Agenda item

The Planning Team Leader (East) highlighted a letter dated24 February 2017 and 20 additional letters of objection. She read out a letter from Councillor Simon Edwards (a local Member) that had previously been circulated to Committee members.  In the letter, Councillor Edwards expressed his opposition to the application because of

·        the cumulative effect of additional traffic

·        adverse impact on neighbour amenity, and the setting of the Rampton Road Alms Houses

·        adverse impact on the Conservation Area and open Parkland in Westwick, together with the Grade 2 listed Westwick Hall

·        the impact on highway capacity and safety in the village of Oakington.

·        air pollution

·        Sustainable transport is limited, because the route to the Guided Bus stop in Oakington cannot be reached safely by bicycle as Oakington Road has no safe cycleway, or path, and is a narrow road carrying fast moving traffic. A Section 106 contribution should be sought to fund a cycle path from Cottenham to Oakington, should the application be approved.

Malcolm Dee (objector), Laurie Lane (applicant’s agent), Councillor Frank Morris (Cottenham Parish Council) and Councillors Tim Wotherspoon and Lynda Harford (local Members) addressed the meeting.

Malcolm Dee referred to the impact of increased traffic on the Alms houses, and on the safety of residents. Laurie Lane said that the applicant had listened to previous objections, and taken steps to ensure that there would not be any harm caused to the setting of the Alms houses. He agreed that a requirement to submit a Reserved Matters application within two years would be acceptable. Councillor Morris said that the application would cause significant harm, referring to the site’s rejection as part of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. Concerns included traffic and drainage, as well as harm to the Listed Buildings. Councillor Wotherspoon was concerned about increased traffic, noise, and the implications for air quality. Further concerns related to the size of the roundabout, extent of the signage required, and vibration. Affordable housing must be secured by Section 106 not Condition. Councillor Harford recognised the tensions involved with this application, and the sensitivity needed in balancing the harm and benefit. Councillor Harford made reference to the provision of community transport.

During the ensuing Committee debate, the following points were made:

·        Cotenham had a Village Design Statement

·        The proposal was out of scale

·        The proposed roundabout was over twice the size of the current one

·        There would be an adverse impact on heritage assets

·        The proposal was unsustainable

·        The inability to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply was not the only issue to take into account

·        Traffic and highway implications

·        Key statutory consultees had not objected

Upon the Chairman’s casting vote, there being one abstention, the Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to

1.     A Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing

a.     Affordable Housing

b.     Open Space

c.      Community Facilities

d.     Waste Receptacles

e.     Education contribution

f.       Health contribution

g.     Transport requirements

h.     Surface Water Scheme maintenance

i.       Archaeological Exclusion Zone maintenance

j.       Landscape and Ecological Management Plan for all areas outside private ownership;

2.    The Conditions set out at (a) to (pp) in the report from the Head of Development Management; and

3.   An additional Condition requiring that no more than 200 residential dwellings, including 40% affordable, and 70 dwellings with care be built on this site.