A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

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Note: Item 7 - 3 Saxon Street – withdrawn from the agenda 

Items
No. Item

19/26/Plan

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Page-Croft.

 

Councillor McQueen left after the consideration of item 19/38/Plan.

19/27/Plan

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

Name

Item

Interest

Councillors Baigent and Sargeant

All

Personal: Member of

Cambridge Cycling Campaign.

 

19/28/Plan

Minutes pdf icon PDF 237 KB

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.

 

19/29/Plan

18/1993/FUL - Land Between 21 and 29 Barton Road (inc. 27 Barton Road and Croft Gardens) pdf icon 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).

19/30/Plan

18/1826/FUL - 43-47 Water Street pdf icon 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.

19/31/Plan

19/0183/FUL - 3 Saxon Street pdf icon PDF 118 KB

Minutes:

This application was withdrawn from the agenda.

19/32/Plan

18/1661/FUL - 44 George Street pdf icon PDF 184 KB

Minutes:

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

19/33/Plan

19/0141/FUL - Land adj 2 Mortlock Avenue pdf icon 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.

19/34/Plan

18/2044/FUL - 25 Brampton Road pdf icon 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.

19/35/Plan

19/0573/FUL - 2A Carisbrooke Road pdf icon 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.

19/36/Plan

19/0199/FUL - 220 Milton Road pdf icon 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 resolvedto 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.

19/37/Plan

19/0769/PIP - Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Authority, 18 Vinery Road pdf icon 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 resolvedto 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.

19/38/Plan

19/0283/FUL - 48-50 High Street, Chesterton pdf icon 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.

19/39/Plan

19/0407/FUL - 105-107 Norfolk Street pdf icon 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.

19/40/Plan

18/1925/FUL - Baileys Studios, 63 Eden Street pdf icon 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 resolvedto 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.