Agenda, decisions and minutes

The Chair made several brief housekeeping announcements

Councillors Dr Tumi Hawkins and William Jackson-Wood sent Apologies for Absence. Councillor Dr Richard Williams was not present at the start of the meeting and had sent apologies for lateness but was to join the Committee later in the meeting.

1.         Disclosable pecuniary interests (“DPI”)

A  DPI is where a committee member or his/her spouse or partner has any kind of beneficial interest in the land under consideration at the meeting.

 2.        Non-disclosable pecuniary interests

These are interests that are pecuniary involving a  personal financial benefit or detriment but do not come within the definition of a DPI.  An example would be where a member of their family/close friend (who is not their spouse or partner) has such an interest.

3.         Non-pecuniary interests

Where the interest is not one which involves any personal financial benefit or detriment to the Councillor but arises out of a close connection with someone or some  body /association.  An example would be membership of a sports committee/ membership of another council which is involved in the matter under consideration.

• With respect to Minute 5, Councillor Bill Handley declared that he was a local Member for Willingham but was coming to the matter afresh

• With respect to Minute 7, Councillor Henry Batchelor declared that was a local Member for Great Abington and had been present at Parish Council meetings where the application had been discussed but was coming to the matter afresh. Councillor Geoff Harvey declared that he lived in Great Abington but was coming to the matter afresh

• With respect to Minute 8, Councillor Henry Batchelor declared that his employer had previously held a business relationship with the architect, who was speaking as an agent of the applicant, but that his employer did not have any ongoing business with said architect and subsequently had no conflict of interest. Councillor Ariel Cahn declared that he was a local Member for Comberton but was coming to the matter afresh

• With respect to Minute 11, Councillor Heather Williams declared that one of the appeals listed in the report was next door to her father’s property and that she would withdraw from the Committee for the duration of the item to ensure that there was no conflict of interest

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 14 September 2022 as a correct record.

With respect to Minute 7, the wording “The Committee agreed, by affirmation, to the removal of condition 26. The Committee requested, and approved by affirmation, an additional condition stating” at the beginning of the Minute was recognised as having been included as a mistake. The Minutes were corrected to remove this wording. It was also requested that the full details of who voted which way in the vote in Minute 7, and future votes, be listed. The final paragraph of the Minute subsequently opened with:

“By 5 votes (Councillors Henry Batchelor, Dr Martin Cahn, Peter Fane, Dr Tumi Hawkins and William Jackson-Wood) to 4 (Councillors Ariel Cahn, Peter Sandford, Heather Williams and Dr Richard Williams), with one abstention (Councillor Geoff Harvey)”

With the amendments, the Committee authorised the Chair to sign the Minutes as a correct record by affirmation.

Reserved matters application for the approval of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following outline planning permission S/2921/15/OL (Erection of 26 Dwellings including 10 Affordable Units & Ancillary Access Arrangements (All matters reserved apart from access). The outline planning application did not seek permission for EIA Development.

The Committee agreed, by affirmation, to the addition of a condition (condition 9) which stated:

“The development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with the following documents, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

• Surface Water Drainage Report, A E Designs Ltd, Ref: 1414 Rpt, Dated: October 2017

• Proposed Site Drainage, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1102 Rev P03, Dated: 17 June 2022

• Drainage Construction Details Sheet 1 of 2, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1103 Rev P01, Dated 20 September

• Drainage Construction Details Sheet 2 of 2, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1104 Rev P01, Dated 20 September

• Proposed Site Levels, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1101 Rev P03, Dated: 16 June 2022

• External Works Details, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1105 Rev P02, Dated: 17 June 2022

• Ground Investigation, Paddock Geo Engineering Ltd, Ref: P21-249inf, Dated: 27 July 2021

• Stormwater Hydraulic Calculations, Chiltern Design, Dated: June 2022

• Surface Water Exceedance Routes, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1106 Rev P01, Dated: 20 July 2021

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water drainage and to prevent the increased risk of flooding in accordance with Policies CC/7 and CC/9 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018.”

By affirmation, the Committee approved the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, subject to the agreed additional condition (9) and the conditions laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Senior Planner, Alice Young, presented the report and informed the Committee that the applicant had responded to the reasons for deferral given at the previous hearing of the application. The Committee agreed, by affirmation, to the addition of a condition (condition 9) which stated:

“The development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with the following documents, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

• Surface Water Drainage Report, A E Designs Ltd, Ref: 1414 Rpt, Dated: October 2017

• Proposed Site Drainage, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1102 Rev P03, Dated: 17 June 2022

• Drainage Construction Details Sheet 1 of 2, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1103 Rev P01, Dated 20 September

• Drainage Construction Details Sheet 2 of 2, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1104 Rev P01, Dated 20 September

• Proposed Site Levels, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1101 Rev P03, Dated: 16 June 2022

• External Works Details, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1105 Rev P02, Dated: 17 June 2022

• Ground Investigation, Paddock Geo Engineering Ltd, Ref: P21-249inf, Dated: 27 July 2021

• Stormwater Hydraulic Calculations, Chiltern Design, Dated: June 2022

• Surface Water Exceedance Routes, Chiltern Design, Ref: 853/1106 Rev P01, Dated: 20 July 2021

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water drainage and to prevent the increased risk of flooding in accordance with Policies CC/7 and CC/9 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018.”

Members asked questions of clarity on the potential for piling on site, further detail on the split and locations of affordable units and the working hours for construction. The Senior Planner informed the Committee that affordable housing matters had been agreed in the Outline consent and the S106 agreement; working hours for construction had been conditioned in the Outline consent. A comment was raised on the potential for overbearing from the 3 storey properties and the Senior Planner assured the Committee that this had been considered and that officers were satisfied that there was no negative impact on neighbour amenity.

The Committee was addressed by Colin Williams, the agent of the applicant. Member asked the agent questions of clarity regarding piling and affordable housing.

In the debate, piling concerns were revisited and the Committee was informed that condition 20 of the Outline consent covered piling. A comment was raised on the provision of 3.5KW electric vehicle charging points, it was stated that 7KW charging would be preferable, but this was not considered to be a material reason for refusal. The Committee expressed support for the application as the issues raised when the application was previously deferred had been addressed.

By affirmation, the Committee approved the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, subject to the agreed additional condition (9) and the conditions laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

S73 Variation of conditions 2 (Approved plans) and 8 (Cycle store) of planning permission S/2239/13/FL (Erection of football ground for Cambridge City Football Club and creation of new community recreational space).

By affirmation, the Committee approved the application in accordance with the officer's recommendation, subject to the conditions laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Senior Planner, Tom Chenery, presented the report. Clarity was offered over the moving of the cycle parking and traffic management. The Committee felt that the changes to the scheme were minor, as well as positive and sensible. The Chair noted that there was an error in the paperwork and clarified that there was no S106 agreement linked to the proposal.

By affirmation, the Committee approved the application in accordance with the officer's recommendation, subject to the conditions laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

Demolition of existing haystore and erection of a single detached dwelling including all associated external works and re-instatement of granny annexe to stables/ancillary buildings servicing 33 South Road.

The Committee voted on the application. 3 Members voted for the application, 3 voted against and two abstained. The Chair, who had initially voted against the application, used his casting vote to refuse the application, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, on the basis of contravention of policy GAL/2 of the Great Abington Neighbourhood Plan.

The Senior Planner, Sumaya Nakamya, presented the report. The Committee was informed that compliance with policy GAL/2 (7) of the Great Abington Land Association Estate Neighbourhood Plan was not possible due to the constraints of the site but, on balance, the application was acceptable.

The Committee was addressed by a representative of Great Abington Parish Council, Councillor Tony Orgee, who informed Members that the Parish Council objected to the proposal for a variety of reasons, including the contravention of policy GAL/2. Councillor Orgee also raised concerns about the accuracy of the location of the piggery shown in the maps. Members asked a number of questions of clarity of the Parish Council’s representative.

In the debate, Members agreed that the decision on the application must be based on the location of the piggery as listed in the adopted Neighbourhood Plan, despite the uncertainty around its location. The Committee agreed that the proposal was not compliant with policy GAL/2 of the Neighbourhood Plan and felt that approval was a balance between the harm of the contravention of policy GAL/2 and the harm to amenity than an alternative proposal, which would comply with GAL/2, would incur. Some Members felt that the proposal was the best possible for the constraints of the site, with the amenity benefits tilting the balance in favour of the application, whereas others felt the non-compliance with policy GAL/2 and violation of a Neighbourhood Plan carried more weight.

The Committee agreed that, if it were minded to refuse, the reason for refusal would be contravention of policy GAL/2 of the Great Abington Neighbourhood Plan. Concerns were raised over design (policy HQ/1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan), due to a “jutting” edge facing the road rather than a flat edge, but this was not deemed a reason for refusal.

The Committee voted on the application. 3 Members voted for the application (Councillors Dr Martin Cahn, Peter Fane and Geoff Harvey), 3 voted against (Councillors Henry Batchelor, Ariel Cahn and Heather Williams) and two abstained (Councillors Bill Handley and Peter Sandford). The Chair, staying consistent with his initial vote, used his casting vote to refuse the application, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, on the basis of contravention of policy GAL/2 of the Great Abington Neighbourhood Plan.

Single storey 3 bedroom dwellinghouse and associated works.

In the vote, 4 Members voted for the application and 4 voted against, with one Member not voting. The Chair, who had initially voted to approve the application, used his casting vote to approve the application subject to the conditions and in accordance with the officer’s recommendation laid out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Senior Planner, Charlotte Spencer, presented the report and offered clarity on the history of decisions on the site.

The Committee was addressed by an objecting resident, Edward Halford, who felt that the proposal would cause harm to the Protected Village Amenity Area (PVAA), the Conservation Area, listed buildings in the area and wider public amenity. An agent of the applicant, Simon Redman, addressed the Committee in support of the application. Members asked questions on the impact of the proposal on badger sets as well as the types of foundations that would be used and the impact of this, alongside soakaways, on drainage on site. Councillor Jessica Marshall of Comberton Parish Council addressed the Committee, representing the Parish Council’s view that the application should be rejected. Councillor Dr Lisa Redrup addressed the Committee as a local Member and represented the views of a number of residents who had concerns about the application and felt that permission should be refused.

Councillor Dr Richard Williams joined the meeting but, as he was not present for the duration of the discussion, would not vote on the application

In the debate, it was noted that a number of Members had received direct communications from residents regarding the application. The Committee was informed that, if the application was to be approved, any changes to the location of the soakaway could be dealt with by officers. Members discussed the “slinky” that would be part of the ground source heat pump, but were informed that this would be underground and thus would not be harmful to the PVAA. Opinion in the Committee was divided on a number of points:

• Badger sets- some Members felt that there was no evidence of badger activity in the area, whereas others questioned how up to date the ecological survey was

• Impact on the PVAA- some Members felt that the impact on the PVAA would be minimal, whereas others felt it would be notably detrimental

• Impact on the Conservation Area- some felt that the impact would be minimal and noted the lack of objection from the Conservation Officer, whereas others felt the impact on the Conservation Area was unacceptable

• Design- some felt that the modern design would bring a point of interest to the area and was not harmful, whereas others felt the design was not suitable and would be harmful to the historic character of the area

The Committee agreed that, if it were minded to refuse, the reasons for refusal would be the contravention of policies HQ/1, NH/11 and NH/14 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan as well as National Planning Policy Framework legislation around harm to Conservation Areas and PVAAs.

In the vote, 4 Members voted for the application (Councillors Henry Batchelor, Dr Martin Cahn, Peter Fane and Geoff Harvey) and 4 voted against (Councillors Ariel Cahn, Bill Handley, Peter Sandford and Heather Williams)- Councillor Dr Richard Williams did not vote. The Chair, staying consistent with his initial vote, used his casting vote to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Assistant Director Planning and Building Quality presented the report on the behalf of the Lead Cabinet Member for Planning and the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development. Context was provided on why the report was being brought to Committee and, following a discussion by Members, the Committee noted the report.

Councillor Bill Handley left the meeting

The Principal Planning Enforcement Officer presented the report and offered a number of updates. These included staffing in the Enforcement team, the online Enforcement register and the ongoing cases at Smithy Fen. Members asked questions on staffing and requested a report or briefing on Smithy Fen to be brought forward. The Committee noted the report.

Councillor Heather Williams withdrew from the Committee, in line with her Declaration of Interest

The Interim Delivery Manager presented the report and answered Member questions on some of the appeals listed in the report. The Committee noted the report.