Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for demolition of existing garages and hardstanding to provide 4 modular homes.

The Principal Planner updated her report by referring to updated condition wording and removal of three conditions detailed on the Amendment Sheet.

The Committee received a written representation in objection to the application from a resident of Elmfield Road [read by the Committee Manager]:

      i.          As a landlady of the ground adjacent to Dundee close (CB4), this issue is extremely important to me because it will radically change the landscape and the social life of the neighbourhood.

     ii.          There is more than one reason to reject this planning permission.

   iii.          A couple of months ago, during the discussion between the local council (Cambridge City) and the planning committee, some concerns were raised by the planning committee about the size of the "micro-home" and the impact of this type of accommodation on the territory.

   iv.          There is an evident conflict of interest in the decision making for this case.
On one end the applicant has previously clearly defined the minimum required standard size for new houses ensuring a dignified quality of life, on the other hand the same applicant is called to decide over an exception to the same rules which has no character of urgency and represents a deviation of 30% from the norm (13 sqm less than expected). This anomaly would set a precedent undermining the transparency and fairness of the planning permission process, hence the application should be rejected.
Surely, the proposal does not encounter the support of the local residents, as only objections have been submitted online for an arrangement out of character and context in an area without other pods.
Moreover, the lack of details and criteria in the selection and management of the occupancies does not guarantee the most in need will access and benefit from the new micro dwellings in a responsible and sustainable way.

    v.          Finally, I would like to remind this Committee that I submitted a planning request to gain access from Dundee Close to the back of my property and at this stage it is close to being evaluated, so your decision will impact my right to get access to Dundee close. Please consider postponing your decision until this situation is resolved.

Mr Lowings (Agent’s representative, City Council) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer in the Officer’s report, as amended on the Amendment Sheet, including:

      i.          revised wording to conditions 12 (dust mitigation and management), 14 (carbon emissions) and 16 (surface and foul drainage);

     ii.          deletion of conditions 4 (closure of public highway), Il (piling) and 17 (flood resilient construction);

   iii.          rewording of conditions 19 and 20 to make reference to condition no. 15, not 18, due to re-numbering of the proposed conditions list.