Agenda item

The Town Council have objected to the proposals; and Officers consider, having consulted with the Chair and Vice Chair, that the proposals should be reported to Committee due to the significance of the proposals, in the context of the wider development of West Cambourne

By affirmation, the Committee approved the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation as laid out in the report to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development. This approval was from application 22/04785/REM, subject to conditions set out in the report with delegated authority granted to undertake appropriate minor amendments to the conditions and/or informatives (and include others considered appropriate and necessary) prior to issue of the permission. The approval also approved the part discharge of the outline planning conditions 5, 8, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of S/2903/14/OL in so far as they relate to application 22/04785/REM, as laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Senior Planner (Strategic Sites Team) presented the report. In response to questions from the Committee, officers:

• Offered explanation regarding the proposed distribution of affordable housing and the work undertaken with the Housing Development Officer.

• Confirmed that the parking provision was considered to be acceptable and detailed why officers had formed this view.

• Provided clarity over the access to the site.

• Informed the Committee that the Cambourne West site had a sustainability strategy included as part of the Outline consent and that the proposal was compliant with the sustainability strategy for the wider development.

• Made reference to conditions to explain that an electric vehicle charge point plan was to be submitted to secure the details of electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

• In response to concerns over management companies, informed the Committee that the Highways Authority was to adopt the roads, with Cambourne Town Council would adopt green space and other management responsibilities.

The Committee was addressed by the agent of the applicant, Susie Hartas, who responded to a number Member questions. The agent informed the Committee that landscaping works would be ongoing throughout the development process, confirmed the number of storeys in larger buildings and confirmed that affordable houses were M(42) compliant and the levels of provision were higher than policy requirements. Further questions were asked with regard to management companies and the agent advised that decisions regarding the use of private management companies had not been made; officers advised, in response to Member comments, that a condition regarding management companies would be inappropriate to implement at the Reserved Matters stage.

Prior to the commencement of the debate, the Interim Delivery Manager advised that the Recommendation on the front page of the report (approve 22/02785/RMA) was incorrect, and that the Recommendation as referred to in paragraph 10 was correct (approve 22/04785/REM).

In the debate, Members stated that there were no reasons for refusal and noted the work undertaken between the developers and officers to produce an acceptable proposal. Comment was made on building height appearances and the need to ensure that sustainability measures utilise the best available technology. Whilst noting that the proposed use of management companies was not relevant to the application, Members raised general concern about reliance on management companies and expressed a desire to see future Local Plans include policies to mitigate concerns about management companies.

Councillor Peter Fane, seconded by Councillor Bill Handley, proposed that the Committee move to a vote. The recommendation was clarified by the Senior Planning Lawyer.

By affirmation, the Committee agreed to the officer’s recommendation and:

(i)             Approved application 22/04785/REM subject to the planning conditions, as laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development, with authority delegated to officers to undertake appropriate minor amendments to the conditions and/or informatives (and include others considered appropriate and necessary) prior to issue of the permission.

(ii)            Approved the part discharge of the outline planning conditions 5, 8, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of S/2903/14/OL in so far as they relate to application 22/04785/REM, as laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development