A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details

Decision details

14/1697/FUL - ARU, East Road

Decision Maker: Planning

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The proposal sought approval for the planningconsentforthedemolitionof the existingBryantand MellishClarkbuildingsand removalof the externalescapestairtotheDavidbuilding. Theconstruction of aScienceCentre(UseClassD1)withassociatedalterations to theeastelevationof theLord AshcroftBuilding,landscaping and accessalterations. 

 

Mary Croston addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

  i.  The proposed development would have a negative impact on the surrounding residential area.

  ii.  Would bring an increase in noise from refuse lorries and the fume cupboards.

  iii.  The maintenance road not referenced in the Officer’s drawings would house a number of bins and it was not clear what they would hold.

  iv.  Stated that the mass and bulk of the proposed building and skyline was not clearly shown on the Officer’s drawings.

  v.  Explained that Norfolk Terrace sat in a dip and there would be a loss of light to the properties.

  vi.  Stated that the shadow diagram in the Officer’s report was not arcuate as it showed the properties in shadow at 6.00pm which is not the case.

 vii.  The proposed development would bring an increase in light pollution at night.

viii.  The site sat on conservation area.

  ix.  The atrium would also add to the loss of light and queried if this was necessary.

 

Steve Bennett (Applicant) and addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Richard Robertson addressed the Committee in objection to the application as a Ward Councillor for Petersfield.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Norfolk Terrace sits in a 3 metre dip below ground level.

  ii.  The design did not the show the view from Norfolk Terrace.

  iii.  Concerns raised by the local residents have not been addressed.

  iv.  The service entrance at the back of the site had not been recognised in the Officer’s report; this would bring an increase in traffic and noise from those vehicles using the service entrance.

  v.  Asked if the application was approved restricted access to the service road / yard should be considered to limit noise pollution in the morning from the refuse / delivery trucks.

  vi.  The proposed development would bring a loss of light to the properties in Norfolk Terrace.

 vii.  Stated the shadow diagrams were not correct, the gardens were in light in the early evening.

viii.  Stated that the proposed building was much bigger than it needed to be and should be scaled down before the application was considered.

  ix.  Not in accordance with the 2006 Local Plan 3/4 and 3/7.

  x.  Plans did not address the Master Plan. 

 

The Committee:

 

Councillor Smart proposed an additional informative to include the Considerate Contractors Scheme.

 

This proposal was carried nem con.

 

The additional informative to read:

 

Except with the prior agreement of the local planning authority in writing, there shall be no collection or deliveries associated with the use of the building hereby approved outside the hours of 0700 hrs and 1900 hrs on Monday – Saturday and there should be no collections or deliveries on Sundays or Bank and public holidays.

 

Reason: Due to the proximity of residential properties to this premises and that extensive refurbishment will be required the above conditions are recommended to protect the amenity of these residential properties throughout the redevelopment in accordance with policy 4/13 of the Cambridge Local Plan (2006).

 

 

 

Resolved (7 votes to 0 with 1 abstention) to approve the application for full planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions, the amended conditions and the additional condition recommended by the officer.

 

Pre-Committee Amendments to Recommendation:

 

Condition 4: Prior to the commencement of development (or within a timescale that shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority), with the exception of any works of demolition or below ground works, a Public Art Delivery Plan and Public Art Maintenance Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Condition 10: Prior to the commencement of development, a programme of measures to minimise the spread of airborne dust from the site during the demolition/construction period shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

Report author: Angela Briggs

Publication date: 31/03/2015

Date of decision: 04/03/2015

Decided at meeting: 04/03/2015 - Planning

Accompanying Documents: