Agenda item

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for the erection of seven 3 x bed terrace dwellings, along with the conversion and vertical sub-division of No.49 Arbury Road into two houses (1 bed unit and 1 x 2 bed unit), together with eight car parking spaces, cycle parking and associated landscaping (following the demolition of the existing garage buildings on site.

The Applicants Agent spoke in support of the application.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from Mr Aplin.

 The representation covered the following issues:

(i)                 Speaking on behalf of local residents.

(ii)               Whilst the site should be used for housing, the current proposal did not respect neighbouring properties or the residential amenity.

(iii)              Proposal out of character with the suburban area.

(iv)             Overpowering and oppressive design.

(v)               Overshadowing of neighbouring properties.

(vi)             Lack of space for vehicle turning.

The Committee:

Resolved (by 8 votes to 0) to accept the officer recommendation to refuse the application for the following reasons:

1. Currently, 20-28 Leys Road and 51 Arbury Road enjoy a relatively open outlook to the rear of their properties. Due to the proximity of the proposed terrace of houses to the common boundaries and their design, scale and bulk, it is my opinion that the proposed houses would be oppressive and overbearing. Due to the orientation of the buildings they would also overshadow the gardens of 20-28 Leys Road. For these reasons it is my opinion that the proposed development is unacceptable as it would have a significant detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the occupiers of these dwellings, and their ability to enjoy their gardens. The proposals are therefore in conflict with policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan (2006)

2. The proposed roof form, which includes pitched roofs and flat roofs is very unorthodox and the development will be a very alien form in the area. The alterations to the design to reduce its impact on neighbouring properties results in a scheme that would be poorly related to its context and out of character with the area and for these reasons the proposal does not comply with policies 3/4 or 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan (2006).

3. The proposed development does not make appropriate provision for public open space, community development facilities, education and life-long learning facilities, waste facilities, waste management and monitoring in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/7, 3/8, 3/12, 5/5, 5/14, 8/3 and 10/1, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 policies P6/1 and P9/8 and as detailed in the Planning Obligation Strategy 2010, the Open Space Standards Guidance for Interpretation and Implementation 2010, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Waste Partnership (RECAP): Waste Management Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2012

2. In the event that the application is refused, and an Appeal is lodged against the decision to refuse this application, delegated authority is sought to allow officers to negotiate and complete the Planning Obligation required