South Cambs Planning Committee yesterday refused an application by Linden Homes to build 74 homes on a site off Highfields Road Caldecote. That is because it did not meet Local Plan and Village Design Guide policies.
Site History
The site is part of the parcel of land granted outline planning permission by Planning Inspectors at appeal in March 2017. The site was then owned by Gladman Developments but Linden Homes subsequently became new owners of the 140-home site. Linden submitted the Reserved Matters (RM) application in 2019 but for just 66 homes which it termed Phase 1. It never submitted the RM for Phase 2.
First Reserved Matters Application
The first RM application was considered by Planning Committee in October 2019. I was not on the committee at the time, but addressed the committee as the Ward Member. I asked for deferral of the application to enable us work with the applicant to deal with some of the issues that were not acceptable to the community. The debate on the 3-storey blocks of flat was heated. Reference made to the emerging Village Design Guide (VDG) that had undergone consultation and awaiting adoption. However, it was not given weight because it had not been adopted, though that happened 2 months later. That was to my mind, a kick in the teeth and huge disappointment. The VDG had been created specifically for the purpose guiding the design of the new developments. In addition, I had made the Linden design team aware of the existence of this design guide.
Drainage was also a particular topic of concern, again discussed in detail. A condition was imposed to bring the final design back to the Planning Committee as a pre-commencement condition.
Rather than deferment, the committee chose to decide the application because of the Extension of Time that had been agreed. The issues were so finely balanced resulting in a tied vote. The application was granted on the casting vote of the Committee chairman.
That was the point where quite out of character, I swore in public for the first time in my life. I blame this on the disappointment I felt with the decision. To make matters worse and unfortunately for me, my swearing was heard by those in the public gallery where I sat. The local democracy reporter at the time, went on to tweet the decision and referred to the swearing in his newspaper article.
I subsequently received challenges about the committee decision on social media (see example in image). I was also accused by a then Conservative councillor of having given the planning permission myself! Oh joy!
Phase 1 is now being built out, and as of a few days ago, have 12 houses occupied.
New Application for 74 Homes
Moving on to now, Linden Homes having failed to submit in time the reserved matters for the remaining 74 granted outline in 2017, were left with no option but to put in a fresh new application. This is what was considered at Planning Committee yesterday 9th February 2022. The Linden planning team did not bother to engage with Caldecote Parish Council, residents groups, nor me, prior to their submission.
Engagement with Local Community
It is not a planning material consideration, but we encourage developers to engage with the community hosting their development . It is good practice and many do.
I asked the Linden Homes representative if there was any consultation with the Parish Council, but his response was to hark back to the consultation on Phase 1. Similarly I asked him if he thought the proposal for 3/4 storey block of flats is in the spirit of the VDG. He tried to be smart with words saying “they had regard to the VDG”. Furthermore that this proposal is similar to the 2 blocks consented in Phase 1. I asked if they had taken the design to the Design Enabling Panel, and yet again harked back to the work on Phase 1.
Other members asked him about the biodiversity net gain being farmed out to Fulbourn for example, on the landscape buffer being removed, scale and density etc. You can watch the replay on the council website
Local Ward Member comments
As a member of the planning committee, I had the option of presenting my comments as part of the debate on the application. Following is a summary of the points that I raised:
- In acknowledging the work done by the Case officer on the project, I expressed appreciation for the detailed committee report. It clearly showed the fine balance.
- I read out paragraph 47 of the Planning Inspectors Appeal Decision Notice. This paragraph clearly showed the shortfall in land supply was the key factor in allowing the appeal and granting permission.
- The only reason the application was before committee was because Linden Homes messed up by failing to submit the reserved matters application in time
- Reminded members of the close vote for Phase 1, and the resulting uncharacteristic response I expressed
- The application is for 74 homes is outside the development framework of Caldecote, a group village. It is contrary to the adopted local plan Policies S/2(e), S6, S7 and S10
- It is not an infill development
- The application by its nature is sticking two fingers at the VDG for a number of reasons.
- The apartment block was a 4 storey building masquerading as 3-storeys, and 3 storeys were masquerading as 2/2.5 storey buildings.
- The drainage calculations from their experts showed 45% of the drainage nodes were showing Flood Risk
- The Landscape officer had stated concerns – large parking court, boundary treatment with Clare Drive, lack of green buffer
- Urban design officer had concerns stating there were further areas of improvement possible.
- Some buildings locations did not conform to the District Design Guide
- Harm to the character of the existing community and to the amenity of Damms Pastures
- Biodiversity gain is being farmed out to Fulbourn is unacceptable. There are at least 3 locations, potentially 4 in or near to Caldecote where the gain could be achieved. They would have known this had they engaged with me or the Parish Council.
In conclusion, I asked the committee to reject the application.
Each member of the planning committee contributed to the discussion on the above grounds and more, and in detail. In all, it took about 2 hours to determine this application, showing again just how sensitive this site is, and how controversial the proposals that have come from the developer.
Emerging Local Plan
The Linden Homes representative referred to the fact that this site is included in the First Proposals list of preferred sites for the emerging plan, and that it should be given weight as a result. As I pointed out, it is the first proposals and is preferred, not definite, and not even in the draft local plan yet, so it carries no weight. Strange how the boot is now on the other foot regarding the weight attached to emerging planning guides and documents.
As to the benefits alluded to being more than it was back in 2017, that is hard to fathom. The proposals included 30 affordable homes which is the only new benefit. There are no further facilities proposed for the village itself than what was committed in Phase 1. Whilst that is absolutely great to have, that benefit does not outweigh the harm that we identified.
Cambridge News Article
I have now seen the article in the Cambridge News by Hanna Brown the Local Democracy Reporter. The headline is slightly misleading. It is the Planning Committee (made up of Councillors) that refused the application, not planners.
Furthermore, the land on which the homes are proposed is not on green belt land. There is no green belt in Highfields Caldecote. The land is outside the village framework and so considered as being in the Countryside.
Conclusion
After much deliberation, members of the committee were not convinced by the statements made by Linden Homes. Weighing the benefits against the harm of the conflict of current local plan policies, voted 10 to 1 to refuse the application.