Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for erection of 2 No. dwellinghouses together with associated access and landscaping works.

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of 309 Milton Road which raised the following concerns:

      i.          Safety of pedestrians and vehicles in adjacent roads and on Milton Road as there was no turning circle.

     ii.          Queried where builders’ lorries would park during construction.

   iii.          Impact on the environment.

   iv.          No benefit to the area from the application. Application out of character.

    v.          Impact on amenity space.

   vi.          Lack of light and small internal spaces.

 vii.          Poor cycle access to garden and storage area.

viii.          Family home could become a house of multiple occupation.

   ix.          Lack of notice about the proposal.

 

Councillor Collis (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application:

i.                The existing track was not wide enough to serve properties as an access route.

ii.               If approved, the application could set a precedent for building lots of properties on a narrow track which was unsafe. Improving the track would not resolve this.

iii.             Expressed concern about how vehicles would access the site and neighbouring properties during construction. Narrow pavements could be blocked.

iv.             The design resulted in cramped floor space.

v.              The amenity of the area would be affected. Queried if residents were informed about the application. Expressed concern the safety and access arrangements for existing residents in the area would be affected by the application.

 

Councillor Porrer proposed amendments to the Officer’s recommendation to include conditions regarding:

      i.          Construction Management Plan.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

     ii.          Remove ‘subject to viability’ in Condition 11.

 

This amendment was carried by 4 votes to 1.

 

   iii.          A green/brown roof on the cycle store.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

Councillor Gawthrope Wood proposed and Councillor Thornburrow seconded an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation:

 

In order to facilitate the upgrade of heating systems to efficient (i.e. heat pump) electric heating, radiators shall be sized and fitted on the basis of running at a maximum of 45°C flow temperature to all residential units .  In addition, for all residential units identify an appropriate space for external air source heat pump units that are acceptable within permitted development requirements for noise, proximity to boundaries and physical size and provide valved and blanked pipework connections between the external unit and the primary heating installations (heating pump and hot water tank) to enable the use of the heat pump system with minimum disruption upon gas boiler removal. The hot water tank is to incorporate sufficient heat exchanger area and storage volume to allow a designated heat pump system with domestic hot water capability to be used without the need for replacement or upgrade.

 

Reason: In the interests of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and futureproofing the development for net zero carbon and ensuring that new buildings are constructed in a sustainable manner and are easily adaptable (Cambridge Local Plan 2018, Policy 28 and Policy 57 and the Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction SPD 2020).

 

This amendment was carried by 4 votes to 1.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolved to reject the Officer recommendation to approve the application as amended above and in accordance with the Amendment Sheet  including the proposed new condition 9.

 

Unanimously resolved to refuse the application contrary to the Officer recommendation for the following reason:

        i.        The proposal, by virtue of its scale, massing, height, design and layout would appear incongruous in this back-land location, resulting in harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area, failing to integrate appropriate access for bin and bike storage and failing to provide appropriate access and turning space for vehicles. As such, the scheme would appear cramped, represent an overdevelopment of the site and fail to promote sustainable travel contrary to Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 52, 55, 57, 80 and 82 and appendix L of the Local Plan 'Car and Cycle Parking Requirements' and NPPF 2021 paras 92, 113 and 126- 136.