CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL

To: Councillors Baker, Blencowe, Dixon, Dryden, Harrison, Hipkin, Schofield, Slatter, R Smith, Wright

Reid (LD Alt )

Ward Councillors for Queen Edith’s, Castle, Kings Hedges and Petersfield

All other members for information

Applicants/Agent[s] and Lead Petitioner[s] (enc DCF Guidelines)

Published & despatched: 31 October 2003

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL FORUM

Date: 12 November 2003

Time: 9.30am

Place: Committee Room 1, The Guildhall

Contact: Liz Whitcher Ext: 7015

AGENDA

9:30am: PLANNING APPLICATION NO: C/03/0929/FP

SITE ADDRESS: 95 Glebe Road, Cambridge

DESCRIPTION: Demolition of Existing Dwelling and Erection of 19 No Flats

Applicant: Countryside Residential Ltd

LEAD PETITIONER: Mr W G Peters

CASE OFFICER: Jennie Parsons Tel: 01223 457158

The petition is in the following terms in relation to the above planning application.

Petition Summary*:

1. Density

2. Character of area

3. Loss of privacy

4. Flooding / Drainage

5. Design Height

6. Removal of trees

7. Access and traffic

8. Cumulative impact

9. Precedent

10. Summary

* Full text attached.

11.00am: PLANNING APPLICATION NO: C/03/0991/FP

SITE ADDRESS: Plot to the rear of 27 Windsor Road, Cambridge

DESCRIPTION: Erection of 3-bedroomed dwelling with off street parking.

Applicant: Mrs J Turton

Applicant’s AGENT: Neil Cutforth, Neil Cutforth & Associates

LEAD PETITIONER: Mrs Jane Burton

CASE OFFICER: Rebecca Flood Tel: 01223 457164

The petition is in the following terms in relation to the above planning application.

You will note that all the signatories are in the immediate neighbourhood and all of us will be directly affected in one way or another. Feelings in some cases were running extremely high; issues of highway safety were raised.

12.30 pm: Lunch Break (Committee members, officers)

1.00pm: PLANNING APPLICATION NOS: C/03/0734/RM & C/03/0974/RM

SITE ADDRESS: Chesterton Hospital, Union Lane, Cambridge.

DESCRIPTION: Construction of residential development comprising of a mix of 4 and 3 bed homes and 1 and 2 bed flats – 59 units in total.

Applicant: CHBC Architects

LEAD PETITIONER(S): Anne Janowski, Kevin Francis (Laburnum Close & Oak Tree Avenue residents), Deborah Kaye, Paula Heaney (Union Lane residents).

CASE OFFICER: Ruth Lucy Tel: 01223 457475

The petition is in the following terms in relation to the above planning application:

1. Laburnum Close & Oak Tree Avenue Petitioners

1. The scale and form of development is out of character with the two storey surrounding residential properties. Three and four storey planned buildings would dominate the area and skyline resulting in a depressing lack of privacy and light for the existing residential properties on Oak Tree Avenue and Laburnum Close. We ask that the proposed height would be reduced to two storeys in line with the proposed two storey residential building on Union Lane, so reflecting closely the residential character and form. In addition we wish to see evidence of consideration made of the overlooking of the proposed buildings on Oak Tree Avenue and Laburnum Close.

2. The density of the development is too high for the location. We would recommend a reduction from 59 to 45 residential units to be built, thereby reducing the overdevelopment of the area.

3. The plans do not make clear the area of change in the makeup of units in the revised planning proposal. We would ask for an explanation as to the outline area of change.

2. Union Lane Petitioners

1. The increase in traffic the development will create and the subsequent concern about safety for all users of Union Lane need to be reassessed in light of planning approval given to the Health Care Application P/C/03/0044/FP on 6^th August 2003 and the Traffic Assessment undertaken in May 2003 in relation to this.

2. The major access road to the site needs to be set further back and widened. It is too close to the protected horse chestnut tree and may damage it. The number of houses on the frontage to Union Lane (4) appears to be compromising the ideal position and design of the access road.

3. The four storey houses flats are out of keeping with the current housing and will distort the current skyline and restrict the light enjoyed by existing properties.

4. Many of the new properties will overlook properties in Oak Tree Avenue and Laburnum Close and this will unacceptably invade privacy.

5. The proposed creation of a kick about area is inappropriate use of open space for this development as it is too close to houses and will cause significant noise nuisance.

6. The frontage of the housing opposite numbers 48-56 Union Lane is too imposing, as it is closer than the majority of the existing housing line.

7. Residents have serious concerns about parking as those living opposite the new development have to use the highway and no assurances have been provided that this facility can be continued.

8. Parking arrangements for the new housing development appear inadequate given 15 out of the 57 planned houses are 3 bed properties.

2.30pm PLANNING APPLICATION NO: C/03/ 0982/FP

SITE ADDRESS: 101 – 139 St. Matthews Gardens, Cambridge

DESCRIPTION: To replace 12 number ‘A’ type houses on plots 50 –55 and 64 – 69 with 4 blocks of ‘X’ type flats (8 flats to each block – 4 X 2 bed and 4 X 1 bed)

Applicant: CHBC Architects

LEAD PETITIONER(S): Ms Berenice Howard - Smith

CASE OFFICER: Sarah Dyer Tel: 01223 457153

The petition is in the following terms in relation to the above planning application:

1. Loss of privacy. Privacy will be lost as the type X flats have windows on the top storey and stairwell. This is compared to type A houses (previously passed by planning committee) at 3.5 storey without windows on the top floor to the rear elevation.

2. Extensive loss of cycle and car parking will result in obstruction to the pavements and surrounding streets in an area that already suffers from overspill parking.

3. Quality of life for residents in basements flats. Lack of light, dampness and lack of fresh air. Such living conditions could affect the health of those people obliged to live and sleep entirely in a basement environment.

Information for Petitioners’ and Applicants’ Representatives

The aims of the Forum are to allow early discussion of the planning issues and to explore the scope for agreement and compromise between all sides.

Up to three representatives of the petitioners and up to three representatives of the applicants may attend and speak for a total period not exceeding 20 minutes.

The applicants’ presentation is heard first and applicants are asked to start their presentation with a brief description of the application proposals.

For further information on the conduct of the Forum or the petition process, please see the Development Control Guidelines, a copy of this is available on the Council’s website or contact the Council’s Committee Section (01223) 457012.

Information for the Public

You are welcome to attend this meeting as an observer. Please note that only the three representatives nominated by the applicant (or the applicant’s agent) and the lead petitioner may speak at the meeting.

In the event of the fire alarm sounding (which is a continuous ringing sound), you should pick up your possessions and leave the building by the route you came in. Once clear of the building, you should assemble on the pavement opposite the main entrance to the Guildhall and await further instructions. If your escape route or the assembly area is unsafe, you will be directed to safe areas by a member of Cambridge City Council staff.

Planning Committee	Development Control Forum
November 5 December 3 January 7 February 4 March 3 April 7 May 5	November 12 December 10 January 14 February 11 March 10 April 14 May 12

G:\Committee\D C Forums\FORUMS\2003\031112\Agenda.doc