

Declarations of Interest

Members are asked to declare at this stage any interests, which they may have in any of the following items on the agenda. If any member is unsure whether or not they should declare an interest on a particular matter, they are requested to seek advice from the Head of Legal Services before the meeting.

Minutes:

Name

Item

Interest

Councillor Marchant-Daisley

11/71/PLANa

Personal and Prejudicial: Applicant is her landlord

Councillor Saunders

11/71/PLANc

Personal: Member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign.

Councillor Stuart

11/71/PLANd

Personal and Prejudicial: Applicant is her husband.

 

Withdrew from discussion and room, and did not vote

Councillor Saunders

11/71/PLANg

Personal: Member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign.

Councillor Brown

11/72/PLANa

Personal and Prejudicial: Property abuts application site.

 

Withdrew from discussion and room, and did not vote

Councillor Stuart

11/72/PLANa

Personal: Works in Station Road

11/70/PLAN

Minutes pdf icon PDF 57 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2011.

Minutes:

The minutes of the 19 October 2011 meeting were approved and signed as a correct record subject to the following amendment in section 11/65/PLANa:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 3) to defer whilst awaiting further refinements to the scheme for further supporting plans to demonstrate the visual impact of the current application scheme. Application to be presented back to Committee at November Planning Committee.”

11/71/PLAN

Planning Applications pdf icon PDF 30 KB

Additional documents:

11/71/PLANa

11/0692/FUL: 21 Cambridge Place pdf icon PDF 70 KB

Minutes:

Item withdrawn from agenda.

11/71/PLANb

11/0746/EXP: Ashley Hotel, 74 - 76 Chesterton Road pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for demolition of existing garages. To be replaced by a two storey building to provide 19 additional hotel bedrooms (4 within roof space), an underground car park for 16 cars and 12 bicycles and an extension to the existing semi-basement hotel facilities.

 

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

·  Mr Leone

·  Ms Susan Hilken

 

The representations covered the following issues:

 

(i)  Local residents were not opposed to the Ashley Hotel development, but were opposed to this iteration.

(ii)  Felt that the design sought to over develop the site and impacted on the Conservation Area.

(iii)  Suggested that the design was inappropriate for the area as it was not sympathetic to the character of neighbouring properties. Also the proposed building was too big in terms of height and mass.

(iv)  Raised concerns about loss of trees on the north of the site.

(v)  Suggested that existing traffic flow, safety and parking issues would be exacerbated by the development.

 

Mr Norfolk (Applicant) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Nimmo-Smith (Ward Councillor for West Chesterton) addressed the committee about the application to reiterate residents concerns as outlined above. Councillor Nimmo-Smith also referred to sections 3.0 and 8.8 of the Officer’s report in relation to PPS4, and asked if this was still a relevant consideration.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 1) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda subject to completion of s106 Agreement by 16 January 2012.

 

Councillors Brown and Saunders participated in the discussion but not the decision making for this item, as they were not present for its entirety.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.  This development has been approved subject to conditions and the prior completion of a section 106 planning obligation (/a unilateral undertaking), because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

East of England plan 2008: SS1, ENV6, ENV7, ENG6, T1, T9 and T14

 

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003: P6/1, P9/8 and P9/9

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12, 4/4,

4/11, 4/13, 8/2, 8/10, 8/16

 

2.  The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

 

Unless prior agreement has been obtained from the Head of Development Services, and the Chair and Spokesperson of this Committee to extend the period for completion of the Planning Obligation required in connection with this development, if the Obligation has not been completed by 16th January 2012 it is recommended that the application be refused for the following reason(s).

 

The proposed development does not make appropriate provision for transport mitigation measures, public art and monitoring in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/7, 3/8 and 10/1, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 policies P6/1 and P9/8 and as detailed in the Planning Obligation Strategy 2010, the Public Art Supplementary Planning Document 2010, and the Eastern Corridor Area Transport Plan 2002.

11/71/PLANc

11/0876/FUL: Service Station Corner Histon Road and Huntingdon Road pdf icon PDF 31 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for erection of building for student housing accommodation and retail unit together with associated new hard and soft landscaping and service lay by.

 

The committee received representation in objection to the application from the following:

·  Professor Evans spoke on behalf of Dr Apter.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)  Referred to resident’s and Inspector’s comments that the building should be occupied only by Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) and University of Cambridge students. This was stipulated in the s106 agreement, but Professor Evansqueried if this could be overturned/renegotiated in future to allow other organisations to use the building.

(ii)  Suggested that the private sector were entitled to make speculative developments, but their risk should not be mitigated through the s106 agreement.

 

Mr Brennan (Architect) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Todd-Jones (Ward Councillor for Arbury) addressed the committee about the application. He raised the following issues:

 

(i)  Referred to Urban Design Team plus Design & Conservation Panel comments in the 19 October 2011 Officer’s report, and suggested that concerns raised in these had not been addressed.

(ii)  Suggested that the application did not meet Local Plan policy 3.7 regarding to creation of successful places.

(iii)  Asked Members to be mindful of the impact of the application on the nearby Conservation Area and listed buildings.

(iv)  Referenced residents and Environmental Health Officer concerns relating to noise levels, the need for a noise level assessment, and how noise levels could preclude development on site unless abatement levels were undertaken.

(v)  Sought clarification on action to be taken if the developer sought to renegotiate the s106 agreement, particularly regarding the possibility of expanding occupancy beyond ARU and University of Cambridge students.

 

Mr Paul Brown addressed the committee to clarify Design & Conservation Panel comments concerning the application. The Panel were generally satisfied with the design of the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 3) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application.

 

The Chair decided that the reasons for refusal should be voted on and recorded separately.

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 0) to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reason:

 

The proposed development, by virtue of the lack of articulation of the Histon Road elevation which would lead to an unrelenting and overly dominant built form, would fail to enhance the visual amenity of the streetscene.  In so doing the development would not respond positively to the site context and would not provide an attractive frontage to positively enhance the townscape where the development adjoins existing public space.  The development is therefore contrary to policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2006.

 

Councillor Herbert proposed to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reasons: 3.8. This was lost by 3 votes to 2 with Chair’s casting vote.

 

Councillor Tunnacliffe proposed to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reasons: 3.7 (general). This was lost by 5 votes to 2.

11/71/PLANd

11/0697/FUL: 3 Aberdeen Square pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

Councillor Stuart withdrew from the meeting for this item and did not participate in the discussion or decision making. Councillor Tunnacliffe assumed the Chair for this item.

 

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for the addition of photovoltaic solar thermal panels on roof.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda.

 

Councillor Herbert did not participate in the discussion or the decision making for this item as he was not present for its entirety.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.  This development has been approved, conditionally, because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

East of England plan 2008: SS1 and ENV7

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/14 and 8/17

 

2.  The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

11/71/PLANe

09/0943/OUT: Land Rear Of 306 Cherry Hinton Road pdf icon PDF 14 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The committee received an application for outline planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for outline application for one three bed house and garage.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.  This development has been approved subject to conditions and the prior completion of a section 106 planning obligation (/a unilateral undertaking), because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

East of England plan 2008: SS1, ENV7

 

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003:

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/8, 3/12, 4/4, 4/13

 

2.  The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer

Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday. 

11/71/PLANf

11/0219/FUL: 9-15 Harvest Way pdf icon PDF 7 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for erection of 75 residential apartments, comprising 30 affordable units and 45 private flats, provision of a commercial space at ground floor level comprising 174m2 to be used for A1, A2, B1(a) or D1 (in the alternative); and associated infrastructure (following demolition of the existing building).

 

The committee received a representation in objection to the application from the following:

·  Mr Goode speaking on behalf of 3 local resident groups.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)  Concern regarding height of proposed building.

(ii)  Observed the application did not provide physical links between local roads/communities.

(iii)  Observed the application did not provide any amenity space.

(iv)  Suggested the application did not meet Supplementary Planning Document criteria due to a lack of trees on site.

 

Mr Colin Brown (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Mr Corrance addressed the committee to clarify Highway Authority comments concerning the application. He suggested the application should not adversely affect traffic flow or air quality in the area, as traffic volume was anticipated to rise regardless of whether the development went ahead or not. The cumulative impact of the development on projected traffic volume and air quality figures was minimal.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 4 with Chair’s casting vote) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agendasubject to the revised list of conditions appended to the amendment sheet and the completion of a Section 106 agreement.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

Because it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

East of England plan 2008: policies SS1, H1, H2, T2, T9, T14, ENV6, ENV7, ENG6, WM6, CSR1;

 

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003:  policies P6/1, P9/8 and P9/9;

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006):  policies 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12, 3/13, 3/15, 4/11, 4/13, 4/14, 5/1, 5/5, 5/9, 5/10, 7/1, 7/3, 8/1, 8/2, 8/4, 8/6, 8/8, 8/10 and 8/16;

 

The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

11/72/PLAN

General Items

11/72/PLANa

CB1 Station Area Redevelopment - Variation of s106 Agreement pdf icon PDF 53 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The committee received an application for variation of Section 106 Agreement for the Station Area Redevelopment.

 

The application sought approval that the Planning Committee delegate powers to officers to vary the Section 106 Agreement by means of a deed of variation to:

(i)  Allow an interim area of open space to be brought forward in lieu of provision of the Station Road Open Space (the Interim Station Road Open Space).

(ii)  To remove the link between the commencement of development of Block F1 and the Cycle Park.

(iii)  To address the omission of Network Rail land from the Interim Station Road Open Space.

 

The committee received a representation in objection to the application from the following:

·  Mr Frank Gawthrop on behalf of local residents

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)  In general terms residents were pleased to see the removal of the 650 place multi deck car park building, as in their view it would reduce vehicle parking on the CB1 site, plus levels of traffic in their neighbourhood (which already causes problems).

(ii)  Queried if the City Council Planning Department could review the strategic issue of access to the station from the South. The Cambridge Leisure Park contains a multi deck car park for 636 spaces that residents felt could be used as alternative parking if a link was provided across the rail tracks. Residents asked Councillors to consider how this asset could be better utilised either with a direct link, or via the new central platform with the cooperation of Network Rail. 

 

Mr Derbyshire (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Blencowe proposed an amendment to include a cycle parking requirement.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

The Committee:

Resolved (5 votes to 2) to accept the officer recommendation to approve variation of the Section 106 Agreement for the Station Area Redevelopmentsubject to amendment to link the delivery of the Cycle Park to the development of Block A2.

 

Councillor Brown withdrew from the meeting for this item and did not participate in the decision making.