Agenda and minutes

Councillors Harrison and Moghadas.

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 Brown	11/44/PLAd	Personal: Member of Cambridge and Peterborough Mental Health Trust
Councillor Brown	11/46/PLAd	Personal: Shops at establishment in question in application
Councillor Marchant-Daisley	11/46/PLAe	Personal and prejudical: Works in vicinity of application site.   Withdrew from meeting for this item and did not vote.
Councillor Pogonowski	11/45/PLA	Personal: Attended Abbey & Coleridge Action for Youth meetings as Ward Councillor and advised them to submit a funding bid
Councillor Saunders	11/43/PLA	Personal: Shops at establishment in question in application
Councillor Saunders	11/46/PLAd	Personal: Works in Cambridge wine merchant establishment
Councillor Smart	11/46/PLAa	Personal: Works in Signet Court opposite site of application
Councillor Wright	11/46/PLAa	Personal: Received information concerning previous iterations of application

 

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 23 June 2011.

The minutes of the 23 June 2011 meeting were approved and signed as a correct record.

(i)          11/30/EAC Matters and Actions Arising From the Minutes “Action Point: ARU parking in Guest Road to be revisited at a future EAC meeting.”

 

Item addressed under item 11/41/EAC of the agenda.

 

(ii)          11/30/EAC Matters and Actions Arising From the Minutes “Action Point: Circulate new EAC City Neighbourhood Policing team contact.”

 

New area Sergeant is Jamie Stenton. He replaces Mark Kathro.

 

(iii)          11/31/EAC Open Forum “Action Point: EAC Councillors to follow up and seek Officer response from Green Space Manager to Mr Gawthrop concerning his ‘open forum’ question concerning a tree in Devonshire Road.”

 

The Green Space Manager has responded to Mr Gawthrop.

 

(iv)          11/31/EAC Open Forum “Committee Manager to invite Tree Officers and Councillor Ward as Executive Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport to discuss tree issues and Tree Protection Orders at next EAC.”

 

Item addressed under item 11/42/EAC of the agenda.

 

(v)          11/32/EAC Presentation on South and East Corridor Funds “Action Point: Head of New Communities Service (County) to send Councillor Wright details on cycleway projects supported by East and South Corridor funding.”

 

The Head of New Communities Service has responded to Councillor Wright outside of the meeting.

 

 

(vi)          11/32/EAC Presentation on South and East Corridor Funds “Action Point: Head of New Communities Service (County) to bring future reports to EAC for review of potential projects that could be supported by East and South Corridor funding.”

 

Action Point: Committee Manger to invite the Head of New Communities Service to 27 October or 15 December 2011 EAC.

 

(vii)          11/33/EAC Environmental Improvements Programme Update “Action Point: Environmental Projects Manager to circulate a suggestions sheet for cycleway schemes for prioritisation for delivery through the City/County joint cycleways.”

 

Environmental Projects Manager to add County Council maintenance costs to EIPs. A report on this plus general EIPs will be brought back to 27 October 2011 EAC. Report will also go to next Area Joint Committee.

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

1.      Ms Hornsby raised a question concerning shop theft.

 

EAC returned to this question under agenda item 11/43/EAC.

 

2.      Mr Carpen raised a question concerning illegal modification of motor vehicles, plus associated noise pollution affecting Cherry Hinton Road.

 

EAC returned to this question under agenda item 11/43/EAC.

 

3.      Mrs Richardson raised the following points through a statement to EAC:

(i)          Expressed concerns about path running from Romsey Post Office up to Hope Street.

(ii)       Drain covers were misplaced or standing proud of their fixtures.

(iii)     The condition of the path was a safety concern for residents, particularly as it was well used, and some residents were visually impaired.

 

Romsey Ward Councillors to respond to Mrs Richardson’s pavement concerns.

 

Action Point: Councillors Moghadas, Saunders and Smart to follow up with Highways Authority to ascertain who were the landowners with maintenance responsibility ie shop owners or Highways Authority.

 

4.      Mr White raised the following points:

(i)          Expressed concerns about conditions of Hector Peterson playground next to the Bath House.

(ii)       Asked if funding could be allocated for new play equipment.

 

Councillor Marchant-Daisley noted residents concerns about anti-social behaviour and that residents would welcome an environmental improvement project to regenerate the area.

 

Action Point: Councillor Marchant-Daisley to respond to Mr White’s concerns about the Hector Peterson playground. Councillor Marchant-Daisley to liaise with environmental improvement officers.

 

5.      Mr Woodburn welcomed improvements to the pavement outside Cherry Hinton Road Post Office and asked if cycle parking facilities would be re-instated.

 

Coleridge Ward Councillors to respond to Mr Woodburn’s bike rack query.

 

Action Point: Councillors Benstead, Herbert and Owers to ascertain if cycle parking facilities removed as part of the Cherry Hinton Road Post Office environmental improvement project can be re-instated.

 

6.      Mr Carpen asked if the Council would make greater use of social media to interact with the community and publish news/information.

 

Councillors observed that the North Area Committee was piloting greater use of information distribution through social media. Social media was currently used at Councillors discretion, but individual EAC Members were encouraged to make greater use of it where appropriate.

Oral report expected

ARU parking in Guest Road to be revisited at a future EAC meeting.

 

Action Point: Councillor Blencowe to liaise with Councillor Harrison to address item through public forum at next EAC.

Oral report expected

The committee received an oral report from Councillor Cantrill (Executive Councillor for Arts, Sport and Public Places) plus Green Spaces Manager regarding tree issues and Tree Protection Orders.

 

In response to member’s questions Councillor Cantrill and the Green Spaces Manager confirmed the following:

 

(i)      The Council has a commitment to green spaces. The Council has a Tree Team who manage green space issues, including trees (eg through Tree Preservation Orders (TPO)). Details of tree works and processes to action these were available publicly.

 

(ii)      The Street & Open Space Service (Tree Team) has been restructured and given the following responsibilities:

·       The Operations Team was responsible for day to day operations.

·       The Asset Team have strategic and management responsibilities.

·       The Arboricultural Team review the impact of planning applications on trees and manage trees on highways on behalf of the County Council.

 

(iii)     Once a request to undertake tree work (pruning, removal etc), an officer would inspect the tree to ascertain work required. The officer can seek independent third party advice if required before making a recommendation (on a case by case basis) on tree work options that can be undertaken (if appropriate). The Council’s policy was to leave trees in situ as long as possible before safety issues become a concern. The Council prefers to remove tree limbs that could be a danger prior to removing a whole tree, in order to keep it in place as long as possible.

 

(iv)     It was the responsibility of applicants who requested tree works to check with the Council if work could be undertaken, if a tree was covered by a TPO or located in a Conservation Area.

 

(v)          Requests for tree works and officer’s recommended responses to these would be made in writing in future to provide an audit trail. Enforcement action could be taken where appropriate if tree work was undertaken without authorisation.

 

(vi)     It would be Council policy to support Councillors and private land owners who wanted to plant new or replacement trees with funding over the next 3 years. Ward Councillors and local residents could contact their local Area Committee with funding requests. The intention would be to begin planting during the autumn and winter.

 

(vii)    Aerial photos would be used in future to identify canopy cover and significant trees to plot density in the City. Consultation would be undertaken in September/October 2011 concerning how the Tree Strategy would affect policy in specific wards.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

 

1.                 Mr Gawthrop raised resident’s concerns about the removal of a tree in Devonshire Road prior to planning application 11/0355/FUL 114 Mill Road.

 

EAC noted resident’s concerns about the unauthorised tree removal, but were advised by the Green Space Manager and Planning Officer that planning and tree protection legislation were two separate issues. The planning application was considered under agenda item 11/46/EACd.

 

2.                 Mr Catto sought advice on permission required to undertake work on trees in the Riverside Conservation Area.

 

The Green Space Manager responded that trees in the public realm were the responsibility of the County Council. The City Council was contracted to undertake maintenance work on the County Council and Highways Authority’s behalf.

 

Action Point: Green Space Manager to respond to Mr Catto’s Riverside Conservation Area tree concerns post EAC. 

 

3.                 Mrs Deards said that notices posted on trees in the Burnside and Budleigh Close area advertising tree works were not easily visible to passersby.

 

The Green Space Manager said that there was no legal requirement to display notices, but it was considered good practice to provide them. The Tree Officer would be asked to ensure that adequate consultation had been undertaken, as the process may need to be restarted if not. 

The committee received a report from Inspector Kerridge and Sergeant Stenton regarding policing and safer neighbourhoods trends.

 

The report outlined actions taken since the Committee on 14 April 2011. The current emerging issues for each ward were also highlighted (see report for full details). They covered Anti-social behaviour (ASB) in Mill Road Cemetery, misuse of public open spaces and emerging issues/neighbourhood trends.

 

The committee observed the Officer’s report contained a typographical error on P29 as Cheddars Lane was not in Abbey ward.

 

The committee thanked the Police for their efforts to maintain law and order in Cambridge during the period of rioting in other areas, most notably London. E-cops was welcomed as an effective method of distributing information during this period.

 

The committee discussed the following policing issues:

 

(i)      Theft from shops at the Beehive Centre, and associated crime such as drug dealing.

 

(ii)          Illegal modification of motor vehicles, plus associated noise pollution and anti-social behaviour (ASB) affecting Cherry Hinton Road.

 

(iii)     ASB, drug and alcohol use affecting Mill Road Cemetery.

 

(iv)     ASB, drug and alcohol use affecting Norfolk Street and immediate area.

 

(v)     ASB of drivers in Mill Road (eg cycling without lights, blocking road whilst loading vehicles) and enforcement of 20 mph speed limit.

 

(vi)     ASB of moped riders in Coleridge Road and possible link to other criminal activity such as drug dealing.

 

(vii)    ASB of moped riders in Peverel Road.

 

(viii)   ASB of moped riders in Birdwood Road.

 

(ix)     ASB at Coleridge Recreation Ground and possible link to other criminal activity.

 

(x)          Summer time ASB affecting open spaces in general (thematic rather than geographic focus).

 

(xi)     ASB linked to street drinking and practicability of citywide ban.

 

Inspector Kerridge informed EAC that it was his role to attend all Area Committees to join up priorities and ways to address them, particularly if issues were cross-boundary. Issues such as ASB of drivers in Mill Road had the potential to be cross-boundary, as West Area Committee had adopted this priority. Inspector Kerridge was gathering information at present prior to producing a future report on Police priorities to be addressed through agreed protocols with the City Council by means of legislation and other methods.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

 

1.                 Ms Hornsby asked if shop theft could be made a priority for EAC for the October to December 2011 period. She felt that theft was not a victimless crime, and it was associated with other crime such as drug dealing.

 

EAC debated the merits of including this as a priority to be adopted.

 

Sergeant Stenton observed that shop theft was more appropriate as a police priority over the Christmas period. A special squad was set up last year to tackle the issue, and may well be used again this year.

 

2.                 Mr Carpen raised concerns about illegal modification of motor vehicles, plus associated noise pollution and anti-social behaviour affecting Cherry Hinton Road.

 

EAC debated the merits of including this as a priority to be adopted.

 

3.                 Mr Gawthrop asked for tackling anti-social behaviour in Mill Road Cemetery to be continued as a police priority.

 

EAC debated the merits of continuing with this as a priority.

 

4.                 Mr Catto asked if police patrols in the Riverside area could address anti-social behaviour such as littering, as a number of sharps bins had been found in bushes.

 

Councillor Blencowe undertook to notify Streetscene and Environmental Health Officers to the issue.

 

The following priorities were unanimously agreed:

 

(i)          (Variation of existing priority) ASB, drug and alcohol use affecting Norfolk Street and immediate area.

 

(ii)      (New priority) ASB of moped riders in Birdwood Road and immediate area. 

 

(iii)     (New priority) Traffic regulation and enforcement of 20 mph speed limit in Mill Road.

 

(iv)          Summer time ASB affecting open spaces in general (thematic rather than geographic focus). 

The committee received a report from the Head of Community Development regarding Community Development Capital Projects in the East Area.

 

Members considered applications for grants as set out in the Officer’s report. The Head of Community Development responded to member’s questions about individual projects and what funding aimed to achieve.

 

Resolved (unanimously) the application from Kings Church, as set out in the project appraisal at Appendix B of the officer’s report was suitable for funding from resources allocated to Community Development Capital Project Grants for the East Area.

 

Resolved (unanimously) to recommend to the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health that a capital grant of up to £100,000 be awarded to Kings Church for the improvement and refurbishment of their premises, subject to compliance with the Council’s legal agreement.

 

Resolved (by 10 votes to 0) The Area Committee recommended to advise the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health that, having considered the request from Squeaky Gate Studios for an additional £7,602, this was suitable for funding from resources allocated to Community Development Capital Project Grants for the East Area.

The committee received a report from the Cambridgeshire Community Foundation regarding Community Development and Leisure Grants.

 

Members considered the grant application as set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Resolved (unanimously) to approve the grant allocation as listed below for Abbey and Coleridge Action for Youth.

 

Leisure current applications.               Available: £3,970
CCF ID	Group	Project	Requested £	Recommended from Area Committee Grants £	Offer from other CCF  funds £
WEB 26136	Abbey and Coleridge Action for Youth	football coaching programme	865	865	0
Total			865	865
Remaining			3,105	3,105

 

 

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 full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for change of use to car hire business and erection of associated office and wash down canopy on land off Swann's Road.

 

The committee received a representation in objection to the application from the following:

·        Mr Stookes (Objector’s Agent)

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)          Requested a full environmental impact assessment be undertaken.

 

(ii)          Expressed concern about noise pollution from the site and the impact of this on his client’s quality of life. Noise from the site had been an ongoing concern for some time.

 

(iii)          Suggested that the change of use from car sales to car hire would lead to more vehicular traffic.

 

Councillor Blencowe asked the committee to vote on whether they wished to proceed with considering the application in light of the Planning Officer receiving correspondence from Mr Stookes after the deadline for it to be a material consideration.

 

The committee resolved by 6 votes to 5 to consider the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 1) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda subject to a condition restricting use of the washdown facility to the car hire operation only.  Wording to be agreed by Chair and Spokes.

Item withdrawn from agenda 

Item withdrawn from agenda. 

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for change of use from A1 to mixed Use Class A1/A3 and single storey rear extension.

 

The committee received a representation in objection to the application from the following:

·        Mr Gawthrop

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)          Referred to the historic use of the site and how 3 requests for change of use had previously been rejected.

 

(ii)          Suggested that Mill Road had a large number of food establishments already.

 

Mrs Jaine (local resident) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Tariq Sadiq (Coleridge Ward County Councillor) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Hart proposed an amendment that were permission to be granted, a condition should be attached, requiring that A1 use should be predominant.

 

This amendment was carried by 5 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission for the single storey rear extension as per the agenda.

 

Resolved (by 8 votes to 3) to reject the officer recommendation to refuse consent for change of use.

 

Resolved (by 8 votes to 3) to approve the change of use contrary to the officer recommendations subject to the attachment of conditions requiring a new extraction system, and requiring the Class A1 element of the use to remain predominant. Conditions and reasons for approval to be agreed by Chair and Spokes.

The committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for refurbishment and extension of ground floor existing meat preparation area.

 

The committee received a representation in objection to the application from the following:

·        Mr Gawthrop

 

The representation covered the following issues:

 

(i)      The tree should not have been removed from the site prior to a planning application being submitted.

 

Councillor Herbert proposed an amendment that an informative should be included requesting the applicant plants a suitable replacement tree on site in line with guidance from the Arboriculture Officer.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously by 10 votes to 0) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda subject to the addition of an informative urging the applicant to consider planting a new tree on site (wording to be agreed by Chair and Spokes).

 

Reasons for Approval

 

1.      This development has been approved, conditionally, because the proposal is considered to positively enhance the appearance of the conservation area without adversely affecting the amenity of neighbours and subject to the requirements of the conditions it is considered to generally conform to the Development Plan, particularly the following policies:

East of England Plan 2006: ENV6 and ENV7

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/4, 3/14, 4/11 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.

 

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 change of use of property from offices (use class B1(A)) to D1 floorspace to provide a library, cafe/common room and associated facilities to provide ancillary student support facilities to be used in conjunction with Abbey College.

 

The committee received representations in objection to the application from the following:

·        Miss Josselyn

·        Mr Gawthrop

 

The representations covered the following issues:

 

(i)      The application was in a cul-de-sac, which was affected by congestion due to a bottleneck entrance.

 

(ii)          Expressed concern about student safety (due to the above) as there was little room for them to congregate outside if the application went ahead.

 

(iii)          Questioned if there was a policy for specialist schools in Cambridge.

 

Mr Belton (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 8 votes to 1) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda.

 

Councillor Marchant-Daisley withdrew from the meeting for this item and did not participate in the decision making.

 

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:

 

East of England plan 2008: ENV6, ENV7

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 4/11, 7/2, 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.

 

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 part two storey and part first floor rear extensions and change of use from dwelling (C3) to Sui Generis HMO (more than 6 tenants).

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 1) 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:

 

East of England plan 2008: SS1, T9, T14, ENV7 and WM6

 

Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/14, 4/13, 5/7, 8/2, 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.

 

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.