PLANNING COMMITTEE Date: 20 th October 2010 Application Number 10/0810/REM Agenda Item Date Received 12th August 2010 Officer Mrs Sarah Dyer Target Date 11th November 2010 Ward Petersfield Site Station Area Redevelopment Land Between Cambridge Station And Hills Road - Blocks M1,M2, M5 And M6 Of The CB1 Station Area Masterplan And 125 Hills Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire Proposal Approval of reserved matters for phase 1A of the CB1 Masterplan (ref: 08/0266/OUT), comprising 125 Hills Road and Blocks M1/M2, M5 and M6 for 666 sqm of retail (classes A1/A3/A4/A5), and 511 student units, along with associated student recreational facilities, access roads, disabled and warden only car parking, cycle parking, surface water attenuation storage, a substation and landscaping (revised scheme). Applicant C/O Savills Lansdowne House 57 Berkeley Square London W1J 6ER 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION/AREA CONTEXT 1.1 The application site forms part of a larger area, which is the subject of the CB1 Station Area Redevelopment proposals for which outline planning permission was granted in April 2010. 1.2 The application site includes land to the north and south of the proposed new road which will form the fourth arm of the Hills Road/Brooklands Avenue junction and land to the west of the London to Kings Lynn railway line. An access route via Station Road is also included in the application site boundary. 1.3 The application site is currently vacant and most of the buildings that were previously accommodated on the site have been demolished in the last few months. 125 Hills Road is the only building to be retained within the application site.
Transcript
PLANNING COMMITTEE Date: 20th October 2010 Application Number
10/0810/REM Agenda Item
Date Received 12th August 2010 Officer Mrs Sarah Dyer
Target Date 11th November 2010 Ward Petersfield Site Station Area Redevelopment Land Between
Cambridge Station And Hills Road - Blocks M1,M2, M5 And M6 Of The CB1 Station Area Masterplan And 125 Hills Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire
Proposal Approval of reserved matters for phase 1A of the CB1 Masterplan (ref: 08/0266/OUT), comprising 125 Hills Road and Blocks M1/M2, M5 and M6 for 666 sqm of retail (classes A1/A3/A4/A5), and 511 student units, along with associated student recreational facilities, access roads, disabled and warden only car parking, cycle parking, surface water attenuation storage, a substation and landscaping (revised scheme).
Applicant C/O Savills Lansdowne House 57 Berkeley Square London W1J 6ER
1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION/AREA CONTEXT 1.1 The application site forms part of a larger area, which is the
subject of the CB1 Station Area Redevelopment proposals for which outline planning permission was granted in April 2010.
1.2 The application site includes land to the north and south of the
proposed new road which will form the fourth arm of the Hills Road/Brooklands Avenue junction and land to the west of the London to Kings Lynn railway line. An access route via Station Road is also included in the application site boundary.
1.3 The application site is currently vacant and most of the buildings
that were previously accommodated on the site have been demolished in the last few months. 125 Hills Road is the only building to be retained within the application site.
1.4 To the north and west of the site is existing residential
development fronting Hills Road and the Warren Close development. To the north fronting Station Road there are buildings that accommodate a doctor’s surgery and offices that also fall within the CB1 redevelopment area. To the north fronting the station forecourt and the station buildings are the former Mill building, the site of the Silo building which was destroyed by fire in March 2010 and Murdoch House, an office building which lies within the CB1 redevelopment area. To the east are the railway lines and the route of the guided bus and to the south the Earl of Derby Public House and the signal box and other rail related uses.
1.5 The application site is within an area of major change as
allocated by the Cambridge Local Plan 2006 (Policy 9/9 Station Area) and falls within Conservation Area No.1 – Central and the controlled parking zone.
1.6 The Station Buildings are listed grade two. Sleeperz Hotel, the
Mill and Silo, the Ceres statue, 32-38 Station Road and 125-127a Hills Road are Buildings of Local Interest (BLI). There are no trees within the application site.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application relates to a submission of reserved matters
following the grant of Outline Planning permission in April 2010. The application is the second of its type on this part of the CB1 development and follows a submission of reserved matters that was considered by Planning Committee in June this year (‘the June 2010 scheme’). The Committee resolved to refuse the submission, but it was withdrawn before the Decision Notice was issued. When outline planning permission was granted the only detailed matter that was also approved was access, all other matters were ‘reserved’ for determination a later stage. In this case the ‘reserved matters’ were appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. In common with the earlier submission, this submission relates to all of these matters.
2.2 Outline planning permission was granted subject to a number of
planning conditions. The most pertinent condition to this submission is condition 3. This condition requires that all
reserved matters for each phase must be approved before development can commence.
2.3 There are also a large number of conditions on the outline
planning permission that require the submission of further detailed information in tandem with the reserved matters submission for discharge prior to the commencement of development. The discharge of these planning conditions can be carried out under powers delegated to officers but I have made reference to them throughout my report as background information. The relevant conditions are the same as in relation to the earlier submission and relate to the following:
Condition 5 – Development to be carried out in accordance with Parameter Plans. Condition 8 – Development in accordance with Public Realm and Landscape Strategy. Condition 10 – Development in accordance with Estate Management Strategy Condition 11 – Detailed landscape scheme in accordance with Public Realm and Landscape Strategy Condition 13 – Management and maintenance plan for landscaping. Condition 20 – Renewable energy (15%) – installation and operation Condition 23 – Surface Water drainage Condition 25 – Ecological Conservation Management Plan Condition 26 – Disabled parking (5%) Condition 28 – Cycle parking Condition 29 – Foul Water drainage Condition 42 – On site waste storage Condition 57 – Car parking ratio/Air Quality impact Condition 58 – Detailed design in relation to the Cambridge Guided Bus (CGB)
In addition to the above conditions this reserved matters submission is accompanied by information to discharge the following conditions:
Plan October 2009. 9. CB1 Phase 1a – Response to Natural England For
Condition 25 August 2010. 10. CB1 Phase 1a – Foul and Surface Water Drainage
Strategy August 2010. 11. CB1 Phase 1a – Air Quality Statement October 2009. 12. CB1 Phase 1a – Relationship with CGB. 13. CB1 Phase 1a – Condition 34 Acoustic Report August
2010. 2.5 The following amendments have been made to the original
submission:
1. Amended Design and Access Statement to include the following:
� A statement of the design vision.
� A commentary on ‘vistas and spaces’, ‘frontage and building proportion’ and ‘skyline and faēade’ articulation diagrams.
� ‘Hierarchy of uses’ diagram and commentary.
� Details and revised views of modified design of 125 Hills Road and description of works.
� Revised waste strategy.
� Full description of materials and photograph of sample panel.
2. Amended plans in relation to the following:
� Updated plans to show lightwell to rear of M5 and M6.
� Updated sections to show ground level 450mm above footpaths.
� Revisions to cycle storage.
� Refuse and service areas shown to serve 125 Hills Road.
� Vertical hoists for 680 litre bins provided.
� M1/M2 elevations revised in relation to fenestration to the glazed stairs and kitchens, central entrance bay oriel, north and south elevations and addition of canopies to front and rear.
� M5 and M6 elevations revised in relation to fenestration to provide central mullion to 1st and 2nd floor windows, to show shopfront design and signage location, circular columns in lieu of rectangular at ground level and corners and canopies to front and rear.
� Horizontal zinc elements have been removed and replaced by brickwork.
� Addition of red brick to recessed coursing and cappings.
� Additional plan detailing parking provision for servicing, disabled drivers, the warden and loading/holding bays for student arrival/departure parking.
3. Updated Landscape Strategy document.
3.0 SITE HISTORY
Reference Description Outcome
08/0266/OUT CB1 Station Area Redevelopment
A/C
09/0706/CAC Conservation Area Consent for demolition of 127/127a Hills Road
A/C
C/00501/09/CC County Council application for construction of a new bus only access road and cycle route and associated facilities for
A/C
pedestrians and cyclists
10/0327/REM Reserved matters submission for Phase 1a
W/D
Non- Material Amendment to 08/0266/OUT – Use of basement to M1/M2
Agreed
Non- Material Amendment to 08/0266/OUT – Footprints of M1/M2, M5 and M6
5.0 POLICY 5.1 Central Government Advice 5.2 Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable
Development (2005): Paragraphs 7 and 8 state that national policies and regional and local development plans (regional spatial strategies and local development frameworks) provide the framework for planning for sustainable development and for development to be managed effectively. This plan-led system, and the certainty and predictability it aims to provide, is central to planning and plays the key role in integrating sustainable development objectives. Where the development plan contains relevant policies, applications for planning permission should be determined in line with the plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
5.3 Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (2006): Sets out to
deliver housing which is: of high quality and is well designed; that provides a mix of housing, both market and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price; supports a wide variety of households in all areas; sufficient in quantity taking into account need and demand and which improves choice; sustainable in terms of location and which offers a good range of community facilities with good access to jobs, services and
infrastructure; efficient and effective in the use of land, including the re-use of previously developed land, where appropriate. The statement promotes housing policies that are based on Strategic Housing Market Assessments that should inform the affordable housing % target, including the size and type of affordable housing required, and the likely profile of household types requiring market housing, including families with children, single persons and couples. The guidance states that LPA’s may wish to set out a range of densities across the plan area rather than one broad density range. 30 dwellings per hectare is set out as an indicative minimum. Paragraph 50 states that the density of existing development should not dictate that of new housing by stifling change or requiring replication of existing style or form. Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate a positive approach to renewable energy and sustainable development.
5.4 Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable
Economic Growth (2009): sets out the government’s planning policies for economic development, which includes development in the B Use Classes (offices, industry and storage), public and community uses and main town centre uses. The policy guidance sets out plan-making policies and development management policies. The plan-making policies relate to using evidence to plan positively, planning for sustainable economic growth, planning for centres, planning for consumer choice and promoting competitive town centres, site selection and land assembly and car parking. The development management policies address the determination of planning applications, supporting evidence for planning applications, a sequential test and impact assessment for applications for town centre uses that are not in a centre and not in accordance with the Development Plan and their consideration, car parking and planning conditions.
5.5 Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic
Environment (2010): sets out the government’s planning policies on the conservation of the historic environment. Those parts of the historic environment that have significance because of their historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest are called heritage assets. The statement covers heritage assets that are designated including Site, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens and Conservation Areas and those that are not designated but
which are of heritage interest and are thus a material planning consideration. The policy guidance includes an overarching policy relating to heritage assets and climate change and also sets out plan-making policies and development management policies. The plan-making policies relate to maintaining an evidence base for plan making, setting out a positive, proactive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, Article 4 directions to restrict permitted development and monitoring. The development management policies address information requirements for applications for consent affecting heritage assets, policy principles guiding determination of applications, including that previously unidentified heritage assets should be identified at the pre-application stage, the presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, affect on the setting of a heritage asset, enabling development and recording of information.
5.6 Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological
Conservation (2005): Paragraph 1 states that planning decisions should aim to maintain, and enhance, restore or add to biodiversity and geological conservation interests. In taking decisions, local planning authorities should ensure that appropriate weight is attached to designated sites of international, national and local importance; protected species; and to biodiversity and geological interests within the wider environment.
5.7 Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (2001): This
guidance seeks three main objectives: to promote more sustainable transport choices, to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services, by public transport, walking and cycling, and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car. Paragraph 28 advises that new development should help to create places that connect with each other in a sustainable manner and provide the right conditions to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport.
5.8 Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy (2004):
Provides policy advice to promote and encourage the development of renewable energy sources. Local planning authorities should recognise the full range of renewable energy sources, their differing characteristics, location requirements and the potential for exploiting them subject to appropriate environmental safeguards.
5.9 Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk
(2006): States that flood risk should be taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and that development should be directed away from areas at highest risk. It states that development in areas of flood risk should only be permitted when there are no reasonably available sites in areas of lower flood risk and benefits of the development outweigh the risks from flooding.
5.10 Circular 11/95 – The Use of Conditions in Planning
Permissions: Advises that conditions should be necessary, relevant to planning, relevant to the development permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects.
5.11 Circular 05/2005 - Planning Obligations: Advises that
planning obligations must be relevant to planning, necessary, directly related to the proposed development, fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind and reasonable in all other respect.
5.12 Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 – places a
statutory requirement on the local authority that where planning permission is dependent upon a planning obligation the obligation must pass the following tests:
(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
(b) directly related to the development; and
(c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
5.13 Cambridge Local Plan 2006
3/1 Sustainable development 3/3 Setting of the City 3/4 Responding to context 3/7 Creating successful places 3/11 The design of external spaces 3/12 The design of new buildings 3/13 Tall buildings and the skyline 3/15 Shopfronts and signage
4/10 Listed Buildings 4/11 Conservation Areas 4/12 Buildings of Local Interest 4/13 Pollution and amenity 4/14 Air Quality Management Areas 4/15 Lighting 6/8 Convenience shopping 6/10 Food and drink outlets. 7/10 Speculative Student Hostel Accommodation 8/1 Spatial location of development 8/2 Transport impact 8/4 Walking and Cycling accessibility 8/6 Cycle parking 8/8 Land for Public Transport 8/9 Commercial vehicles and servicing 8/10 Off-street car parking 8/16 Renewable energy in major new developments 8/17 Renewable energy 8/18 Water, sewerage and drainage infrastructure 9/1 Further policy guidance for the Development of Areas of Major Change
9/9 Station Area 5.14 Supplementary Planning Documents
Cambridge City Council (May 2007) – Sustainable Design and Construction: Sets out essential and recommended design considerations of relevance to sustainable design and construction. Applicants for major developments are required to submit a sustainability checklist along with a corresponding sustainability statement that should set out information indicated in the checklist. Essential design considerations relate directly to specific policies in the Cambridge Local Plan 2006. Recommended considerations are ones that the council would like to see in major developments. Essential design considerations are urban design, transport, movement and accessibility, sustainable drainage (urban extensions), energy, recycling and waste facilities, biodiversity and pollution. Recommended design considerations are climate change
adaptation, water, materials and construction waste and historic environment.
Cambridge City Council (January 2010) - Public Art: This SPD aims to guide the City Council in creating and providing public art in Cambridge by setting out clear objectives on public art, a clarification of policies, and the means of implementation. It covers public art delivered through the planning process, principally Section 106 Agreements (S106), the commissioning of public art using the S106 Public Art Initiative, and outlines public art policy guidance.
5.15 Material Considerations
City Wide Guidance The Cambridge Shopfront Design Guide (1997) – Guidance on new shopfronts. Biodiversity Checklist for Land Use Planners in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough (March 2001) - This document aims to aid strategic and development control planners when considering biodiversity in both policy development and dealing with planning proposals. Cambridge Walking and Cycling Strategy (2002) – A walking and cycling strategy for Cambridge. Cambridgeshire Quality Charter for Growth (2008) – Sets out the core principles of the level of quality to be expected in new developments in the Cambridge Sub-Region
Cambridgeshire Design Guide For Streets and Public Realm (2007): The purpose of the Design Guide is to set out the key principles and aspirations that should underpin the detailed discussions about the design of streets and public spaces that will be taking place on a site-by-site basis.
Cycle Parking Guide for New Residential Developments (2010) – Gives guidance on the nature and layout of cycle parking, and other security measures, to be provided as a consequence of new residential development.
Air Quality in Cambridge – Developers Guide (2008) - Provides information on the way in which air quality and air pollution issues will be dealt with through the development control system in Cambridge City. It compliments the Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document.
Buildings of Local Interest (2005) – A schedule of buildings of local interest and associated guidance.
Station Area Development Framework (2004) – Sets out a vision and Planning Framework for the development of a high density mixed use area including new transport interchange.
6.0 CONSULTATIONS
Cambridgeshire County Council (Engineering)
6.1 Building footings and basements must not extend out under the public highway except in the case of basements with Highway Authority consent. Informatives are recommended.
The use of double tier cycle parking is questioned and the provision of cycle parking in basements may deter usage. The gradients of the ramps serving basement need to be checked. The practicality of cycle parking within the shops is questioned. Angled granite drainage channels could present problems for cyclists and the upstand granite channel could prevent effective drainage. Access ramps and steps cannot be included in land which is to be adopted as public highway and surfaces under balconies can only be adopted under an appropriate licence under s177 of the Highways Act 1980. Cambridgeshire County Council (Transport)
6.2 No comments received.
Cambridge City Council Head of Environmental Services 6.3 ‘A’ Class Use – the use of M5, M6 and 125 Hills Road is not
defined. As the exact use is not known there a number of potential problems that could impact the amenity of the
neighbouring residents both existing and on the CB1 development. Informatives are recommended in relation to licensing, and food safety and conditions are recommended to control opening and delivery hours. It should be noted that plans are underway to extend the City Centre cumulative impact area up Hills Road, which will include this site. Any licence application within the area is ‘deemed to be refused’. Conditions 37 and 38 of the outline planning permission are adequate to control impacts associated with fume extraction.
Waste and Recycling – The waste and recycling facilities shown on the plans are acceptable for the retail uses.
Noise – Road traffic noise levels are not sufficient to preclude development at this site. However, in order to achieve a satisfactory internal noise environment, further assessment and noise mitigation is required. There is insufficient information to discharge condition 34 of the outline planning permission.
Noise – Various areas of plant are shown but the exact details are not known. Condition 37 of the outline planning permission will control noise from plant.
Noise – The noise report investigates potential noise from the neighbouring Earl of Derby Public House. The calculations show that noise insulation will be required. Condition 34 of the outline planning permission secures noise insulation as necessary. As part of the investigations for this report it was identified that whilst the Premises Licensed required a noise limiter this had not been installed. This has been raised with both the Licence holder and it is understood a limiter has now been installed. A visit is planned to confirm this. Providing the Earl of Derby complies with the conditions of its Premises Licence I do foresee noise complaints from the residents of M5. Lighting - The lighting should be designed by a lighting engineer to ensure that the lighting is adequate without causing problems. High powered lamps such as those in excess of 100 watts should be avoided. A condition is recommended to control external lighting. Air Quality – The requirements of Condition 57 of the outline planning permission have not yet been met because the air quality monitoring station is not on site. Units of blocks M1 and
M2 facing the bus interchange will be subject to poor air quality and odours, such as from the stationary buses. In order to protect the amenity and health of the residents of these units it is strongly suggested that a condition requiring a scheme to mitigate pollution and odours is required.
Contaminated Land - Parts of the CB1 site have been identified as being contaminated. Investigation and remediation is covered by condition 30 of the outline planning permission reference 08/0266/OUT.
Conditions are recommended in relation to opening and delivery hours, waste and recycling, lighting and air quality. Informatives are recommended in relation to food safety, licensing, fume filtration/extraction, noise insulation and contaminated land.
Cambridge City Council Historic Environment Manager
Application as submitted 6.4 Revised design briefs, taking into account the historic
environment context were produced by Beacon Planning in consultation with City Council officers and English Heritage. However these briefs are not reproduced in the Design and Access Statement.
Overall Issues
There is insufficient detail that is crucial to the overall appearance of the development. The D & A Statement includes Concept Plans and Elevations that were welcomed by officers during pre-application discussions. However the Statement does not address key matters set out in the design briefs or respond in detail to the analysis. Detailed Comments The D and A provides a good and very helpful historic analysis. However there is some incomplete analysis in relation to ‘Vistas and Spaces’, Frontage and Building Proportion’ and Skyline and Faēade Articulation’. The application needs to address the requirements and implications of the proposed ‘A’ class use of 125 Hills Road.
A series of detailed comments follow in relation to information that is lacking by reference to the agreed design brief. These include the design detailing of the buildings, treatment of window openings and the design of windows and screens, details of the conservatory to 125 Hills Road and detail of glazing elements.
Comments in response to further information
The revised Design and Access Statement and plans resolve almost all the issues raised in previous comments. There are two issues relating to glazing and brick detailing which need to be resolved by condition.
The D & A Statement has been expanded to cover the matters suggested. The proposals for 125 Hills Road are now shown in acceptable detail.
The fenestration (including the shopfronts) has been developed in acceptable detail. The sample panel has confirmed that the aluminium frame and panel material will provide subtle accenting to the windows. Some aspects (including the use of clear or obscure glazing, and the scope for creating visual interest) of the glazing to the stairs of M1 and M2 and the kitchen / lounges remain unresolved. These can be covered by condition.
Now that the link elements to M5 and M6 are brickwork rather than zinc, the facing materials are acceptable. However to avoid a bland appearance, the way in which brick detailing is (or is not) used to express openings needs further thought. The use of red brick accents reflects the character of both 125 Hills Road – whose red brick window arches are surprisingly not shown on the coloured plans - and the demolished 127 and 127a. This is welcome, but not yet convincing. The further work needed to refine the brick detailing can be covered by condition.
The integration of signage on both the new shop fronts and 125 Hills Road needs to be covered by condition.
Cambridge City Council/South Cambridgeshire DC Joint Urban Design Team
Application as submitted 6.5 Buildings M1 and M2
The concept drawings show a ‘base, middle and top’ to the north and south elevations and a hierarchy of windows but this has been lost in the submission and should be reintroduced. There is a discrepancy between the West elevation and plan, which needs to be resolved, and the East and West elevations need to be reviewed in relation to the position of windows at 5th floor level. A level change on the East elevation would help to protect the privacy of occupants whilst promoting natural surveillance. The relationship between areas of planting and the basement is crucial in terms of achieving an acceptable interface with the street. Details of materials including the bricks and windows and details of the windows are needed. An appropriate balance has been achieved between the number of entrances and the bus interchange function of the street. The three entrances on the rear are well located in relation to the accesses for the proposed cycle parking and potential routes into the City Centre and to ARU. Buildings M5 and M6 The buildings would benefit from a coping to provide a more positive ‘horizontal stop’. The overall approach creates a good solid to void relationship and the proportions of window openings relate well to 125 Hills Road and the terraces to the north.
The concept drawings indicated further vertical sub-division of the windows, which is not shown on the submitted drawings. Clarity is needed regarding how and where shop signage will be located. Details of materials will be needed.
The meeting room, post room and entrance lobby provide activity and surveillance to the open space. The access stairs to the basement cycle parking need to be reviewed in relation to their impact on the public realm and landscaping. Entrances to the front and rear are supported but a planted buffer needs to be introduced on both sides to protect the amenity of occupiers. The removal of the external ramp access is supported. 125 Hills Road As submitted the detail of the conservatory is inadequate. Conclusion The more restrained approach when compared with the previous scheme is recognised and a number of improvements have been made. Further work is needed as set out above.
Comments in response to further information
To follow on the Amendment Sheet. Cambridge City Council Arboriculture Team
Application as submitted 6.6 Clarification of tree species required; there is potential for root
damage in student courtyard to the north of Block M6; the space and stability of trees could be compromised in relation to minor street tree planting; the future size of trees is realistic; and tree pit details need to be clarified.
Comments in response to further information
No further comments received. Cambridge City Council Landscape Team
Application as submitted
6.7 Comments should be read in conjunction with comments on earlier application which were as follows: Sample boards of materials should be provided for consideration.
It is understood that the County Council do not accept Silva Cell as a method of tree planting in the adopted highway. The adopted and non-adopted areas therefore need to be clear. Further detail is needed of faēade greening including its maintenance. Structural and planting details are also needed. The planting palette needs to be reviewed to ensure that planting will be robust enough in the public realm. The commitment to estate management is recognised but there needs to be more detail specifically on landscape management by suitably qualified specialists. A more detailed Landscape Maintenance and Management Plan is needed and information has been sent to the applicant on this point. (Condition 13 of outline planning consent)
Additional comments are made about the level of topsoil on lawned areas, the tree pit detail and the design of the gate on M5.
Comments in response to further information
The amendments to the Landscape Proposals are acceptable but the management/maintenance issue remains unresolved.
Cambridge City Council Access Officer 6.8 6% of the rooms should be ‘accessible’. Cambridge City Council Walking and Cycling Officer Application as submitted 6.9 The Walking and Cycling Officer provided guidance direct to the
architect in relation to the following issues:
� Confirmation of swept path diagrams.
� Need for wheeling channels on both sides of the ramp and increase in ramp width to 2.2m.
� The number of doors that have to be negotiated in M1/M2 should be reduced.
� Internal staff parking to retail units is welcomed.
� Two tier cycle parking has been accepted in the Multi Storey Car Park but this should not be regarded as a default position. The Cycle Parking Guide for New Residential Developments (page 18) states that 'they may be considered for large volumes of student cycle parking (above 350 spaces) where significant space saving can be demonstrated'. Such a demonstration is necessary in comparison with high capacity stands. The advantage over using two-tier stand is less maintenance and easier accessibility.
Comments in response to further information
Comments awaited. Cambridge City Council CCTV Team 6.10 No comments received.
Cambridge City Council Senior Sustainability Officer (Design and Construction)
Application as submitted 6.11 Renewable Energy
It has been agreed that low carbon technology could count towards the 15% renewables target. The applicants strategy for Phase 1a comprises energy efficiency measures, use of photovoltaic panels and a gas Combined Heat and Power plant which will result in a 43% reduction in CO2 compared with baseline. This figure is welcomed. The potential for expanding the district heating network is also supported.
BREEAM Pre-Assessment
The submissions demonstrate that the student accommodation element is capable of achieving BREEAM excellent. More information is needed about the retail units as the request to submit the assessment prior to occupation is not supported in
the absence of any guarantee that the desired BREEAM standard is capable of being met.
In response to further information
It is recognised that the complexities of the development of phase 1a do somewhat complicate the phased discharge of condition 18. However, following discussions with the developers consultants and subject to written confirmation of the build standards for the shell of the retail units and the legal obligations that will be passed to tenants in relation to the achievement of BREEAM “Excellent” I feel that I can now withdraw my original concerns about the achievement of the required standard.
Environment Agency
6.12 Further information is needed in relation to surface water
drainage. Foul water drainage details are acceptable. Anglian Water 6.13 Drainage details are acceptable.
6.15 Discussions have taken place with the architects. In the light of these the following comments are made:
� Pleased to see the lightwell to the north of M1/M2 designed out. Defensible planting is supported.
� Lighting and CCTV coverage is essential to the basement cycle storage areas and access should be restricted.
� Access to the basement rooms will need to be restricted in relation to the cycle stores.
� There should be access controls within the building and restrictions on the number rooms served of a corridor.
� No further comments on M5/M6.
Natural England 6.16 Natural England is satisfied with the ecological management
information provided in relation to Phase 1A of this development and we have no further comments to make.
English Heritage 6.17 The revised design represents a more considered response to
this important site and its context. The decision to omit the double corridors to reduce the width of M1/M2 is particularly welcome as it allows more space for lightwells. The revised massing and elevational treatment results in a better relationship with the Mill. M5 and M6 benefit from design changes.
Further information is needed on the detailed aspects of the design including window openings, enclosures to the lightwells and the conservatory to 125 Hills Road. Conditions are recommended to control these key details. The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy advice and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice.
Design and Conservation Panel (Meeting of 24 November 2009)
6.18 The Panel considered the proposals at pre-application stage on
26 August 2009, 23 September 2009 and 24 November 2009. A copy of the minutes of the Panel meeting on 24 November 2009 is attached at Appendix A. The conclusions of the Panel were that the works to 125 Hills Road were unsatisfactory, that there are concerns about the living conditions for students accommodated in the basement, that the use of natural ventilation to the basement (bus interchange side) is questioned and that the location of the community space is unsatisfactory. Block M5 (Green subject to squaring off of retail space), Block M6 and 125 Hills Road (Red) and Blocks M1 and M2 (Amber).
The revised scheme has not been presented to the Sub-Panel
because it is anticipated that the revisions made would not result in a different outcome and the current scheme responds positively to the outstanding issues raised by the Panel.
Disability Consultative Panel (Meeting of 12 August 2009)
6.19 Operation of entrance doors, to maintain security and ensure building is accessible. Any door entry systems will need to be fitted with induction loops and tactile/Braille markings and positioned at a height accessible to wheelchair users. There should be a secure storage space for mobility scooters and a charging point.
There should be handrails in all showers. Accessible rooms should have the potential for hoist provision between bedroom and bathroom (a revised layout was provided later).
The revised scheme has not been presented to the Consultative Panel because it is anticipated that the revisions made would not result in a different outcome and the matters of detail can be addressed within the decision notice.
6.20 The above responses are a summary of the comments that
have been received. Full details of the consultation responses can be inspected on the application file.
7.0 REPRESENTATIONS 7.1 The owners/occupiers of the following addresses have made
representations: 19 Glisson Road 255 Cherry Hinton Road 7.2 The representations can be summarised as follows:
� Concern about the potential for an increase in traffic.
� Potential for noise and disturbance and the means be which this will be controlled particularly in the summer months.
� Conditions should be included in the ‘inevitable approval’ to address concerns.
� Objection to having so many student rooms when key worker housing and affordable housing is needed.
� Impact of high number of student rooms on the local community.
� Concerns regarding access in conjunction with the proposed hotel.
� Insufficient cycle parking spaces in Station Road.
� Recreational facilities and similar facilities should be open to the public.
� There should not be more gated communities like the Belvedere.
7.3 Glisson Road/Tenison Road Residents Association raise
concerns about the minor changes that have been made to the overall plans which may mean that focus is on these changes and not wider objections. There remains concern about the impact of the student population on the wider area and also the problems already associated with hostels operated by ARU that could be a warning of things to come.
7.4 The above representations are a summary of the comments
that have been received. Full details of the representations can be inspected on the application file.
8.0 ASSESSMENT 8.1 From the consultation responses and representations received
and from my inspection of the site and the surroundings, I consider that the main issues are:
1. Principle of development 2. Amendments in Comparison with the June 2010 Scheme 3. Context of site, design and external spaces 4. Trees 5. Public Art 6. Renewable energy and BREEAM 7. Disabled access 8. Residential amenity 9. Refuse arrangements 10. Highway safety 11. Car and cycle parking 12. Third party representations 13. Outstanding issues raised by internal and external
consultees. 14. Planning Obligation Strategy
Principle of Development 8.2 The principle of development has been established by the
Outline Planning consent and associated parameter plans. Parameter plans 3 to 9 address the following matters:
� PP3 Building Layout (+ maximum balcony/canopy overhang 1.5m)
� PP4 Building and Ground Conditions (building height (maximum height of occupied floorspace + maximum plant/lift motor rooms 2 m), building height above proposed ground level, proposed ground level (+/- 0.5m tolerance), existing ground level and proposed ground floor setback)
� PP5 Access and Circulation
� PP6 Public Realm and Open Space
� PP7 Residential and Non-Residential Parking.
� PP8 Proposed Uses – Ground Floor
� PP9 Proposed Uses – Typical Upper Levels 8.3 There are two reports elsewhere on the Agenda that deal with
applications for Non-Material Amendments to the parameter plans to accommodate changes to Blocks M1, M2, M5 and M6. This report assumes that the recommendation on that report is accepted.
8.4 The parameter plans principally control the size and mass of the
development and the disposition of land uses. I will deal with issues of appearance, layout, scale and landscaping in the following section on Context of the site, design and external spaces. With regard to use, the parameter plans set out the following arrangement:
8.5 299 student rooms are to be accommodated within blocks M1
and M2 comprising 214 en-suite rooms, 65 studios and 20 accessible rooms. A student amenity area is to be provided in the basement. The applicants have confirmed that this is an ancillary use to the student accommodation and does not therefore constitute a D1 Non-residential Institution use. 122 student rooms are to be accommodated in Block M5, 81 en-suite rooms, 38 studio and 3 accessible rooms with an
unidentified retail use at ground floor in the western half of the building. Block M6 accommodates 90 student rooms comprising 75 en-suite rooms, 9 studios and 6 accessible rooms. Within the western half of the building there is to be a meeting room, post room and office associated with the student accommodation and an unidentified retail use. 125 Hills Road now sits separately and is to accommodate unspecified retail uses at ground and first floor. The mix of uses accords with the parameter plan disposition of uses.
8.6 The basement level of M1/M2 is to accommodate student
rooms and amenity space as in the previous scheme. Committee approved a Non-Material Amendment to Parameter Plan 7 in June 2010 to allow for this use.
8.7 In my opinion, the principle of the development is acceptable
and in accordance with policies 3/1, 6/8, 6/10 and 9/9 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2006.
Amendments in Comparison with the June 2010 Scheme 8.8 The Design and Access Statement sets out the key changes
that have been made in comparison with the earlier scheme. These are as follows:
M1/M2
� Extra lift/stair core included.
� Depth of building reduced.
� Pavement widths/public realm increased.
� CHP plant relocated to M5.
� Floor plans and elevational modelling.
� Lightwell omitted from eastern face.
� Entrances reorganised.
� External materials revised. M5/M6
� Basement plant and stores included.
� Landscaped external area increased.
� Floor plan and elevational modelling.
� Entrances reorganised.
� External materials revised.
� Student amenity areas relocated to M1/M2.
� Relocation of Community Room to the residential phase. 125 Hills Road
� Internal proposals refined in line with survey.
� Conservatory revised.
� No connection and clear gap maintained between 125 and M6, with no glass link.
8.9 These changes have had a fundamental impact on both the
internal layout of the buildings and their external appearance. For this reason my assessment relates predominately to the plans as now submitted and does not seek to draw on similarities with the earlier scheme in detail. However the decision of the Committee in relation to the earlier scheme is a material consideration and should be borne in mind when determining the revised scheme. The principle concern of the Committee was that the design of the buildings was not of a sufficiently high standard for a site within a Conservation Area and would therefore have an adverse impact on the Conservation Area.
Context of site, design and external spaces and impact on the Conservation Area
8.10 The reserved matters submission relates to the appearance,
landscaping, layout and scale of the development, therefore design considerations are key to the determination of the application. The parameter plans have set a threshold on matters such as the footprint and height of the blocks as they come forward in their detailed form. The approvals of the parameter plans were predicated on the assumption that buildings of such height and mass would be acceptable in the context of the site. It is therefore essential that the buildings that have been brought forward accord with parameter plans.
8.11 There is a report elsewhere on the Agenda that deals with the
issue of the footprint of the blocks. On the assumption that the recommendation is accepted, blocks M1, M2, M5 and M6 have building footprints that accord with the parameter plans. A comparison can be made between the building heights as defined by the parameter plans and the reserved matters submission as follows:
Block Parameter Plan height (occupied floorspace)
RM height (occupied floorspace)
RM height to parapet
RM height to plant
M1 18m 17.3m 18.5m 19.1m
M2 18m 17.3m 18.5m 19.1m
M5 12m 11.5m 12.8m 13.5m
M6 9m 8.8m 10.5m 10.5m
Taking into account the allowances and tolerances set down by Parameter Plan 4, the proposed development accords with the Parameter Plan height limits. I have recommended conditions to secure details of the solar panels and rooftop plant because these do not form part of the submission (Conditions 4 and 11)
8.12 The overall layout and scale of the development are controlled
by the restrictions imposed by the parameter plans and I have concluded that the scheme accords with the maximum parameters. However consideration also needs to be given as to the how the built forms sit within those parameters and to the appearance of the development. Only by doing this can the detailed impact of the development be properly addressed.
Blocks M1 and M2 – appearance and scale of development 8.13 The building that is proposed on the site of Blocks M1 and M2
effectively fills the volume permitted by the parameter plans and creates a very large structure. Given the constraints of the immediate site and particularly the proposed bus interchange and the railway to the east, it is my view that there is merit in this approach. The building will act as an effective barrier to the quieter uses to the west in the form of existing and proposed residential development and the Local Park and will also be read with the retained Mill building which itself is a building of significant presence. However there is a danger with buildings of this scale that they can feel very dominant unless ways are found to reduce their impact to more ‘human’ scale. The June 2010 scheme sought to achieve this via the use of articulation and a mixed palette of materials. The revised scheme takes a
different approach producing a building that has a strong vertical rhythm to relate to the Mill and has components that reflect the traditional proportions and scale of warehouse buildings.
8.14 The central part of the building that straddles the boundary
between blocks M1 and M2 accommodates the main entrance to the building. This is highlighted by a full height brick and glazed vertical feature, which is recessed slightly on the west side (bus interchange) where it demarcates the only entrance into the building and which projects on the east side (residential mews/Southern Access Road). Two further full height glazed elements subdivide both the east and west elevations. Brickwork predominates between the glazed elements with window openings that have a strong vertical emphasis and it is taken down to ground level in a series of pillars, which further emphasise the solidity of the building. The revision to the plans that incorporates red brick detailing reflects the appearance of buildings in the area and adds interest to the brick elevations. On the northern and southern ends of the west (bus interchange) elevation, full height corner windows turn the corner onto the northern and southern elevations. At roof level the fifth floor accommodation is finished in grey zinc rain cladding.
8.15 The way in which the building functions internally is expressed
in the elevational treatment. To the west side (bus interchange) the full height glazing serves communal spaces and will provide interest to the building when viewed from the outside especially at night. To the east side (residential mews/Southern Access Road) the glazed projections accommodate stairwells.
8.16 The revised Design and Access Statement and plans have
been submitted to respond to the comments made by the Historic Conservation Manager (HEM) and the Joint Urban Design Team (JUDT). Coloured elevations and detailed plans have been provided in support of the revised submission, reducing the need for detailed conditions to be included in the recommendation. For example a detailed drawing of a typical window detail is provided, which clearly shows how the glazed part of the window will sit in the opening in relation to the perforated metal panel alongside. This level of detail was missing in relation to the previous submission and its inclusion
now means that it is possible to develop a very clear idea of what the M1/M2 building will look like.
8.17 I have not had a formal response from the JUDT and this will
not be available prior to this report being finalised. However I note that the hierarchy of windows has been reintroduced, discrepancies on the plans have been resolved, the level change has been shown, and window details have been shown.
8.18 The HEM is satisfied that the additional information and plans
that have been submitted overcomes most of his concerns about the application as submitted. I have recommended conditions in relation to the treatment of glazing to the stairs in M1/M2 and the kitchen/lounges and in relation to the red brick detailing. (Conditions 5, 7 and 10)
8.19 In my view M1/M2 is a much more successful building than its
predecessor in the earlier scheme. It relates well to the Mill and has clearly drawn inspiration from the positive aspects of its surroundings. I have addressed the issue of the impact of the building on the visual amenity of the Conservation Area in more depth below.
Blocks M1 and M2 – External spaces and landscaping/tree planting
8.20 The reserved matters submission is supported by a landscaping
scheme for the area surrounding M1 and M2. To the east of the building the application site boundary follows what will become the line of bus shelters and trees within the bus interchange. The space between the building and the bus interchange has been significantly altered in comparison with the previous scheme, in particular the proposed light well and ramps has been removed from the plans. The pavement will be between 4.5 m and 5.5 m wide (compared with 2-3.5m in the previous scheme) and a planting bed that runs the full width of the building at a minimum of 1m deep will provide separation from the pavement.
8.21 To the west of the building the landscaped area included within
the application site is more extensive and includes the Southern Access Road, which will form the mews street between the student accommodation and the residential blocks, which will front the park. The access road will be finished in hydro-blasted
asphalt with granite sett banding to match the new link road. 10 Himalayan Birch trees are to be planted within the pavement adjacent to the building. This pavement will be between 3 m and 4.8 m wide and finished in Harvest Buff conservation paving. The variation in width of the pavement is because the there are ramps and lightwells to this side of the building. There is a ramp serving the main entrance in the centre of the building; this will be for pedestrians and serves the ground floor only. Two similar ramps are associated with ground floor access to the northern and southern ends. There will also be two ramps serving the basement cycle parking areas. These take the form of steps with a side gully for cycles. Two lightwells at the northern and southern ends serve six student rooms and two kitchens in the basement. Small ‘patio gardens’ of up to 2 m x 2.6 m are provided to serve a further twelve student rooms in the basement. Glazed barriers surround the ramps and lightwells. I have recommended conditions to control the details of this balustrade and the means by which they will be kept clean (Conditions 3 and 16).
8.22 Small planting beds, 15.5 metres wide by 1.2 metres deep, are
proposed to the northern and southern ends of the building. There are no longer any proposals for climbing plants to be used.
8.23 Further details of tree pits have been provided in the revised plan submission, but I am waiting for further advice regarding the maintenance and management plan. I have consulted the Landscape Team and the Arboricultural Officer and will report further on the Amendment Sheet. Subject to their comments, I am of the view that the design of the external spaces associated with blocks M1 and M2 is acceptable and will be well co-coordinated with other hard and soft landscaping within the wider development.
Block M5 – appearance and scale of development 8.24 Block M5 sits on the south side of the new link road and to the
north of the Earl of Derby Public House. The parameter plan for this block takes account of the constraints of the site and the importance of this block, which together with M6 forms the gateway into the site from Hills Road. The parameter plan height allowance for M5 is 12 metres while for M6 it is 9 metres.
8.25 The elevation to Hills Road comprises the area that will accommodate the shopfront to the retail use at ground floor level with three floors of student accommodation above. The occupants, and therefore the nature of the use of the retail space are unknown, but as part of the proposals a shopfront is shown and areas for advertisements are identified. That part of the building nearest to the new junction features a projecting bay element at first and second floor level that is glazed. Common rooms will be accommodated in this area adding animation to the street at these upper levels. The rest of this elevation will be finished in brick at first and second floor level and zinc cladding on the recessed third floor. In common with revisions to M1/M2 the inclusion of red brick detailing is a very positive revision. Windows will have a vertical emphasis and other detailing within the brickwork will help the building to sit comfortably with the Earl of Derby and 125 Hills Road; both of which have vertical window openings in a three ‘bay’ arrangement and the strong rhythm set up by the terraced houses fronting Hills Road.
8.26 The elevation to the new link road includes the shopfront to the
retail unit that is as described above and a continuation of the projecting bay feature at first and second floors. The rest of the elevation to the student rooms is composed of brick at first and second floor level and zinc cladding at third floor level. Brickwork is taken down to ground floor level at the junction of the two halves of the building.
8.27 The rear elevation of the building faces towards the Earl of
Derby public house and overlooks an enclosed courtyard. At ground floor level the rear elevation of the retail unit is finished in brickwork and includes a double door and a window. The rest of the elevation serves the student accommodation and is generally finished in brickwork at ground to second floor level and zinc cladding to third floor level. The exceptions are two access stairwells which project from the rear elevation and which are full height brick structures. In common with the rest of the student accommodation the windows have a vertical alignment reminiscent of the existing buildings in the area.
8.28 The revised plans that have been submitted show changes to
the elevations and the materials in response to the comments made by the HEM and the JUDT. The incorporation of
shopfronts and signage locations reduce the need for detailed conditions and enable the building as a whole to be analysed.
8.29 I have not had a formal response from the JUDT and this will
not be available prior to this report being finalised. However I note that red brick capping feature has been introduced; the further vertical subdivision of windows is provided; and planting buffers are shown where possible.
8.30 The HEM is satisfied that the additional information and plans
that have been submitted overcome his most of his concerns about the application as submitted. I have recommended conditions in relation to the treatment of glazing to the kitchen/lounges and in relation to the red brick detailing. (Conditions 5, 7 and 10) I have also added a condition requiring that the signage associated with the retail units be limited to the locations shown on the plans. (Condition 23)
8.31 In my view M5 is a much more successful building than its
predecessor as brought forward in the earlier scheme. It has clearly drawn inspiration from the positive aspects of its surroundings. I have addressed the issue of the impact of the building on the visual amenity of the Conservation Area in more depth below.
Block M5 – External spaces and landscaping/tree planting 8.32 The landscaping scheme addresses the courtyard to rear of the
building and planting beds that are sited along the frontage to the link road. The tree and planting details that are shown on the route of the new link road form part of the landscaping proposals for that project.
8.33 The courtyard area has significantly changed in comparison
with the earlier scheme because a basement is to be provided to accommodate cycle parking and plant including the CHP boiler. This enables more planting beds to be provided within the courtyard together with small area of visitor cycle parking. In common with M1/M2, steps and a cycle gully afford access to the basement cycle park. The courtyard is secured at its eastern end by a gate, outside which is a delivery/parking bay. The applicant has agreed that the mesh can be removed from this gate and that it will be a bespoke powder-coated steel gate. I have added an appropriate condition to secure the details of
the gate (Condition 3). A service yard serving the retail use is located off Hills Road, segregated from the student courtyard. Two small structures are to be provided adjacent to the service yard to accommodate a substation and wheel chair store. I have recommended a condition to secure details of the way in which these buildings will abut the wall to the Earl of Derby public house because it is a Building of Local Interest. (Condition 6). I have also recommended a condition to secure the approval of any flues associated with the CHP boiler and/or the retail units. (Conditions 8 and 12).
8.34 Two small planting beds are to be provided to the frontage of the student accommodation to the link road, one of which wraps around the eastern end of the building. These measure 14 m by 2 m and 28 m by 2 m respectively. The ramps that formed part of the earlier proposals have been removed. To the rear of the building is a lightwell and in common with Block M1/M2 I have recommended conditions to control the details of the balustrade to the lightwell and the means by which they will be kept clean (Conditions 3 and 16)
8.35 Further details of tree pits have been provided in the revised plan submission, but I am waiting for further advice regarding the maintenance and management plan. I have consulted the Landscape Team and the Arboricultural Officer and will report further on the Amendment Sheet. Subject to their comments, I am of the view that the design of the external space associated with block M5 is acceptable and will be well co-ordinated with other hard landscaping within the wider development.
Block M6 and 125 Hills Road – appearance and scale of
development 8.36 Block M6 sits on the north side of the new link road and to the
south of the terrace of houses fronting Hills Road of which 123 Hills Road is the most southerly. The external treatment to the new building mimics that which has been used on Block M5, including the projecting bay feature and the use of brick on the first and second floors. There is no third floor to M6, therefore a much smaller extent of zinc cladding is used on the roof. The tree and planting details that are shown on the route of the new link road form part of the landscaping proposals for that project. The shopfront to the retail unit wraps around the west and south elevations and some details of this have been provided.
8.37 When the application for outline planning permission was under
consideration, concerns were expressed that unlike 127/127a Hills Road there was no justification for the demolition of the Building of Local Interest 125 Hills Road. As a result the parameter plan was adjusted to make provision for the retention of this building. The proposals that have been brought forward include the retention of 125 Hills Road. In contrast with the previous scheme, 125 Hills Road is to remain a separate building and will not be linked to M6.
8.38 The plans show that 125 Hills Road is to be refurbished and a
conservatory added. In comparison with the earlier submission much more information has been provided about the design and appearance of the conservatory and the materials of its construction in the revised submission.
8.39 125 Hills Road is an L-shaped building with its longer side fronting Hills Road. The proposals for the frontage to Hills Road involve refurbishment and reinstatement of windows and the central door. The new conservatory will be located to the rear, but will visible from the footpath/cycleway that lies to the north. The conservatory measures approximately 8 m long and 6 metres wide. Its northern elevation to the footpath/cycleway is fully glazed and to the south it will be attached to a new white rendered wall that is attached to the existing building. The roof and the east elevation will be clad in zinc.
8.40 The conservatory is very much a modern addition to 125 Hills
Road and contrasts with the materials and design detailing of the existing building. However, the vertical treatment of the glazed wall and the colour of the zinc cladding echo the vertical nature of the fenestration on 125 8.41 Whilst 125 Hills Road is not listed, and therefore listed building consent is not required and the planning authority has limited powers in relation to internal alterations to the building, Local Plan policy 4/12 is relevant. This policy states ‘applications for planning permission to alter such buildings will be considered in the light of the Council’s approved Guidance on Alterations and Improvements to Buildings of Local Interest.’ The HEM is satisfied with the level of information that has been submitted in relation to the works to 125 Hills Road indicating compliance with policy 4/12.
8.41 Concerns were raised by the D & C Panel about how an A3 use could be accommodated within the building without having an adverse impact on its integrity. In my view this issue has been successfully tackled in the revised submission. The need for servicing and plant has been anticipated and provision has been made in the service yard. The local planning authority will have control over advertisements that require advertisement consent.
8.42 The revised plans that have been submitted show changes to
the elevations and the materials in response to the comments made by the HEM and the JUDT. The incorporation of shopfronts and signage locations reduce the need for detailed conditions. The level of detailing of the conservatory extension to 125 Hills Road is much improved in comparison with the previous submission.
8.43 In common with M5, I have not had a formal response from the JUDT and this will not be available prior to this report being finalised. However I note that red brick capping feature has been introduced; the further vertical subdivision of windows is provided; and planting buffers are shown where possible. Detailed plans are provided of the conservatory extension to 125 Hills Road as described above.
8.44 In common with my assessment of Block M5 I have no
objections to the design of the new building subject to the approval of materials and other detailed matters as recommended by the HEM. The alterations and extension to 125 Hills Road will ensure the long term retention of a Building of Local Interest. I have recommended a condition to secure details of the internal alterations to 125 Hills Road (Condition 9). I have also recommended conditions to secure the approval of any flues associated with the retail units (Condition 12) and requiring that the signage associated with the retail units be limited to the locations shown on the plans. (Condition 23)
Block M6 – External spaces and landscaping 8.45 The landscaping scheme addresses the open space to rear of
the building, planting beds that are sited along the frontage to the Local Park and a hard surfaced and treed/planted area at the southern end of the Local Park. The open space lies adjacent to the existing footpath/cycleway that separates the CB1 development from the terraced houses fronting Hills Road
and the Warren Close development. This area is to be laid out with lawn, hard surfacing, planting beds and trees including Weeping Silver Lime and Wild Cherry. An external seating area associated with the retail use in 125 Hills Road and an enclosed servicing area are also shown on the plans. The applicants have confirmed that the topsoil depth for lawned areas can be 300mm over de-compacted subsoil as requested by the Landscape Officer.
8.46 Two small planting beds are to be provided to the frontage of
the student accommodation to the Local Park. These measure 18 m by 1.5 m and 16 m by 2 m respectively. Five False Acacia trees are to be planted between the student accommodation and the Local Park and six Turkish Hazel trees planted at the southern entrance to the Local Park. To the rear of the building is a lightwell and in common with Block M1/M2 I have recommended conditions to control the details of the balustrade to the lightwell and the means by which they will be kept clean (Conditions 3 and 16)
8.47 Further details of tree pits have been provided in the revised plan submission, but I am waiting for further advice regarding the maintenance and management plan. I have consulted the Landscape Team and the Arboricultural Officer and will report further on the Amendment Sheet. Subject to their comments, I am of the view that the design of the external space associated with block M6 is acceptable and will be well co-ordinated with other hard landscaping within the wider development.
Impact on the Conservation Area 8.48 A key difference between this application and the previous one,
is the approach that has been adopted to assessing and responding to the impact of the development on the Conservation Area. Following the earlier Committee resolution to refuse permission on the grounds of impact on the Conservation Area, a series of meetings took place between the applicants and their agents, the case officer and the Historic Environment Manager and a representative from English Heritage. As a result of these meetings the applicants prepared a series of design briefs, which addressed such issues as the design vision for the individual block and the response to
context including height, footprint and use, scale and massing, articulation, skyline and materials.
8.49 Although absent from the Design and Access Statement as
submitted, it is clear to me that the revised scheme has used the design brief to help to address the criticisms that were made in relation to the previous plans. The revised Design and Access Statement does address the brief in full and makes the following observations about the ‘Design Vision’:
� Vistas and Spaces – the ‘bookends’ of M5 and M6 should sit comfortably with both the Earl of Derby and 125 Hills Road. The response to this was to create a ‘3 bay expression’ to the ‘bookend’ of M6 of two storeys above a retail plinth. M6 is set behind the building line of 125 Hills Road to ensure that it does not dominate. A similar approach is adopted for M5. The high level view of the rear of M5 is also carefully considered. M1/M2 is a building that is seen ‘in the round’ and for this reason it needs well considered gable ends, corners and a degree of articulation to retain the traditional warehouse proportions and scale.
� Frontages and Building Proportion – Kinked or splayed buildings are not a characteristic of the area therefore the buildings have been designed as linked but separate terraces.
� Hierarchy of Uses – Building projections and different fenestration signifies room types and uses. Entrances are clearly signaled and glass is used extensively to provide light and active frontage. Oriel windows are used at key ‘rotational corners’.
� Skyline and Faēade Articulation – Projecting elements are further expressed as raised elements that screen roof plant including CHP flues on M5.
8.50 The ‘Design Vision’ then naturally moves onto the concept
plans, which illustrate how the concept for each block can be developed using the brief and ‘Design Vision’ to constrain the layout, appearance and landscaping of the development. The further development of the concept plans has resulted in the reserved matters submission. The comments of the Historic
Environment Manager (HEM) in relation to the application as submitted highlighted that the submission was lacking in detail, both in terms of the development of the concept plans and the detailed design of key elements of the building such as openings and window details. These concerns have been resolved by the submission of the revised Design and Access Statement, detailed plans and materials and the HEM is now satisfied with the submission and the impact that the development will have on the Conservation Area.
8.51 In my opinion the revised submission overcomes the criticisms
of the previous scheme and the proposal is compliant with Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policy 4/11 and guidance provided by PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment.
Public Art 8.52 There are no public art proposals as part of this submission.
The provision of public art is secured via the s106 Agreement associated with the Outline Planning Consent.
8.53 In my opinion the proposal is compliant with Cambridgeshire
and Peterborough Structure Plan (2003) policies P6/1 and 9/8 and Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policies 3/7 and 10/1 and the Public Art SPD 2010
Renewable energy and BREEAM
8.54 The Energy Strategy Assessment and Addendum which support
the application, recommend the use of a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system and photovoltaic cells to achieve the appropriate carbon savings for the development and discharge of condition 20 on the outline planning consent, which requires 15% of the energy needs of the development to be achieved by renewable energy sources.
8.55 Condition 18 on the outline planning consent requires that the development achieves BREEAM ‘excellent’ at pre-assessment stage. This has been demonstrated in relation to the student accommodation but the Senior Sustainability Officer (Design and Construction) has raised concerns in relation to the retail space, which has not reached the ‘fit out’ stage. The applicants have provided the following additional information:
‘Because the type of fit out of these (retail) units would be very much dependent on the type of tenant that Brookgate eventually agrees with, producing any form of pre-assessment now would be irrelevant. Furthermore it was agreed (with the Senior Sustainability Officer (Design and Construction)) that it would be more appropriate to carry out the necessary pre-assessment for the purpose of the BREEAM accreditation at the fit out stage once the retailer has identified and not to make it a pre-commencement of the main phase 1a development. The passing down of all statutory obligations where relevant to any such tenant will be done formally in the respective lease documentation to ensure compliance with any relevant wider obligations that the tenant may have to the conditions of the CB1 masterplan.’
8.56 The Senior Sustainability Officer (Design and Construction)
accepts this approach to the discharge of condition 18. 8.57 Although the discharge of conditions 18 and 20 are not of direct
relevance to the reserved matters submission, they are relevant in terms of the design of the scheme. The CHP boiler will be located in the basement of Block M5 from where the system can be expanded to other blocks in the development.
8.58 I am satisfied that the applicants have suitably addressed the
issue of renewable energy and the proposal is in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policy 8/16 and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.
Disabled access
8.59 The Design and Access Statement confirms that level access is
provided for all. There are ramps into the buildings, but these have a gentle slope. Landscaped areas are flat and provide opportunities for people in wheelchairs and those with limited mobility. I have recommended informatives to address the issues raised by the Disability Consultative Panel. The Access Officer has requested that the 6% of rooms that are ‘accessible’ be identified. I have asked for confirmation of this.
8.60 In my opinion the proposal is compliant with Cambridge Local
Plan (2006) policies 3/7 and 3/12.
Residential Amenity Impact on amenity of neighbouring occupiers
8.61 Blocks M1 and M2 This building is located in excess of 60 metres from the nearest residential properties in the Warren Close development. I do not consider that there will be any impact on the occupiers of these properties in terms of a reduction of residential amenity. New residential development is proposed as part of the CB1 development to the west. The building to parameter plan envelope distance is 13.5 metres, which, although slightly greater than the previous scheme (12m), could give rise to some overlooking or privacy impacts. In the absence of a detailed scheme for the residential blocks it is difficult to assess whether this will arise. It appears to me that this constraint could be addressed by sensitive treatment of windows in the residential blocks and the architects for the residential scheme who are in pre-application discussions with officers have been encouraged to consider this.
8.62 Block M5
Block M5 is located between 5 m and 14 m to the north of the boundary with the Earl of Derby public house. The public house building, and an accommodation block that was constructed in recent years, are positioned on the boundary. There are no windows in the rear elevation of the accommodation block, so it will not be affected by the development in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy or enclosure. There are windows in the flank of the original public house building, but these are located forward of the set back space in front of Block M5 as it fronts Hills Road. Whilst it will be possible to see the development from this window its impact in terms of loss of outlook and overlooking will not be significant.
8.63 Block M6
The new build elements of Block M6 are located a minimum of 23 metres from 123 Hills Road. The proposed extension to 125 Hills Road will be 10 m from the boundary with 123 Hills Road. Given these separation distances I do not consider that the residential amenity of the occupiers of 123 Hills Road will be
compromised to a significant degree by the development. The introduction of the area of open space for use by students, and a separate area for use in association with the retail use of 125, may result in an increase of noise and disturbance as people congregate there, but this needs to be set against the fact that the existing footpath/cycleway is a very well used route which already generates noise. The open space is overlooked by the student rooms, which should reduce the likelihood of it becoming a magnet for anti-social behaviour.
8.64 The north elevation of M6 is set 12 metres from the side gable
of the nearest block on the Warren Close development. The flats in Warren Close are generally orientated to face either the internal open space or the public open space. There are windows on the gable ends of the existing and proposed blocks, but given the separation distance, the presence of the footpath/cycle way and the relative heights of the buildings I do not consider that the impacts in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy will be significant.
8.65 The Head of Environmental Services has recommended that
further details are needed to assess the impact of plant noise and lighting. This can be controlled via conditions on the outline planning permission and a lighting condition that I have recommended. (Condition 22) I have also recommended a condition to control the opening and delivery hours of the retail uses. (Condition 24)
8.66 In my opinion the proposal adequately respects the residential
amenity of its neighbours and the constraints of the site and I consider that in this respect it is compliant with Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policies 3/4 and 3/7.
Amenity for future occupiers of the site
8.67 In my view the development will generally provide a good
environment for the student population. The use of changes in level between the floor levels and the pavement, and the introduction of planting beds immediately adjacent to the buildings, helps to ease the relationship between the internal environment and external environment, part of which will become a busy bus interchange.
8.68 The initial proposal to house students in the basement area adjacent to the bus interchange has been abandoned. There will be basement living accommodation to the mews street, but I less concerned about this proposal given the quiet residential character of this street. The revised scheme replaces some of the lightwells with small patio gardens, which will benefit the occupants of associated student rooms. A report has been produced which concludes that the basement accommodation will benefit from adequate natural light. All areas of open space benefit from natural surveillance, but I consider that there should be access controls to the courtyard behind M5 to protect the occupants of this building. I have recommended a condition to require submission and approval of details of such controls. (Condition 13)
8.69 The Head of Environmental Services has requested that a
condition be added to secure details of the means by which ventilation will be provided to the east elevation of M1/2, to enable mitigation of any air quality impacts arising from the use of the bus interchange to be addressed. I have recommended a condition. (Condition 1)
8.70 In my opinion the proposal provides a high-quality living
environment and an appropriate standard of residential amenity for future occupiers, and I consider that in this respect it is compliant with Cambridge Local Plan (2006) policies 3/7 and 3/12.
Refuse Arrangements
8.71 All student blocks will accommodate refuse stores within their
basements. Residents will be expected to take their waste to the refuse stores and sort it by type. On collection days the bins will be moved to ground level holding areas by the estate management team using dedicated refuse hoists. In the event that the hoists cannot be used, the can be moved using the lift. The ground level holding areas are within the 10 metre collection distances for refuse personnel. The retail uses will have their own ground level refuse storage areas within the service ‘yards’. The bins will be moved to on street collection areas on collection days. The Head of Environmental Services has confirmed that the size of bins, their location and number and means of collection are acceptable. I have recommended conditions relating to provision and retention of waste storage
facilities and to secure details of collection arrangements. (Conditions 19 and 20)
8.72 In my opinion the proposal is compliant with Cambridge Local
Plan (2006) policy 3/12.
Highway Safety
8.73 Access within the site was determined at the outline planning stage; therefore access is not a reserved matter. The Highway Authority have not raised any concern in relation to highway safety, but have asked for information to be brought to the attention of the applicant, for instance in relation to adoption of the public highway. I have added informatives as requested. I have raised the issue of angled drainage channels and upstands with the applicant and will provide further information on the Amendment Sheet.
8.74 In my opinion the proposal is compliant with Cambridge Local
Plan (2006) policy 8/2.
Car and Cycle Parking Car Parking 8.75 No car parking is to be provided for general use by students.
Six parking spaces are provided for use by disabled students, one parking space for the warden and two informal drop off/pick up bays. Other areas that can be used during student drop off periods have been identified. Condition 51 of the outline planning consent secures the provision of a student departure and arrival traffic management strategy. Condition 26 of the outline planning consent requires that 5% of all car parking spaces be available for people with disabilities. In this case I am satisfied that a suitable level of provision for car parking for use by disabled students is made in the context of a car free development.
8.76 Condition 57 of the outline planning consent requires that all
reserved matters applications for residential and commercial development be supported by evidence to demonstrate that the proposed car parking provision will not have an adverse impact on air quality, in the light of information derived from the on site continuous air quality monitoring station. The monitoring station
has not yet been installed and therefore the Environmental Health officer is reluctant to allow the discharge of this condition. Although not directly relevant to the submission of reserved matters, adjustments to car parking provision could have implications for the site layout. However in this case I do not consider, despite the lack of evidence from the monitoring station, that a justification for reduction in car parking levels beneath the already low levels could be justified.
Cycle Parking
8.77 Provision for students is made across the site for 100 cycle
parking spaces in each basement in M1 and M2, 82 spaces in the basement of M5 and 60 spaces in the basement of M6, with access via a cycle channel on the access stairs in each case. All of these spaces are provided using double stacker systems, which put one bicycle above another. This provides 342 covered cycle spaces in total.
8.78 By application of the adopted cycle parking standards in relation
to each building the following applies
BLOCK Number of rooms
Student cycle spaces (2 per 3 rooms)
Visitor cycle spaces (1 per 5 rooms
M1/2 299 200 60
M5 122 82 24
M6 90 60 18
TOTAL 511 342 102
8.79 The provision for students living on site is in accordance with
the number required through application of the standards although they do rely on the use of double stackers. In terms of visitor cycle parking, 150 cycle parking spaces are shown on street and in the courtyard behind M5. This exceeds the requirement for visitor spaces for use by visitors to the student population by 48 spaces.
8.80 Cycle parking provision is also required for use in connection
with the retail uses. In the absence of detailed plans I have
assumed that the units will be in A1 use. The requirement for cycle spaces is therefore 27 spaces for M5 and M6. In contrast with the previous submission, space for up to 24 cycles to be parked within the building envelope has been shown for both M5 and M6. The area is close to the service area in each case and can be separated from the shop floorspace to deal with the question raised by the Highway Authority. I have however recommended a condition that secures details of the access to these areas. (Condition 15). Together with on street cycle parking spaces this provision is acceptable and accords with the parking standards.
8.81 I accept the concerns that have been raised about the reliance
on cycle parking stackers and the ability of users to access them. In this case I consider their use to be acceptable because it will still be possible for less able cyclists to use the lower level stands. Students are generally younger and fitter people who are well placed to activate the assisted upper level parking spaces.
8.82 The Walking and Cycling Officer raised concern about the width
of the access for cyclists into the M1/M2 basement cycle park. The width of the access ramp has been increased to 2.2 metres wide with wheeling ramps on either side. I have recommended a condition to secure full details of the access to the cycle stores and other conditions to control the provision and retention of cycle parking and safe use of basement cycle parking areas. (Conditions 2, 18 and 21).
8.83 In my opinion the proposal is compliant with Cambridge Local
Plan (2006) policies 8/6 and 8/10.
Third Party Representations 8.84 Very few representations have been made in relation to the
application. I have addressed the comments made in my assessment and below:
Concern about the potential for an increase in traffic. 8.85 There will not be any significant increase in vehicular traffic
given the very limited number of car parking spaces and the controls imposed via the section 106 Agreement in relation to students having cars. There may be a noticeable increase in
car parking on the Southern Access Road at student drop off and pick up times. Condition 51 of the outline planning permission addresses this issue. The Student Departure and Arrival Strategy that has been submitted deals with pre-arrival, phased arrivals, on-site management, arrival strategy and departure. Arrivals by car and taxi are phased over a two week period and based on a 30 minute loading slot. This equates to up to 170 cars per day between 9.30am and 7pm across the site. Disabled students are allocated 1½hours to unload. Management staff will act as traffic marshals. Given the limited time during which students will arrive, the more extensive time period during which departures are likely to take place, and the fact that the impacts will be generally screened from existing residents by CB1 buildings, I do not consider that the impact will be significant.
Potential for noise and disturbance and the means be which this will be controlled particularly in the summer months./Impact of high number of student rooms on the local community.
8.86 There will be more noise and disturbance generated by the new
population in comparison with the existing situation. The student accommodation is to be managed and wardens will be on hand to deal with potential problems. I have addressed the Estate Management Strategy in more detail below. I have also recommended a condition which requires the applicants to provide details of the means by which members of the public can contact the management company. (Condition 17) Conditions should be included in the ‘inevitable approval’ to address concerns.
8.87 I have recommended planning conditions. In my view ‘approval’ is not inevitable as evidenced by the Committee resolution on the earlier scheme. Objection to having so many student rooms when key worker housing and affordable housing is needed.
8.88 Student accommodation is not being advocated in lieu of affordable housing on this site, as this would be contrary to planning policy. Affordable housing is being brought forward in the next phase and is currently under discussion by officers.
Concerns regarding access in conjunction with the proposed hotel.
8.89 Access to the student accommodation was agreed as part of
the outline planning permission. I do not consider that the proposals for the Red House site will compromise access to the student accommodation.
Insufficient cycle parking spaces in Station Road. 8.90 The development does not affect cycle parking on Station
Road. The provision that is made for cycle parking accords with the Parking Standards.
Recreational facilities and similar facilities should be open to the public.
8.91 Provision is made for a student amenity space in the basement
of M1/M2. The space is not large and does not equate to a Student Union. Such facilities are provided on the ARU campus. I do not consider it appropriate or necessary in planning policy terms for student facilities to be accessible to the public.
There should not be more gated communities like the Belvedere.
8.92 The proposal is not for a ‘gated community’. Access controls
will be needed to the blocks for the safety of residents. External space will be fully accessible with the exception of the courtyard to the rear of M5, which is not a large space and is effectively an entrance area for the students living in that block. I have recommended a condition to address the need for this control. (Condition 13)
GTARA comments 8.93 The impact of the large student population was discussed and
determined at the outline planning permission stage. I remain of the view that the impact will not have a significant affect on residential amenity, given the design and location of the student blocks and the management arrangements.
Outstanding issues raised by internal and external consultees
8.94 I have not had confirmation from the County Council Transport
Team that they are satisfied with the information that has been submitted in relation to the discharge of condition 58 on the outline planning consent. I am hopeful that this will not require any alteration to the design of M1/M2, which is the only issue that is relevant to the reserved matters submission.
8.95 Both Anglian Water and the Environment Agency are satisfied
with the information that has been submitted in relation to foul and surface water drainage. This facilitates the discharge of conditions 23 and 29 of the outline planning consent.
8.96 Natural England is satisfied with the Ecological Conservation
Management Plan for Phase One, which relates to condition 25 of the outline planning consent.
8.97 An Estate Management Strategy for the first phase is included
in the submission. A CB1 Management Company is to be established as a registered company. One of the responsibilities of the management company will be to appoint an estates company, which will carry out the necessary functions and duties to the satisfaction of the management company. An organisation called Mainstay has been brought on board to provide management services for the student blocks. They will be responsible for the buildings and their immediate surroundings, but CB1 management will control the wider estate. I am satisfied with this information and that it is sufficient to address condition 10 of the outline planning consent, provided that the strategic Estate Management Strategy is approved (Condition 9 of the outline planning consent). However I have recommended a condition (Condition 17) to require contact details for the management company to be displayed, so that the non-student population of the area have a point of contact available. The issue raised by the landscape officer with regard to landscape maintenance is in my view more appropriately picked up in relation to the discharge of strategic condition 9 of the outline planning permission that is ongoing.
8.98 The Design and Conservation CB1 Sub-Panel considered the
site of the community room, which formed part of the previous
scheme, to be unacceptable. The potential for this use to be located in block M6 was established by the outline planning permission, however the current proposals to not include a community room in this position or in any other part of Phase 1a. There is no requirement to provide a community room in association with the student accommodation as part of the outline planning permission, but its provision as part of the residential development is secured by the s106 Agreement. Pre-application discussions suggest that the wish of Sub-Panel may be achieved, but an application for a Non-Material Amendment will necessary to allow the location of the community facility in a Block other than Block M6. Planning Obligation Strategy
8.99 This is a reserved matters submission and necessary mitigation
measures are already secured via the Planning Obligation secured under the outline planning permission.
9.0 CONCLUSION 9.1 This submission relates to the important first phase of the CB1
Station Area redevelopment. In my view the application should be supported because it does deliver on the vision established by the Masterplan and brings forward much needed student accommodation in a setting which is likely to encourage further positive improvement to an area of the city which forms part of the Conservation Area but which is in urgent need of regeneration.
9.2 The submission is a significant improvement upon the previous
submission, which although recommended by officers was not supported by Planning Committee. In particular there have been significant changes to the elevations and more detailed plans have been provided of the way in which elements of the building will sit together. A much more robust analysis of the impact of the development on the Conservation Area has been made and officers have concluded that the development will make a positive contribution to the streetscene.
10.0 RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the commencement of development of Blocks M1 and
M2, with the exception of below ground works, full details of the means by which natural ventilation is to be provided to all internal spaces on the east elevation of Blocks M1 and M2 shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The details shall include such mitigation measures as are necessary to control the ingress of fumes and odours arising from the use of the adjacent land as a bus interchange. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers of
the development (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4 and 4/13.)
2. Prior to the commencement of development, full details of
access to below ground cycle storage areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, which shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of the block to which they relate and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To provide convenient and safe access to cycle
storage areas. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 8/6) 3. Prior to the commencement of development of Blocks M1 and
M2 and Block M5 and Block M6, with the exception of below ground works, full details of the balustrade serving the lightwells and the access gate serving the courtyard to the rear of Block M5, including the materials of their construction, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the
streetscene. (Cambridge Local Plan policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12).
4. Prior to the commencement of development of each block hereby approved, with the exception of below ground works, full details of all solar panels [water pre-heat, etc.] and/or photovoltaic cells to be erected on that block, including type, dimensions, materials, location, fixing, etc. shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. In bringing forward such details the applicant is reminded of the restrictions imposed on the height of buildings under the outline planning approval and encouraged to site such features so as not to be visible from ground level. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the
streetscene. (Cambridge Local Plan policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12). 5. Prior to the commencement of development of each block
hereby approved, with the exception of below ground works, full details including samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of that block shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the appearance of the external surfaces
is appropriate. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4, 3/12 and 4/11)
6. Prior to the commencement of development of the single storey
refuse store, substation and wheelchair store building to the rear of Block M5, full details at a scale of not less than 1:100 of the junction between the building and the existing boundary to the Earl of Derby Public House shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity and historic
significance of the Earl of Derby public house. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 4/12)
7. Prior to the commencement of development of each block hereby approved, with the exception of below ground works, full details of glass type(s) to be used in windows/doors/screens/roofs/stairwells or other glazed features within that block shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the appearance of the external surfaces
is appropriate. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4, 3/12 and 4/11)
8. Prior to the commencement of development of Block M5, with
the exception of below ground works, full details of any proposed ventilation extract flues associated with the installation of the CHP boiler or any other plant, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the streetscene
and the Conservation Area (Cambridge Local Plan policies 3/4, 3/12, 3/15 and 4/11)
9. Prior to the commencement of development of Block M6, with
the exception of below ground works, full details of the proposed internal refurbishment works to 125 Hills Road shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity and historic
significance of 125 Hills Road. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 4/12)
10. Before starting any brick or stone work, a sample panel of the
facing materials to be used shall be erected on site to establish the detail of bonding, coursing and colour, type of jointing and the red brick detailing and shall be agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The quality of finish and materials incorporated in any approved sample panel(s), which shall not be demolished prior to completion of development, shall be maintained throughout the development.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure that the quality and colour of the detailing of the brickwork/stonework and jointing is acceptable and maintained throughout the development. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4 and 3/12)
11. No rooftop plant shall be constructed on each block hereby
approved until such time as full details, to a large scale, of any rooftop plant screening systems to be installed on that block, where relevant, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This may include the submission of samples of mesh/louver types and the colour(s) of the components. Colour samples should be identified by the RAL or BS systems. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the details of development are
acceptable. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4, 3/12 and 4/11)
12. Prior to the commencement of use of the retail units located in
Blocks M5 and M6 and 125 Hills Road, full details of any proposed ventilation extract flues shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the streetscene
and the Conservation Area (Cambridge Local Plan policies 3/4, 3/12, 3/15, 4/11 and 4/12)
13. Prior to the commencement of occupation of Block M5, full
details of the means by which entry to the rear courtyard will be controlled shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved entry controls shall be provided prior to the first occupation of Block M5 and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: In the interests of the community safety (Cambridge
Local Plan policy 3/7)
14. Prior to the commencement of occupation of Block M5, full details of the means by which access to the rear courtyard will be kept clear at all times with the exception of during use by delivery vehicles and during agreed periods of student drop off and collection shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved access provisions shall be provided prior to the first occupation of Block M5 and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To provide convenient and safe access to cycle
storage areas. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 8/6) 15. Prior to the commencement of use of the retail units located in
Blocks M5 and M6 and 125 Hills Road, full details of access to covered and secured cycle parking facilities for staff working within the retails units shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing prior to the commencement of any development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and cycle storage shall be provided prior to commencement of use and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed by the local planning authority in writing.
Reason: To provide convenient and safe access to cycle
storage. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 8/6). 16. Prior to the commencement of occupation of Blocks M1 and
M2, Block M5 and Block M6, full details of the means by which rubbish and other detritus is to be regularly removed from lightwells shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The maintenance regime for cleaning the lightwells shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the streetscene
and to protect the amenity of future occupiers of the buildings. (Cambridge Local Plan policies 3/4, 3/7 and 3/12.
17. Prior to the commencement of occupation of any part of the development, full details of the means by which members of the public can contact the management company responsible for on site management and maintenance, including the location of a sign to include such details on each of the buildings, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved provisions for contact details shall be provided prior to the first occupation of any block or in accordance with such timetable as may be agreed by the local planning authority and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: In the interests of the community safety (Cambridge
Local Plan policy 3/7) 18. Prior to the commencement of occupation of Blocks M1/M2 and
Block M5 and Block M6, full details of the security arrangements to provide for safe use of the basement cycle parking areas, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved provisions for safe use of cycle parking facilities shall be provided prior to the first occupation of each block and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To provide convenient and safe access to cycle
storage areas. (Cambridge Local Plan policy 8/6) 19. Prior to the commencement of occupation, the on-site storage
facilities for domestic and trade waste, including waste for recycling and the arrangements for the disposal of waste detailed on the approved plans shall be provided. The approved arrangements shall be retained thereafter unless alternative arrangements are agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents/occupiers
and in the interests of visual amenity. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 4/13)
20. Prior to the commencement of occupation, full details of the means by which domestic and trade waste will be collected from the site, including the means by which refuse containers will be moved to the street frontage for collection and returned to the refuse store after the collection of waste and the location of on-street storage on collection days, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved arrangements shall be retained thereafter unless alternative arrangements are agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents/occupiers
and in the interests of visual amenity. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 4/13)
21. The development shall not be occupied until the 492 cycle
parking spaces have been provided for use in association with the development. The cycle parking spaces shall thereafter be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To avoid obstruction of the surrounding streets and in
the interests of highway safety and convenience. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006, policy 8/10).
22. Prior to the commencement of occupation, a lighting plan
including details of the height, type, position and angle of any external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved plan.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents/occupiers and in the interests of visual amenity. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 4/13)
23. Any advertisements that are displayed on the retail units located
within Block M5 and M6 shall be restricted to the signage locations shown on the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenity of the streetscene and
the Conservation Area (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/4, 3/12, 3/15 and 4/11)
24. The retail units accommodated in Block M5, Block M6 and 125 Hills Road shall not be open for trade nor shall deliveries be made to them between the hours of 2300 hrs and 0800 hrs.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residents and
residents of the adjacent student accommodation. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 4/13)
INFORMATIVE: Highway works - Buildings footings or
basements must not extend out under the public highway except in the case of basements with the express permission of the Highway Authority and under licence. Adopted areas should also exclude areas under balconies except under licence (Section 177 of the Highways Act 1980)
INFORMATIVE: Highway works - The applicant is advised that
any granting of Planning Permission does not constitute a permission or licence to a developer to carry out any works within, or disturbance of, or interference with, the Public Highway, and a separate permission must be sought from the Highway Authority for such works.
INFORMATIVE: Highway works - Notwithstanding any consent
granted under the relevant planning act/s, the applicant is advised that before any works are carried out on any footway, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the public highway the express consent of Cambridgeshire County Council as the Local Highway Authority will be required. All costs associated with any construction works will be borne by the developer. The developer will not be permitted to drain roof water over the public highway, nor across it in a surface channel, but must make arrangements to install a piped drainage connection. No window or door will be allowed to open over a highway and no foundation or footing for the structure will be allowed to encroach under the public highway.
INFORMATIVE: Highway works - Notwithstanding any consent
granted under the relevant planning act/s, the applicant is advised that before any works are carried out on any footway, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the public highway the express consent of Cambridgeshire County Council as the Local Highway Authority will be required. All costs associated with any construction works will be borne by the developer.
INFORMATIVE: New development can sometimes cause
inconvenience, disturbance and disruption to local residents, businesses and passers by. As a result the City Council runs a Considerate Contractor Scheme aimed at promoting high standards of care during construction. The City Council encourages the developer of the site, through its building contractor, to join the scheme and agree to comply with the model Code of Good Practice, in the interests of good neighbourliness. Information about the scheme can be obtained from The Considerate Contractor project Officer in the Planning Department (Tel: 01223 457121).
INFORMATIVE: In the interest of meeting the needs of disabled
people and people with limited mobility it is recommended as follows:
Any door entry systems will need to be fitted with induction loops and tactile/Braille markings and positioned at a height accessible to wheelchair users.
There should be a secure storage space for mobility scooters and a charging point.
There should be handrails in all showers. Accessible rooms should have the potential for hoist provision
between bedroom and bathroom. INFORMATIVE: Contaminated Land - The application is for part
of the CB1 redevelopment site, for which outline planning permission reference 08/0266/OUT has been granted. Due to previous land uses contamination of the land has been identified on parts of the site. Condition 30 of 08/0266/OUT requires investigation of possible contaminated land and, if necessary, treatment such as remediation. The applicant is reminded that it is their responsibility to ensure that all the necessary investigation and treatment has taken place before commencing building work and that the requirements of condition 30 are met.
INFORMATIVE: Food Safety - As the premises are intended to be run as a food business the applicant is reminded that under the Food Safety Act 1990 (as amended) the premises will need to registered with Cambridge City Council. In order to avoid additional costs it is recommended that the applicant ensure that the kitchen, food preparation and foods storage areas comply with food hygiene legislation, before construction starts. Contact the Food and Occupational Safety (FOS) Team of the Refuse and Environmental Service at Cambridge City Council on telephone number (01223) 457890 for further information.
INFORMATIVE: Licensing - If the premises are intended to
provide alcohol, regulated entertainment or food after 11pm or before 5 am they may require a Premise Licence under the Licensing Act 2003. The applicant is advised to contact The Licensing Team of Environmental Health at Cambridge City Council on telephone number (01223) 457899 for further information.
INFORMATIVE: To satisfy condition 38 Fume
Filtration/Extraction, details should be provided in accordance with Annex B of the, “Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems,” prepared by Netcen on behalf of Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) dated January 2005 available at
INFORMATIVE: To satisfy condition 37 Noise Insulation, the
noise level from all plant and equipment, vents etc (collectively) associated with this application should not raise the existing background level (L90) by more than 3 dB(A) (i.e. the rating level of the plant needs to match the existing background level). This requirement applies both during the day (0700 to 2300 hrs over any one hour period) and night time (2300 to 0700 hrs over any one 5 minute period), at the boundary of the premises subject to this application and having regard to noise sensitive premises. Tonal/impulsive noise frequencies should be eliminated or at least considered in any assessment and should carry an additional 5 dB(A) correction. This is to guard against any creeping background noise in the area and prevent unreasonable noise disturbance to other premises.
It is recommended that the agent/applicant submits a noise prediction survey/report in accordance with the principles of BS4142: 1997 “Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas” or similar. Noise levels shall be predicted at the boundary having regard to neighbouring residential premises.
Such a survey / report should include: a large scale plan of the
site in relation to neighbouring premises; noise sources and measurement / prediction points marked on plan; a list of noise sources; details of proposed noise sources / type of plant such as: number, location, sound power levels, noise frequency spectrums, noise directionality of plant, noise levels from duct intake or discharge points; details of noise mitigation measures (attenuation details of any intended enclosures, silencers or barriers); description of full noise calculation procedures; noise levels at a representative sample of noise sensitive locations and hours of operation.
Any report shall include raw measurement data so that
conclusions may be thoroughly evaluated and calculations checked.
INFORMATIVE: This planning permission should be read in
conjunction with outline planning permission reference 08/0266/OUT and its associated deed of planning obligation prepared under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)
Reasons for Approval 1. This development has been approved, conditionally, because
subject to those requirements it is considered to generally conform to the Development Plan, particularly the following policies:
Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/3, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12,
2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission. These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 Under Section 100D of the Local Government Act 1972, the following are “background papers” for each report on a planning application: 1. The planning application and plans; 2. Any explanatory or accompanying letter or document from the
applicant; 3. Comments of Council departments on the application; 4. Comments or representations by third parties on the application
as referred to in the report plus any additional comments received before the meeting at which the application is considered; unless (in each case) the document discloses “exempt or confidential information”
5. Any Structure Plan, Local Plan or Council Policy Document referred to in individual reports.
These papers may be inspected by contacting John Summers (Ext.7103) in the Planning Department.
Appendix A – Design and Conservation Sub-Panel minutes 24 November 2009.
Cambridge City Council Design & Conservation (CB1) Sub-Panel
Notes of the meeting Tuesday 24th November 2009
Present: - Prof Peter Carolin Chair Oliver Caroe RIBA Bobby Open RIBA Carolin Gohler Cambridge Past, Present & Future Jon Harris Co-opted Member David Grech English Heritage Officers: - John Preston City Council Glen Richardson City Council Sarah Dyer City Council 5. Presentation – Reserved Matters submission. (Student
accommodation Blocks M1, M2, M5 and M6) Presentation by Jeff Wall of TP Bennett Architects with Robert Myers.
The Panel’s comments included the following:
• M5 student amenity. The expanded A Class area could be ‘squared off’ at its eastern end in order to building could be squared in order to give more amenity space (launderette/kitchen) to the student accommodation.
• M5 service block. The panel requested further detail on the proposed roof and wall treatments of the single storey cycle/bin/plant enclosure.
• M6 external bin storage to the north. This eyesore should be removed. The panel expressed a preference for the bin storage areas to be located within the footprint of the building (as they were initially), not tacked on the side.
• No 125 Hills Road. The Panel questioned the feasibility of an effective conversion for the intended use and was not convinced by the significant alterations proposed. The Panel
called for further detail on how the possibility of A3 usage could work here. Particular attention would need to be paid to the delivery of goods, to accommodating kitchens, cooking exhaust flues, bin storage and non-obtrusive signage. Although the building is not listed, it nevertheless has historic value and a historic buildings sensitivity (starting with understanding of the structure) should now be demonstrated by the architectural team. The integrity of 125 could be completely destroyed by inappropriate A class use and extensive alteration. The Panel was unconvinced by the measures suggested to integrate 125 with M6 next door
• Balustrade to M1 and M2 basement area. This could be improved with the incorporation of some public art or variation of some kind as opposed to a stark length of 200meters. The panel was not convinced that quality should be compromised on cost grounds.
• Width of pavements. Concerns remain about the width of the footpath/bus waiting area. The panel suggested that a review of the entrance arrangements around the two staircases, and the possibility of re-planning some of the basement accommodation on the east side, so that ‘areas’ were not required, might locally increase footpath widths and ease these public areas.
• Cladding. The cladding material was discussed. The architect’s confirmed that this would be a ‘soft grey’ and would be real metal. Confirmation of the actual material and samples is sought.
• The community room. This has been moved out of M6 for commercial reasons. Its proposed new location within H1 has been rejected by the Community Liaison Officer. The Panel feel that this facility must be given serious consideration by Ashwell. It needs to be based in a central, accessible location such as near public park and / or square/ or major pedestrian thoroughfare and have space for future expansion. A temporary solution may be acceptable but the long-term location must be presented at the next meeting discussing Phase 2 developments and public art strategy. This facility must not be relegated to a corner by the station.
Conclusions. Proposals for 125 Hills Road are unsatisfactory. The Panel welcomes the elimination of basement living accommodation on the east side of M1 and 2. However, although
aware of the issue of financial viability, it is still deeply concerned about the remaining basement living accommodation on the west side. The reliance on natural ventilation in the rooms facing onto the bus stands is still regarded as highly questionable. The unresolved issue of the Community room location is wholly unsatisfactory and needs early resolution.
• M5: VERDICT – GREEN (On condition that the retail unit is squared off to give the retail space back to the students.)
• M6 and 125 Hills Road – VERDICT – RED.
• M1 and M2. VERDICT – AMBER. Reminder CABE ‘traffic light’ definitions: GREEN: a good scheme, or one that is acceptable subject to minor improvements AMBER: in need of significant improvements to make it acceptable, but not a matter of starting from scratch RED: the scheme is fundamentally flawed and a fresh start is needed.
