Agenda, decisions and minutes

Members are requested to complete and return the entire attached form, and to declare interests immediately prior to the relevant item on the agenda.  Should Members wish to declare an interest in an item to be discussed after they have left the meeting, and to have that declaration recorded in the Minutes, they should make their declaration clear to the Committee.  (Members need only declare an interest in circumstances where there is an item on the agenda that may cause a conflict of interest.)

Councillor SGM Kindersley declared a personal interest as a Cambridgeshire County Councillor with regard to all those items on the agenda involving input from that Authority. 

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 December 2006 as a correct record.  The draft Minutes are available on the Council’s website.

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 December 2006.

Refused contrary to report on the grounds of design and car parking provision. 

Prior to considering this application, Members attended a site visit on 8^th January 2007.  The Committee REFUSED the application, contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities).  Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being

·                Design in the context of the proposed building’s setting on the approach to the city of Cambridge

·                Car parking provision in the context of the parking standards set out in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004.

Officers warned Members about the rsik of costs being awarded against the Council given the support of the desgn panel for the proposal. 

Councillor MJ Mason, in attendance but not a member of the Committee, declared a personal interest as a member of Histon Parish Council.

Mr. Denis Payne, Chairman of Impington Parish Council, addressed the meeting.

Refused contrary to report on the grounds of design, bulk,  position, impact on locality, landscaping, and it being out of character. 

Prior to considering this application, Members attended a site visit on 8^th January 2007.  The Committee REFUSED the application, contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities).  Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being

·                Design, height, size and bulk

·                Siting

·                the proposal being out of character with the immediate locality

·                the adverse impact on neighbouring properties

·                inadequate landscaping

Accordingly, the proposal was contrary to Policy P1/3 of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 and Policy HG9 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004.

Councillor JD Batchelor declared a personal interest as having been present at the meeting at which Linton Parish Council had discussed this application.  He stated that he had taken no part in the debate there and, in any event, was considering the proposal afresh.

Councillor Mrs DP Roberts declared a personal interest as the current Housing Portfolio Holder, but stated that she had not held that position in October 2004 when the Council’s Cabinet had decided to facilitate Hereward Housing Association’s provision of affordable extra care sheltered units on this site, and neither had she been involved since then with this application.  Councillor Mrs Roberts stated that she would be considering this application purely on its planning merits.

Esther Cornell, representing Linton Parish Council, addressed the meeting.

Refused contrary to report 

The Committee REFUSED the application, contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities).  Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being

·                The proposal’s implications for the timely delivery of Northstowe

·                The perceived threat to the local community from the nature of the additional detainees to be accommodated at the Centre, which would include those awaiting deportation following a prison sentence

·                the proposed erection of a 5.2 metre high security fence which enhanced this perceived threat, would undermine the assimilation of the Centre within the village of Longstanton and would raise concerns regarding safety in the village.

·                The security fence would have an unacceptable visual impact on the area and, by reason of its scale and form, would be out of character with its surroundings.

Councillor MJ Mason declared a personal interest as a member of Histon Parish Council.

Councillor A Riley declared a personal interest as having been present, as Chairman, at the meeting at which Longstanton Parish Council had considered this application.  He stated that he believed he had taken no part in the debate or vote there and that he was, in any event, considering the application afresh.

Support in principle 

The Committee instructed officers to inform Cambridgeshire County Council that South Cambridgeshire District Council SUPPORTED the application in principle, subject to further work being undertaken prior to planning permission being granted, to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities) including drainage, and to additional conditions relating to noise levels, vibration, hours of construction, contaminated land, lighting, landscaping, the control of HGV journeys through the site, andinformatives relating to no-smoking policy in the public building, and the prohibition of bonfires during the construction period.  Members also instructed officers to explore, with the County Council, options for enhancing pedestrian and cyclist safety, Green Infrastructure Strategy and for establishing a ‘park and cycle’ facility at Milton Country Park.

Councillor SGM Kindersley declared a personal interest as a member of the Development Control Committee at Cambridgeshire County Council and abstained from voting.

Councillor Mrs HM Smith declared a personal interest as a member of Milton Parish Council, which had considered this proposal.  She stated that she was now considering the matter afresh.

Deferred as report and to address issues of refuse collection, amenity land and ecology. 

Prior to considering this application, Members attended a site visit on 8^th January 2007.  The Committee DEFERRED the application, as recommended in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities), so that

·                this proposal could  be considered alongside the planning application for 40 affordable dwellings on land off Challis Green in terms of how the overall need for affordable housing in Barrington should be addressed

·                the applicant could re-design the turning area so that it could accommodate refuse lorries

·                the requirement for public open space could be determined

·                ecological issues could be addressed

·                the number of proposed dwellings could be reduced to 12 or 13.

Councillor SGM Kindersley declared a personal interest as Cambridgeshire County Councillor for the Gamlingay Electoral Division, which covers the parish of Barrington.    

Delegated approval/refusal as report. 

The Committee gave officers DELEGATED POWERS TO APPROVE OR REFUSE the application, for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities),  subject to the prior submission of an acceptable detailed landscape scheme, the repositioning of buildings to allow a five metre strip adjacent to the award drain, consideration of bin storage issues and negotiations on ecological enhancement of the off site balancing pond, and subject to safeguarding Conditions relating to materials, local user (in line with Policy EM3), highway safety, Green Travel Plan, landscape implementation, foul and surface water drainage, flood mitigation, ecological enhancement, prevention of direct access to the A14, restrictions on outside storage, safe storage of all fuel, oil, greases and chemicals, details of street lighting, the provision of temporary facilities during construction, removal of permitted development rights to change from B1 to B8 uses, and provision and location of fire hydrants.

Delegated refusal for reasons 1-3, 5-7 and 9-10 in the report (Reasons 4 and 8 deleted), the effect on trees on site, and any other reasons flowing from comments yet to be received. 

The Committee gave officers DELEGATED POWERS TO REFUSE the application as amended by plans received 5^th January 2007,  for reasons 1-3, 5-7 and 9-10 set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities) (Reasons 4 and 8 being deleted), additional reason because of the effect on trees adjoining the site, and for any other reasons flowing from comments yet to be received. 

Councillor CR Nightingale declared a personal interest as Chairman of Great Shelford Parish Council and as having attended four public meetings on this topic accompanied by a planning officer.  He confirmed that he had not given any prior indication of his view on this application and that he approached the matter without bias or pre determination

Approval as report 

The Committee APPROVED the application, as amended by letters, plans date stamped 21^st and 29^th November 2006 and ownership certificates dated 29^th November 2006, for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities) and subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Delegated approval as report 

The Committee gave officers DELEGATED POWERS TO APPROVE the application, as amended by drawings  2006-001-05 Rev P1  received 22nd December 2006, for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities) and to one further condition to restrict permitted development rights for the erection of buildings on the additional garden land, and subject to receipt of suitably amended drawings to overcome concerns about potential overlooking of the adjoining premises at 40, New Road.

Temporary consent for a period of three years for a temporary building. 

The Committee APPROVED a further consent for a temporary building for a period of three years up to 31 December 2009, for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities) and subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

Approval as report 

The Committee APPROVED the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning Services and Sustainable Communities), subject to the Conditions referred to therein.

This item does not form part of the hard copy of the agenda.  It has not been in the public domain for the statutory period but the Chairman has agreed that it should be discussed as a matter of urgency in the light of impending changes to planning policies. Such consideration will assist in the Council’s defence of an appeal which is due to be heard before the next Planning Committee meeting on 7 February 2007.

Item 18 (referred to in the report as Item 19) of the meeting held on 6 September 2006 refers.

Agreed as report

This item had not been in the public domain for the statutory period but the Chairman agreed that it should be discussed as a matter of urgency in the light of impending changes to planning policies that would have implications for the Council’s defence of an appeal against the refusal of planning applications S/1114/06/F and S/1113/06/LB (Planning Committee, 6 September 2006 – Minute 18 refers), to be heard at public inquiry before the next Planning Committee meeting on 7 February 2007.

The Inspectors’ Report on the Council’s Local Development Framework Core Strategy indicated that Over was  a less sustainable location for new development than Rural Centres and Minor Rural Centres would suggest. The Inspectors (plural) decided  therefore that Over should be designated not as a rural centre (note no capital letters) but, instead, as a Group Village under Policy ST/6.  As such, residential development and redevelopment  will only be allowed up to an indicative maximum scheme size of eight dwellings (or exceptionally up to about 15 dwellings where this would make the best use of a brownfield site).

It was envisaged that Full Council would endorse the Core Strategy on 25 January 2007, after which time the Core Strategy would form part of the development plan prior to the appeals against refusal of applications S/1114/06/F and S/1113/06/LB being heard.

The Committee NOTED the likely change to the Council’s Development Plan and AUTHORISED officers to present the Council’s case at the Appeal Hearing on the basis that conflict with Policy ST/6 would effectively be an additional reason to oppose the development.

Summaries of Decisions of interest attached.

Contact officers:

Gareth Jones, Head of Planning  – Tel: 01954 713155

John Koch, Appeals Manager (Special Projects) – Tel: 01954 713268

Noted 

The Committee noted a report on Appeals against planning applications and enforcement action and, in particular, written summaries of decisions relating to:

·                Cambridge Wind Farm Ltd – 15 wind turbines, anemometry mast substation and associated infrastructure – Land southwest of A14, between Boxworth and Conington – Appeal dismissed

The Development Control Quality Manager commended the outcome to the Committee, especially in view of the fact that landscape had not been the sole consideration.  He also highlighted the experience that the Counsel brought to the case, and the help provided by local residents. He outlined the cost of the Appeal to the Authority, but Members considered it to have been completely justified.

Members recorded their appreciation of the work carried out by officers in mounting the successful defence of the decision to refuse the planning application.

·                Ms C Romeyer and Mr R Kennedy – Change of use from meadow land to residential garden and retention of garden room (retrospective application) – 2 Manor Farm Barns, Litlington – Appeal allowed. Application for costs dismissed.

Contact Officer:

Tony Marks – Enforcement Officer (Development Control)

Tel: 01954 71

Noted

The Committee noted a report on enforcement action ongoing as at 10^th January 2007. The Chairman requested that, in future, where Members had issues upon which they needed clarification, it would be helpful if such issues could be raised in advance with the Enforcement Officer (Development Control).

These Minutes are available on the Council’s website. 

Noted and received

The Committee noted that the Minutes of the Planning Sub-Committee meetings held on 11^th October 2006 had been published on the Council’s website, and received them for information.