Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Sedgwick-Jell.

Members of the committee are asked to declare any interests in the items on the agenda. In the case of any doubt, the advice of the Head of Legal should be sought before the meeting.

Name	Item	Interest
Councillor Smart	13/6/EAC	Personal and prejudicial: Had given the go-ahead to housing listed in the Officer’s report (housing scheme on the green off Stanesfield Road) as Executive Councillor for Housing.   Withdrew from discussion on scout hut and did not vote on this decision
Councillor Brown	13/10/EACa	Personal: Director of Ravensworth Gardens Residents Association Ltd, an organisation that administers the car park opposite 142 Tenison Road.
Councillor Brown	13/10/EACa	Personal: Ravensworth Gardens Ltd car park leaseholder.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 29 November 2012.

 

Minutes to follow.

The minutes of the 29 November 2012 meeting were approved and signed as a correct record subject to the following amendments:

 

(i)                12/62/EAC Declarations Of Interest: Councillor Herbert made a personal declaration of interest that he lived near both the Coleridge stops recommended for priority under12/70/EAC New and Replacement Bus Shelter Programme.

(ii)              12/66/EAC Open Forum: The Minutes stated "Dr Eva asked if cycle parking could be provided at all civic venues by 2013. This would encourage alternative transport methods to cars, and could help promote a healthier lifestyle. Dr Eva said he had originally raised this query at EAC 25 June 2012".

 

Text revised to say: “Dr Eva pointed out that there are currently no secure cycle stands at the River Lane Centre, pointed out how unsatisfactory this situation was given that the River Lane Centre is used as a Polling Station, and pointed out that he had raised this issue at the EAC of 25 June 2012 and had not had a satisfactory response.  He then went on to say that he would like to see the EAC be ambitious in its provision of secure cycle stands.

 

Dr Eva suggested "The East Area Committee resolves that for buildings where there exists a community or civic interest we will ensure that all such buildings are made cycle-friendly by providing an adequate provision of free and safe cycle stands by December 2013".

 

Following discussion the following resolution was adopted instead:

 

The East Area Committee resolves that for buildings where there exists a community or civic interest we would strive to ensure that all such buildings are made cycle-friendly by providing an adequate provision of free and safe cycle stands by December 2013".

Reference will be made to the Committee Action Sheet available under the ‘Matters & Actions Arising From The Minutes’ section of the previous meeting agenda.

 

General agenda information can be accessed using the following hyperlink:

 

http://www.cambridge.gov.uk/democracy/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=147

(i)          12/66/EAC Open Forum “Action Point: Councilor Bourke to liaise with County Council Officers regarding measures to prevent waiting / loading / unloading vehicles on the footway of Mill Road.  Also the issue of drop kerbs being parked on by heavy vehicles, which leads to damage.

 

Councillors Blencowe and Smart to confirm if a loading ban is in place to restrict loading times in Mill Road.”

 

Councillors Bourke and Smart have been advised by the Highways Agency that a waiting / loading / unloading ban exists during peak traffic hours in Mill Road.

 

A response regarding the loading ban question was sent to Mr Wood (the questioner) and all members of the East Area Committee (EAC).

 

(ii)          12/66/EAC Open Forum “Action Point: Councillor Smart to liaise with colleagues concerning the provision of cycle parking for civic buildings in future.”

 

Councillor Smart said she had talked to Councillors Ward and Smith. Councillor Ward noted the request for cycle provision at Riverside, but observed the property was not owned by the Council.

 

Councillor Smith has reportedly agreed to add cycle rack provision to the list of criteria for choosing polling stations in the city centre, but fringe sites were a lower priority. Cycle rack provision would be one of a number of criteria and wouldn't be the deciding factor.

 

Councillor Johnson had liaised with Officers regarding cycle parking provision. He spoke with Clare Rankin (Cycling & Walking Officer) and Adele Dant from the Cambridge Housing Society (the organisation that owns the River Centre) regarding River Centre bike racks. Cambridge Housing Society will check land ownership of potential sites then look at funding sources and conditions.

 

Dr Eva met Councillor Johnson post 29 November 2012 to discuss suggestions.

 

(iii)          12/66/EAC Open Forum “Action Point: Councilor Blencowe to ask City Council Chief Executive to invite Police and Crime Commissioner to meet Councillors and members of the public to discuss police priorities. Councillor Bick to be asked to follow up the issue through Scrutiny Committee if an open forum is not possible.”

 

Councilor Blencowe had suggested at the Area Chairs meeting that this be taken forward as an all-member briefing. The Safer Communities Section Manager and Councilor Bick proposed to meet the Police and Crime Commissioner on 10 January 2013 to discuss arrangements. The Police and Crime Commissioner attended West Area Committee on 10 January.

 

(iv)          12/67/EAC Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods “Action Point: Councilor Blencowe to ask City Council Street Scene Officers to clarify needle drop figures in 29 November 2012 Officer report.”

 

Ross Lewis (Service Delivery Support Officer) has confirmed needle drop figures reported at 29 November East Area Committee were correct.

 

(v)          12/67/EAC Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods “Action Point: Lynda Kilkelly (Safer Communities Section Manager) to write a press release to raise public awareness of ‘Review of Street Based Anti-Social Behaviour’ report; and meeting between Safer Communities Officers, Councillors and stakeholders in January 2013.”

 

Anti-social behaviour workshops are proposed for February and March 2013. Issues could also be raised in East Area Committee policing and safer neighbourhood agenda items.

 

(vi)          12/68/EAC Devolved Decision-Making and Developer Contributions “Action Point: East Area Committee to ask the Executive Councillor for Arts, Sport and Public Places to supplement the East Area’s devolved funding for play provision with some city-wide funding in the event that the updated financial analysis in January 2013 does not identify an increase in funding available to the Area for this contribution type.”

 

To be covered at a future East Area Committee.

 

(vii)          12/68/EAC Devolved Decision-Making and Developer Contributions “Action Point: Trevor Woollams (Head of Community Development) to undertake an assessment of Cherry Trees Day Centre funding bid.”

 

Project being considered at 10 January 2013 East Area Committee.

 

(viii)          12/68/EAC Devolved Decision-Making and Developer Contributions “Action Point: Tim Wetherfield (Urban Growth Project Manager) to liaise post meeting with Councillor Blencowe regarding initial assessment of feasibility of projects identified as eligible for s106 funding in Appendix D of Officer’s report.

 

Initial assessment on the feasibility of the identified S106 projects to be brought to March EAC meeting.”

 

To be covered at a future East Area Committee.

Refer to the ‘Information for the Public’ section for rules on speaking. 

1.      Mr Brigham referred to the impact of changes to the nature reserve, cattle grazing, fencing and play area in the vicinity of Coldham’s Common; and the impact of these on the Common. Mr Brigham felt the piecemeal work demonstrated an absence of a management / conservation plan for the whole common.

 

EAC supported Mr Brigham’s concerns and expressed support for a management plan for Coldham’s Common. It was suggested a management plan existed, but may need renewal.

 

Members of the public and EAC felt Coldham’s Common plus Stourbridge Common were attractive because of their ‘wild’ feel; achieved by not over managing the commons.

 

Members of the public and EAC felt Coldham’s Common and Stourbridge Common were important open spaces. Support was expressed for Friends of Coldham’s Common and Friends of Stourbridge Common as bodies to preserve the characters of the commons and aid management.

 

Members of the public felt Coldham’s Common had too many boundaries between the Common, nature reserve and play areas. Boundaries in place were unsatisfactory and should be more in keeping with the character of different parts, particularly if more housing was proposed for the surrounding area. A holistic management plan would help manage the Common. Natural wooden materials for play equipment and fences would also be welcome.

 

Councillor Johnson observed a consultation was in progress regarding Coldham’s Common and the play area on it.

 

Action Point: Councillor Moghadas and Alistair Wilson (Streets and Open Spaces Asset Manager) to enquire status of Coldham’s Common Management Plan (ie if one exists) and if a new one is required to be produced.

 

Action Point: Councillor Moghadas to advise stakeholders of Management Plan status.

 

2.      Dr Eva referred to environmental improvements along the entire length of Riverside between Stourbridge and Midsummer Commons. These were referred to East Area Committee 15 December 2011. Dr Eva asked for a progress update, specifically concerning houseboat moorings and land ownership issues affecting these.

 

Councillor Pogonowski has spoken to the Streets and Open Spaces Asset Manager plus Andrew Preston (Project Delivery & Environment Manager). A mooring consultation will occur in January 2013. Environmental improvement work is expected be undertaken after this, probably by summer 2013.

 

Councillor Blencowe said the land ownership issue had now been resolved.

 

3.      Mr Green referred to concerns expressed by EAC and members of the public at previous meetings regarding anti-social behaviour linked to the sale of alcohol on Norfolk Street. He asked for EAC’s comments on the Licensing Sub Committee’s decision of 7 January 2013 to suspend rather than revoke the licence for Norfolk Street Newsagents (News & More), 92 Norfolk Street.

 

Councillor Owers and Saunders sat on the Licensing Sub Committee and said a range of options were considered. The Sub Committee received conflicting testimony from the Police, witnesses and 39 representations on the merit of the licencee. The Sub Committee imposed 21 conditions and a one-month suspension of alcohol sales to break the habit of street drinkers going to the shop to buy alcohol.

 

Many representations supported the licencee selling alcohol, so the Sub Committee imposed licence conditions and a suspension instead of revoking the licence, in response to concerns regarding the reported sale of alcohol to the intoxicated.

 

The Police would continue to monitor the Norfolk Street situation.

 

Councillor Brown had made a representation in support of the Police asking for a licence review. Councillor Brown also endorsed the Sub Committee’s decision to support a popular local business and discourage street drinking. There was an option to review the licence again in future if required.

 

Councillor Marchant-Daisley said the review of 92 Norfolk Street was the first in the City for some time. Stringent conditions were imposed which served as a warning to licencees in general.

The Committee received a report from the Head of Community Development regarding the East Area Capital Grants Programme.

 

The report outlined an update of the East Area Capital Grants Programme. It set out project proposals regarding a new community facility on land off of Stanesfield Road, plus community facilities at the Cherry Trees Centre in St. Matthew’s Street.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Head of Community Development confirmed the following:

 

(i)                The new scout hut proposed in the application would be a welcome asset. One third of the land on-site would remain as open space. The rest of the site would contain around 9 new homes.

(ii)              The lease will set out conditions obliging the Scouts to hire out the premises to other groups.

 

Action Point: Head of Community Development to ask Planning / Housing Officer to advise Councillor Sadiq of planning application details regarding housing scheme on the land off Stanesfield Road.

 

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

 

The Committee resolved by 11 votes to 0 with 1 abstention:

 

(i)                To recommend to the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health that a contribution of £100,000 towards a new community facility at Stanesfield Road, be approved from the East Area Capital Grants Programme.

 

Councillor Smart withdrew from the discussion for this item once it touched upon the housing scheme on the land off Stanesfield Road and did not participate in the decision making.

 

The Committee resolved unanimously:

 

(ii)              To recommend to the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health that an award of £36,598 be made from the East Area Capital Grants Programme towards a grant to Age UK for improvements to the Cherry Trees Centre.

(iii)            To recommend to the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health that he makes a further award to Age UK towards the improvements to the Cherry Trees Centre from the central developer contributions budget so that the total grant to Age UK will be £80,500.

The Committee discussed future arrangements and agreed to continue with the 6 week meeting cycle.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

 

(i)                Suggested avoiding 14 February for future meetings where possible

(ii)              Suggested 5 September 2013 as an alternative to the indicative 29 August date, so only one meeting would be held in the summer holiday period.

(iii)            Suggested 9 January 2014 as an alternative to the indicative 8 January.

 

Meeting dates for 2013 / 2014 were agreed as follows:

 

6 June 2013, 25 July 2013, 5 September 2013, 17 October 2013, 28 November 2013, 9 January 2014, 27 February 2014 and 10 April 2014.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that the East of England Plan had been revoked, so references to it in planning reports should be ignored.

The applications for planning permission listed below require determination. A report is attached with a plan showing the location of the relevant site. Detailed plans relating to the applications will be displayed at the meeting.

The Committee received an application for change of use.

 

The application sought approval for change of use of first floor premises (with separate ground floor entrance) from Class B1 business use to Class D1 (non-residential institutions) use and then back to Class B1 business (in the alternative) for use as consulting rooms to see clients by appointment only on a one by one basis.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.      This development has been approved, conditionally, because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 4/11, 5/11, 5/12, 7/3 and 8/2

 

2.      The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

3.      In reaching this decision the local planning authority has acted on guidance provided by the National Planning Policy Framework, specifically paragraphs 186 and 187. The local planning authority has worked proactively with the applicant to bring forward a high quality development that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for the demolition and rebuild of two flats.

 

The Chair said that he, the Principal Planning Officer and (application) Planning Officer had received a further representation via email in objection to the application from Ms Stiles. As the representation was received immediately prior to the Committee, and after the accepted deadline for late representations, it was not circulated to the Committee.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda.

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.      This development has been approved, conditionally, because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12, 4/13, 8/6 and 8/10

 

2.      The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

3.      In reaching this decision the local planning authority has acted on guidance provided by the National Planning Policy Framework, specifically paragraphs 186 and 187. The local planning authority has worked proactively with the applicant to bring forward a high quality development that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

Application 12/1203/FUL 5 Montreal Road has been withdrawn and therefore the Planning Officer recommends removing the item from the meeting agenda.

The application was withdrawn and therefore the Planning Officer recommended removing the item from the meeting agenda.

 

The Committee agreed not to consider the application.

The Committee received a report requesting authorisation to take formal enforcement action.

 

The report sought authority to serve an Enforcement Notice to address a breach of planning control, namely the unauthorised use of a House in Multiple Occupation as C1 hotel accommodation.

 

Site:            142 Tenison Road, Cambridge.

Breach:      Unauthorised change of use of a House in Multiple Occupation (sui generis).

 

The Principal Planning Officer brought the report up to date by advising EAC that the Applicant had lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspector regarding the certificate of lawful use. The Principal Planning Officer suggested amending the recommendation so that enforcement action was not taken during the appeal process.

 

Councillor Herbert proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation that the period for compliance should be changed from 6 to 3 months from the date the notice comes into effect.

 

This amendment was carried by 6 votes to 5.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the officer recommendation with amended 3 month compliance period that the Head of Legal Services be authorised to issue an enforcement notice under the provisions of S172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), for Material Change of Use from a C3 dwellinghouse to C1 hotel accommodation. Currently, it is expected that the enforcement notice would contain the wording set out in paragraphs 5.2 to 5.4 of this report (with such amendments as may later be requested by the Head of Legal Services).