Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Anna Bradnam sent Apologies for Absence and appointed Councillor Hazel Smith as her substitute.  Councillor Ben Shelton sent Apologies for Absence.

The following interests were declared:

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2014 as a correct record.  The Minutes can be viewed by visiting www.scambs.gov.uk, and following the links from ‘Your Council’.

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2014.

There are three Appendices attached to the online version of the agenda.

The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and noted the ongoing appeal against the Enforcement Notice issued and served in April 2014

Michael Alderton (objector), John Dadge (applicant’s agent with David Coates (whose business currently operated from the site), and Frank Morris (Cottenham Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

Members heard concerns about the reliability of information about the number of trips likely as a result of the application, traffic concerns, the absence of a footpath, inadequate access for emergency vehicles, loss of neighbour amenity and unsustainability, The applicant’s agent said the proposal would help to enhance the site and provide new employment opportunities for the village, The Parish Council’s principal concern was of adverse impact on the community.  Councillor Lynda Harford (a local Member) highlighted significant safety issues for pedestrians and a written submission from Councillor Simon Edwards (another local Member) reiterated that concern adding that, in his view, it could not be overcome by conditions.

The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and noted the ongoing appeal against the Enforcement Notice issued and served in April 2014

There are three Appendices attached to the online version of the agenda.

The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.  Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being:

1.    Insufficient evidence of need

2.    Harm to the Landscape that is not outweighed by the personal circumstances of the applicants

3.    The application failed to make provision for infrastructure through Section 106 contributions

Rick Bristow (objector) and Frank Morris (Cottenham Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

Members were asked to consider what had changed during the past three years to justify the application for three further plots – the need for accommodation, the same as in 2011, had already been met.  Members also heard concern about the access for emergency vehicles.  A written statement from Councillor Simon Edwards (a local Member) stated as follows:

“This is a complex site, with a complex history. However, the fundamental strategy for this site remains unchanged, and that is the intention to provide a pleasant and manageable location for a modest traveller site, comprising of two distinct areas of authorised development, namely the area along Setchell Drove, and the separate area at Water Lane.

These two areas were always intended to be separated by an area of clear open countryside, I.e. 'Green Separation', and the council has in the past gone to great lengths to clear the unauthorised development at Victoria View and Pine View which were contrary to this strategy.

This application should therefore be viewed in light of this strategy and it is clear that approval would be contrary to our overall approach for the site.

I am in complete agreement with the lengthy submission of Mr. Rick Bristow, and I urge members to read this document carefully, as I do not intend to repeat any of the points made as he has made them perfectly clearly.  They are all valid, relevant, and worthy of being given significant weight in determining this application.

The one area where my opinion differs from Mr. Bristow's, is that I urge the committee to refuse this application outright,  rather than give a partial approval/refusal, as I do not consider the applicant has demonstrated sufficient need to live in this particular location, and therefore the weight the committee should attach to this is far outweighed by the harm the application does to the overall intention of maintaining the green separation between the two approved areas.

This is, after all, a site in the open countryside, outside the village framework, and in the flood plain. Any approval should only be granted if there are exceptional circumstances, supported by clear evidence.  I do not consider the case has been made in this instance.

In any case, I am unsure if the committee are at liberty to give a partial approval/refusal, and therefore it should be for an inspector to judge if plots 4 and 5 could be granted consent, for the reasons Mr. Bristow has set out’”

The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.  Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being:

1.    Insufficient evidence of need

2.    Harm to the Landscape that is not outweighed by the personal circumstances of the applicants

3.    The application failed to make provision for infrastructure through Section 106 contributions.

Councillor  Deborah Roberts withdrew to the public gallery, did not contribute to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no material adverse responses to the revised details, and to the Conditions, as amended, set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

Philip Kratz (applicant’s agent) addressed the meeting.  He highlighted the benefits of solar energy and the relatively unobtrusive nature of the solar arrays.  A degree of ongoing agriculture use could be possible.

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no material adverse responses to the revised details, and to the Conditions, as amended, set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act securing financial contributions towards public open space, community facilities, waste receptacles and monitoring and legal fees, to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director and an additional Condition removing Permitted Development Rights.  .  Members gave delegated authority to officers to seeks a modified scheme altering the layout of the dwelling on the site, and a condition requiring the provision of an acoustic fence.  

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act securing financial contributions towards public open space, community facilities, waste receptacles and monitoring and legal fees, to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director and an additional Condition removing Permitted Development Rights.  .  Members gave delegated authority to officers to seeks a modified scheme altering the layout of the dwelling on the site, and a condition requiring the provision of an acoustic fence.  

The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

Appendix 1 is attached to the online version of the agenda.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, following the reduction of ground floor levels, subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act securing financial contributions towards public open space, community facilities, waste receptacles and monitoring and legal fees, and to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.  Members requested that enquiries be made into the causes of flooding in the area.

Jackie Sitton (objector), Matthew Hare (applicant’s agent), Mary Drage (Fulbourn Parish Council) and Councillor Neil Scarr (a local Member) addressed the meeting.

Members heard concerns about flood risk and a request that, at the very least, Permitted Development Rights be withdrawn.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, following the reduction of ground floor levels, subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act securing financial contributions towards public open space, community facilities, waste receptacles and monitoring and legal fees, and to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.  Members requested that enquiries be made into the causes of flooding in the area.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no material adverse responses to the revised details, and to the Conditions, as amended, set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

Philip Kratz (applicant’s agent) and Alison Elcox (Arrington Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  Members heard concerns about the impact the proposal would have on aviation, the Clopton Way, and food production.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no material adverse responses to the revised details, and to the Conditions, as amended, set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee approved the application subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring infrastructure payments, the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and an additional Condition requiring the submission of an acceptable Construction Management Plan.

Enid Bald (Linton Parish Council) and Councillor Roger Hickford (a local Member) addressed the meeting.

Members heard concerns about the dominant and overbearing nature of the proposal and it being out of character with the area, its effect on a footpath used as a Safer Route To School, and traffic.  

The Committee approved the application subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring infrastructure payments, the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and an additional Condition requiring the submission of an acceptable Construction Management Plan.

The Committee noted that the applicant had withdrawn this application from the agenda so that it could  be considered at the Design and Enabling Panel  meeting in August before being presented to a future meeting of the Planning Committee for determination.

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  The Committee noted that the applicant had withdrawn this application from the agenda so that it could  be considered at the Design and Enabling Panel  meeting in August before being presented to a future meeting of the Planning Committee for determination.

Appendix 1 is attached to the online version of the agenda.

The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

Lesley Taylor (applicant), Tony Fletcher (Barrington Parish Council) and Councillor Aidan Van de Weyer addressed the meeting.

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to the consideration of any comments received in respect of the revised scheme, and confirmation that the viability of the scheme precludes a different market housing mix, the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of affordable housing, public open space and community facilities, and Conditions including those referred to in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director

John Pook (Swavesey Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

Members heard concerns that the proposal was outside the village framework and created highway issues.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to the consideration of any comments received in respect of the revised scheme, and confirmation that the viability of the scheme precludes a different market housing mix, the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of affordable housing, public open space and community facilities, and Conditions including those referred to in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to withdrawal of the objection from Cambridgeshire County Council’s Historic Environment Team, the Conditions (as slightly reworded) set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and an additional Condition requiring an approved detailed scheme for laying the cable with minimum disruption.

Stuart Homewood (applicant’s agent) and a representative of Great Wilbraham Parish Council addressed the meeting.

Members visited the site on 1 July 2014.  Members heard concern about the route proposed and distance covered in laying the cable to connect to the National Grid.

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to withdrawal of the objection from Cambridgeshire County Council’s Historic Environment Team, the Conditions (as slightly reworded) set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, and an additional Condition requiring an approved detailed scheme for laying the cable with minimum disruption.

The Committee received and noted an Update on enforcement action.

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