A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Issue

Issue - meetings

Report 16/1206/FUL - 2 Mill Street

Meeting: 05/10/2016 - Planning (Item 159)

159 Report 16/1206/FUL - 2 Mill Street pdf icon PDF 143 KB


The Committee received an application for full planning permission.


The application sought approval for a rear two storey extension and rear garden studio.


A resident of Mill Street addressed the Committee in objection to the application.


The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  The gutter would be blocked in, so the objector would be unable to clean it.

  ii.  Referred to paragraph 3.4.1 of the Cambridge Local Plan, which stated that extensions should have a successful relationship with neighbouring properties.

  iii.  Referred to Policy 3.7 of the Cambridge Local Plan and the design of the development.

  iv.  Commented that the boundary line was incorrectly drawn on the planning drawings.

  v.  Commented that the Studio building being in a Conservation Area would dominate and increase disturbance.

  vi.  Noted the condition about the separate letting of the studio.

 vii.  The extension did not retain adequate bin storage. 


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


Councillor Robertson (Petersfield Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.


The representation covered the following concerns:

i.  Endorse comments made about the guttering being inaccessible.

ii.  Policy wording of the Local Plan was relevant; the development will create a difficult area for maintenance purposes.

iii.  It was a gross overdevelopment of the site.

iv.  The alleyway was very narrow and it would be difficult to manoeuvre bikes and bins down it.

v.  The back of the building and the outbuilding had outward opening doors; it would not be possible to store bins and bikes.

vi.  Expressed concern regarding the studio outbuilding becoming a separate dwelling.


The Committee:

The Chair decided that the recommendations highlighted in the Officer’s report should be voted on and recorded separately:


Resolved (by 6 votes to 1 with 1 abstention) to approve part of the application for the two storey extension for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers with the additional condition:


There should be no collections from or deliveries to the site during the demolition and construction stages outside the hours of 0800 hours and 1800 hours on Monday to Friday, 0800 hours to 1300 hours on Saturday and at no time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.


Reason: To protect the amenity of the adjoining properties. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 4/13)


On a show of hands the recommendation to approve the rear garden studio was lost by 2 votes to approve to 6 votes against.


Resolved (unanimously) to refuse part of the application for the rear garden studio for the following reason:


By virtue of its footprint and scale, the proposed garden studio would unduly enclose and dominate the outlook from the adjacent property 4 Mill Street and provide an enclosed and dominated outlook and cramped amenity space for the existing property 2 Mill Street. As such, the proposal is contrary to Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policy 3/12 in that it would fail to have a positive impact on its setting and would be contrary to NPPF (2012) guidance paragraph 17.