Decision details

Councillor Dryden withdrew from the meeting for this item and Councillor Blencowe took the Chair.

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval to erect 8 semidetached dwellings with 8 car parking spaces and covered cycle storage facilities at Fishers Lane, Cherry Hinton.

 

Mr Harney (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Russ McPherson (Ward Councillor for Cherry Hinton) addressed the Committee about the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

       i.          He was a member of several Royal British Legion groups in the city.

     ii.          The (former) hall in Fishers Lane was in a poor state of repair, so the local Royal British Legion branch had asked the national body to find an alternative venue. None had been offered to date.

   iii.          The Fishers Lane hall has now been demolished, but it had been a valued community asset. It was registered as such in 2013 (this should have been valid for five years).

   iv.          Requested a replacement venue with comparable facilities at affordable hire prices.

    v.          Community space was scarce in Cherry Hinton, more so now since the demolition of the hall.

   vi.          The hall had attracted significant numbers of bookings, and therefore income for the Royal British Legion. Reiterated it was a valued resource.

 vii.          Suggested Application 14/2027/FUL contravened Local Plan policy.

viii.          Expressed concern that approval of the application would set a precedent that would lead to a loss of community facilities across the city.

 

Mark Ashton (Ward Councillor for Cherry Hinton) addressed the Committee about the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

       i.          Spoke as Chair of the Cherry Hinton Residents association.

     ii.          The Fishers Lane hall was a valued asset for the community and City Council as both had used it.

   iii.          Previous planning applications had proposed to use the hall building, the latest did not.

   iv.          Expressed concern that:

·       The hall was demolished prior to submission of the planning application, and took issue with this process.

·       The developer had not liaised with residents.

·       A valued community asset was expected to be replaced by housing.

 

The Principal Planning Officer was asked to respond to points raised in the representations. He said:

       i.          Gave a synopsis of the Council’s demolition policy.

     ii.          As the Fishers Lane hall was no longer there, the Council had no policy in place to seek re-instatement.

 

The Committee:

 

Councillors Hipkin and Smart proposed refusing the application as it would be contrary to Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12. The proposal to use policy 3/4 was lost by 5 votes to 2. Policy 3/11 was proposed instead.

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 2) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application.

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0 with 1 abstention) to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reasons:

 

By virtue of the siting of the proposed units and layout of external space, the proposed development would result in the provision of poor quality amenity space for future occupants, which would be confined and restricted. It would also result in a poor outlook from the front of the proposed units to car parking spaces and cycle storage at close proximity. As such, the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site and would be contrary to Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policies 3/7, 3/11 and 3/12.