By affirmation, the Planning Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.
By seven votes to two, with one abstention and Councillor Pippa Heylings having previously left the meeting, the Committee approved the application subject to
1. The Conditions and Informatives set out in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development, Condition (h) being reworded to read
All deliveries to the site and all muck away
movements are to be carried out only between 08.30am and 2.30pm Monday to Friday and at
no other time.
(Reason - In the interest of highway safety in accordance with
Policy HQ/1 of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan
2018)
2. the final wording or amendment of Conditions and Informatives referred to in 1. above being agreed by officers in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning Committee and Vice-Chairman for this item (Councillor Brian Milnes) prior to the issue of a Decision Notice.
Councillors John Batchelor, Cahn, Fane, Handley, Milnes, Rippeth and Topping voted to approve the application. Councillors Roberts and Wright voted to refuse. Councillor Heather Williams abstained.
The Committee approved the application subject to
1. The Conditions and Informatives set out in the report from the Head of Development Management; and
2. Additional Conditions requiring that a plan be submitted and approved showing dedicated car parking spaces for each of the five properties, and that those car parking spaces be made available three months before occupation of the first dwelling.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to
1. the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the obligations referred to in the Heads of Terms attached as Appendix 1 to the report from the Head of Development Management; and
2. the Conditions and Informatives referred to therein.
The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing contributions towards community facilities, open space and waste receptacles, and to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee gave officers delegated power to approve the application, subject to
· an independent assessment of the viability appraisal to determine whether additional affordable housing would be possible within the market housing element of the scheme
· the prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring financial contributions in respect of public open space, community facilities, waste receptacles and affordable housing
· clarification from Cambridgeshire County Council as to whether or not the Section 106 Agreement should require a financial contribution towards the provision of education
· Conditions referred to in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation from the Planning and New Communities Director. Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being highway safety issues due to the lack of hardstanding on site, and the adverse impact on neighbouring dwellings and on the cemetery by virtue of noise. The Committee authorised officers to take appropriate enforcement action with a six-month compliance period.
The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities). Members agreed the reason for refusal as being the proposal’s negative impact on the street scene and its failure either to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area.
The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and because the design and scale of the proposed development would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. In addition the proposal exceeds the number of dwellings identified as acceptable on a greenfield site in a Group Village in Policy ST/6 of the Core Strategy.
The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities) and because the design and scale of the proposed development would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. In addition the proposal exceeds the number of dwellings identified as acceptable on a greenfield site in a Group Village in Policy ST/6 of the Core Strategy.
The Committee approved the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities). Members agreed the reasons for approval as being that the tennis court had been moved further away from the tree belt, thus overcoming a previous reason for refusal, and the fact that they did not consider it to be detrimental to the countryside. Conditions would be attached to the planning permission as appropriate, and would cover such things as landscaping, permitted hours of construction, and a requirement that upon cessation of use as a tennis court the land should be returned to agricultural use. The planning permission would also include an Informative making clear that any floodlighting would require a further planning application to be made.
The Committee gave officers delegated authority to approve the application, contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), subject to it not being called in by the secretary of State for his determination, and to safeguarding Conditions, including a Condition relating to highway safety. Members agreed the reason for approval as being that the proposal was not out of scale, did not have an adverse impact on nearby properties or the surrounding countryside, and achieved carbon neutrality.
The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to there being no new material objections received as a result of the outstanding Notice advertising the application as a departure from the Development Plan, and to the Conditions set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to Anglian Water confirming that the existing foul water sewerage system had sufficient capacity to cater for the proposed development.
The Committee approved the applications subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities).
The Committee approved the applications subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities), compliance with Condition 4 (installation of extraction system and flue) being required within three months of the decision notice being issued.
The Committee approved the applications subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities) and an extra Condition requiring ongoing maintenance of the kitchen extraction system and external extraction flue.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to negotiations with the Developer and local members seeking to restrict vehicle movements and hours of work.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application, subject to the conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities).
Deferred in order to allow more time to identify potential planning conditions.
· Application 2101 refused as report.
· Application 2104 refused contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities). Reason: prematurity.
Delegated approval as report.
Delegated Approval as report and subject to outstanding consultation responses and completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement.
Refused as report
Approved with the conditions contained in the report to the November meeting and an extra condition requiring the use of obscure window glass at ground floor level where there might otherwise be an issue of overlooking the neighbouring property.
Deferred for a site visit
Approval as report.
Approved as report subject to the Environment Agency’s comments on the Flood Risk Assessment, and to an additional Condition restricting the hours of power tool operation during the period of construction.
Approval as report
Delegated approval as report and subject to investigating revised options for onsite parking.
Deferred to enable officers to consider consultation response.
Delegated approval if the outstanding issues referred to in the report can be resolved satisfactorily, including further consideration in connection with the threatened trees. Delegated refusal if the outstanding issues cannot be so resolved.
REFUSED
APPROVAL
DELEGATED APPROVAL
Delegated approval, subject to a revised design being sought, and that revision being acceptable to the two local Members.
Refused
Refused
Refused as report.
Minded to approve as report