Agenda and draft minutes

Councillor Judith Rippeth sent Apologies for Absence. Councillor Dr. Tumi Hawkins was present as substitute.

1.         Disclosable pecuniary interests (“DPI”)

A  DPI is where a committee member or his/her spouse or partner has any kind of beneficial interest in the land under consideration at the meeting.

 2.        Non-disclosable pecuniary interests

These are interests that are pecuniary involving a  personal financial benefit or detriment but do not come within the definition of a DPI.  An example would be where a member of their family/close friend (who is not their spouse or partner) has such an interest.

3.         Non-pecuniary interests

Where the interest is not one which involves any personal financial benefit or detriment to the Councillor but arises out of a close connection with someone or some  body /association.  An example would be membership of a sports committee/ membership of another council which is involved in the matter under consideration.

Councillor Dr. Martin Cahn declared a non-pecuniary interest in Minute 7 (S/1486/18/FL - Impington (Land to the rear of 49-83 (odds) Impington Lane, Impington, CB24 9NJ)). Councillor Cahn’s wife is a member of Impington Parish Council. Councillor Cahn is a member of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) of which another member would be addressing the meeting as a public speaker.

Councillor Dr. Tumi Hawkins declared a non-pecuniary interest in Minute 9 (S/2866/18/VC - Little Gransden (Land at Gransden Lodge Airfield, Cambridge Gliding Club Ltd,  Gransden Lodge Airfield,  Longstowe Road)). Councillor Hawkins had been present at Parish Council meetings at which this application had been discussed, but was considering the matter afresh.

Councillor Pippa Heylings declared a non-pecuniary interest in Minute 7 (S/1486/18/FL - Impington (Land to the rear of 49-83 (odds) Impington Lane, Impington, CB24 9NJ)). Councillor Heylings had met with residents, the developer and other interested parties about this application but was considering the matter afresh.

Councillor Heather Williams  declared the following non-pecuniary interests

·        Minute 9 (S/2866/18/VC - Little Gransden (Land at Gransden Lodge Airfield, Cambridge Gliding Club Ltd,  Gransden Lodge Airfield,  Longstowe Road)). Four of the parishes affected by the application were located in Councillor Williams’ ward. She had attended meetings of each of those Parish Councils but did not take part in any of the debates.

·        Minute 12 paragraph 5(g) (Enforcement – 147 St. Neots Road, Hardwick). The landlords of no. 147 are also landlords of the neighbouring property, which is the headquarters building of  the political association of which Councillor Williams is Vice-Chairman.

Councillor Nick Wright declared a non-pecuniary interest in Minute 9 (S/2866/18/VC - Little Gransden (Land at Gransden Lodge Airfield, Cambridge Gliding Club Ltd,  Gransden Lodge Airfield,  Longstowe Road)). Councillor Wright had been present at Parish Council meetings at which this application had been discussed but was considering the matter afresh.

Pending the issue of recorded voting at Planning Committee being addressed by the Constitution, Councillor Deborah Roberts proposed that all substantive votes be recorded.

Councillor Nick Wright seconded the proposal and, upon a show of hands, the Committee agreed unanimously that all substantive votes at the current Planning Committee meeting should be recorded by name and / or number and name.

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 October 2018 as a correct record.

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 October 2018 subject to the following:

Minute 2 – Declarations of Interest

In the second paragraph, replace the words “…spoken at…” with the word “…attended…” so that that paragraph now reads as follows:

Regarding Minute 5 (S/1694/18/FL - Wimpole (Wimpole Hall, Wimpole Park, Wimpole Road)) Councillor Heather Williams had attended meetings of Arrington Parish Council about this application.

Minute 7 – S/4555/17/FL – Fowlmere (The Triangle)

Start the third paragraph with the words “Having taken legal advice…” so that that paragraph now reads as follows:

Having taken legal advice, Councillor Deborah Roberts stood down from the Planning Committee for this item, took no part in the debate and did not vote. Councillor Roberts did however address the Planning Committee as the Local member in opposition to the application.

Report from Cambridgeshire County Council as agent for South Cambridgeshire District Council. South Cambridgeshire District Council is the Order Making Authority.

The Planning Committee considered  a report detailing a proposal to divert part of Public Footpath No.5 in Hauxton.

James Stringer, Cambridgeshire County Council’s Asset Information Definitive Map Officer, summarised the legislative and procedural background relating to applications to divert public rights of way, with particular reference to Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. He also referred to an Agreement made in 2007 whereby the County Council would carry out all legal and administrative matters while South Cambridgeshire District Council remained the Order Making Authority. If not diverted, Footpath no. 5 would run through some of the proposed plots and potentially inhibit the developer’s ability to sell the houses on those plots. Mr. Stringer said that design of the diverted route would be considered when finalising the Adoption Agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980.

In response to Members’ questions, Mr. Stringer confirmed that the proposal was to divert Public Footpath no. 5 onto a route following an estate road that would be adopted by the Local Highways Authority. He also confirmed that the proposal would not have any negative impact on utility providers’ apparatus in the vicinity.

Councillor Peter Topping said that matters such as the diversion of public rights of way ought to be resolved at an earlier stage in the overall process.

Councillor Deborah Roberts was minded to refuse the application because it would result in the footpath going through a housing development rather than through the countryside. She said that a stopping-up Order would have been preferable.

The Senior Planning Lawyer reminded the Committee that the housing layout had been approved at an Appeal Hearing.

The Planning Committee resolved, by five votes to four:

1.     That South Cambridgeshire District Council, as Order Making Authority, refuses the application for the proposed diversion of part of Public Footpath No. 5 in Hauxton because such diversion was not deemed necessary to enable development to be carried out; and

2.     That this refusal be reported to Cambridgeshire County Council, in its capacity as agents for South Cambridgeshire District Council,  indicating that an Order be not made.

(Councillors John Batchelor, Cahn, Handley and Hawkins voted to approve the application. Councillors Heylings, Roberts, Topping, Heather Williams and Wright voted to refuse the application. Councillors Fane and Milnes were not present for this item.)

The Committee received and noted a report about the differences between the affordable housing threshold set out in the Local Plan 2018 (in policy H/10 affordable housing), and that in the new National Planning Policy Framework 2018 (NPPF)  and the recommendation that significant weight be given to the national threshold in planning decision making and when planning advice is given.

The Committee agreed that, for the reasons set out in paragraphs 5-16 of the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development, when determining planning applications and when giving pre-application advice that significant weight will be given to the affordable housing threshold policy contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 (at paragraph 63 and in the glossary).

The erection of 26 dwellings with associated access, car and cycle parking, open space and landscaping

Members had previously visited the site on 9 October 2018.

Sue Lee (objector), Nick Parkinson (for the applicant), Councillor Brian Ing (Impington Parish Council) and Councillor Steve Hunt (a local Member) addressed the meeting. Councillor Pippa Heylings also spoke in her capacity as another local Member.

Members engaged in debate and some, but not all,  identified housing mix and the issue of ‘pepper potting affordable housing throughout the development rather than grouping it in one location' as material reasons to refuse the application. There was some support for attributing weight to the emerging Neighbourhood Plan. Members also expressed concerns about public engagument undertaken, the impact on landscape, biodiversity, residenital amenity concerns linked to construction phase, highway safety and drainage.

Members felt that further information/amendments were required, and Councillor Heylings proposed that the application should be deferred with more work to be undertaken. This proposal was seconded by Councillor Deborah Roberts and, by ten votes to one with Councillor Nick Wright voting against, the Committee deferred the application.

The Senior Planning Lawyer informed Members that, in the event of an Appeal being lodged for non-determination, the report would be brought back to Committee to identify what its decision would have been, and its reasons.

Full planning application for the erection of 15 dwellings and associated infrastructure including new landscaping, internal access roads, garages, and parking areas following demolition of existing agricultural buildings along with construction of new access to Pampisford Road.

Members visited the site on 13 November 2018.

The case officer corrected the report. In paragraph 29, the words “…are two trees…” should be replaced with “…is one elm tree…”. In paragraph 99. The words “…on the public open space…” should be deleted.

Stephen McDonnell (objector), Nick Rust (for the applicant), Councillor Bernie Talbot (Great Abbington Parish Council) and Councillor Henry Batchelor (a local Member) addressed the meeting.

Members engaged in debate. They raised the following concerns:

·        The site was outside the village framework

·        Affordable housing issues

·        Conflict with the Local Plan 2018

·        Insignificance of the community benefit under the Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in terms of the number of dwellings proposed

The Planning Team Leader informed the Committee that the Section 106 Agreement complied fully with the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and that the affordable housing cascade provision was district-wide. This second point was cited to counter an earlier suggestion that the fact that the demand for affordable housing in the village had been met should be seen as a material reason for refusal.

By ten votes to nil (with Councillor Milnes abstaining) the Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development. Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being a conflict with Policies S/7 (Development Framework) and S/10 (Group Villages) of the South CambridgeshireLocal Plan 2018, and the need to give weight to the emerging Neighbourhood Plan.

Variation of Condition 4 (Aerotows) 5 (Flying activities) 6 ( Self launching sail planes) 7 (Hours of Operation) 8 (Aerotowing Equipment) of Planning consent S/0607/90/F  for Use as Gliding Club and ancillary purposes

Members visited the site on 13 November 2018.

The case officer referred to continuing correspondence concerning this application. Little Gransden Parish Council now objected to Condition  4. Great Gransden Parish Council (Huntingdonshire) objected to the Variation of Conditions 4, 6, 7 and 8.

A similar application was being presented to Huntingdonshire District Council.

Noushin Rostami (objector), Richard Brickwood (applicant), Councillor Murden (Little Gransden Parish Council) addressed the meeting. Councillor Dr. Tumi Hawkins also spoke in her capacity as local Member.

Members engaged in debate about the various Conditions subject of the application.

The Committee resolved as follows:

Reconfiguration of the public play area to allow for the erection of a single storey nursery building with additional car parking and access road modification

Members visited the site on 13 November 2018.

The case officer reported verbally that a further 16 letters supporting the application had been received since the report had been written.

George Russell (objector), Lynda Harford (agent for Cottenham Parish Council as applicant) and Councillor Frank Morris (Cottenham Parish Council) addressed the meeting. The Chairman read out written statements from Rosemary …… (a community supporter) and from Councillors Neil Gough and Eileen Wilson (the two local Members, who also both supported the application).

Those Committee members minded to support the application nevertheless commended the case officer for clearly stating the policy issues leading to his recommendation of refusal. Councillor Deborah Roberts, who was minded to vote for refusal, also praised the case officer, saying he was quite rightly seeking to protect the Local Green Space. Councillor Roberts said that she could think of no very special circumstance such as to justify approval of the application, and urged the Committee not to set a precedent. 

Councillor Dr. Tumi Hawkins was minded to support the application which, she said, when some way towards mitigating the harmful effects of previous speculative developments permitted at a time when South Cambridgeshire District Council had been unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply. Here was an opportunity to provide the necessary infrastructure at an early stage.

Councillor Heather Williams acknowledged the purpose of the Local Plan but said that the Committee should seek to find very special circumstances in order to approve the application.

Councillor Bill Handley said that the nursery was a much needed facility and would not set a precedent given that every application had to be considered on its own merits.

Councillor Brian Milnes supported the application, suggesting that proximity to the existing school should be viewed as a very special circumstance.

Councillor Peter Topping described the very special circumstance in this instance as being specific to Cottenham.

Councillor Dr. Martin Cahn described the location of the proposed nursery as perfect.

Councillor Peter Fane supported the application by saying it was for the Committee to interpret the meaning of ‘very special circumstances’.

The Planning Team Leader stressed the importance of the Committee being satisfied both that there were very special circumstances and that those very special circumstances outweighed any planning harm. A consideration had to be why the nursery had to be built on this Local Green Space.

The Chairman said that the proposal’s proximity to existing schools should be seen as a very special circumstance, especially in the context of safety and other benefits to the community.

The Senior Planning Lawyer told Members that they had to be satisfied that the sequential test was robust. The Vice-Chairman said that that test was paramount and that the correct process had to be followed. Councillor Pippa Heylings did point out that the Local Green Space in question had already been compromised.

Noting the absence of any objections from statutory consultees, the Committee approved the application by eight votes to one, contrary to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

New Parking Bays

Liam Flatters (Planned Works Surveyor, South Cambridgeshire District Council) addressed the meeting on behalf of the applicant.

The principal issue related to unlawful car parking that had the effect of inhibiting the use of formal parking bays.

By six votes to one, the Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions and Informative set out in the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development, the final wording of which being agreed by officers in consultation with the Committee Chairman and Vice-Chairman prior to the issue of planning permission.

(Councillors John Batchelor, Handley, Hawkins, Heylings, Roberts and Heather Williams voted to approve the application. Councillor Cahn voted to refuse the application. Councillor Fane did not vote. Councillors Milnes, Topping and Wright had previously left the meeting and did not vote.)

The Committee received and noted an Update on enforcement action.    

Members received and noted a report on Appeals against planning decisions and enforcement action.