Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from South Cambs Councillors Fane, R.Williams and Stobart. Councillor Garvie attended as alternate for Councillor Stobart.

The application sought approval for outline planning permission (all matters reserved except for means of access) for up to 1,000 residential dwellings, secondary school, primary school, community facilities, retail uses, open space and landscaped areas, associated engineering, demolition and infrastructure works.

The application had been appealed against non-determination within an agreed timeframe and could no longer be determined by it as the local planning authority. The application comes to this Committee to establish the local planning authority’s position for the purposes of conducting the appeal.

The Principal Planner updated their report by referring to:

i.    An additional condition regarding the proposed demolition of existing buildings which detailed in the Amendment Sheet.

ii.  An update to the Officer’s recommendation including an additional recommendation (c) that:

Members delegated authority to Officers in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair to settle:

                                              i.     a scheme of measures (the Scheme) providing for and delivering enhanced water saving and other appropriate mitigation measures and

                                             ii.     the appropriate conditions which support and secure delivery of the Scheme.

Alison Wright (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from the Environment Agency (EA) representatives.

The representation covered the following issues:

      i.         Water was a precious resource which was under pressure all over the country and particularly in Cambridgeshire. Increased abstraction was a risk to chalk streams and wetland habitats.

    ii.         The EA had a duty to protect the environment and ensure that there was enough water for people, businesses, and the environment. The EA regulated the extraction of water and worked with water companies, farmers, industry and businesses to ensure that water was available.

   iii.         The EA had a legal duty to secure the proper and efficient use of water resources. The EA, where necessary, would take action to prevent deterioration/over abstraction. The EA had acted in this case as the planned development was not in terms of water supply sustainable and risked harm to the environment. Solutions and mitigations needed to be led by the local planning authority and Cambridge Water Company. 

  iv.         The EA objected to the application on the grounds that it would increase abstraction and have an associated increased risk in deterioration to water bodies within the Greater Cambridgeshire area.

    v.         The grounds for the objection are that the water supply demands for this development both alone and in combination with other proposed development posed a significant risk of deterioration to Water Framework Directive designated water bodies.

  vi.         The EA raised significant concerns regarding Cambridge Water Company’s ability to meet the demand for water in its supply area without increasing the risk of deterioration to the status of water bodies, which was considered to be of direct relevance to this matter.

 vii.         Cambridge Water Company were already abstracting at unsustainable levels, in some cases to capped levels on its licences. The EA had raised concerns regarding Cambridge Water Company’s Water Resource Management Plan with the company through their letter of representation earlier  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23/51/JDCC