Agenda item

Description: Eddington Phase 2 - Outline application for a mixed-use development including residential, student, senior living, commercial and academic floorspaces, alongside supporting retail and community uses. Associated infrastructure and engineering works including accesses, roads, and open space.

Members raised the 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 Council as the local planning authority so consequently are not recorded in these minutes.

i.               Who would be responsible for the maintenance of the shared gardens shown in the presentation if residents neglected them?

ii.        What would be the shade implications on the shared gardens from the surrounding housing and apartments?

iii.       What was the intention for traffic management - was there an intention to exclude traffic on site and where would this exclusion operate?

iv.       Was it correct that the taller massing was at the highest point of the site?

v.        Could there be more explanation in terms of the ‘public ownership’ regarding the apartments on Cartright Avenue as referenced in the presentation?

vi.       Parking per dwelling had been reduced from 1.1 (ratio for Phase one) to 0.43, why was this so and what evidence had this reduction been based upon. Was this for the same type of housing that was on Phase one or was this different? 

vii.      What provision had been made for visitor parking?

viii.     Was there plans to improve the access from the Madingley park and ride site to Eddington?

ix.       Would there be plans for a car club on site and specific parking allocated to it?

x.        Could the reasoning for the reduction of landscaping from thirty metres to twenty meters between buildings be explained.

xi.       Could a breakdown of affordable housing be provided?

xii.      Would co-operative housing type structures be considered?

xiii.     Suggested that proactive advertising should be used to encourage residents outside of Eddington to access and use the site?

xiv.     Had been informed that 95% of apartments would be four to six storeys, what was the makeup of the remaining 5% percent?

xv.      Had the walking trails been planned ‘in plan’ or how residents would walk round the site. It was important the trails worked visually when people walked around and not just as an architect would plan it on paper.

xvi.     Would there be planning for irrigation on site to help maintain the greenery and gardens?

xvii.    Questioned if Dutch style cycle ways were suitable; there was a different culture in Holland to cycling as there was in the UK.

xviii.   Would be beneficial to see some elevational treatments in the design which dealt with overheating, particularly for single aspect homes?

xix.     It was also beneficial to consider the use of materials and other issues which could make a property cold.  Important to ensure that the temperatures could be controlled?

xx.      How close was the application to using a water recycling system on site?

xxi.     Would it be possible to use the mothballed carpark on Phase one should there be a demand?

xxii.    Allotments on Phase one had still not been delivered, when would this be completed?

xxiii.   Was the application within the current Local Plan?    

xxiv.   Housing for older people should be distributed across the site rather than in a block.

xxv.    Health and wellbeing of residents was very important and would like to know more about this; lessons learnt from the pandemic, open spaces, pausing places, quiet and safe spaces were needed. How had they have been incorporated into the design?

xxvi.   Welcomed the varied frontage.

xxvii.  Would strongly recommend a nursery on site which would also benefit the surrounding area.

xxviii. A critical mass of spaces would be required for a car club and should be considered.

xxix.   Would there be segregated cycleways?

xxx.    Would be a positive to have early landscaping on site.

xxxi.   The use of apprenticeships should be encouraged by the applicant. 

xxxii.  It was important to think about spaces for teenagers as this group were often overlooked, would welcome all ages play.

xxxiii. Would hope the student housing would be year-round and not for a limited time with the rest of the year rented out on Airbnb. 

xxxiv. Extremely useful to have this exemplar pre-application briefing in the public domain which could be viewed by other developers, architects, designers, planning officers etc. to view examples of co-living, sustainability and street furniture.

xxxv.  Pleased that Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIAs) were being carried out from an early stage and not at the reserved matters stages which tended to be the case.

xxxvi. When looking at the taller buildings in the western sector at the edge of the application it was important that the long-term landscape impacts were being contemplated, such as considering Madingley Hill (as referenced in the presentation) and the American Cemetery.

xxxvii. The height and roofscapes of buildings were of concern. Having different tiers of buildings was important; features in the upper storeys of buildings could have a major impact from a great distance.

xxxviii.The internal street scene was important and should be considered.

xxxix. What access would there be from the northern quarter to the green open spaces at the southern end of the site, and the open spaces of Girton and towards the American Cemetery?

xl.       What noise mitigation methods were being put in place to reduce the noise from the M11, particularly for those properties directly facing the motorway?

xli.      In the presentation reference was made to slip roads and negotiating with Highways England, where would these connections be and how would they impact on through traffic going through Eddington?

xlii.     When looking at the reduction of landscaping the major roads and hierarchy of roads should be considered, the side streets and the sequence of spaces. What was experienced is what was important rather than a blanket reduction across the application?

xliii.    Would recommend returning to the Committee for a final briefing prior to submission, including to enable members to understand the heads of terms put forward for the Section106 agreement.