Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Committee Room 1 & 2, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
No. | Item | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies Minutes: Apologies were received from County Councillor Hudson, South Cambs Councillor Chamberlain, South Cambs Councillor Hunt. South Cambs Councillor Cheung Johnson attended as South Cambs Councillor Hunt’s alternate. |
|||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the 18th July 2018 were agreed and signed as a correct record subject to the correction in 18/27/JDCC which referred to South Cambs Councillor Bygott as a County Councillor. Councillor Bradnam abstained from voting on the minutes as she was not present at the previous meeting. |
|||||||||||||
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee received an application (under Regulation 3 of the Town
and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 (as amended)) for full planning
permission for the continued operation of existing Park and Ride Site on 24hr
basis together with a proposed extension to accommodate 274 additional car
parking spaces (including disabled parking bays); additional bus and coach
stops and layout area; reconfiguration of existing car parking and the site
entrance; provision of pedestrian and cycle links to Trumpington
Meadows and replacement/new undercover cycle parking with associated
infrastructure and landscaping. The Committee
noted the amendments contained in the amendment sheet and the addendum
amendment sheet circulated at Committee. David Fletcher (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of
the application. Philip Allen (Chair of South Trumpington
Parish Meeting) addressed the Committee and made the following comments: i.
South Trumpington Parish
were supportive of the application and were aware of traffic implications in
the area. ii.
Discussed drainage. iii.
Referred to concerns contained on p22 of the
committee report regarding hours of construction and asked that these would
meet Cambridge City Council hours of construction. iv.
Asked if works undertaken around the school could
be done during the school holidays In response to Members’ questions the Development Management Officer,
Business Manager and Assistant Director (Delivery) said the following: i.
Confirmed that an
informative may be used to refer to legislation other than planning
legislation, which was different to planning conditions as there were specific
planning requirements that needed to be met for these to be lawful. ii.
Additional disabled parking
bays were being provided, although he could not comment why these were not
located next to existing disabled parking bays. iii.
The Applicant had submitted
projections of cycle use and the cycle parking provision exceeded projections.
The cycle route through the site was detailed on submitted plans. iv.
She could not comment on
whether the proposals would affect any future autonomous vehicle plans. v.
It would be difficult to
enforce parking restrictions for the use of certain parking bays during
un-social hours. Environmental Health Officers did not raise any concerns about
noise to residents or the school. vi.
Air quality had been
addressed. vii.
The south west car park
would be approximately 285m from the school. 923 trees were due to be removed
as part of the application but 1040 would be planted and 40 bird boxes should
be provided. Planning Officers had been made aware of pre-application
correspondence between the school and the applicants regarding the vegetation
removal and no concerns were raised. viii.
Environmental Health
Officers did not raise any concerns regarding MUGA use. ix.
The maintenance of the
drainage system would fall to the site operator and or its owner. The applicant had had to submit a lot of detail to
ensure that concerns were overcome. x.
Noted concerns expressed
about tree removal, however a number of trees type had been changed for trees
with a wider base to offer more immediate screening. If the trees did not take,
condition 11 dealt with their replacement. xi.
Officers would encourage
the applicant to be a considerate contractor but it was not possible to
condition that works were undertaken during school holidays. xii.
Confirmed that an
informative would be added to the permission, if approved, regarding CCTV for
public safety at the bus layover point. xiii.
Changes had been made to
the width of the cycle parking to meet the Cambridge City Council requirements
as detailed in paragraph 8.60 of the officer’s report. xiv.
Noted Members comments that
pedestrian walkthroughs should follow desire lines however the applicant had to
comply with health and safety legislation and therefore walkways would be
located in accordance with health and safety requirements. xv.
Confirmed that fences being
approved off site as part of the residential development would be located on
the boundary of residential properties and would not cut through residential
gardens. xvi.
Confirmed officers would
check the number of parking spaces following a member highlighting a
discrepancy on the plans. xvii.
Confirmed that the parent and
child parking bays would become regular parking bays, they were not being
removed. xviii.
Commented that the reason
for the dog-legged area and bollards was to ensure vehicles could not use the
shared cyclist and pedestrian route. xix.
There was an urgent need
for the additional parking spaces; the current site was working at full
capacity. This was an immediate short term solution a longer term strategy
would need to be considered. xx.
It was important to have a
link between the park and ride site and Trumpington
Meadows. xxi.
This application did not
consider electric charging points. xxii.
Noted that informative 4
needed to have the word ‘shall’ corrected to ‘should’. xxiii.
Noted that whilst there was
a net loss of cycle parking provision this was balanced against the quality of
the cycle parking provision. The Committee: Resolved (by 9 votes to 3 with 2 abstentions) 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 subject to the changes set out on the 2 amendment sheets and
additional informatives (below), with delegation to
officers in consultation with the Chair, Vice-Chair and Spokes to confirm the
on-plan discrepancy identified by Members in relation to the overall number of
car parking spaces The identified
discrepancy was an additional parking bay and reconfigured soft landscaping
area on the western site boundary, adjacent to the shared cycle and pedestrian
access into Trumpington Meadows. This is to be shown consistently on all of
the submitted plans and be clear on the number of new parking spaces being
provided.. Additional Informatives Surface Water
Drainage All surface water
from roofs CCTV CCTV should be set
up within the site, to address issues of anti-social behaviour. In particular in the bus layover area. |