Decision details

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The proposal sought approval for a third storey extension to the existing hotel to provide an additional 16 bedrooms. The proposed also included the re-cladding of the existing façade and an extension to the existing plant room on the rooftop.

 

Caroline Gholer (Cambridge Past Present and Future) addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

     i.        Disappointed with the design which did not enhance the setting and the surroundings.

    ii.        The proposed extension should be lowered to lessen the impact.

   iii.        Would have a negative impact on the conservation green belt and protected area.

  iv.        The proposed design had the potential to be highly visible as the roof line was too domineering, particularly along the river corridor.  

    v.        The use of solar panels had not been referenced in the Officer’s report.

  vi.        There were no landscaping proposals in the application to address the massing of the bulk of the building.

 

Mark Savin (Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Rod Cantrill (Newham Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

     i.        The surrounding setting of the site sit in the green belt of Sheep’s Green and Coe Fen both of which are unique public spaces, acting in harmony with each other, the river and the built form that sits at the edge of the space.

    ii.        The harmonious relationship had been recognised in the Conservation appraisal and the Government Inspector documented the important views from this space and across the space, including the City’s sky line. 

     i.        The nature and form of the surroundings must be taken into consideration.

    ii.        Acknowledged that some form of development should be accepted but asked the Committee to consider this application separate to previous applications.

   iii.        The Inspector viewed the existing building of the site as made up of a number of component schemes. These schemes provided an important break down of the massing of the building when approaching from the west of the river or Coe Fen from the South.

  iv.        The current boundary between the Hotel and surroundings does have some balance. The proposed extension would disturb this relationship.

   v.        The proposed roofline would create an intensification of the massing of the building which would have a negative impact of the views of the City’s skyline.

  vi.        Use of materials was confusing. 

 vii.        Highlighted the comments  from English Heritage (6.14 of the Officer’s report) who advised that the proposed development

          would result in some harm to the character and appearance   of the conservation area.

viii.        Stated that the proposed development conflicted with 3/14 and 3/11 of the 2006 Local Plan

  ix.        Would encourage the Committee to refuse this application.

 

The Committee:

 

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 and the amended conditions recommended by the officer.

 

Pre-Committee Amendments to Recommendation:

 

Condition 3 has been repeated twice (Condition 3 and 4). Therefore condition 4 needs to be deleted.

 

Conditions 15 (Archaeology) and 16 (Contamination) need to be removed as the proposal does not require ground works and therefore are not necessary.