The planning application for the Bishops DIY site has been given approval and approval on conditions, the issue is not that planning permission was granted on housing that is in high demand but the lack of keeping sites that are/where useful employment hubs.
I disagreed at the time, but a developer that wants to build housing will always give a good argument, it was not able to make the profits for the developer, there is a need for employment and buildings to rent/buy within the village but this has certainly been a declining area to have suitable employment locations within the villages. but decisions on this site by developers and planning officers deemed the site could be turned into residential much to my dismay. The site has gone through several planning applications and public meetings and whilst we have probably had our say in what should be on the site the one thing that has stood out is the developer pleading the ability to not put affordable housing on the site because of not being financially viable(not that affordable housing is all that affordable).
Now that planning has been granted, a condition for 14 affordable homes to be a payment in Section 106 at just over £4900 per unit makes me wonder why our current District Councillors didn’t push for a better deal. £4900 per unit is nothing to deliver some kind of affordable housing the developer should have at least been paying what it would cost to build 14 units on site. I saw no representation from our local members pushing the point that the contributions needed to be far higher than the offer on the table. I am utterly amazed that the developer can wind up with such a great deal that they will be laughing all the way to the bank. We need a better voice in planning meetings if we are not able to say no to a planning application we must be fighting for better ,affordable housing deals or better funding contributions to the community to provide this accommodation via other means.
In conclusion, As a previous District Councillor, I stood against this development as it had a lack of parking a massive impact on the windmill (which has a protected height of development around it). A sheer lack of working with the locals to develop a site that would fit in with the local environment. And to top it off now, a development that has managed to squirm its way of delivering affordable housing and what they are paying to compensate would not allow anyone else to provide such housing. A poor show indeed.
A Brief History,
Planing application S/1152/13/FL Refused 4th June 2014
Minutes from the meeting.
Stephen Temple (objector), David Jenkins (Histon & Impington Parish Council), and Councillors Neil Davies and Edd Stonham (local Members) addressed the meeting.
The Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director. Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being the non-compliance with Policies DP/1 (Sustainable Development) and DP/2 (Design of New Development) contained in the South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework 2007 and Policy E/8 (Mixed use development in the Histon and Impington station area) of the emerging South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2013.
Planning Appeal S/1152/13/FL Appeal Dismissed – 20 March 2015
Planning Application S/0671/17/FL – Approved on delegated authority
Planning Application 20/03690/S73 Variation – Granted – 2 Sep 2018 – delegated authority
Planning Application Variation 21/02902/FUL June 2022 – Approved by Committee
Excerpt from meeting
“Members debated the application and raised concerns over the appearance of the development and the impact of character on the local area but noted the comments and lack of objection from the statutory consultees. The Committee noted the previous permissions granted on the site. Councillor Dr Martin Cahn expressed support for the application as local Member and stated that he felt the benefits outweighed the harm.”