Decision details

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for redevelopment of a vacant site to provide two flats.

The Committee received representations in objection to the application from residents of Mulberry Close.

The representations covered the following issues:

       i.          Accepted the development of 125 Milton Road in principle, but objected to this application.

     ii.          The distance between the new development’s windows and the road was too small.

   iii.          Mulberry Close Residents' Society owned the track which is used by residents as access to the local area.

   iv.          The track could not accommodate pedestrians and vehicles at the same time now, so would be unsuitable for future access needs of the new development.

    v.          The 127 Milton Road development should not be accepted as a precedent for the area.

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

Councillor Nethsingha proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation to include an additional reason for refusal:

Both the north east and south west presented blank and harsh faces which exaggerated this is an over development of a constrained site.

The Principal Planner augmented this:

The proposal by virtue of its poor design, in relation in particular to the north east and south west walls that present blank and harsh facades that exaggerate the cramped and overdeveloped nature of the proposal, fails to respond positively to its surroundings. As such the proposal is contrary to policies 3/4, 3/7, 3/10 and 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2006.

This amendment was carried by 3 votes to 0.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to refuse the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers plus additional fifth reason for refusal below:

The proposal by virtue of its poor design, in relation in particular to the north east and south west walls that present blank and harsh facades that exaggerate the cramped and overdeveloped nature of the proposal, fails to respond positively to its surroundings. As such the proposal is contrary to policies 3/4, 3/7, 3/10 and 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2006.