A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Decision register

Decisions

Decisions published

30/01/2019 - Draft Pay Policy Statement 2019/20 and Implementation of 2019 Pay Award ref: 4869    Recommendations Approved

To consider a draft Pay Policy Statement 2019/20

Decision Maker: Civic Affairs

Made at meeting: 30/01/2019 - Civic Affairs

Decision published: 08/02/2019

Effective from: 30/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Head of Human Resources.

 

The report set out a draft pay policy statement as required under the Localism Act. The Localism Act requires the Council to have considered, approved and published a pay policy statement for each financial year. This must be approved by Full Council and be in place by 31March each year.

 

In response to the report Councillors welcomed the apprentice scheme and commented that the City Council offered better rates of pay for apprentices than other organisations.

 

The Head of Human Resources said the following in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  Trade Unions were supportive of the pay proposals.

  ii.  GMB had previously responded to the proposals. Unison’s position on the consultation in the Officer’s report was now known.

 

Unanimously resolvedto:

  i.  Recommend to Council the draft Pay Policy Statement 2019/20 attached as Appendix 1.

  ii.  Note the position on the consultation with Unison members on the proposed pay scale changes, and to receive an update at the Civic Affairs meeting.

  iii.  Recommend to Council the proposal to introduce the proposed changes to the Council’s pay scale with effect from April 2019, attached in Appendix 2 of the Officer’s report and to delegate authority to the Head of Human Resources to implement the changes to the Council’s pay scale.

  iv.  Agree the renaming of the previous grade of JNC1 as ‘Head of Service’.

Lead officer: Deborah Simpson


30/01/2019 - Local Government Pension Scheme - Employers Discretions ref: 4870    Recommendations Approved

Committee recommended:

·  To approve the proposed policy statement on employer discretions.

·  To authorise the Head of Human Resources to determine decisions relating to the merits of individual cases.

·  That Council officers will continue to review the statement every 3 years and / or in line with changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) as advised by the Local Government Pensions Committee (LGPC) and the Administering Authority (Cambridgeshire County Council), and any recommended changes will go before Civic Affairs for approval.

Decision Maker: Civic Affairs

Made at meeting: 30/01/2019 - Civic Affairs

Decision published: 08/02/2019

Effective from: 30/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Support Services Manager.

 

The paper outlined Cambridge City Council’s proposed policy statement on Employer Discretions for the Local Government Pension Scheme.

 

In response to Councillor Robertson’s question the Support Services Manager said the discretions policy was in-line with other Local Authorities in the Cambridgeshire area that we were aware of.

 

Unanimously resolved:

  i.  To approve the proposed policy statement on employer discretions (Appendix A of the Officer’s report).

  ii.  To authorise the Head of Human Resources to determine decisions relating to the merits of individual cases.

  iii.  That Council Officers will continue to review the statement every 3 years and / or in line with changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme as advised by the Local Government Pensions Committee and the Administering Authority (Cambridgeshire County Council), and any recommended changes will go before Civic Affairs for approval.

Lead officer: Karl Tattam


30/01/2019 - Ernst & Young Audit Plan ref: 4868    Recommendations Approved

To receive the 2018-19 Ernst and Young Audit Plan.

Decision Maker: Civic Affairs

Made at meeting: 30/01/2019 - Civic Affairs

Decision published: 08/02/2019

Effective from: 30/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Ernst & Young External Auditor.

 

The Audit Planning report from Ernst & Young summarised the strategy for the audit of the financial statements and the associated value for money conclusion for 2018/19. The External Auditor confirmed the financial statements were sound and that Ernst and Young had no concerns about the council’s value for money.

 

The following was said in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  Ernst & Young External Auditor:The Cambridge Live fee range in the Officer’s report was an estimate that may vary once Ernst & Young had reviewed Cambridge Live figures. The report was written before the decision was made to bring Cambridge Live back in-house.

  ii.  Head of Finance: Before leaving Charity Main had been diligent in her hand over of notes and knowledge to colleagues in the Finance Department. The Head of Finance would review the situation to mitigate risks of an experienced officer leaving, but no issues were expected. The Interim Deputy Head of Finance was experienced in this area.

  iii.  Head of Finance: Wished to reassure Committee that whilst bringing Cambridge Live back in-house was a risk, a number of officers were supporting the hand over. The Head of Finance was overseeing arrangements but not all of these were under the Council’s control.

 

Councillor Robertson said the Council would apply appropriate financial systems.

 

Unanimously resolvedto note the contents of the external audit plan.

Lead officer: Charity Main


30/01/2019 - 2018-19 Statement of Accounts - Accounting Policies and Significant Areas of Judgement ref: 4867    Recommendations Approved

To note areas of significant judgement and approve any required changes in accounting policy.

Decision Maker: Civic Affairs

Made at meeting: 30/01/2019 - Civic Affairs

Decision published: 08/02/2019

Effective from: 30/01/2019

Decision:

The committee received a report from the Interim Deputy Head of Finance. 

 

The Audit and Accounts Regulations govern the preparation, approval and publication of local authority accounts. For the 2018/19 financial year there was a requirement for the Chief Financial Officer (Section 151) of the Council to approve draft unaudited accounts by the 31 May and for the audited accounts to be approved by Civic Affairs by 31 July.

 

The Independent Person submitted a written statement:

It would be helpful to hear from Ernst & Young that all of the areas mentioned in Caroline's covering report for item 5 will be addressed through their work.

 

I can see that some areas are picked up but wasn't sure about Cambridge Live and Clay Farm.

 

The Interim Deputy Head of Finance said all of the areas mentioned in the covering report would be addressed through Ernst & Young’s work.

 

Councillor Robertson sought clarification on the issues discussed during the 2017/18 audit with Ernst and Young, which would still be relevant in the current financial year. The Interim Deputy Head of Finance said that mainly they would and that Cambridge Investment Partnership, Clay Farm Community Centre, Business Rates Appeals Provision, Cambridge Live and Future Events were significant areas of judgement and change for 2018/19.

 

Unanimously resolved to note and approve the proposed presentational changes, accounting policies and significant areas of accounting judgement in relation to the 2018/19 Statement of Accounts.

Lead officer: Charity Main


30/01/2019 - Waste Complaints April - October 2018 ref: 4871    Recommendations Approved

To discuss amount of complaints made relating to the waste service.

Decision Maker: Civic Affairs

Made at meeting: 30/01/2019 - Civic Affairs

Decision published: 08/02/2019

Effective from: 30/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Head of Shared Waste and Business Development Manager.

 

The Officer’s report provided an analysis of complaints made relating to the council regarding waste services during the period of April – December 2018.

 

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

  i.  The complaints logging system needed to be clear what was a complaint and what was a comment. Partly because some feedback could be classified as a comment or a complaint. Also to avoid the council being criticised for situations outside of its control.

  ii.  Ward Councillors picked up low level grumblings that were not reported to the Waste Service such as empty bins being left on pavements.

 

The Head of Shared Waste and Business Development Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  The Council logged customer feedback as a complaint or comment in accordance with residents’ wishes. The system asked residents to clarify if they were making a compliment, comment or complaint. Usually more complaints were logged than compliments (these were usually given verbally).

  ii.  Various systems were consolidated in 2018 to log responses through different communication methods (email, phone etc) in one place. This led to a spike in complaints recorded (but no change in the actual number received (9181 of the Officer’s report)) as customer contacts were now formally being logged in one system, when they were not always done so before.

  iii.  Issues could be tracked and escalated if customers were not satisfied with responses.

  iv.  The system provided clear information on issues and responses. The same information could be shared with residents and bin crews to give them real time updates.

  v.  The system was being streamlined so residents could report issues at their convenience.

  vi.  Issues beyond the council’s control could lead to resident’s complaints such as blocked roads or bad weather preventing bin collections.

 vii.  Blocked roads were an issue for both city and South Cambridgeshire areas.

viii.  The triage team monitored residents’ feedback and filtered the feedback to ensure it had appropriate headings. Occasionally ‘complaints’ may be changed to ‘service requests’ etc.

  ix.  Officers asked that all issues (complaints, comments and compliments) were reported to the Waste Service so trends could be monitored and reported. The service responded to trends by training lorry crews to work better with residents. For example 130 staff had just been trained about bin placement.

  x.  The complaints report covered waste collection issues from residents and businesses. The system did not currently break figures down to ward level, as the service was built on collection rounds and some of these crossed over wards. It would be possible to provide data based on collection days. . It might be possible to manually produce ward level issue reports for councillors upon request, but this would be time consuming. Officers would explore whether the ICT system might be able to break figures down to ward level in future.

  xi.  Streets and Open Spaces, Waste and Housing Services had the highest number of complaints across the City Council. These could be reported back to Councillor O’Connell in more detail after committee if she wished.

 xii.  The underground waste collection system used in the Eddington (North West Cambridge) Development has been well received. Officers were reviewing if similar underground collection systems could be used on other new developments in future. This was more straight forward than retrofitting existing developments.

 

The Executive Councillor for Environmental Services and City Centre addressed the Committee:

  i.  The number of recorded complaints had increased. This was due to the new reporting system.

  ii.  Referred to report p181. The service had increased the number of successful collections to over 99.8%.

  iii.  The position of bins was regularly commented on. Crews had to take bins long distances from homes to where bins could be emptied. The number of complaints was low in comparison to the number of collections made.

  iv.  The reporting system did not register the number of verbal compliments given to crews on their rounds. There were more happy residents than the report figures suggested.

 

Unanimously resolvedto note the contents of the Officer’s report.

Lead officer: Tony Stead


28/01/2019 - Minutes ref: 4861    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Licensing Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2019 - Licensing Committee

Decision published: 07/02/2019

Effective from: 28/01/2019

Decision:

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 October 2018 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.


28/01/2019 - Annual Review of Licensing Fees and Charges 2018-19 ref: 4859    For Determination

To agree and adopt the revised table of fees for Licensing.

Decision Maker: Licensing Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2019 - Licensing Committee

Decision published: 07/02/2019

Effective from: 28/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Environmental Health Manager.

 

The report advised Cambridge City Council, as the Licensing Authority, was responsible for processing and issuing licences for a wide range of activities.

 

The Council needed to demonstrate that the fees it charged for such licences had been set in accordance with the law and best practice, so as to recover its allowable costs in administering the various licensing regimes for which it was responsible.

 

Fees should be set to avoid either a surplus or a subsidy where possible and adjusted, if necessary, in succeeding years to achieve and maintain the correct balance.

 

The Officer’s report set out the revised fees and charges for licences and associated items, which it was proposed should be made with effect from 1 April 2019.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Environmental Health Manager said the following:

  i.  Skin piercing fees were omitted in error from the Officer’s report (para 3.8). They would rise by 2% in-line with other charges.

  ii.  Fees were put up some years ago as the council was not covering its costs.

  iii.  The council was generally covering its costs currently (eg taxi committee hearings). Officers were looking at where the council could charge fees, now and in future, based on case law. In the meantime, 2% seemed viable for this year.

  iv.  A number of fees were set nationally by Central Government, so the council was lobbying to set these locally as they were areas where the council was not covering costs.

 

The Committee:

Resolved (unanimously) to approvethe level of fees and charges with effect from 1 April 2019, as set out in Appendix A of the Officer’s report, and to request officers to communicate the charges to the businesses, taxi trade and public.

Lead officer: Vickie Jameson


28/01/2019 - Review and Update of the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy ref: 4860    Recommendations Approved

To consider proposals for the amendment of the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy.

Decision Maker: Licensing Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2019 - Licensing Committee

Decision published: 07/02/2019

Effective from: 28/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Environmental Health Manager.

 

The report advised under the powers conferred to Cambridge City Council under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, (as amended), Cambridge City Council has responsibility for licensing Hackney Carriage, Private Hire and Dual Licence Drivers as well as vehicle proprietors and Private Hire Operators within the City.

 

The Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing policy (the ‘policy’) was produced in order to provide the Council, its officers, the trade and the public with appropriate guidelines that put the Council’s licensing requirements into practice in a clear and transparent manner. In exercising its discretion in carrying out its regulatory functions, the Council shall have regard to the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing policy document.

 

The policy was last updated in July 2018, following a review and consultation with the trade and members of the public.

 

Since the policy has come into effect, the Licensing Authority has committed to amending its formal data sharing arrangements in relation to revoked and refused drivers, via the new NR3 National Anti-Fraud Network.

 

There has additionally been a request from the trade to require all

Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicles to carry a card payment method and accept debit/credit card payments.

 

It was proposed to renumber the Section entitled ‘Part 5: Enforcement’ in the Index, to reflect previous changes to sections within the main document.

 

Permission was sought from members to go out to consult on the proposed changes to the policy.

 

The Committee received a representation from Mr Vines, Cambridge Licensed Taxis.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Welcomed the report.

  ii.  Wanted credit card machines in vehicles, and stickers on display to show that card payments could be taken.

  iii.  Cambridge Licensed Taxi vehicles took card payments already, some other organisations did not, which confused customers.

  iv.  Customers would have the option to pay by card or cash.

 

The Committee then debated the Officer’s report.

 

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

  i.  Reducing the amount of cash in taxis would increase drivers’ safety.

  ii.  Welcomed card payment facilities. These reflected the trend towards a cashless society. Customers used a variety of technology to pay such as their mobile phones. Electronic payments avoided payment disputes as there was a clear audit trail unlike handing over cash.

 

In response to Members’ questions Mr Vines said the following:

  i.  Drivers could still be given tips by passengers. The amount could be added to journey payments and would go to drivers. They would not lose out through machine service charges. The trade would absorb card service costs and not pass them onto customers.

 

Councillor Pippas said it was illegal for service suppliers to pass on credit card surcharges to customers. Customers would pay the amount on the meter.

 

  ii.  Customers could make payments within 30 seconds through a variety of methods such as contactless, signature or chip and pin.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Environmental Health Manager said she was unaware of other local authorities introducing a similar (voluntary) scheme. Certainly not ones neighbouring Cambridge. She would check this.

 

The Committee:

Resolved (unanimously) to approve that officers go out to consult on the proposed changes to the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy, using the form within Appendix C of the Officer’s report. The results of the consultation would then be presented at the next full meeting of the Licensing Committee in July 2019.


14/01/2019 - Environmental Report - SAC ref: 4857    Recommendations Approved

Actions taken by the environmental departments, reporting on private/public realm data and priority setting.

Decision Maker: South Area Committee

Made at meeting: 14/01/2019 - South Area Committee

Decision published: 05/02/2019

Effective from: 14/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a report from the Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement. She brought the report up to date by stating a typographical error incorrectly listed the reporting period as February-July instead of June-November.

 

The report outlined an overview of City Council Refuse and Environment and Streets and Open Spaces service activity relating to the geographical area served by the South Area Committee.  The report identifies the reactive and proactive service actions undertaken in the previous year, including the requested priority targets and reports back on the recommended issues and associated actions to be targeted in the following period.  It also includes key officer contacts for the reporting of waste and refuse and public realm issues

 

The following were suggestions for members on what action could be considered for priority within the South Area for the upcoming period.

 

Number

Priority details

1

Enforcement targeted approach to areas where Addenbrookes site joins residential areas such as Hills Road and Red Cross Lane and to work with Addenbrookes to work towards the bus station area being cleaned up.

2

Enforcement to work with the County Council, against utilities and companies that damage the verge on Mowbray and Fendon Road.

3

Enforcement action to deal with bins left on pavements in Anstey Way.

 

The Committee discussed the following issues:

  i.  Needle finds in Trumpington.

 

Action Point: Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement to inform Councillor O’Connell if needle find figures (report P10) had increased or decreased in Tumpington.

 

  ii.  The sharp decline in dry recycling and composting figures.

 

Action Point: Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement to ask Waste Recycling Manager to liaise with Councillor Taylor concerning decline in dry recycling and composting figures.

 

  iii.  Area between Cherry Hinton Road and Rustat Road required cleaning. As did Hills Road slip road between Queen Edith’s Way and Nightingale Avenue.

 

Action Point: Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement to advice Streets and Open Spaces Community Engagement Team of street cleaning issues:

·  Between Cherry Hinton Road and Rustat Road.

·  On Hills Road slip road between Queen Edith’s Way and Nightingale Avenue.

 

  iv.  By-laws may limit possible actions that could be taken against people who parked on verges.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement said the following:

  i.  There was a new team called the Streets and Open Spaces Community Engagement Team (formerly the City Rangers).  The team would work with residents in future. Issues could be reported:

a.  On-line.

b.  To the Customer Access Centre.

c.  To Rangers directly.

  ii.  There has been no change to Ranger numbers or contact details. The South Area Ranger had experienced problems with his phone, so he had not received some messages from residents.

  iii.  Central Government decriminalised leaving bins on the pavement where they could be obstructions. The City Council now had to go through a complicated process to take enforcement action. This required the Council to review the cost/benefit of taking action.

 

Action Point: Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement to advice Councillor Taylor which Public Realm Enforcement Officer will be responsible in future for Anstey Way (when appointed).

 

Councillors queried if priority 3 in the Officer’s report was required.

 

Action Point: Councillors Thornburrow and O’Connell to liaise with Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement to determine if priority (iii) was still required: Enforcement action to deal with bins left on pavements in Anstey Way.

 

Following discussion, Members unanimously resolved to approve priorities for action as follows:

  i.  Enforcement targeted approach to areas where Addenbrookes site joins residential areas such as Hills Road and Red Cross Lane and to work with Addenbrookes to work towards the bus station area being cleaned up.

  ii.  Enforcement to work with the County Council, against utilities and companies that damage the verge on Mowbray and Fendon Road.

Lead officer: Wendy Young


14/01/2019 - South Area Committee Dates 2019/20 ref: 4856    Recommendations Approved

The Committee is asked to agree the SAC dates for 2019/20.

Decision Maker: South Area Committee

Made at meeting: 14/01/2019 - South Area Committee

Decision published: 05/02/2019

Effective from: 14/01/2019

Decision:

The following dates were agreed unanimously:

·  22/07/19

·  09/09/19 subject to review and future agreement by committee

·  09/12/19

·  09/03/20

 

Action Point: Committee to confirm if they would meet 9 September 2019 or another date.

 

Post meeting note: Previous query about date has been withdrawn. Councillors raised no objections so South Area Committee to go ahead 9 September 2019 as proposed.

Lead officer: James Goddard


09/01/2019 - 18/0879/S73 - The Cottage Gazeley Road ref: 4848    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a S73 application to a vary condition of permission application 16/2040/FUL.

 

The application sought approval for a S73 application to vary conditions 2 (approved drawings) and 6 (obscure glazing) of permission 16/2040/FUL (Erection of dwelling and creation of new vehicular access) to allow removal of approved basement, removal of the approved integrated garage and proposed replacement garage, bike store and bin store, proposed dormer window, non-obscured glazing on upper floor windows, additional tree planting along northern boundary, and associated internal and external alterations.

 

The Planner updated her report to introduce a new condition requiring the submission of sedum roof details.

 

Dr Wickham (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolvedto grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers plus an additional condition requiring sedum roof details as follows:

10. Prior to construction of the garage, details of the proposed sedum roof shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be thereafter in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the sedum roof will provide adequate surface water drainage (Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 31 and 32).

Wards affected: Trumpington;

Lead officer: Mairead O'Sullivan


09/01/2019 - 18/1625/FUL - Land To Rear Of 53-55 Wulfstan Way ref: 4849    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for the erection of three dwellings and provision of access.

 

The Senior Planner updated his report by stating reference to the 2006 Local Plan should be discounted from conditions.

 

Councillor Thornburrow proposed an amendment to the Officer’s report to include an informative that wildlife access gaps should be included in garden boundary treatments.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolvedto grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers plus additional informative added regarding wildlife gaps in fences and the removal of references to the previous Local Plan policies from conditions to 3 to 8 and substituting as appropriate to those comparable policies of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.

Wards affected: Queen Edith's;

Lead officer: Lewis Tomlinson


09/01/2019 - 18/1120/FUL - 8 Coldhams Grove ref: 4851    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for a change of use to a 9 bed HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) erection of a bin/bike store, and erection of a single storey rear extension.

 

Mr Li (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolvedto grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

Wards affected: Romsey;

Lead officer: Lewis Tomlinson


09/01/2019 - 18/1459/S73 - Land to the Rear of 1 Fen Road and Rear of 179-183 Water Street ref: 4852    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a Section 73 application to vary a condition of permission to application 17/0675/FUL.

 

The application sought approval to vary condition 2 (approved drawings) of permission 17/0675/FUL (demolition of existing garages and erection of three 2bed dwellings with associated landscaping and access arrangements) to permit increase of building height due to site conditions.

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Referred to objections on the public file.

  ii.  Expressed concern that the original application had been given planning permission as this set a new precedent for heights of developments in the area as it was higher than neighbouring properties.

  iii.  The S73 application had been made after neighbours complained that 17/0675/FUL was not being built according to permission given.

  iv.  Queried why the Building Control Department had not realised the property was being built to a higher level than expected and taken enforcement action such as requiring the roof be redesigned to reduce the building height.

  v.  Queried why the building was put on a higher level instead of removing some of the earth before foundations were put in, as neighbours had done.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 8 votes to 1) to grant the Section 73 application permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

Wards affected: East Chesterton;

Lead officer: Mairead O'Sullivan


09/01/2019 - 17/2050/FUL - 64 Coleridge Road and Land to the Rear of 62 and 60 Coleridge Road ref: 4853    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for the erection of 2no. houses to the rear of site. First floor side and rear extension to main house. Conversion of house to 1no. 3-bed and 1no. 1-bed flat.

 

The Planner corrected a typographical error in her report (agenda P108):

0.18 I am satisfied that the revised plans are accurate. The removal of the loft conversion and amendments to make the plans accurate has resulted in a minor increase decrease to scale, bulk and massing of the extensions to the host dwelling.

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Took issue with the Planner’s view that “on balance” the application was acceptable.

  ii.  The amount of development was unacceptable in the proposed space/area. It was too dense, complex and overdevelopment of the site.

  iii.  Queried if the application met amenity space requirements in the new Local Plan.

  iv.  Expressed concern about:

a.  Access to the site (for people and bin collections). Also the impact of this on amenity space.

b.  Loss of privacy.

c.  A car free development was impractical due to the lack of local public transport.

 

Councillor Herbert (Coleridge Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  7 sets of drawings had been received for the site as part of planning applications over 2 years.

  ii.  Councillor Herbert had received 200 emails in response to the 7 sets of drawings. He had expressed concerns about these to the Planning Department.

  iii.  The Council was working to the new Local Plan. The application appeared to have been considered against policies in the previous 2006 Local Plan. Suggested the development did not meet accessibility and amenity space requirements in the new Cambridge Local Plan.

  iv.  The development was not sustainable. By being car free, it also stopped families and disabled people buying properties on the site.

  v.  Families and disabled people would be interested in 3 bedroom properties, but access issues restricted emergency services and potential property owners who needed cars or buggies. There was no sensible way for people to get from their homes to the road (the access route was too small for the number of new/existing properties on-site).

  vi.  The Council supported car free developments. However it was impractical for this application. There was no reliable public transport nearby and property owners in Coleridge needed access to cars.

 vii.  Expressed concern that the application would set a poor precedent for further back garden developments.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application.

 

Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendation for the following reasons:

1.  The proposed access to the house to the rear would generate unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance, through activities including movement of bikes and bins, and deliveries, to the future occupiers of the 2 proposed flats and to the neighbouring property at 66 Coleridge Road which would result in a poor level of amenity for the residents of the flats and adjoining property. This would be contrary to policy 52 and 57 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.

2.  The proposed flats would introduce additional built form in close proximity to the two roof lights in the neighbouring dwelling, no 62 Coleridge Road, this would result in an unacceptable degree of overshadowing and consequent loss of light to the living room of this dwelling and would unacceptable harm the amenities of this dwelling. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies 53 and 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan (2018).

Wards affected: Coleridge;

Lead officer: Mairead O'Sullivan


09/01/2019 - 18/1372/CAP18 - Mill Road Bridge ref: 4854    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received an application for prior approval under Part 18 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (GPDO).

 

The application sought approval for construction of new gated east side stairway from Mill Road to provide access to train drivers walkway, including alterations to arches 5 and 6 to facilitate new sidings, walkway and passive provision for Chisholm Trail.

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Supported the work being undertaken. Work needed to be done on the railway and Chisholm Trail.

  ii.  Expressed concern about details of the work programme and communication about it.

  iii.  Had followed progress to date.

  iv.  His concerns were available on the public file. They had not been addressed. Requested details to respond to these.

 

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

 

Mr Davies addressed the Committee in support of the application. He spoke as the County Council Officer delivering the Chisholm Trail. Network Rail were happy to accommodate the Chisholm Trail and deliver part of it as part of this planning application.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolved to grant the application for prior approval in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report.

Lead officer: Rebecca Wilding


09/01/2019 - 18/0859/S73 - 34-36 Madingley Road ref: 4855    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The Committee received a Section 73 application.

 

The application sought approval to vary condition 2 (approved drawings of ref no: 17/0172/FUL (erection of a residential apartment development to be arranged within two blocks comprising of 10 x 2 bed units and 6 x 1 bed units along with car and cycle parking, hard and soft landscaping following the demolition of the existing buildings on the site) to include changes to the basement layout, introduction of roof lights, increase in height of block (370mm), alterations to windows on second floor units, and changes to the appearance of the east and west elevations.

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Additional height would add to the impact of the building.

  ii.  Proposed density would impact amenity of neighbours.

  iii.  Additional windows would result in overlooking.

  iv.  Plant in basement would produce a noise nuisance.

  v.  Other developments in the area had already had a visual impact on the skyline.

  vi.  Requested mitigation such as frosted glazing and additional green measures, such as a hanging garden.

 

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

 

The Committee noted the amendment sheet.

 

Members expressed concerned about disabled access and reduced designated disabled parking.

 

The Legal Adviser reminded Members that this was a Section 73 application and that they could only determine what was before them today.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0 and 3 abstentions) to grant the application for Section 73 permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.

Wards affected: Castle;

Lead officer: Lewis Tomlinson


09/01/2019 - Minutes ref: 4858    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning

Made at meeting: 09/01/2019 - Planning

Decision published: 29/01/2019

Effective from: 09/01/2019

Decision:

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2019 and 3 December 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.