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 South Cambridgeshire DC Councillors de Lacey, Chamberlain and Bygott,
County Councillors Hudson and Bradnam, City Councillors Smart and Bird County Councillor Cuffley
and City Councillor Thornburrow attended as alternates. |
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
Phase 1a, Wing, Land North of Newmarket Road Minutes: The Committee received a
presentation from Pollard Thomas Edwards Architects and Hill Residential
regarding Phase 1a, Wing, Land North of Newmarket
Road. The presentation
highlighted the following:
i.
The Masterplan details a development
of 1,300 homes with associated local facilities.
ii.
It was anticipated that
Phase 1 would include the delivery of the primary school and some local
facilities.
iii.
Detailed the first
residential area, Phase 1a, which would be delivered in line with the agreed
design code.
iv.
The planning and building
time line was outlined. Members raised comments/questions as listed below. Answers were supplied, but as this was a
pre-application presentation, none of the answers were to be regarded as
binding and so are not included in the minutes. 1.
Would all residential units comply with the latest
space standards and lifetime homes
requirements? 2.
Had the changes to the design code agreed at a
previous JDCC been incorporated and would Phase 1a be compliant? 3.
Sought assurances that High Ditch road would not be
used by construction vehicles. 4.
Raised concerns regarding the limited parking
options near to the primary school. 5.
Suggested that a pre-application briefing regarding
the primary school was needed. 6.
Questioned why waste collections could not mirror
those agreed for Eddington and asked for details on space standards for bin and
cycle storage. 7.
Asked for details regarding density and percentages
of affordable properties. 8.
Questioned car parking provision for visiting healthcare
professionals. 9.
Sought assurances that speeding cyclists would not
be in conflict with other footpath users such as wheelchairs, mobility scooters
or push chairs. 10.
Questioned how residents could be encouraged to use
garages for car storage rather than as additional general storage. 11.
Suggested that the parking provision near to the
sports pitches might be insufficient to meet the demand. 12.
Raised concerns about the park and ride car park
becoming an overflow car park for the Wing development. Asked for more details on the office space around
the market square. Was this intended for individual businesses or
could it be used as shared space? |
|
Proposed hotel and apart-hotel, Eddington, Madingley Road Minutes: The Committee received a
presentation from (developer) regarding the proposed hotel and apart-hotel,
Eddington, Madingley Road. The presentation highlighted
the following:
i.
Outlined the core values
of the developer as: lifestyle choices and aimed at the corporate client.
ii.
Explained how the scheme
would be a split of 150 traditional hotel rooms under the Hyatt brand and 180
apart-hotel rooms or longer stays under the Locke brand.
iii.
Site was a key location
fronting onto the Market Square.
iv.
Design had taken
influences from the courtyard style of Cambridge University Colleges.
v.
Ground floor would be
accessible to the community and would include retail outlets, cafes and a
restaurant.
vi.
Rooftop venue would be a
focal point. Members raised comments/questions as listed below. Answers were supplied, but as this was a
pre-application presentation, none of the answers were to be regarded as
binding and so are not included in the minutes. A number of questions were asked about the parking arrangements and for
the ease of the reader, these have been grouped together. Transport and car parking 1.
How would the limited parking spaces be managed to
avoid overspill into the Park and Ride car park? 2.
Staff would be working anti-social hours. Where
would they park? 3.
Parking arrangements unsuitable for this out of
town location. 4.
Had the impact of displaced parking on surrounding
communities been considered? 5.
Rural communities in the vicinity of the
development would be concerned that their tranquillity would be lost due to
displaced parking and increased traffic on rural roads. 6.
How far was the delivery point from the restaurant
and how would that distance be managed? 7.
How would coach drop off at the hotel be managed? General Questions 8.
Was there evidence of the demand for this hotel? 9.
Was there an upper limit to the number of
consecutive nights an apart-hotel room could be occupied? 10.
Were the hotels suitable for disabled guests
(including any shuttle bus service)? 11.
Would the proposed cycle storage accommodate
nonstandard bikes? 12.
Other buildings surrounding the Market Square were
innovative and award winning, this building was uninspired and bland. 13.
Some areas of the internal courtyard would not
receive much natural light. Had breaks in the building been considered? 14.
How would commercial waste collection to any
franchised outlet within the hotel be managed so that nearby residential units
did not suffer noise disturbance? |