Agenda, decisions and minutes

In connection with Minute 5 (Uttlesford Local Plan Consultation), Councillors David Bard and Kevin Cuffley declared non-pecuniary interests because they had been present, as observers only, at a meeting of a group contesting Uttlesford District Council’s draft Local Plan. Councillor David Bard also attended a meeting of parish council Chairmen along with Councillor Rolfe, Leader of  Uttlesford District Council, and his senior planning officer.

In connection with Minute 7 (Heritage Guardianship Sites), Councillors David Bard and Kevin Cuffley declared non-pecuniary interests because they had been involved in various discussions relating to the Sawston Tannery Drying Shed.

The Planning Portfolio Holder signed, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 25 August 2017, subject to the following amendment:

Minute 3 (South Cambridgeshire Local Plan - Review of Local Green Space following the Inspector’s interim findings)

Deletion of the sentence “There was some debate as to where the frontage was in fact” and insertion of the text “Members noted that the frontage might be used to widen the cycle way being promoted by the Greater Cambridge Partnership. However, it would nevertheless continue to provide protection.” The paragraph would thus read as follows:

“With regard to Fen Ditton, the Principal Planning Policy Officer said that a ‘frontage’ had value. Members noted that the frontage might be used to widen the cycle way being promoted by the Greater Cambridge Partnership. However, it would nevertheless continue to provide protection.  The Planning Policy Manager assured Members that the removal of Local Green Space designation did not automatically render a site suitable for development.”

The Planning Portfolio Holder agreed  that a consultation response be submitted based upon paragraphs 18-25 of this report.

The Planning Portfolio Holder considered a report on the draft Central Bedfordshire District Council Local Plan (Regulation 18) consultation.

The Principal Planning Policy Officer summarised the background to the Local Plan, and highlight the main implications for South Cambridgeshire and, in particular, Gamlingay. Councillors Sebastian Kindersley and Bridget Smith had been consulted in their capacities as local Members for Gamlingay. Their concern was to mitigate any increased traffic pressure on the village, and to protect countryside views as much as possible.

Councillor Anna Bradnam emphasised the need to ensure the supply of fresh water to the proposed settlement at Tempsford. In reply, the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development gave an assurance that Central Bedfordshire District Council would liaise in the usual way with Anglian Water so that the question of infrastructure could be dealt with in a strategic manner. In response to a further question from Councillor Bradnam, the Portfolio Holder considered it unlikely that there would be an increased traffic impact on Gamlingay, even if people lived in Tempsford and travelled to work in Cambridge.

The Planning Portfolio Holder agreed that a consultation response be submitted based upon paragraphs 18-25 of this report.

The Planning Portfolio Holder agreed that a consultation response be submitted based upon the following:

“Huntingdonshire are consulting on their draft Local Plan between the 4^th July and 4.30pm on the 25^th August. They intend to consult again in late 2017 on a Proposed Submission Local Plan and submit their plan for examination in March 2018. The plan includes strategic scale developments at Alconbury to the north of Huntingdon and at St Neots East. The plan proposes sites to meet all of the objectively assessed housing need in the district. Overall its draft policies and proposals are considered to be an appropriate response to the planning challenges affecting Huntingdonshire insofar as it affects South Cambridgeshire. The plan is also considered to be consistent with the agreed duty to cooperate documents relating to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough area.” (paragraph 10 of the report)

The Planning Portfolio Holder considered a report on the draft Huntingdonshire District Council Local Plan (Regulation 18) consultation.

Councillor Anna Bradnam referred to paragraph 12 in the report, and highlighted the importance of addressing the cumulative impact on the A428 of various developments, including Cambourne West and, potentially, a new village at Bourn Airfield. In response, the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development said that a spatial strategy had been designed based on both these developments, which had both been allocated in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. And although the Cambourne West development would be more extensive than that envisaged by the Local Plan, South Cambridgeshire District Council officers were satisfied that any increased impact was unlikely to be significant.

The Planning Portfolio Holder agreed that a consultation response be submitted based upon the following:

“Huntingdonshire are consulting on their draft Local Plan between the 4^th July and 4.30pm on the 25^th August. They intend to consult again in late 2017 on a Proposed Submission Local Plan and submit their plan for examination in March 2018. The plan includes strategic scale developments at Alconbury to the north of Huntingdon and at St Neots East. The plan proposes sites to meet all of the objectively assessed housing need in the district. Overall its draft policies and proposals are considered to be an appropriate response to the planning challenges affecting Huntingdonshire insofar as it affects South Cambridgeshire. The plan is also considered to be consistent with the agreed duty to cooperate documents relating to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough area.” (paragraph 10 of the report)

The Planning Portfolio Holder agreed that a consultation response be submitted on the draft Uttlesford Local Plan based upon paragraphs 15-35 of this report, taking account of agreed modifications and additions concerning transport,  the North Uttlesford Garden Community start date, build-out rates, water supply and disposal, and ‘rat running’.

 The Planning Portfolio Holder considered a report on the draft Uttlesford District Council Local Plan (Regulation 18) consultation.

The Principal Planning Policy Officer reported that officers had met with Parish Councils on 23 August 2017, and that the proposed response could usefully add a number of points which had emerged from that meeting, including

·       reference to whether a start date in 2021/22 for the North Uttlesford Garden Community (NUGC) was deliverable

·        boosting the report concerning village rat running

·       giving more emphasis to implications for the Parkway station at Whittlesford

·       noting possible impacts on Saffron Walden during the long build out phase of the NUGC

·       referencing the need for high quality public transport links to key local destinations.

The Principal Planning Policy Officer drew attention to a letter from Uttlesford District Council dated 24 August 2017 concerning that Council’s emerging Local Plan. He summarised its contents, noting that it had already been circulated to the Portfolio Holder, Opposition Spokesmen and Scrutiny and Overview Committee Monitors. 

Officers summarised the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development.

The Planning Portfolio Holder referred to paragraph 8 of the report, and expressed empathy with the challenges being faced by Uttlesford District Council in its efforts to bring forward a sound Local Plan.

Councillor Tony Orgee (local Member for the Abingtons) thanked officers for their contribution to this process, and addressed the Portfolio Holder. He made the following points:

·       He had concerns about the supply of fresh water

·       Referring to paragraph 33, it should be emphasised that South Cambridgeshire District Council was able to approach this issue on the basis of the real evidence gained from major developments already in progress, and not simply projected figures

·       The problem of “rat running”

·       It should be noted that Great Chesterford railway station was simply a stopping station, and therefore should not form part of the sustainability argument. People would use Whittlesford station instead.

Councillor David Bard (a local Member for Sawston) raised the question of viability in respect of  foul water treatment and water recycling, and expressed concerns about the underlying aquifer.

Councillor Kevin Cuffley (another local Member for Sawston) said that the traffic data relied upon in drafting the Local Plan needed to be updated. He also raised concerns about flood risk, and the impact on landscape. In reply, the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development pointed out that the traffic data had been agreed between Cambridgeshire County Council and Essex County Council. He said that the challenges ahead included the proof of soundness of Uttlesford’s Local Plan, levels of certainty of investment in transport, and mitigation measures.

Councillor Anna Bradnam highlighted the importance of secondary education given the capacity challenges already being encountered by Linton Village College by virtue of several recent planning consents issued by South Cambridgeshire District Council, and the possibility that the NUGC might not be developed to a point at which it could justify having its own secondary school. Furthermore, the withdrawal of school buses could have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Planning Portfolio Holder approved the designation of a Neighbourhood Area for the parish of Thriplow as proposed by Thriplow Parish Council (see Appendix A).

The Planning Portfolio Holder considered a report detailing an application to designate the parish of Thriplow as a Neighbourhood Area.

The Planning Portfolio Holder approved the designation of a Neighbourhood Area for the parish of Thriplow as proposed by Thriplow Parish Council (see Appendix A).

The Planning Portfolio Holder received and noted a report updating him on progress with the Landbeach Tithe Barn and Sawston Tannery Drying Shed Projects, and reporting on the transfer of St. Denis Church, East Hatley.

Those present discussed the report in general terms. In connection with the Sawston Tannery Drying Shed, Councillor Kevin Cuffley (a local Member) highlighted the need to address security issues on site.

The Planning Portfolio Holder, and those present, noted the Work Programme attached to the agenda.

The next scheduled meeting was on 7 November 2017, but an additional

meeting would be called before then, if needed.