Agenda, decisions and minutes

These Minutes were included in the agenda for Full Council on 23^rd February 2006, and are available on the Council’s website.

Approved 

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 1^st February 2006.

Approved as report. 

APPROVED for the reason set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Delegated approval as report, subject to the receipt of comments from the Cultural Services Manager, acceptability of the Flood Risk Assessment, and agreement of an alternative footpath route from West Way. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the receipt of comments from the Cultural Services Manager, acceptability of the Flood Risk Assessment, and safeguarding Conditions, including a Condition requiring the provision of a pedestrian link to West Way

Approved as report, with additional Conditions relating to the hours of operation and to pollution control. 

APPROVAL, subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Director of Development Services, and additional Conditions relating to the hours of operation and to pollution control. 

Refused as report, subject to the deletion of Refusal Reason no. 2 and the consequent renumbering of Reasons 3 and 4. 

REFUSED for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the deletion of Refusal Reason no. 2 and the consequent renumbering of Reasons 3 and 4. 

Refused as report. 

REFUSED for the reason set out in the report from the Director of Development Services. 

Councillor Mrs CA Hunt declared a personal and prejudicial interest by virtue of her ownership of no. 19 Woollards Lane, withdrew from the Chamber, took no part in the debate and did not vote.

Delegated approval, subject to deletion of the paddock from the application site, clarification of drainage proposals, additional Conditions relating to an owl survey and the placing of bird boxes, and no new adverse comments being received prior to the determination date. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services relating to compliance with policies contained in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004 and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 (but deleting reference to the Local Development Framework), subject to no adverse comments being received prior to the determination date, deletion of the paddock from the application site, clarification of drainage proposals, to the Conditions referred to in the report and additional Conditions relating to an owl survey and the placing of bird boxes.

Approved as report. 

APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Approved as report. 

APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Approved as report.

APPROVAL, as amended by drawing nos. CM.22/2 and CM22/3. and front, rear and side elevations plan date stamped 13 February 2006, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services and subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Delegated approval as report. 

RESOLVED

Refused, contrary to report, on the grounds of noise (Policy ES6 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004), the proposed location near to a school, and the loss of car parking spaces (including those lost to queueing). 

REFUSED, contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Director of Development Services, on the grounds of noise (contrary to Policy ES6 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004), the proposed location near to a school, and the loss of car parking spaces (including those lost to queuing). 

The Appendix is available as hard copy only. 

Delegated approval if the outstanding issues referred to in the report can be resolved satisfactorily, including further consideration in connection with the threatened trees.  Delegated refusal  if the outstanding issues cannot be so resolved. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL / REFUSAL.  Officers were authorised to approve the application, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the receipt of acceptable revisions to the landscape proposals, to the Conditions referred to in the report and to any further Conditions necessary as a result of the findings of the Flood Risk Assessment or the awaited comments from Anglian Water.  Failing the satisfactory resolution of outstanding issues, officers were authorised to refuse the application. 

If approved, it was not deemed necessary to refer the application to the Secretary of State, notwithstanding that it was a departure from the Development Plan, having regard to size, impact and nature of development, and expansion of the existing use on the site.

Refused as report. 

REFUSED for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services. 

Councillor Mrs DSK Spink declared a personal interest as an adjacent land owner.  Having sought advice from the Head of Legal Services, she took no part in the debate, and did not vote.

Approval with adjustments to Conditions 1, 5 and 9. 

APPROVAL of siting, design, means of access and principles of landscaping for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services and subject to the Conditions referred to therein.  Conditions 1, and 5 shall be amended so as to require their implementation prior to the occupation of any of the dwellings rather than prior to the commencement of development, and Condition 9 be amended so as to require submission of the schedule referred to therein prior to commencement of the development.

Delegated approval / delegated refusal.  Approval would be subject to the requirement in the report, including the retention of trees along the Avenue, failing which the application would be refused. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL / DELEGATED REFUSAL.  Officers were authorised to approve the application, subject to the receipt of satisfactory house type details, further consultation, retention of trees along the Avenue, and to the Conditions referred to in the report.  Failing any of these requirements, officers were authorised to refuse the application.

Approved as report with an additional Condition precluding any further windows at first floor level.

APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the Conditions referred to therein and an additional Condition barring any further windows at first floor level.

Appendices 1 and 2 are available as hard copy only. 

Minded to approve as report, the application being referred to the Secretary of State as a Departure from the Development Plan.

The Committee was MINDED TO APPROVE the application, as amended by plans date stamped 15^th February 2006  and for the reason set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to variation of the existing Section 106 Legal Agreement to take into account the Manager’s accommodation, to the Conditions referred to in the report, and also to it being referred to the Secretary of State as a departure, in the Green Belt, from the Development Plan,  and not being called in by him for determination.

Approved as report. 

APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services and subject to the Conditions referred to therein. 

Refused contrary to report on the grounds of design and size of the scheme, being out of character, contrary to Policies SE2 and HG10 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004 and of car parking arrangements. 

REFUSED contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Director of Development Services, on the grounds of character, design and size of the site contrary to Policies SE2 and HG10 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004, and of car parking arrangements. 

Approved as report. 

APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services and subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Deferred to explore the possibility of a suitable site being made available elsewhere in the village. 

DEFERRED to explore the possibility of a suitable site being made available elsewhere in the village. 

Councillor A Riley informed the Committee that, as Chairman of Longstanton Parish Council, he had been present at the meeting at which this application had been discussed, but had not contributed to the debate there, or taken part in the vote.  He had considered the matter afresh at this meeting of the Development and Conservation Control Committee.

Refused as report.  Enforcement with a nine month compliance period. 

REFUSED for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services.

RESOLVED to issue an Enforcement Notice to remove the mobile home from the site, with a nine month compliance period. 

Appendix 1 (referred to in paragraph 15) is available as hard copy only. 

Refused as report on the grounds of the proposal’s poor relationship to Milton (Policy RT1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004), the likely increase in traffic, and the proposal’s intrusion into the countryside and a sensitive visual gap in the Green Belt.

REFUSED for the reason set out in the report from the Director of Development Services on the grounds of the proposal’s poor relationship to Milton (contrary to Policy RT1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004), the likely increase in traffic, and the proposal’s intrusion into the countryside and a sensitive visual gap in the Green Belt.

Councillor Mrs HM Smith declared a prejudicial interest as a member of Milton Parish Council, withdrew from the Chamber, did not take part in the debate and did not vote.

Councillor Dr J Williamson informed the Committee that she had attended a presentation of the proposal to Milton Parish Council, but that she had left prior to any debate there.

Councillor JA Hockney informed the Committee that, while he was a member of Landbeach Parish Council, he had not been present when that Council had considered this application.

Councillor Dr DR Bard abstained from voting as he had not attended the site visit.

The Appendix is available as hard copy only. 

Minded to approve contrary to report,  on the grounds that part of the site is brownfield with a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development, and the proposal would lead to ecological gain.  The proposal would be referred to the Secretary of State as a Departure from the Development Plan.

The Committee was MINDED TO APPROVE the application, contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Director of Development Services, on the grounds that part of the site was a brownfield site with a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development, that the proposal would lead to ecological gain, and that it would secure a contribution towards affordable housing, subject to the proposal being referred to the Secretary of State and not being called in by him for determination.

Councillor SGM Kindersley informed the Committee that he had been present, as the local County Councillor, when Wimpole Parish Council had considered this application.  He was considering it afresh.

Councillor Dr DR Bard abstained from voting as he had not attended the site visit.

Delegated approval as report with an additional Condition relating to contaminated land. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to the further comments of the applicant and Local Highways Authority on the feasibility of providing, and the need for,  a satisfactory pedestrian link to the existing footpath to the east of the site, to the Conditions referred to in the report, and to an additional Condition relating to investigation of the site to assess any contaminated land.

Councillor Mrs DSK Spink declared a prejudicial interest by virtue of being a good friend of someone living in West Road, withdrew from the Chamber, did not contribute to the debate and did not vote.

Councillor Mrs A Elsby informed the Committee that, while she was Chairman of Gamlingay Parish Council, she was not a member of the Planning Committee

Delegated approval / refusal as report. 

DELEGATED APPROVAL / DELEGATED REFUSAL. The application would be approved, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services, subject to no new material issues being raised as a result of the notification and consultation exercise, Conditions referred to in the Director of Development Services’ report to the Development and Conservation Control Committee held on 4^th January 2006, and any additional Conditions deemed necessary following the consultation exercise.  The application would be refused if any of the outstanding issues referred to above remained unresolved.

The Committee NOTED the following from the report prepared by the Director of Development Services:

Prior to commencement of the afternoon session of the meeting, the Chairman made a presentation to Mr Jem Belcham, Area 2 Planning Officer, in recognition of his imminent retirement from the Council at the end of March 2006.  Members joined with the Chairman in expressing their appreciation of the tireless work undertaken by Mr Belcham on behalf of the Local Planning Authority.