Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
15 S/2403/FL - Land adjacent to Cambridge North Station, Milton Avenue (Office) PDF 2 MB
Minutes:
Councillor Turner left before the beginning of this item.
The Committee received an application for full planning permission for
the erection of a building comprising of an office B1 (a) floor space and
ancillary ground floor retail (A1/A3) floor space, associated landscaping and
public realm improvements and a 125 space car park.
The Committee
noted the amendment presented in the amendment sheet.
The Committee received a representation in objection to the application
from Matthew Danish, Cambridge Cycling Campaign. The representation covered the following
issues:
i.
Raised concern over the destruction of the section
of Cycle Way between Milton and Cambridge North Station.
ii.
The cycle route was likely to become busier over
time, therefore it needed to be segregated in order to avoid potential
collisions between cycles and pedestrians.
iii.
30 objections had been submitted to this
application.
Mike Derbyshire (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support
of the application.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report.
i.
The access doors to the building lead directly onto an existing cycle
path which caused danger to both the pedestrians exiting the building and
cyclists using the cycle path.
ii.
Demand and use for the cycle path would only increase as the Cambridge
North Station became more popular which would heighten the risk of conflict
between cyclists and pedestrians.
iii.
Raised concern that the cycle route alignment which had previously been
approved was now under threat.
iv.
No Area Action Plan was in place for the wider site so the Committee had
to consider what vision they had for the area and how they would like to see it
develop for the future.
v.
The new cycle route proposed by the applicant introduced inconveniences
such as lengthening the existing route, right angles and crossing the Bus Way.
The impact would see cyclists taking an easier/more direct option of crossing
the main square which would be occupied by pedestrians; this increased the risk
of conflict and collision.
vi.
The proposals breached planning policy, South Cambridgeshire
District Council’s Local Development Framework Policy TR4 by providing
inadequate space for both pedestrian and cyclist use on the path. The proposal
also breached guidance in the Local Transport Plan which required the Cycle Way
and Chisholm Trail to have a good design with clearly defined areas for use.
vii.
National standards of dual use paths also advocated segregation if the paths
were likely to be busy.
viii.
Highlighted that the area already
had a thriving cycling and walking community, this application went against
this ethos.
ix.
Suggested that setting the
development back and changing its footprint would allow more space to maintain
the cycle route and safer access to the building.
x.
Referred to the tree and
landscaping proposals on page 156 of the agenda, asserted how a planter at the
entrance of the office would block the view to both cyclists and pedestrians
further.
xi.
Highlighted the concern the Lead
Flood Authority had expressed regarding drainage of the site.
In response to Members’ questions the Planning Team Leader and Senior Planning
Officer said the following:
i.
Referred
to the cycle path and stated that the current route which crosses the busway
down to Moss Bank would have to change regardless of this application. Assured
that there would be options for routes in all directions.
ii.
The cycle
path was used by people destined for Cambridge North Station and those using it
as a through route along the Chisholm Trail. Installing a segregated section in
front of the office would not mean the remainder of the route would be
segregated as well.
iii.
Highlighted
that Officers proposed a condition to prevent tables and chairs being placed
outside the office building so as not to obstruct the path further.
iv.
Confirmed
that the Lead Flood Authority were content with the drainage proposals.
The Lead Highways Development Manager said the following:
i.
Stated that there were limits to the advice he
could give because the land was owned by Network Rail and was not public
highways.
ii.
Highlighted that the development was constrained
because of the land available to access the station.
iii.
As demand for the station increased the path would
inevitably get busier so conflict between users was likely to increase.
iv.
Commented that dual use of the cycle path between
cycles and pedestrians could work effectively if user behaviour changed.
Principal Transport Officer said the following:
i.
Had looked at the Transport Assessment and had
considered alternative options.
ii.
Travel Plan Plus (TP+) designed bespoke measures
for transport plans to try and make the best use of available space.
The committee were
minded not to accept the officer’s recommendation to approve the application
and to refuse the application. On the basis of the poor design of the cycle
route adjacent to the office building and lack of set back of the office
building and its impact in terms of pedestrian and cyclist conflicts. The committee adjourned at 13:10 to consider
the appropriate text necessary to express the reason for refusing the
application
The
committee reconvened at 13:30
The Committee:
Resolved (by 13
votes to 0) to refuse the
application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reasons:
The section of the proposed cycle route
directly adjacent to the office building, by reason of its proximity to the
building, relative to the lack of set back of the building and insufficient
curtilage for the ground floor retail units, and its design, including
inadequate width, would fail to provide an acceptable layout and would
therefore result in unacceptable conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists,
contrary to Policy TR4 of the South Cambridgeshire District Council Development
Control Development Plan Document July 2007.