A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda item

Agenda item

21/02450/REM - Land North of Newmarket Road, Cambridge (Marleigh Phase 2)

Minutes:

The application sought approval for reserved matters application detailing, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the construction of 421 new homes with associated infrastructure, internal roads, open space as part of Phase 2 pursuant to condition 5 (reserved matter) of outline planning permission S/2681/13/OL dated 30 November 2016.

 

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

 

The Committee raised the following concerns in response to the report:

  i.  Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) took over some green space area, if the SuDS did not drain, some of this would be lost as amenity space.

  ii.  Gradients in SuDS may cause a safety hazard for wheelchair users on access paths, and if people/children got into the SuDS they might not get out.

  iii.  There were a series of alleyways through the site to gardens that may be a focus for criminal activity.

 

The Senior Planning Officer said the following in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  The Titch area was to be built to ‘normal’ levels, the SuDS basin had a 1 in 3 gradient.

  ii.  SuDS were originally located in The Titch as this was the only available open space. They were now located as per the submitted design as there was nowhere else to put them as part of Phase 2. Losing 1/3 of open space due to flooding was a worst-case scenario, but there was more than one area of open space.

  iii.  1 in 100 year flooding events were occurring more frequently so Officers asked the Applicant to model climate change impact on flooding in the area. Drainage Officers at both the County Council and City Council reviewed the results and had no objections to the SuDS scheme.

  iv.  SuDS were controlled through a hydro brake system to gradually leak water stopping ponds forming. The Lead Local Flood Authority had no objections to this.

  v.  Aquatic planting was controlled through the planting condition. The Applicant would undertake a health and safety audit  to ensure plants were safe if anyone went into the SuDS.

  vi.  Landscape planting and screening details for open spaces would be sought in future.

 vii.  Bike parking provision met minimum standards, anymore would require a change in policy.

viii.  M4(2) accommodation standards were met. The City Council wanted M4(3) standard whereas South Cambs wanted M4(2). The application site was within South Cambs administrative area and thereby fell under its local plan requirements.

  ix.  Alleys gave access to rear gardens. Would check if these could be made more secure in future eg gated access.

  x.  There were secure gardens on top of garages as amenity space for apartment occupants.

  xi.  There were no specific timelines on when grid capacity would be available for electric vehicle charging points. It was assumed this would be possible in a couple of years.

 xii.  The Design Code required apartments in the locations stated to a set density that created a mix of affordable rent and shared ownership around the buildings. This was tenure blind and so the best fit to policy under the circumstances.

xiii.  Officers had expressed concern about the number of single aspect apartments so they asked for modelling to quantify the risk of overheating/cooling. Apartments that had been retained in the design had been shown to provide acceptable amenity space. The window type mitigated heat intake into buildings, so the issues had been addressed.

xiv.  Individual car parking spaces could not be allocated to apartments to control uses without changes to conditions in the Car Parking Management Plan.

 

Councillor Thornburrow proposed amendments to the Officer’s recommendation to include:

  i.  an informative encouraging the Applicant to consider M4(3) standard accommodation where possible;

  ii.  include an informative aboutsouth facing single aspect  units to address overheating concerns;

  iii.  an additional condition to remove permitted development rights for garage.

 

These amendments were carried by 8 votes to 0.

 

In response to a point raised by Councillor Chamberlain, the Assistant Director proposed amending wording to Condition 10 Cycle and Alley Way Security to address potential crime focus concerns.

 

This amendment was carried by 8 votes to 0.

 

Councillor Bradnam proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation to amend the Car Park Management Plan.

 

This amendment was carried by 8 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

A) Resolved (by 8 votes to 0)to grant approval of the reserved matters application in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report subject to agreeing the precise wording with the Chair of amendments to:

  i.  condition 10 (Cycle and Alley Way Security);

  ii.  two additional conditions:

a.  24 Car Parking Management Plan;

b.  25 (removal of) Permitted Development Rights);

  iii.  informatives:

a.  5.  M4(3) Standard dwellings;

b.  6.  south facing single aspect  units.

 

B) to approve the partial discharge of the following outline planning conditions (planning application reference S/2682/13/OL) as they relate to the Phase 2 application proposals:

·  Condition 12 (Hard and soft landscaping);

·  Condition 13 (Tree retention/removal);

·  Condition 14 (Local areas of play);

·  Condition 16 (Allotment details);

·  Condition 17 (Ecological mitigation);

·  Condition 19 (Pedestrian and cycle routes);

·  Condition 20 (Car parking);

·  Condition 21 (Noise and insulation);

·  Condition 23 (Details of refuse storage);

·  Condition 24 (Distribution of market and affordable housing);

·  Condition 25 (Mix of private dwellings);

·  Condition 27 (Code for Sustainable Homes);

·  Condition 28 (Compliance with site wide sustainability strategy);

·  Condition 30 (Cycle Parking);

·  Condition 40 (Bird hazard management);

·  Condition 51 (Compliance with Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 for all dwellings)

in accordance with paragraph 255 of the Officer report.


Supporting documents: