Agenda item

Erection of a football ground for Cambridge City Football Club and creation of new community recreational space

Appendices 1 – 7 are available online by visiting www.scambs.gov.uk

Click or tap here, and scroll to Item 4 for links to the Appendices

Members visited the site on 31 October 2017.

Councillors David Bard and Kevin Cuffley (local Members for Sawston) retired to the public gallery for the duration of this item. Apart from addressing the Committee as public speakers, Councillors Bard and Cuffley took no part in the debate, and neither did they vote.

With the Committee’s approval, the Chairman appointed Councillor Robert Turner as Vice-Chairman for this agenda item.

The Senior Planning Lawyer told Members that, if they had voted on this application when it was last before Committee in 2014, it was for each of them to decide whether or not to withdraw from the meeting on this occasion. He told them that there was no legal obligation to do so in the context of the Judicial Review of that first Committee resolution. In summary, voting on this application in 2014 did not constitute pre-determination. The Senior Planning Lawyer asked the ten Members considering this item to confirm their status in doing so. Responses were as follows:

The Planning Team Leader (West) updated Members about transportation impact and mitigation, and confirmed that the Local Highways Authority had no objection.  He said that the decision made in 2014 had been quashed at Judicial Review and that, therefore, Members had no alternative but to consider the matter afresh based on the report before them. With that in mind, he highlighted the significance especially of paragraph 70, and reminded Members that they would need to identify very special circumstances should they be minded to vote against the recommendation in the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development. He also reminded them that the application was a departure from the Development Plan.

Meghan Bonner (applicant’s agent), Brian Milnes (community supporter), Councillor Janet Martin (Sawston Parish Council), Councillor Tony Orgee (the local County Councillor,and, speaking only as public speakers, Councillors David Bard and Kevin Cuffley (local Members) addressed the Committee.

Meghan Bonner pointed out that there were no objections from statutory consultees to this application. She described the location as sustainable, and one that did not present any adverse impact. She maintained that that the purpose behind the application was entirely appropriate in the Green Belt, and that very special circumstances existed for granting permission. These included the gifting of land to Sawston Parish Council, the provision of changing rooms, the installation of floodlights, the provision of an entertainment venue, establishment of a woodland walk, and new cycling facilities.

Mr. Milnes (speaking as a member of the public) said that the application would protect the Green Belt and be a benefit to the village. The Parish Council, of which he was a member, would be responsible for maintaining the land gifted to it.

Councillor Janet Martin said the Parish Council would like to see provisions controlling use of the site in such a way and within such times as to minimise any adverse impact for nearby residents.

Councillors David Bard and Kevin Cuffley addressed the meeting as public speakers. Councillor Bard focussed on the site’s function within the Green Belt, and explored the concept of very special circumstances. He pointed out that the land being gifted to Sawston Parish Council would continue to serve the purpose of Green Belt. Councillor Bard identified the main advantages of the application as being the culmination of a very long site search by Cambridge City Football Club, but also to the community. Councillor Cuffley said that the application would result in a significant improvement in appearance. He considered various elements of sustainability, and concluded that the benefits significantly and demonstrably outweighed the harm.

While Councillor Orgee had some concerns about traffic, he supported the application, citing very special circumstances, and the opportunity to enhance the site, previously used for land fill.

Members engaged in a lengthy discussion.

Noting the absence of any objections from statutory consultees, the Committee resolved (by 8 votes in favour and 2 votes against) for the following reasons to approve the application contrary to the recommendation in the report (and Update R

eport) from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development subject to 1 and 2 below 

In resolving to approve the application the majority of Members agreed that the proposed development would amount to inappropriate development in the Green Belt and that such development would be, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

Members agreed that

(a)       there would not be any significant additional harm to the Green Belt over   and above the harm that would be caused by the proposal’s inappropriateness;

(b)       there would be no significant additional harm to the Green Belt or the openness of the Green Belt over and above the harm that would result by reason of the structures and floodlighting proposed by the development;

(c)        there would be limited adverse effect on the countryside and landscape character given the limited public views and its appearance of dereliction;

(d)       the proposed development needs to be located in the countryside given,   what members had heard from the applicant’s agent as to a robust and comprehensive, but unsuccessful, site search conducted over several years and difficulties in finding other suitable sites within existing built-up areas. As such it would not conflict with Policy DP/7 of the Local Development Framework, which provides that outside urban and village frameworks, only development for agriculture, horticulture, forestry, outdoor recreation and other uses which need to be located in the countryside will be permitted;

(e)       the site is not in a location that would result in significant and unsustainable forms of travel for the proposed use, having regard to its connectivity with other settlements and the proposed mitigation by way of a travel plan;

(f)        the identified harm by reason of inappropriateness and the limited additional harm identified above in (b) and (c) would be clearly outweighed by other considerations which collectively would amount to the necessary very special circumstances to support the application being approved. These very special circumstances were  significant community benefits in the form of additional facilities and community access specifically 3.4 ha of recreation ground for community use, with access to changing rooms and floodlit training ground which will help to address the shortfall identified in the Council’s Playing Pitch Strategy 2015-31, a new woodland walk, ecological enhancements with bat and bird nesting boxes, improvements to the local landscape with additional trees and hedgerow planting, improved footpaths and cycleways as well as additional employment opportunities locally

1.               The matter would be referred to the Secretary of State as a Departure from the Development Plan in so far as the proposed development would amount to inappropriate development in the Green Belt and is therefore contrary to Policy GB/1 of the Council’s Development Control Policies 2007.

2.               The Conditions attached to the earlier Decision Notice issued following determination of the application in 2014 and as an Appendix to the current report, would be modified as deemed appropriate in the light of information already received and considered by officers and the proposed condition in the Update Report.