Agenda, decisions and minutes

For the benefit of members of the public viewing the live webcast of the meeting, the Chair introduced Committee members and officers in attendance.

He explained that this meeting of the Planning Committee was being held virtually and asked for patience bearing in mind the challenges posed by the technology in use and by the new meeting skills required.

The Chair confirmed that the Planning Committee would continue with the practice of recording votes unless a resolution could be reached by affirmation. He explained the process he would follow in a virtual meetings environment.

He confirmed that the meeting was quorate but informed members of the public that, if a Committee member was absent for any part of the presentation of or debate about an agenda item then that member would not be allowed to vote on that item.

There were no Apologies for Absence.

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

To authorise the Chair to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2020 as a correct record.

The Committee authorised the Chair to sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2020.

Demolition of existing community centre and erection of 56 Council rented dwellings car parking new play equipment the creation of new vehicular accesses onto Daisy Close and St Catharines Road the provision of new landscaping and associated land levelling together with land reprofiling as part of wider proposal for the full Meadows site seeking permission for the demolition of existing community centre and the erection of a new community hub 78 affordable dwellings car parking a replacement multi use games area new play equipment the creation of new vehicular accesses on to Arbury Road Daisy Close and St Catharines Road the provision of new landscaping and substation and the installation of drainage to the football pitch and associated land levelling together with land reprofiling.

Upon Councillor John Batchelor’s proposal, seconded by Councillor Pippa Heylings, and by affirmation, the Committee withdrew this application from the agenda noting that a report would shortly be presented for determination by a Joint Committee consisting of Councillors from Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council,

The Delivery Manager (Strategic Sites) explained that this was a cross-boundary planning application and that the original intention had been to present it the Planning Committees at both South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council.

However, upon Councillor John Batchelor’s proposal, seconded by Councillor Pippa Heylings, and by affirmation, the Committee withdrew this application from the agenda noting that a report would shortly be presented for determination by a Joint Committee consisting of Councillors from Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council,

Northstowe Phase 2 Section 106 Deed of Variation

Development of Phase 2 of Northstowe with details of appearance landscaping layout scale and access reserved (save for the matters submitted in respect of the Southern Access Road (West)) comprising:.1) development of the main Phase 2 development area for up to 3500 dwellings two primary schools secondary school  town centre including employment uses formal and informal recreational space and landscaped areas eastern sports hub  remainder of the western sports hub (to complete the provision delivered at Phase 1)  busway a primary road to link to the southern access construction haul route engineering and infrastructure works and.2) construction of a highway link (Southern Access Road (West)) between the proposed new town of Northstowe and the B1050 improvements to the B1050 and associated landscaping and drainage.

By affirmation, the Committee authorised officers to vary the Legal Agreement

under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to revise

triggers ensuring delivery of the re-prioritised infrastructure set out at

Appendix 2 to the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic

Development and that the proposed elements thus falling outside

the cost cap would need to be delivered through alternative funding. The

Committee also varied the Section 106 Agreement to reflect the approved

delivery strategy, specifically:

·       Revision of Part 8 Clause 1.1(a) to deliver the Western Sports Hub reverting from 2,000 dwellings across Phase 1 and Phase 2 to 3,300 dwellings across Phase 2. This would deliver this element in accordance with the approved Phase 2 Phasing Strategy.

·       Revision of Part 8 Clause 1.2 The trigger for the town park to 1,500 dwellings across Phase 2. The play equipment within the town park would be delivered and be available for use by residents at the existing trigger. It would also be necessary to ensure that any damage to the play equipment be kept under review during the construction process and appropriate maintenance be undertaken as appropriate. This is in accordance with the Healthy Living Youth and Play Strategy.

·       Payment of about £3.2 million (with indexation) being brought forward from 2,500 dwellings across Phases 1 and 2 to 450 occupations within Phase 2 so that this reflects the delivery and completion of the Education Campus.

The planning case officer explained the factors prompting the proposal to re-prioritise the Planning Obligations set out in the Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Members noted that the Fire and Rescue Service was no longer seeking money for the provision of a fire station in Northstowe. They also noted, and expressed concern about, the lack of consultation with the community about the re=prioritisation, and the ongoing search for a suitable location for a burial ground.

By affirmation, the Committee authorised officers to vary the Legal Agreement

under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to revise

triggers ensuring delivery of the re-prioritised infrastructure set out at

Appendix 2 to the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic

Development and that the proposed elements thus falling outside

the cost cap would need to be delivered through alternative funding. The

Committee also varied the Section 106 Agreement to reflect the approved

delivery strategy, specifically:

·       Revision of Part 8 Clause 1.1(a) to deliver the Western Sports Hub reverting from 2,000 dwellings across Phase 1 and Phase 2 to 3,300 dwellings across Phase 2. This would deliver this element in accordance with the approved Phase 2 Phasing Strategy.

·       Revision of Part 8 Clause 1.2 The trigger for the town park to 1,500 dwellings across Phase 2. The play equipment within the town park would be delivered and be available for use by residents at the existing trigger. It would also be necessary to ensure that any damage to the play equipment be kept under review during the construction process and appropriate maintenance be undertaken as appropriate. This is in accordance with the Healthy Living Youth and Play Strategy.

·       Payment of about £3.2 million (with indexation) being brought forward from 2,500 dwellings across Phases 1 and 2 to 450 occupations within Phase 2 so that this reflects the delivery and completion of the Education Campus.

Erection of 5-bedroom house and 1-bedroom ancillary annex with associated parking

Councillor Pippa Heylings proposed that Condition 19 be expanded to relate also to visual and neighbour amenity. This was seconded by Councillor Anna Bradnam and, upon a roll call being taken, the Committee accepted the amendment by eight votes to one with two abstentions.

(Councillors John Batchelor, Bradnam, Cahn, Fane, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth, and Heather Williams voted in favour. Councillor Roberts voted against. Councillors Richard Williams and Wright abstained.)

By eight votes to three, the Committee deferred the application to allow the Senior Planning Lawyer to consider the legal arguments made, and verdict reached, in the case of Mansell v Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council and thus be able to advise the Committee fully, and to enable Planning officers to explore the feasibility of conducting a Member site visit.

(Councillors Bradnam, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth, Roberts, Heather Williams, Richard Williams, and Wright voted for deferral. Councillors John Batchelor, Cagn and Fane voted against.)

The planning case officer made a detailed presentation,  and pointed out a formatting error that had resulted in two  separate Conditions being merged into Condition 2 set our in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development. The second part of that Condition – relating to the annex – should have a separate number and the reason should be to protect the amenity of nearby residents. The applicants were Mr. and Mrs. Webster, and not South Cambridgeshire District Council as stated in the report.

Members noted the existence of an extant planning permission on site, and the status of nearby development,

Daniel Fulton (objector), Lee Bevens (the applicants’ agent) and Councillor Harris (Willingham Parish Council) addressed the meeting.

The Member debate focussed on the following points

·       The site was outside the village framework

·       The existence of planning harm

·       Relevant policies in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018

·       The height and bulk of the proposed property

Councillor Pippa Heylings proposed that Condition 19 be expanded to relate also to visual and neighbour amenity. This was seconded by Councillor Anna Bradnam and, upon a roll call being taken, the Committee accepted the amendment by eight votes to one with two abstentions.

(Councillors John Batchelor, Bradnam, Cahn, Fane, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth, and Heather Williams voted in favour. Councillor Roberts voted against. Councillors Richard Williams and Wright abstained.)

Following a further short debate, Councillor Deborah Roberts proposed that the application be deferred. This was seconded by Councillor Richard Williams and, by eight votes to three, the Committee deferred the application to allow the Senior Planning Lawyer to consider the legal arguments made, and verdict reached, in the case of Mansell v Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council and thus be able to advise the Committee fully, and to enable Planning officers to explore the feasibility of conducting a Member site visit.

(Councillors Bradnam, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth, Roberts, Heather Williams, Richard Williams, and Wright voted for deferral. Councillors John Batchelor, Cahn and Fane voted against.)

Tree Preservation Order to be served

By affirmation, the Committee approved the issue and service of a provisional Tree Preservation Order on land at Bourn Road, Caxton as set out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Trees Officer outlined the purpose of the proposal which was to continue to preserve two trees of value from the trees originally covered by Tree Preservation Order 0002 of 1978.

By affirmation, the Committee approved the issue and service of a provisional Tree Preservation Order on land at Bourn Road, Caxton as set out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Committee received and noted an Update on enforcement action.