Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Planning
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
The Committee received an application for
full planning permission.
The application sought approval for the erection of 2no. houses to the rear of site. First floor side and rear
extension to main house. Conversion of house to 1no. 3-bed and 1no. 1-bed flat.
The Planner corrected a typographical error in her report (agenda P108):
0.18 I am satisfied that the revised plans
are accurate. The removal of the loft conversion and amendments to make the
plans accurate has resulted in a minor increase decrease to scale, bulk and massing of the extensions to the host
dwelling.
The Committee received a representation in objection to the application
from a local resident.
The representation covered the following issues:
i.
Took issue with the Planner’s view
that “on balance” the application was acceptable.
ii.
The amount of development was
unacceptable in the proposed space/area. It was too dense, complex and
overdevelopment of the site.
iii.
Queried if the application met
amenity space requirements in the new Local Plan.
iv.
Expressed concern about:
a.
Access to the site (for people and
bin collections). Also the impact of this on amenity space.
b.
Loss of privacy.
c.
A car free development was
impractical due to the lack of local public transport.
Councillor Herbert
(Coleridge Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.
The representation covered the following issues:
i.
7 sets of drawings had been received for the site
as part of planning applications over 2 years.
ii.
Councillor Herbert had received 200 emails in response
to the 7 sets of drawings. He had expressed concerns about these to the
Planning Department.
iii.
The Council was working to the new Local Plan. The
application appeared to have been considered against policies in the previous
2006 Local Plan. Suggested the development did not meet accessibility and
amenity space requirements in the new Cambridge Local Plan.
iv.
The development was not sustainable. By being car
free, it also stopped families and disabled people buying properties on the
site.
v.
Families and disabled people would be interested in
3 bedroom properties, but access issues restricted emergency services and
potential property owners who needed cars or buggies. There was no sensible way
for people to get from their homes to the road (the access route was too small
for the number of new/existing properties on-site).
vi.
The Council supported car free developments.
However it was impractical for this application. There was no reliable public
transport nearby and property owners in Coleridge needed access to cars.
vii.
Expressed concern that the application would set a
poor precedent for further back garden developments.
The Committee:
Resolved (by 7 votes to 0) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application.
Resolved (by 9
votes to 0) to refuse the
application contrary to the officer recommendation for the following reasons:
1.
The
proposed access to the house to the rear would generate unacceptable levels of
noise and disturbance, through activities including movement of bikes and bins,
and deliveries, to the future occupiers of the 2 proposed flats and to the
neighbouring property at 66 Coleridge Road which would result in a poor level
of amenity for the residents of the flats and adjoining property. This would be
contrary to policy 52 and 57 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
2.
The
proposed flats would introduce additional built form in close proximity to the
two roof lights in the neighbouring dwelling, no 62 Coleridge Road, this would
result in an unacceptable degree of overshadowing and consequent loss of light
to the living room of this dwelling and would unacceptable harm the amenities
of this dwelling. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies 53 and 58 of
the Cambridge Local Plan (2018).
Report author: Mairead O'Sullivan
Publication date: 29/01/2019
Date of decision: 09/01/2019
Decided at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning
Accompanying Documents: