Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor(s) Bradnam, (Councillor Garvie attended as an alternate), Hawkins and Smart.

No interests were declared. OR

The minutes of the meetings held on 30 October 2023 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The application sought change of use and refurbishment of existing car showroom and new-build two-storey extension to create a new Operational Hub, reconfiguration and refurbishment of existing MOT garage to provide upgraded office and storage space, car and van parking, cycle parking, landscaping, and associated infrastructure.

The Principal Planner updated their report by referring to the amendments contained within the Amendment Sheet summarised as follows:

Amendments To Text:

      i.         Paragraph 1.1 (page 15) - delete “the demolition of a number of existing buildings” - as demolition is not referenced in the description of development, and does not form part of this application

    ii.         Paragraph 3.1 (page 17) - delete “removal of a number of existing buildings” - for the same reason

   iii.         Addition to Section 7 (page 27) - Late representation received from the County Council Minerals and Waste Planning Team – No objection subject to the proposed odour abatement condition (condition 12). Amendments to Conditions:

  iv.         Additional condition to clearly define the proposed use as an Operational Hub: The development hereby permitted shall not be used for any purpose other than as an operational hub (comprising a combination of office, storage and distribution, and vehicle servicing), being a sui generis use not falling within any class specified within the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

Reason: To clearly define the terms of the permission in the interests of residential amenity and to ensure an acceptable form of development in accordance with Policies 35, 55 and 56 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018

William Nichols (Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Principal Planner and the Delivery Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         There was some water storage proposed. Not familiar with the exact specifications.

    ii.         There was a travel planning process going on with operational staff. Officers were satisfied that the lack of staff parking provision would not cause any issues.

   iii.         There was increase in cycle parking. There was also motorcycle and scooter parking. There was also access from Milton Park and Ride if staff do need to drive to work.

  iv.         It would be difficult to completely minimise noise, especially in the mornings. There was work to be done for the Core Site scheme in mitigating noise from the development.

    v.         The development is not likely to have any impact on the management of the first public drain.

  vi.         There would be a bridge connecting Cowley Road to the high quality pedestrian and cycle route to the southern side of Cowley Road.

 vii.         There was a pedestrian footpath along the length of Cowley Road (Northern end).

viii.         Any future development would need to take into consideration ecological constraints.

The Strategic Sites Manager offered the following summary of amendments to the Officer’s recommendation for planning application reflecting Members’ debate during the meeting:

i.               the amendments detailed in the Amendment Sheet;

ii.             an amendment to condition 20 (Hard and Soft Landscaping) to give account for mature or significant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24/61/JDCC

Councillor Flaubert joined the meeting prior to the start of this item.

Councillor Smith stated that he is a ward councillor for the area and had received and made representations on behalf of residents regarding various aspects of Darwin Green site however discretion remained unfettered.

Councillor Thornburrow had attended public meetings with residents regarding various issues arising from the Darwin Green site however discretion remained unfettered.

Councillor Cahn had attending public meetings where various issues were explained to him regarding the site, however discretion remained unfettered.

Councillor Porrer was the Chair of West Central Area Committee where issues with Darwin Green had been raised, however discretion remained unfettered.

Councillor Williams was an employee of Christ’s College University of Cambridge and as such excused himself from the item. He would not participate in the debate, would not vote and left the room for the duration of the item.

The Committee received three applications seeking to re-discharge conditions 51, 52 and 53 of planning permission 07/0003/OUT. These applications set out the details of proposed demolition works and related matters for the sites knows as Darwin Green 1 as well as well as the relevant specific parcel known as BDW2. The conditions had been discharged in full but due to the unforeseen requirement to undertake demolition works on site the details submitted require updating.

Adrian Jarman (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Principal Planner said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         The houses marked green on the demolition plan were not inhabited.

    ii.         The demolition period was planned to take place for 12 weeks.

   iii.         Barratt David Wilson Homes (BDW) were hoping to start as soon as possible and complete the works by mid-April. This was a time where neighbouring residents windows were less likely to be open.

  iv.         The structures to be demolished comprise all underground services, completed foundations and superstructures ranging from initial brick courses to completed houses.

    v.         Convenient times for demolition had been discussed. There would be breaks in demolition work during the day (blocks of periods of time). There had been discussions to use a space in Darwin Green Community Rooms as a hub for home workers.

  vi.         There were 7 monitoring stations on site. If there were excess noise decibel levels, the contractor would be notified.

 vii.         Monitoring stations would also monitor dust particle levels.

viii.         If there was a notification from the monitoring station work would cease immediately until issue was resolved.

  ix.         The 24 hour helpline goes directly to BDW.

    x.         Residents would also we welcome to report directly to Planning service.

  xi.         There would be no demolition works taking place on Saturdays. However there would be some construction work and deliveries on Saturdays between the hours of 8:00-13:00. As such the shared link path connecting Windsor Road with the rest of the site would be closed during those hours on Saturdays. It would also be shut during demolition. Currently attempting to find a resolution to come  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24/62/JDCC

Councillor Williams re-joined the Committee prior to the start of this item.

The application seeks full planning permission for the construction of a temporary replacement car storage compound and pre-delivery inspection (PDI) building with associated access, boundary treatment, lighting and landscape up to 31 March 2035.

The Principal Planner updated their report by referring to the amendments contained within the Amendment Sheet summarised as follows:

Amendments To Text:

Correction to the ‘Applicant’ on first page of the Report to Marshall Group Properties (MGP). Paragraph 17.3 of the Report should refer to Marshall Motor Group (MMG) employees rather than MGP. Additional paragraph to Section 21 of the Report (Other Matters) to respond to comments of Teversham Parish Council (as detailed in paragraph 6.2): 21.16 The comments of Teversham Parish Council are noted.

However, the application site does not form part of the area designated as playing fields within the Marleigh development, with this area being located further north. The application site lies outside of the area consented for the Marleigh development. Update to Condition 1 (Time Limit) to secure details of how the land will be restored following cessation of the temporary. Updated condition to read as follows: The use of the site as a temporary car storage compound, hereby approved, shall cease on or before 31 March 2035. The development, hereby approved, shall be removed and the land restored to a condition that has been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 12 months from cessation of the use, in accordance with a scheme of work that has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of restoration works. Reason: In the interests of the character and amenity of the area, and to ensure the development does not impact the delivery of Cambridge East in accordance with Policies S/6 and SS/3 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018.

Will Cobley (Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Principal Planner and the Delivery Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         There was an update to Condition 1 of the Amendment Sheet setting out restoration works and time scales regarding the cessation of the use of the site.

    ii.         There was an element of Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) on site due to the landscaping going in however would not reach 10% due to the majority of the site being hardstanding. There was an added complication of what sort of biodiverse features could be incorporated into the area due to proximity of Cambridge Airport and the safeguarding requirements. Therefore an offsite BNG contribution was decided.

   iii.         The landscaping that would go in would be established to start with. By year 10 landscaping would completely encompass the building.

  iv.         The proposal would result in limited vehicles movements to and from the existing car sales site.

    v.         The advice of Officers was a minimum of 10% BNG which is policy compliant.

  vi.         The surface water drainage conditions were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24/63/JDCC

The report relates to a variation of condition application under section 73 (S73) of the Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA) 1990, which seeks to amend conditions 16 (approved drawings), 64 (cycle parking), and 65 (car parking) of application 21/00772/OUT which was allowed on appeal as follows:

·      Amendment the design of Building 3 to facilitate the provision of lab space.

·      Provision of amenities within the Multi-Storey Car Park (MSCP).

·      Design amendments to Building 3 and the MSCP to alter their appearance. The height and footprint of the buildings are unchanged.

·      Amendments to the landscape design to coordinate with the revised building design

·      A reduction in car parking provision

·      An increase in cycle parking provision

The Principal Planner updated their report by referring to the amendments contained within the Amendment Sheet summarised as follows:

Amendments To Text:

Amendment to the title of three of the plans referenced in condition 16 in Section 25 of the report to rectify errors: 16. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

• 2435A4-LLA-ZZ-00-DR-L-0001 Rev P01

• 2435A4-LLA-ZZ-XX-DR-L-0001 P03 Landscape MMA Proposals Supplementary Doc (May 2023)

• 2435A4-LLA-ZZ-00-DR-L-0003 Rev P01 Landscape MMA GA

Condition 72 listed in section 25 is proposed to be removed as it is not required:

Linking condition

72. Conditions 1-15, 17 - 63 and 66 - 71 of planning permission 21/00772/OUT (as set out above) shall continue to apply to this permission. Where such conditions pertaining to 21/00772/OUT have been discharged, the development of planning permission 23/03182/S73 shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of discharge and those conditions shall be deemed to be discharged for this permission also. Reason: To define the terms of the application.

Orestis Tzortzoglou (Applicant)) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Principal Planner and the Delivery Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         The proposed use of the building would be flexible. The amended proposals show a 60/40 split between laboratory and office use floorspace although this can be amended without the need for planning permission as the original consent is suitably flexible. This would result in a reduction in the number of employees by approximately 500. There would be a reduction of car parking spaces of 107. This results in the ratio of employees to car parking spaces remaining the same, which is 1 space per 5.18 staff members.

    ii.         Provisions for car sharing would need to be a part of the travel plan. There would be further travel plans during later phases of development.

   iii.         Cyclists would access the building at the front of the building.

  iv.         Would need to investigate whether any disabled parking bays had EV charging points. Could suggest an informative to recommend that.

The Delivery Manager offered the following summary of amendments to the Officer’s recommendation for both planning applications reflecting Members’ debate during the meeting:

      i.         the amendments detailed in the Amendment Sheet;

    ii.         an additional informative to ask developer to provide proportionate element  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24/64/JDCC