A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: This a virtual meeting via Microsoft Teams

Contact: Democratic Services  Committee Manager

Note: Item 6: Pre-app Developer Briefing - NIAB site - withdrawn 

Media

Items
No. Item

20/13/JDCC

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Smart.

 

20/14/JDCC

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

Item

Councillor

Interest

City Councillor Baigent

All

Personal: Member of CamCycle and Extinction Rebellion

 

20/15/JDCC

Minutes pdf icon PDF 234 KB

To follow.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meetings held on 21 October 2020 were approved as a correct record.

 

20/16/JDCC

20/02569/REM - Phase 1B, Marleigh, Land North of Newmarket Road, Cambridge pdf icon PDF 931 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received a reserved matters application as part of Phase 1B pursuant to condition 5 (Reserved Matters) of outline planning permission S/2682/13/OL dated 30 November 2016 (EIA Development) for detailed access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the creation of 308 new homes, non-residential floor space, laying out of playing fields, open space, allotments, associated infrastructure and internal roads. 

 

The Principal Planner updated her report by referring to the following details in her presentation: 

 

RECOMMENDATION: 

1. Approve planning permission of reserved matters application reference 20/02569/REM, subject to conditions and informatives set out from Page 48 of the Agenda, subject to amended condition 21 (road levels) as set out on the Amendment Sheetwith authority delegated to officers to undertake appropriate minor amendments of those conditions and informatives prior to issue of the planning permission. 

2. Approve the partial discharge of the outline planning conditions listed on Page 47 of the Agenda as they relate to the Phase 1B application proposals. 

 

Mr Cobley (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application. 

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report. 

  i.Queried if sufficient cycle parking was provided on site, particularly near the football field. 

  ii.Queried if there would be conflict between vehicles, cycles, e-scooters and pedestrians travelling around the site; and if routes should be segregated. 

  iii.Queried if appropriate levels of affordable housing were provided. 

 

In response to Members’ questions the Assistant Director and Principal Planner said the following: 

 

Principle of Development / Context of Site, Design and External Spaces / Housing Delivery 

  i.  The outline application and existing s106 Aagreement for the development set affordable housing provision for the whole development. The viability assessment set the level of affordable housing at 30% for the whole site (this could not be changed at a reserved matters stage).  

  ii.  The site aimed to be a sustainable community that encouraged bike/pedestrian access/movement over cars. 

  iii.  The parameter plans approved at outline stage, including the movement and access parameter plan set out high level principles for the development of the site. Further detail was provided in the reserved matters applications. 

  iv.  Pedestrians could still access the woods through the courtyard squares, there was no impact on permeability through the alternative courtyard configuration. 

  v.  Routes into the woods were accessible for both able bodied and disabled people. The application would meet LTN1-20 criteria. 

 

The Local Highways Engineer made the following points: 

  vi.  The site (layout) would reduce vehicle speed and encourage cycle/pedestrian movements as envisioned in LTN1-20. 

 vii.  The highway could be safely used by cycles and vehicles due to the predicted numbers of cars. Higher numbers of pedestrian/cycle movements were expected around the site. 

 

The Assistant Director and Principal Planner said the following: 

viii.  The hierarchy of access routes included segregated routes for pedestrians, cycles and vehicles eg primary routes and the highway and some shared spaces occurred on tertiary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20/16/JDCC

20/17/JDCC

North West Cambridge: Eddington Phase 2 Infrastructure pdf icon PDF 9 MB

Minutes:

Councillor Baigent left the committee and Councillor Harford joined as a Ward Councillor.

 

The Committee received a presentation from North West Cambridge on Eddington phase 2

 

Members raised comments/questions as listed below. Answers were supplied, and comments from officers, but as this was a pre-application presentation, none of the answers or comments are binding on either the intended applicant or the local planning authority so consequently are not recorded in these minutes.

 

1. Asked whether mature tree specimens would be included in the new planting scheme along the border with the M11, to improve the look of Eddington, and when this planting would take place.

 

2. Requested details of what is currently located in the vicinity of the junction with Huntingdon Road and what the anticipated impact on traffic of that junction would be.

 

3. Will the developers be providing edible planting throughout the landscaping?

 

4. When provision for older living is provided to the north of phase 2, does the landscaping accommodate improved access for older people in just this area or will standards for older people be carried out throughout the whole site?

 

5. As the large earth mounds located behind residents on Huntingdon Road were built up over several years, leading to extended periods of dust and noise pollution, can we have a logistic plan for removing the soil to minimise the length of time required and to ensure this is communicated to local residents in advance?

 

6. As some residents already living on site have found noise levels from the M11 excessive, what additional plans are in place to mitigate this issue?

 

7. In relation to some issues from phase 1 which have been taken into account when planning phase 2, are developers planning to retrofit phase 1? Specifically transition points where it is unclear where a pedestrian is moving between a path and a road.

 

8. As cycling routes are designed by a range of authorities and developers, how consistent will provision be along the length of Huntingdon Road so cyclists don’t have to keep adjusting to different environments along its length?

 

9. As the development area is on higher ground than the M11, will mitigation measures which need to be close to the source of the noise need to be quite tall to effectively protect those properties towards the top of the ridge?

 

10. Requested a copy of the draft Environmental Management Strategy.

20/18/JDCC

NIAB site

Mixed use build to rent residential use, apart-hotel and minor commercial use

Minutes:

The pre-application briefing was withdrawn from the agenda and should be reported to the December 2020 committee.