Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Pippas.

No declarations of interest were made.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 3 August 2016.

Minutes to follow.

The minutes of the meeting of the meeting of the 3^rd August 2016 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chair used his discretion to alter the order of the agenda items. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the agenda.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for a new library (1539 sq m), the enclosure of Library Court (201 sq m) and the provision of bridge access between the first floor of the new library and the South Range and Bodley Library. Internal and external alterations to Bodley Library and South Range (Staircase G and Guest Suite) and the South Elevation of South Range between First Court and Library Court. Involved the demolition of the existing library (809 sq m).

The Committee noted the amendment sheet and the history of planning applications for this site. A site visit had also taken place.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

The representation covered the following issues:

     i.        Design and conservation concerns.

    ii.        Many objectors unable to attend today due to short notice.

   iii.        Many objectors concerned that the respected David Loggan engraving would now be inaccurate.

  iv.        Chapel window would also become inaccurate.

   v.        Agreed that the library needed updating. However the fabric of the building needed to be protected.

  vi.        Friends of the Library object to proposal.

 vii.        Old library was precious and needed to be retained.

viii.        Structure was over 500 years old, timber framed and delicate.

  ix.        New roof would put strain on the old building and the additional weight of snow had not been considered.

Professor Kelly 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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for listed building consent.

The application sought approval for the demolition of the existing 1970’s library, the provision of new and upgraded library facilities for the College (1,539sqm), a new glazed atrium amenity space, bridge links between the first floor of the new library and the South Range and the Bodley Library.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for erection of student accommodation with 219 student rooms (following demolition of existing buildings), together with ancillary accommodation comprising common / study rooms, laundry room, management office, plant room, bin and bicycle enclosures, landscaping and associated infrastructure including a sub-station.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of a nearby property on behalf of himself and his neighbours.

The representation covered the following issues:

     i.        Proposed heights exceed those suggested by planning guidance.

    ii.        Guidance suggests a robust test be applied.

   iii.        Visual images provided were poor and did not illustrate the impact on neighbours.

  iv.        Build line very close to Godestone Road.

   v.        Mass and height would dominate the area.

  vi.        Height of building excessive.

 vii.        Poor internal space.

viii.        Open spaces on the site would encourage unneighbourly noise and light pollution.

  ix.        General disturbance to area which had not been a feature of the previous use as a garage.

Justin Bainton (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Resolved (by 5 votes to 1 with 1 abstention) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for section 73 permission.

The application sought approval for to vary condition 2 (approved

plans) of permission 14/1154/FUL, allowed under appeal APP/Q0505/W/15/3137454, to permit a minor material amendment to the approved scheme to include the reconfiguration of the internal layout to create 7 additional study bedrooms (209 study bedrooms in total), reduction in the buildings footprint and cluster sizes, alterations to the substation enclosure and cycle parking arrangement, together with minor external alterations.

The Committee noted the amendment sheet and noted the explanation regarding the need to consider this application before application 16/1030/FUL.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for s106BA permission.

The application sought approval to vary the existing s106 Affordable Housing provision from 30 units to 27.

Caroline Wilberforce (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Committee noted an error in the report. An addendum had been published to correct this on the same day that the agenda was published.

The Committee:

The Committee:

Resolved (by 6 votes to 1) to grant the application to reduce the provision of affordable housing in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for erection of 14 flats and associated bin and cycle stores following demolition of existing dwelling.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for part two storey part single storey side and rear extension, roof extension incorporating rear dormer.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of Greville Road.

The representation covered the following issues:

       i.          Took issue with the Officer’s recommendation.

     ii.          Raised specific concerns regarding:

·       The application was a stepping stone to the house becoming a home in multiple occupation. So there were issues that should be considered at today’s committee that had been discounted as this was a residential application.

·       Loss of a family home to a potential home in multiple occupation.

·       Noise nuisance and bin storage issues.

·       Floor space for occupants.

·       Signposted local residents’ objections in the Officer’s report.

Mr Proctor (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Baigent (Romsey Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.

The representation covered the following issues:

       i.          The application was a home in multiple occupation. The design leant itself to occupancy by 7 people, which required different permission to that being sought. (Bedroom 6 could be shared by 2 people).

     ii.          Expressed concern that the application would set a precedent where family homes would be lost in favour of homes in multiple occupation.

   iii.          Existing parking and access issues would be exacerbated.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for change of use.

The application sought approval for change from dwelling to 6 bed HMO with up to 8 persons (Sui Generis). Retrospective single storey rear and side extension, first floor rear extension and ancillary garden room in rear garden.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of Darwin Drive.

The representation covered the following concerns:

       i.          There was too much of an urban feel in the area already. The application would increase the amount of brick and concrete in the area.

     ii.          Loss of trees in the Applicant’s garden.

   iii.          Loss of light.

   iv.          Overlooking and lack of privacy.

    v.          Existing noise issues would be exacerbated.

   vi.          Building safety.

 vii.          Loss of parking space.

Mr Khan (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Committee:

Resolved (by 5 votes to 1) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for erection of a two storey dwelling containing two one-bedroom flats on the land behind 27-29 Mill Road. Works involve the demolition of an existing outhouse.

Mr Owers (Architect) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Robertson (Petersfield Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.

The representation covered the following concerns:

       i.          Impact on neighbours’ amenities.

     ii.          Impact on streetscape, parking and character of area.

   iii.          Sense of overbearing / dominance / enclosure.

   iv.          Loss of light.

    v.          Overlooking / overshadowing.

   vi.          Queried if a condition requiring obscured glazing was needed.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to defer considering the application to seek further information.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for a rear dormer, two storey side/rear and single storey front extensions.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of Hawthorn Way.

The representation covered the following issues:

       i.          Gave a history of the applications for the site and expressed concern over the planning process.

     ii.          Referred to concerns set out in representations set out in the report eg noise, parking, shared downpipes and loss of light. Residents’ concerns do not appear to have been addressed by the report.

   iii.          Queried the accuracy of the plans.

Mr Khan (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Committee suspended this item whilst Members were discussing the proposal so that further information could be sought regarding plans and layout. They returned to the discussion and decision after considering (minute item 16/140/Plan) 171 Hills Road.

The Committee:

Resolved (by 3 votes to 2) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for a single storey rear extension, single storey side infill extension, amended first floor rear window and extension of rear dormer (following removal of chimney). A single storey bike shelter and bin storage on front driveway. Replacement white painted timber windows.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for demolition of the existing single storey pitched roof warehouse building and the construction of a two storey and a half storey detached building with accommodation in the loft space consisting of three self-contained flats (2x 1bed units and 1x2bed). The proposal also includes bin and cycle storage and communal space to the rear with a private garden for the round floor flat (flat 1).

The Planning Officer said his report contained a typographical error in paragraph 8.14. Obscured glazing was not required for the rooflights, only the landing window.

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 report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers as amended below:

Remove reference in paragraph 8.14 to obscure glazing of roof lightings in the rear roofscape.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for the erection of a two bedroom bungalow to the rear of 5 Harding Way, with access off Gunning Way.

The Committee:

Resolved (by 4 votes to 1) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

The Committee received a request to vary the Section 106 Agreement made in association with planning permission 09/0141/FUL (for change of use from hotel (class C1) to hotel (class C1) or student accommodation (sui generis) in the alternative) at 139 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, to allow the provision of open space and recreation facilities on College sites rather than via a financial contribution.

Members were asked to agree to the variation proposed to the Section106 Agreement made in association with planning application 09/0141/FUL, and thus permit appropriate open space and recreation facilities to be provided on College sites rather than through a financial contribution.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to accept the officer recommendation to agree to the variation proposed to the Section106 Agreement.