Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no Apologies for Absence.

Declarations of interest were declared as follows:

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2015 (available on the Council’s website) as a correct record.

The Committee authorised the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2015 as a correct record, subject to the following:

Minute 5 - S/2216/14/FL - Steeple Morden (48 Station Road)

Replace  "Steeple Morden Parish Council having approved the amended plans. Outstanding issues remained the height of the building to the front of the site, and location of the drain."

with "Steeple Morden Parish Council had indicated general approval of the amended plans although still voiced concern about the height of the building to the front of the site and the location of a drain."

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to officers discussing with the applicant and Local Highways Authority options for a footpath on at least one side of the access road, a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing affordable housing and financial contributions towards off-site outdoor formal sports space, indoor community facilities, waste receptacles and on-site public open space management and maintenance, and the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, Condition (f) being deleted by virtue of affordable housing being secured by Section 106 and Conditions (g), (h) and (i) being re-designated as (f), (g) and (h).

Philip Kratz (applicant’s agent) and Councillor Neil Harris (Willingham Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

During the course of the public speaking, Members noted comments about

·       Principle of the development is consistent with the Local Plan and National Planning Policy Framework

·       There being no significant and demonstrable harm

·       The need for affordable housing

·       Concern at road layout on site and the fear that it allows for further development in the future

The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to officers discussing with the applicant and Local Highways Authority options for a footpath on at least one side of the access road, a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing affordable housing and financial contributions towards off-site outdoor formal sports space, indoor community facilities, waste receptacles and on-site public open space management and maintenance, and the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director, Condition (f) being deleted by virtue of affordable housing being secured by Section 106 and Conditions (g), (h) and (i) being re-designated as (f), (g) and (h).

The Committee approved the application, as amended by plans date stamped 8 September 2014, and instructed officers to investigate with the applicant options for providing street and footway lighting within the site.

David Futter (applicant’s agent) and Councillor Peter Johnson (both as Waterbeach Parish Council representative and as a local Member) addressed the meeting.

During the course of the public speaking, Members noted comments about

·       The absences of local objections

·       The proposal being within policy

·       The demand for office space

·       Quality

·       Employment opportunities offered by the proposal

·       Increased traffic concerns

·       Inadequate lighting

·       Improvements needed to the access

The Committee approved the application, as amended by plans date stamped 8 September 2014, and instructed officers to investigate with the applicant options for providing street and footway lighting within the site.

Members noted that this application had been withdrawn from the agenda.

Members noted that this application had been withdrawn from 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 over development of the site, the detrimental impact on the surrounding area by virtue of intensification, and the absence of a dedicated car parking area. The Committee further resolved that an Enforcement Notice be issued and served, with a compliance period of six months, in respect of the material change of use.

Members visited the site on 31 March 2015.

Councillor Lawrence Wragg (Fowlmere Parish Council) addressed the meeting. He said that the mobile home was very conspicuous and could be described as overdevelopment.

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 over development of the site, the detrimental impact on the surrounding area by virtue of intensification, and the absence of a dedicated car parking area. The Committee further resolved that an Enforcement Notice be issued and served, with a compliance period of six months, in respect of the material change of use.

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

Councillor Cicely Murfitt (local Member) addressed the meeting, focussing on the proposal’s cramped appearance, overlooking, traffic, and the absence of a pavement.

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

The Committee deferred the application for further information.

Members visited the site on 31 March 2015.

Dr Ralph Rickards (objector) and Councillor Ian Young (Cottenham Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

During the course of the public speaking, Members noted comments about

·       Loss of amenity

·       Loss of sunlight

·       Overshadowing of neighbouring property

·       Highways issues

·       Proximity of car parking spaces to a blind bend

·       “rat running”

·       Visibility

·       Parking arrangements

·       High volume of traffic

·       Loss of light

The Committee deferred the application for further information.

The Committee reused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director. Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being adverse visual impact that was exacerbated by the loss of existing landscaping.

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 adverse visual impact that was exacerbated by the loss of existing landscaping.

The Committee received and noted an Update on enforcement action.

The Principal Planning Enforcement Officer summarised the land clearance activity at Smithy Fen, Cottenham, and assured Members that this particular work was being paid for by members of the travelling community,

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

The Committee noted that the Appeal against refusal of Application S/1152/13/FL (former Bishops Hardware Store, Impington) had been dismissed on design grounds, design having been a major concern for Members.

In relation to S/2724/13/OL (land adj. 7 Station Road, Over), the Committee noted that the Inspector had not placed much weight on the Council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply.