The Chair made several brief housekeeping announcements introducing the members of the committee; the process of how applications would be considered and reminded members that they needed to remain in the meeting for the whole of the consideration of each application.

To consider an application for the erection of a single storey bungalow and associated works (report attached).

By unanimous vote, the committee deferred the application to allow further and necessary information on a sequential test for flooding to be obtained and considered.

The chair reported that she had been advised by officers that they wished to defer application 23/03657/FUL, a site on land northwest of 60 - 64 Histon Road, Cottenham to allow further information on flooding to be considered.

By unanimous vote, the committee deferred the application to allow further and necessary information on a sequential test for flooding to be obtained and considered.

Councillors A Cahn, M Cahn, G Harvey, B Handley, T Hawkins and R Williams had given their apologies for the meeting.

Councillors H Bachelor, W Jackson-Wood and J Rixon had been appointed substitutes for the meeting.

To receive declarations of interest from committee members.

Councillor L Redrup indicated that she was involved in the local football club that used the pitches at Impington College (Item 6). The Councillor indicated that she had no involvement with the college. Councillor Redrup right also indicated that she was the local ward member for item 9 at Cotton orchard, Coton. For both items the councillor remained of an open mind and would remain in the meeting for the consideration of and the voting on the items.

Councillor H Bachelor indicated that he used to be the District Council Board Member for South Cambridge Investment Partnership in relation to Item 5 - land south of pond Camborne Business Park, Camborne but that had been some years ago. The member remained in the meeting for the consideration of and the voting on the item.

Councillor Heather Williams declared an interest as being the applicant for the 

tree preservation order at item 9 (Coton Orchard, Coton) on the agenda. Councillor Williams indicated that she would withdraw from the committee membership for that item. Councillor Williams also stated that as a member of South Cambridgeshire District Council, Members were able to consider the matter at item 5 (land south of pond Camborne Business Park, Camborne) in the normal way.

Councillor J Rixon stated that on item 6 (Impington College) he would remove himself from the committee and speak as the local ward member.

To authorise the Chair to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 12 March 2025 as a correct record.

By affirmation the committee authorised the chair to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 12 March 2025 as a correct record subject to the substitution of the words ‘Guilden Morden’ with the word ‘Meldreth’ in minute 3 (declarations of interests by Councillor H Williams).

To consider an application for non material amendment of application 23/00123/FUL for amendments to the layout including: the relocation and reconfiguration of the footpath to the south of the open space in the north east corner of the site, modest relocation of the frontage of houses and the apartment block within development parcel C, minor repositioning of homes within development parcels D and E, and minor landscape amendments. (report attached)

By unanimous vote, the Committee approved the proposed post-decision changes as non-material amendments to planning permission 23/00123/FUL

The committee considered non-material amendments to the layout of application 23/00123/FUL, site at land north of lower Camborne Business Park, Camborne which included; the relocation and reconfiguration of the footpath to the south of the open space in the northeast corner of the site; modest relocation of the frontage of houses and the apartment block within the development parcel C and the relocation of car parking spaces serving plots D1, D11 and E7.

The application was before the committee as South Cambridgeshire District Council had a direct interest in the application as part of South Cambridgeshire Investment Partnership. It would not otherwise require a further planning application.

In response to member questions, the officer confirmed that the apartment block adjacent the neighbouring property was three stories but the height was not changing as part of this application. Members queried why the application was coming before members given that they path in question was only being reduced by 40 centimetres and was this due to the requirements of the neighbouring building. The officer confirmed that the block in question wasn't moving closer to the neighbouring property, the matter was before members because of the involvement of the council. The land ownership matter was not a material planning consideration.

In debate, Councillor H Williams stated that she understood that these were non material amendments and asked if the town council had been consulted. She had previously objected to the proposal but considering these were minor adjustments, which have should have been resolved at application stage, the committee had not much choice in approving them.

Councillor Sandford stated that he was happy to take the officers recommendation that these were non material amendments and that the application should be approved.

Councillor P Fane moved and Councillor J Rixon seconded a proposal to take the matter to the vote. The Area Development Officer summarised the application and a vote was taken.

By unanimous vote, the Committee approved the proposed post-decision changes as non-material amendments to planning permission 23/00123/FUL.

To consider an application for retrospective permission for the change of use to a car park and associated works. Creation of a 3G Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) with perimeter fencing, hardstanding areas, storage container, floodlights, access footpath, associated bund, toilet block and resurface the car park and associated works.

By unanimous vote, the Committee approved the application subject to:

(i) the planning conditions as set out in the report with minor amendments to the conditions as drafted delegated to officers;

(ii) Amendments to conditions 4, 9, 11 brought forward by officers;

(iii) Additional archaeological and biodiversity net gain conditions;

(iv) amendments to condition 12 to protect the proposed hedge planting insight requested by members at the meeting;

(v) associated informatives and an additional informative to encourage continued liaison between the IPC liaison group in the college regarding ongoing traffic management on the site.

Councillor J Rixon left the committee for this item to address the committee as the local member.

The committee considered an application for retrospective permission for the change of use to a car park and associated works and the creation of a 3G artificial grass pitch with perimeter fencing, hard standing areas, storage container, floodlights, access footpath, associated bund, toilet block and resurfacing of car park and associated works at Impington Village College, Impington.

The officer, in presenting the application, brought forward updates to planning condition number 4 (car parking management plan approval by the council and implemented in accordance with those proposals); changes to condition 9 (to require collections/deliveries during construction to be outside of school peak time hours); changes to condition 11 (to refer to the current revised plan number in regards to floodlighting); an additional standard condition relating to archaeology suggested by the County Council; and the inclusion of the biodiversity net gain statutory condition which had not been listed in the conditions.

Additionally, the officer clarified that in this case there was an error in paragraph 9.93 as it was the officers view that although the indicative parking standards for the site were for 268 car parking spaces there was a case for deferring the away from the indicative standards in this instance.

In answer to members questions, it was clarified that 3G was a type of third generation artificial grass pitch that could be used for multiple different sports and activities.

In relation to the proposal for condition 9, Councillor Sandford suggested that including wording of ‘outside peak school times’ was too ambiguous and should have hours within the condition. The officer responded that this could be altered in consultation with the chair and the vice chair after the meeting if members approved the application.

Councillor H Williams queried whether there was a need to marry up the hours of operation of the floodlighting on the proposed pitch with those agreed by the committee at a previous meeting for the netball courts. Officers clarified that the previous application had set the end time for the netball courts at 9:30 PM and that this application set the end time at 10:00 PM to allow for staggered leaving of the site by users.

Councillor Redrup asked whether the proposed hedging between the car park and the road could be protected by condition indefinitely. Officers clarified that the application had a proposed landscaping condition and that this could be added to that condition if members so wished.

A member queried whether there could be changes to the design of the entrance to the car park to encourage its use. The officer responded that this would have the effect of extending the red line of the application. However, a signage condition had been suggested that would help manage the car parking across the whole of the school site. The County Council highways officer in attendance stated that a parking survey had been submitted showing there was sufficient parking capacity  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To consider an outline application for the development of up to 8 No. self and custom build dwellings, with all matters reserved except access, together with all ancillary works. (report attached)

By four votes for (Councillors Bradnam, Fane, Jackson-Wood and Rixon) and three votes against (Councillors H Batchelor, Redrup and Sandford), the committee approved the outline application subject to:

(i) the conditions as set out in the report including those amendments to conditions 1 and 16 and an additional condition regarding the requirement to construct the dwellings as self/custom build dwellings set out in the amendment report of officers;

(ii) an amendment to condition 30 ensuring that the positions of the dwellings were formalised but with other matters including building height being dealt with at reserved matters stage;

(iii) a Section 106 agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the report; and

(iv) proposed informatives

With amendments and completion of agreements delegated to officers.

Councillor J Rixon rejoined the committee for this item.

The committee considered an outline application for up to 8 self and custom build dwellings, with all matters reserved except access, together with all ancillary works on land north of Field Side, Thriplow Road, Fowlmere.

Members had before them the report of officers together with an amendment sheet which brought forward amendments to the landscape officer's comments, amendments to a paragraph within the report and changes to the list of conditions including an additional condition relating to the requirement of self-build. Additionally, members had a written representation from a local resident.

In response to a question of members the officer explained that each proposed dwelling came with a ‘plot passport’ which was a way of controlling what came forward at reserved matters stage and, in this case, limiting the plots to 162 square metres with a maximum height of nine metres. This was controlled by a proposed condition.

Additionally, the applicant was proposing to install bus stops near to the site and connections to the footpath network.

Members questioned what weight should be given to the previous appeal and the change to self-build numbers on the site. The officer indicated that they still considered there to be harm from the development but that the level of it had been reduced because of the changes that had been made to the application, the council's local plan suggested that if the site had been within framework and contained eight properties, it would have been considered suitable.

It was noted that the landscape officer still had objections to the proposal but that the submission of winter verified views of the site had helped alleviate some of the concerns in relation to the urbanising effects on the rural character of the receiving landscape but that he had maintained that the proposed building footprints for large in comparison and were likely to appear bulky on the settlement edge.

The committee agreed to a short adjournment of the meeting to allow officers to consider the wording of the condition that controlled the requirement to match plot passports at reserved stage. Following the adjournment, officers suggested that the condition could be reworded such that it formalised the positions of the dwellings only, with the requirement that the reserved matters application would deal with the height of the buildings at that later stage.

The committee noted that the registered objector Mr D Myers was unable to be at the meeting and the democratic services officer read from their submitted written statement.

The committee heard from Mr E Durrunt, agent for the applicant.

During debate, the committee noted that this was a similar application to that previously submitted, refused, appealed and then the appeal dismissed. However, the application had changed with differences of the number of plots, additional pavement, improvements to lighting and safer access arrangements. It was confirmed that the entrance was within the village 30 mile an hour zone.

Other factors were that the site was outside of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The meeting was adjourned at 13:45 to 14.30 with the consent of the committee.

To consider the confirmation of Tree Preservation Order (TPO) TPO/01/2025 within the Parish of Coton for the protection of 12 Bramley apple trees. (report attached)

By unanimous vote, the committee confirmed Tree Preservation Order (TPO) TPO/01/2025 within the Parish of Coton for the protection of 12 Bramley apple trees.

Councillor P Fane left the meeting prior to the consideration of this item.

The committee considered a proposal of officers to confirm a tree preservation order TPO/01/2025 to protect 12 bramley apple trees at Coton Orchard, Coton.

The matter had previously been before members in January 2025 and officers sought now to confirm the order following a period of public consultation.

The committee had previously taken the view that the trees in question were of such a status that they should be protected by a tree preservation order. Although no observations had been received during consultation the owner of the orchard had confirmed at the January meeting their support for the making of a TPO.

By unanimous vote, the committee confirmed Tree Preservation Order (TPO) TPO/01/2025 within the Parish of Coton for the protection of 12 Bramley apple trees.

The committee noted the current appeals, decisions and local inquiry dates.