Agenda item

Erection of a chalet bungalow with garage and associated infrastructure

The section called ‘Appendices’ consists of appendices 1-6, 8 and 9. Appendix 7 is a separate document and large computer file (over 17 Mb).

1.       By eight votes to three, the Planning Committee resolved that, had it still the authority to determine the application then it would have been Minded to Approve the application subject to the Conditions and informative set out in the report dated 8 September 2021from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development and reproduced in identical terms for the meeting on 29 September 2021; and

2.       By seven votes to three with one abstention, the Planning Committee gave officers delegated authority to submit a response to the Planning Inspectorate in relation to the costs application dated 23 September 2021 made against the Local Highways Authority by Fews Lane Consortium for consideration on behalf of South Cambridgeshire District Council.

The case officer reminded Members that, following an appeal against non-determination, the jurisdiction for determining this application lay now with a planning inspector rather than with South Cambridgeshire District Council. However, the Council was required to submit a Statement of Case and so the Planning Committee needed to agree on what decision it would have made given the opportunity. He referred Members to the various updates since the abandoned meeting on 8 September 2021 and to various representations received which were in the public domain. He also referred orally to submissions that had been received on the morning of the abandoned committee meeting in relation to hedgerow and tree loss pertaining to visibility splays. The Local Highway Authority had responded to a Highways Report commissioned by Fews Lane Consortium by saying it could not identify any reason for refusing the application on highways grounds.

Officers were also seeking delegated authority to respond to the planning inspectorate in response to the mention of a costs application from the Fews Lane Consortium.

The Delivery Manager (Strategic Sites) explained the circumstances in which South Cambridgeshire District Council had been granted extra time to submit its Statement of Case.

Upon there being concern that questions of clarification should be asked of officers prior to public speaking, the Chair proposed that the Committee should follow its usual practice of reserving such questions for the Committee debate. This was seconded by Councillor Henry Batchelor and, by seven votes to four, the motion was carried.

Daniel Fulton (Fews Lane Consortium – objector), Gerry Caddoo (applicant, and Longstanton Parish Council addressed the meeting.

Dr. Jon Finney (Local Highways Authority) was in attendance.

Committee members’ debate revolved around highway safety and the risk posed by the hedges at the junction of Fews Lane and the High Street. It was established that the Local Highways Authority had the power to trim hedges but the onus was on the owners of those hedges to do so. The Council could not impose a Condition to trim and maintain the hedges because such hedges were outside the control of the applicant.

1.    By eight votes to three, the Planning Committee resolved that, had it still the authority to determine the application then it would have been Minded to Approve the application subject to the Conditions and informative set out in the report dated 8 September 2021from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development and reproduced in identical terms for the meeting on 29 September 2021; and

((Councillors Henry Batchelor, Cahn, Daunton, Fane, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth and Wilson voted in favour while Councillors Roberts, Heather Williams and Richard Williams voted against)

2.       By seven votes to three with one abstention, the Planning Committee gave officers delegated authority to submit a response to the Planning Inspectorate in relation to the costs application dated 23September 2021 made against the Local Highways Authority by Fews Lane Consortium for consideration on behalf of South Cambridgeshire District Council.

(Councillors Henry Batchelor, Cahn, Daunton, Hawkins, Heylings, Rippeth and Wilson voted in favour while Councillors Roberts, Heather Williams and Richard Williams voted against. Councillor Peter Fane did not vote)