Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Committee Room 1 & 2, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
Note: Item 7 - 3 Saxon Street – withdrawn from the agenda
No. | Item | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillor Page-Croft. Councillor McQueen left after the consideration of item 19/38/Plan. |
|||||||
Declarations of Interest Minutes:
|
|||||||
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 17 June 2019 were approved as a
correct record and signed by the Chair. |
|||||||
Change to Published Agenda order 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 published agenda. |
|||||||
18/1993/FUL - Land Between 21 and 29 Barton Road (inc. 27 Barton Road and Croft Gardens) PDF 387 KB Minutes: The Committee
received an application for full planning permission. The application
sought approval for redevelopment for College accommodation (comprising 4 new
buildings which would provide 60 graduate rooms and 12 x 2 bed and 12 x 1 bed
family apartments) and refurbishment and extension of 27 Barton Road, together
with associated cycle and car parking and external works following demolition
of existing buildings (1-12 Croft Gardens, storage building and garages). The Senior Planner
updated her report by referring to details on the amendment sheet regarding
conditions 25 and 33. 34. The wording of condition 34 to restrict occupation of
the site was reported verbally at Committee (set out in ‘decision’ below). The Delivery Manager said that resolutions made at
11 June 2019 Planning Committee were null and void; thus, the application would be considered
afresh when Committee considered it today. The Committee received
representations in objection to the application from the following: · Residents
of Millington Road. · Mr
Dadge (Agent for Millington Road residents who were objecting). The representations covered the following issues: i.
Disappointment that Officers
recommended approval of the application. ii.
The application would have a
negative impact on the character of the area. The west of the city had a rural
character. iii.
Concern King’s College (as the
land owner and applicant) had let the property fall into disrepair so the site
could be redeveloped and usage intensified. iv.
Queried with the King’s College
Bursar on how much had been spent on maintenance. Had been informed this was
millions, as witnessed by Councillor Gehring, but did not accept this. Asked
the Bursar to repeat this assertion in committee. v.
The Council had received
objections to the application, as set out in the representations section in the
Officer’s report. vi.
Referred to Building of Local
Interest and Duty of Care criteria. vii.
Supported objections made to
Robinson College’s planning application. viii.
The application was worse than the
previous one due to its impact on residents’ amenities. ix.
One new building would be located
just 15m away from the neighbouring dwelling 4c Millington Road. This was an
issue because: a.
It would be 3 storeys high. b.
Concerns about bulk and scale. c.
Close proximity to neighbours. d.
Open windows at night would cause
light pollution and noise issues. Dr Carne (representing King’s College (Applicant)) addressed the
Committee in support of the application. Councillor Cantrill (Newnham Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee
about the application; declaring a personal interest as a resident of
Millington Road, but was speaking as a Ward Councillor.
i.
Case of demolition and impact on the Conservation
Area. a.
The existing buildings made a positive impact on
the local area. Buildings of Local Interest status had been conferred by the
City Council in 2016. b.
Historic England had made a representation asking
for the existing building to be retained. c.
Buildings had not been maintained in-line with
other buildings in the King’s College estate. They should not be demolished. d.
Proposed buildings would not make a positive impact
on the local area due to height, scale and massing. e.
The new buildings were materially different from existing
ones, they were monotonous and uniform.
ii.
Need for student accommodation. a.
The City Council undertook a detailed analysis of
the need for student accommodation across the City in 2017 identifying 3,100
units were needed between 2017-2026. b.
Taking into account sites in the Local Plan, these
would exceed the expected need, so queried whether King’s College needed the
extra accommodation (in the proposal) given the existing supply in the market
place already.
iii.
Impact on amenity and bio-diversity of neighbouring
properties. a.
The area around 4c Millington Road was unique in
Newnham. The application would have a material impact on biodiversity. He
referred to Local Plan Policy 70. b.
A number of Resident Associations had expressed
concern about the play equipment proposed for Lammas Land. Funding could be
better spent in the area. Councillor Gehring (Newnham Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee
about the application:
i.
Took issue with the proposal and possible
demolition of buildings.
ii.
Referred to the Barton Road Study (as did
Councillor Cantrill).
iii.
Referred to Objector’s comments: a.
Climate change mitigation was not a good reason to
demolish the existing buildings and replace with newer ones. b.
Impact on the street scene. c.
Lack of maintenance of existing buildings.
iv.
Did not agree with the Officer’s interpretation of
Historic England’s comments.
v.
Re-using building tiles on the cycle store was a
token gesture.
vi.
Took issue with the need of extra (student)
accommodation for King’s College. Referred to the Cranmer Road development. vii.
Took issue with the loss of the eco-nursery. This
was not an issue that affected the woodland, the application would have a more
significant impact. Councillor Sargeant proposed amendments to the Officer’s recommendation
covering: i.
Proctorial control to limit
student parking in nearby residential areas. Course tutors would limit parking
permits to 12 cars in a year. ii.
A condition to control how
car usage was covered in the College’s job advertisements. However, Councillor
Smart accepted the Senior Planner’s recommendation to require a Travel Plan
condition instead. These amendments (re
Proctorial limitation of parking and the Travel Plan requirement) were carried
unanimously. Officers were given delegated authority to settle the text for
the conditions after Committee. Councillor Baigent proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation
by deleting condition 33. The Delivery Manager advised the Committee that
Officers recommended retaining condition 33 stating that removal of this
particular condition would fundamentally affect the Officer recommendation. Without
the condition being included the Officer recommendation would move from one of
approval to one of refusal. On voting Cllr Baigent’s
proposed amendment was carried by 4 votes to 3. The Committee adjourned from Noon to 12:25pm so Officers could further
consider the implications of removing condition 33 from a grant of a planning
permission for the application. The Delivery Manager said Officers recommended
approval of the application subject to all 33 conditions listed in the
Officer’s report. Councillors had voted to remove condition 33, thus the
decision to approve/refuse the application rested with the Committee. Officers
could not support the application in its current form i.e. without the
inclusion of condition 33 because it had been materially changed. Members would
now be asked to approve the application (as per the officer’s recommendation or
to follow the Adjourned Decision Protocol if a ‘minded to’ refuse decision was
carried. Councillor Smart proposed to annul the vote calling for the removal of
condition 33. Cllr Smart’s amendment was carried
3 votes to 3 – on the Chair’s casting vote). The Committee: Resolved (by 4 votes to 3) to grant the
application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer
recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer Report, subject to the
conditions recommended and set out in the Officers Report (and for the
avoidance of doubt, with condition 33 re-instated) plus the following three
additional conditions: 34.
The 60 Graduate rooms (in
Buildings C and D) shall be occupied during the academic terms only by students
of King’s College who are enrolled in full-time education on a course of at least
one academic year; or within the 24 apartments (Buildings A and B) by students
(including Postdoctoral students), Fellows and Research Associates of King’s
College (including their partner and immediate family). Outside of academic
term times, the graduate rooms shall only be occupied by students studying at
educational institutions within Cambridge, conference delegates or others
attending such institutions for purposes linked with the educational functions
of those institutions. Reason: To ensure the
site is occupied on the basis of the information assessed as part of the
application and to ensure compliance with policy 46 of the Cambridge Local Plan
2018 35. The University of Cambridge shall
not issue any more than twelve (12) car parking permits to student occupiers of
the site within any academic year. Reason: To ensure there is
no overspill car parking on the surrounding streets from student occupiers of
the site (Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 45 and 82) 36.
Within six (6) months of the
occupation of the development, a Travel Plan will be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan will deal with
occupiers of the 24 flats and it shall specify the methods to be used to
discourage the use of the private motor vehicle; and the arrangements to
encourage the use of alternative sustainable travel arrangements such as public
transport, car sharing, cycling and walking. The Travel Plan shall be implemented
as approved upon the occupation of the development, and monitored in accordance
with details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of
encouraging sustainable travel to and from the site (Cambridge Local Plan 2018,
policies 80 and 81). |
|||||||
18/1826/FUL - 43-47 Water Street PDF 205 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for erection of block containing 9 flats
following demolition of existing building. The Committee received representations in objection to the application
from local residents. The representations covered the following issues: i.
32 residents objected to the
proposals. ii.
Design was out of keeping with the
character of the area. iii.
Mass and scaling would have an
adverse impact on neighbours. iv.
Existing structure could be
refurbished. v.
Demolition process would have an
impact on neighbours. vi.
Residents’ concerns about safety. Peter Mckeown (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of
the application. Councillor Thittala
(East Chesterton Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application as
follows:
i.
Resident’s amenity would be adversely impacted by
the scale of the proposed building.
ii.
Questioned how the existing building could be safely
demolished when it was so close to the neighbouring property.
iii.
Balconies would overlook neighbours.
iv.
Properties would be small and would not accommodate
families.
v.
Sites previous use as a builder’s yard could result
in contamination.
vi.
Tree on the site deserved protection. The Committee: Resolved (by 4 votes to 2 and 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. |
|||||||
19/0183/FUL - 3 Saxon Street PDF 118 KB Minutes: This application was withdrawn from the agenda. |
|||||||
18/1661/FUL - 44 George Street PDF 184 KB Minutes: This item was withdrawn from the agenda. |
|||||||
19/0141/FUL - Land adj 2 Mortlock Avenue PDF 166 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for erection of a detached two storey,
two bedroom dwelling. Councillor Thittala
(East Chesterton Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.
i.
The site was not big enough to accommodate the
proposed building.
ii.
A family house would not fit on the site.
iii.
Would have an impact on the existing trees. iv.
Contravened policy 51 regarding accessibility. The Committee: Resolved (by 6 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. |
|||||||
18/2044/FUL - 25 Brampton Road PDF 115 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for change of use from single dwelling
to two flats (retrospective) and erection of first floor balcony to rear. The Committee noted the amendment sheet. The Committee: Resolved unanimously to grant
retrospective 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. |
|||||||
19/0573/FUL - 2A Carisbrooke Road PDF 109 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for change of use of private amenity
space to residential garden, and enclosure of extended garden with 1.8m high
close-boarded fencing. The Committee noted the amendment sheet. Mr S Grant (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the
application. The Principal
Planner provided clarity on ownership of the land and what changes the property
owner could undertake without a specific
planning permission under the Town & Country
Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). The Committee
expressed concerns about the visual impact of the proposed fencing on the
street scene and the loss of an amenity that was currently enjoyed by local
residents. The Committee: Resolved (by 4 votes to 2 and 1 abstention) to reject the officer recommendation to
approve the application. Resolved (unanimously) to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendation for the
following reasons: Both the change of use and the enclosure of
the land with 1.8 metre high fencing would result in the loss of land which
contributes to the openness and character of the area. The proposal would
therefore have a harmful visual impact within the street scene, contrary to
Policies 55, 56 and 59 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018. |
|||||||
19/0199/FUL - 220 Milton Road PDF 166 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application
sought approval for extension and conversion of the existing building to create
6no. flats comprising 1 x 3-bedroom units, 1 x 2-bedroom
units and 4 x 1-bedroom units along with car and cycle parking and provision of
a communal garden following the demolition of the existing studio building. David Mead (Applicant’s Agent) 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. |
|||||||
19/0769/PIP - Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Authority, 18 Vinery Road PDF 92 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
planning permission in principle for a residential development of 9 dwellings. David Mead (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the
application. The Committee: Unanimously resolved to grant the application for planning
permission in principle in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the
reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions
recommended by the officers. |
|||||||
19/0283/FUL - 48-50 High Street, Chesterton PDF 196 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application
sought approval for part demolition of existing single storey rear element and
refurbishment of existing flat and Post Office. Erection of
4no. 1xbed duplex dwellings. Erection
of timber outbuilding to provide bin and cycle storage. Demolition of existing outbuilding and shed. Associated landscaping and infrastructure including replacement
gates to public highway. Peter Mckeown (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of
the application. The Committee: Resolved (by 6 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 and subject to clarification of the wording of the fire hydrant
condition. |
|||||||
19/0407/FUL - 105-107 Norfolk Street PDF 124 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for extensions and alterations to create
two self-contained dwellings. The Committee
discussed the desire to remove Class A and
E permitted development rights granted by the Town & Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) which was
agreed unanimously. The Committee: Unanimously
resolved to grant the
application for planning permission in accordance with Officer recommendation, subject to the conditions recommended and
set out in the Officer’s report, and additional condition removing Class A and
E permitted development rights. |
|||||||
18/1925/FUL - Baileys Studios, 63 Eden Street PDF 139 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for erection of a new dwelling house
following demolition of existing building on site. Julian Woods-Wilford (Applicant’s Agent) 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. |