Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Sebastian Kindersley declared a personal interest as an elected member of Cambridgeshire County Council.

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 September 2010 as a correct record.  These minutes are attached to the electronic version of the agenda, which can be accessed by following the links from www.scambs.gov.uk/meetings

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 1 September 2010,

The Committee received a report summarising the drainage situation as at 23 September 2010.

Colin Sharp (WSP) addressed the meeting and summarised the remedial works carried out to date relating to the adoptable sewers.  Measures taken during 2009 had reduced the incidence of flooding during 2010, but the Consortium accepted that there remained a problem.  Accordingly, a system of “tankerage” had been adopted, and non-return valves were being fitted to prevent the flooding of private properties.  Efforts were continuing to identify troublespots and to take appropriate mitigating action.  As the sewers had not yet been adopted, the developers remained liable for the cost of remediation.  Mr Sharp confirmed that the Consortium accepted that its ultimate responsibility was to do everything necessary to bring the sewers up to the standard required for them to be adopted and maintained by Anglian Water.

The Planning Lawyer said that the Consortium was ultimately responsible for ensuring resolution of the flooding issues in Cambourne.

On the Chairman’s casting vote, the Committee approved the Reserved Matters of layout, scale, appearance, access and principles of landscaping as amended by plans received 23 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), which are additional to those referred to in Outline planning permission S/1371/92/O).

On the Chairman’s casting vote, the Committee approved the Reserved Matters of layout, scale, appearance, access and principles of landscaping as amended by plans received 23 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), which are additional to those referred to in Outline planning permission S/1371/92/O.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, as amended, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), and to an appropriate redesign of the proposal to address Members’ concerns about boundary treatment, in particular by encouraging better integration of the scheme into the community by the removal of gates from the vehicular access, and by negotiating more sensitive treatment of the boundary with No. 7 Church Street, and to satisfy the additional requirements of the Conservation Manager.

David Freeman (objector) and Nick Parkinson (applicant’s agent) addressed the meeting.

Prior to considering this application, the Committee attended a site visit on 6 October 2010.  The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, as amended, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), and to an appropriate redesign of the proposal to address Members’ concerns about boundary treatment, in particular by encouraging better integration of the scheme into the community by the removal of gates from the vehicular access, and by negotiating more sensitive treatment of the boundary with No. 7 Church Street, and to satisfy the additional requirements of the Conservation Manager.

Councillor Sebastian Kindersley declared a personal interest as a member of Cambridge Past, Present and Future.

Councillor Charles Nightingale (Chairman of South Cambridgeshire District Council) declared a personal and prejudicial interest because the applicant had been involved in the sponsorship of an Awards ceremony hosted by South Cambridgeshire District Council in Great Shelford.  He withdrew from the Chamber, took no part in the debate and did not vote.

The Committee approved the application as amended by plan no. 235-01 B and Planning Statement date stamped 20 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and an extra Condition requiring details to be submitted about treatment of the access point to the rear of the site.

Martyn Gerrard (on behalf of the applicant) and Councillor James Hockney (a local Member) addressed the meeting.

The Committee approved the application as amended by plan no. 235-01 B and Planning Statement date stamped 20 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and an extra Condition requiring details to be submitted about treatment of the access point to the rear of the site.

The Committee approved the application, contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).  Reasons for approval: Members considered that the high standard of energy efficiency and renewable energy provision and a commuted sum in respect of affordable housing would outweigh any conflict with Policy HG/2 (Housing Mix).  The Committee did not consider the Local Highways Authority advice sufficiently strong to justify refusal, taking into account the relatively low volume of traffic and the absence of road accidents in the vicinity.  Members gave officers delegated powers to negotiate and complete a Section 106 Legal Agreement and to finalise planning Conditions. 

Councillor Janet Lockwood (local Member) addressed the meeting.

The Committee approved the application, contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).  Members agreed the reason for approval as being that the high standard of energy efficiency and renewable energy provision and a commuted sum in respect of affordable housing would outweigh any conflict with Policy HG/2 (Housing Mix).  The Committee did not consider the Local Highways Authority advice sufficiently strong to justify refusal, taking into account the relatively low volume of traffic and the absence of road accidents in the vicinity.  Members gave officers delegated powers to negotiate and complete a Section 106 Legal Agreement and to finalise planning Conditions. 

The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).  Reason for refusal: Members considered that, by virtue of the building’s scale, and in the absence of sufficient evidence of its need such as might justify approval under Policy GB/1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework 2007 (as well as national guidance), the proposal would represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).  Members agreed the reason for refusal as being that the building, by virtue of its scale and appearance would harm the visual amenities of the Green Belt and is subsequently considered to have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. Consequently, the development was contrary to Policy GB/2 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework 2007 and paragraph 3.15 of Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts.

Councillor Sebastian Kindersley declared a personal interest as Cambridgeshire County Councillor for the Electoral Division of Gamlingay, which includes the Parish of Haslingfield.

The Committee approved the application, subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities). 

The Committee approved the application, subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities). 

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to Conditions and other obligations as deemed appropriate and to the outcome of a financial assessment of the viability of the proposed housing mix.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to Conditions and other obligations as deemed appropriate and to the outcome of a financial assessment of the viability of the proposed housing mix.

Councillor Lynda Harford declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application because her daughter is a Director to JS Bloor (Sudbury) Ltd., withdrew from the Chamber, took no part in the debate and did not vote.

Withdrawn from the agenda.

The Committee noted that this application had been withdrawn from the agenda.

The Committee approved the application as amended by plans date stamped 17 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and to an extra Condition requiring the details of construction. 

Prior to considering this application, the Committee attended a site visit on 6 October 2010.  The Committee approved the application as amended by plans date stamped 17 September 2010, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and to an extra Condition requiring the details of construction. 

Councillor Sally Hatton declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application by virtue of her close acquaintance with the staff working for this business, withdrew from the Chamber, took no part in the debate and did not vote.

The Committee approved the application, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).

The Committee approved the application, subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).

Withdrawn from the agenda.

The Committee noted that this application had been withdrawn from the agenda.

Withdrawn from the agenda.

The Committee noted that this application had been withdrawn from the agenda.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no new material objections received as a result of the outstanding Notice advertising the application as a departure from the Development Plan, and to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no new material objections received as a result of the outstanding Notice advertising the application as a departure from the Development Plan, and to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).

Summaries of Decisions of interest attached.

Contact officer:

Gareth Jones – Head of Planning   – Tel: 01954 713155

 The Committee received and noted a report on Appeals against planning decisions and enforcement action.

The Committee received and noted a summary of current enforcement cases.