Agenda and draft minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes from the previous meeting of 27 November 24..

The minutes of the meeting of the 27 November 2024 were agreed and signed as an accurate record.

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Jackson, the agent. Mrs Jackson stated that she is seeking full planning permission for the construction of 18 dwellings and the scheme comprises phase B of the existing Berryfield’s residential development. She explained that the proposal would result in high quality housing within a primary market town and the principle is acceptable in accordance with local housing policy as well as sustainable development objectives as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Mrs Jackson explained that the officer recommendation is one of refusal due to a perceived lack of compliance with the sequential test and failure to provide 10% biodiversity net gain, however, with regard to the sequential test, Paragraph 174 of the NPPF, states that the aim of the sequential test is to steer new development to the areas at the lowest risk of flooding from any source and that the strategic Flood Risk Assessment will provide the basis for applying this test. She explained that this is reiterated in Policy LP14 of the Local Plan and added that the site is located in Flood Zones 1, 2 and 3 of the Environment Agency’s flood maps for planning and when considering the requirements of the sequential test, the dwellings and their private amenity spaces have been placed in Flood Zone 1 and are, therefore, in land at the lowest risk of flooding.

Mrs Jackson made the point that with this in mind no property or person would be placed at risk and the proposal would comply with the aims of the sequential test, however, the reason for refusal states that the sequential test is not passed due to the fact that the access road falls within Flood Zone 2. She referred to Paragraph 175 of the NPPF which states that ‘the sequential test should be used in areas known to be at risk now or in the future from any form of flooding except in situations where a site-specific flood risk assessment demonstrates that no development within the boundary, including access or escape routes would be located on an area that would be at risk of flooding’ and she would interpret that as being where a Flood Risk Assessment demonstrates that the development is not at risk of flooding then the sequential test does not need to be applied.

Mrs Jackson referred the committee to the consultation responses which had been received and that the Environment Agency have not raised any objection to the development on flood risk grounds and the Middle Level Commissioners have stated that the development is capable of providing many benefits, with the Lead Local Flood Authority noting that Internal Drainage Board are satisfied and raised no objections either. She expressed the view that with all of the statutory consultees submitting no objections and then considering the wording of paragraph 175 of the NPPF, in her opinion, the aims and objectives of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P77/24

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report to members and drew attention to the update report that had been circulated.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Jake Stentiford, the agent. Mr Stentiford explained that the officer’s report sets out a clear recommendation for approval and recognises that the application is in accordance with the Local Plan and is policy compliant. He stated that the backdrop to the application is the previous planning permission for 58 houses which was an outline consent for an open market scheme with 25% affordable housing which would have equated to 15 affordable homes.

Mr Stentiford explained that he has looked at the site in the context of the very high levels of need for new affordable housing in Chatteris and made the decision to bring forward a scheme of all affordable homes on the site which, in his opinion, is the correct approach. He advised the committee that he has been able to secure more land than that of the previous scheme which has allowed for the provision of more affordable homes as well as increasing the provision of public open space, landscaping and biodiversity areas.

Mr Stentiford made the point that he is very proud of the quality of the design that has been achieved for the scheme which includes generous gardens, public landscaping and open space, along with tree planting throughout the site to create green tree lined streets and a varied materials pallet to maintain the visual interest moving through the site. He explained that as a result of the extensive work undertaken with officers to amend the scheme in order to meet all of the requirements of policy as well as meeting the needs of residents, the application was submitted at the end of 2023 which proves that the application has been considered very carefully and responds positively to consultee comments making appropriate amendments.

Mr Stentiford expressed the view that the result is an excellent quality development which will create a distinctive neighbourhood and be an attractive place to live whilst at the same time making a positive contribution to the character of the town. He added that the development will be delivered in partnership with the housing association which offers a range of benefits as the wider site will remain under one ownership and will be actively managed with ongoing maintenance of public areas, open space, parking and drainage infrastructure as well as the street environment such as managing bins and there will be a permanent single point of contact to resolve any local concerns.

Mr Stentiford stated that the most important issue for this application is the delivery of affordable homes and officers in the Housing Team have provided the latest figures from the housing register with regards to affordable need in Chatteris and the wider area. He stated that that the figures demonstrate a critically urgent situation of families with an immediate need for a suitable affordable home and will firstly be offered to  ...  view the full minutes text for item P78/24

To determine the application.

Tracy Ranger presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Jackson, the agent. Mrs Jackson explained that the application is seeking full planning permission for the construction of an occupational dwelling which is required for the effective and safe operation of Sims Contract Furniture. She explained that the Sims family have been on the site since 1994 where the applicant’s family operated an upholstery business which has evolved into Sims Contract Furniture, which designs and manufactures high-end bespoke furniture and their clients include restaurants, pubs and ither venues.

Mrs Jackson added that over the recent years, the business has expanded rapidly which has meant that the workshop buildings have need to be extended on site and also the need to change the layout of the yard area and this is noted in the planning history. She explained that the business has just purchased another company and that will amalgamate with Sims Contract Furniture, and now this has been secured the applicant can look at the logistics of extending the building, with the business employing 10 people and, therefore, having a meaningful contribution to the rural economy.

Mrs Jackson added that the rapid growth of the growth of the company as well as the increased number of high value products and materials on the site has meant an increased risk of security, which she is aware that this is not strictly a justification for a new dwelling, however, the applicant wishes to reside on the site in order to protect his business which has evolved over the years to make it the successful enterprise that it is now. She stated that the proposal is part of a natural evolution, and it is much like any other rural business within Fenland, with the applicant having made the point that there is a fear of crime within the area, and she has reviewed the crime statistics for that particular postcode and there were four crimes reported within the last year, and she sympathises with the applicant’s position.

Mrs Jackson stated that there is an existing dwelling on the site, which is known as Plash Farmhouse, however, that is occupied and is not available for the applicant and his family to use to help look after the business. She added that the application has been recommended for refusal as it is considered that there is no need for the proposal in accordance with Policy LP3 and Paragraph 84 of the NPPF, however, she asked members to consider the fact that the proposal would support a local and successful rural business by reducing crime and fear of crime, with it also allowing the applicant to be on site in order to take deliveries and to work late to meet the demands of the business.

Mrs Jackson stated that on the basis that the need for the dwelling is established the second reason for refusal relating to the sequential test falls away and this is because there is  ...  view the full minutes text for item P79/24

To determine the application.

Tracy Ranger presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Mr Liam Lunn-Towler, the agent and Mr Jerrom, the applicant. Mr Lunn-Towler stated that the proposal is for 2 frontage plots within the lowest flood risk zone in the central and built form of Manea and the site is located on the same road as the village hall. He explained that a footpath will serve the frontage to allow for a sustainable walk into the village services and facilities and including a 25-minute walk to the train station.

Mr Lunn-Towler stated that the officers have said that the previous application was refused based on the example site plan at the time, however, the principle of having dwellings on the land is supported by officers. He explained that since the previous refusal he has visited the example site plan layout to reflect the officers’ comments at the time and the site plan before officers is an example because the application before the committee is an outline application and it is only the access which is being committed, with the dwelling, design and site layout including the elevations of the properties being subject to a later detailed application.

Mr Lunn-Towler explained that the proposed new access would enhance the visibility for number 12 to improve highway safety and the access is supported for the application by Highways Officer. He added that the application provides the opportunity for 2 family dwellings with large gardens in Manea and it makes good use of land and, in his view, it will make a good contribution to the local distinctiveness and character of the area.

Mr Lunn Towler referred to an application recently approved in School Lane, a back land dwelling to the rear of 22c, which is located on the same side of the road as the application site before the committee, which is only 9 houses away and is to the west of the application site and was approved by the committee against the officer’s recommendation 8 months ago. He referred to that application and explained that it was also in outline form and only committed access, reference F/YR24/0194/O, making the point that it was very similar to the application before the committee.

Mr Lunn-Towler added that he has worked with officers on this application and, in his view, it will make a positive addition to the area and will support the existing services and facilities in Manea including the village and train station.

Members asked Mr Lunn-Towler and Mr Jerrom the following questions:

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that there appears to be a number of comments with regards to drainage and she asked how the drainage issue is going to be dealt with? Mr Lunn-Towler stated that the foul drainage will be connected to the mains sewer within the road and with regards to the surface water it is likely that it will go to soakaways in the gardens although that is not confirmed at this  ...  view the full minutes text for item P80/24

To determine the application.

Tracy Ranger presented the report to members and drew attention to the update report that had been circulated.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Jackson, the agent and David Boyce, the landowner. Mrs Jackson explained that the application is for single self-build dwelling and the proposal has been recommended for refusal as it has been stated that the sequential test has not been passed due to there being other sites available in Wisbech, however, she highlighted to members that the site address is located in Leverington and, therefore, in her view it made sense to carry out the sequential test in the area of Leverington. She explained that the sequential test that was carried out demonstrated that there are no other sites available for development within Leverington and, therefore, the test is passed and the test also demonstrates that the site is technically safe from flooding, presents a community benefit and, therefore, the exception test is also passed and there is no issue in respect of flood risk.

Mrs Jackson referred to Paragraph 10.1 of the committee report, where it states that the development is acceptable with no adverse impact on character or amenity and only fails because it is considered that there are other sites available in Wisbech which are at lower risk of flooding, despite the fact that the site address is in Leverington and Leverington Parish Council have been consulted. She expressed the view that there are no issues with the proposal and that it has been recommended for refusal purely on an administrative error and she asked for the reason of refusal to be overturned, and that planning permission is granted.

Mr Boyce explained that he is a fifth-generation farmer who has purchased the land in order to retire two horses onto and when the building commenced around the site, this placed a great deal of stress on the two horses and they died, leaving the site redundant as he had no other use for it. He explained that he farms in Outwell, and the site is located in area where he can justifiably drive a tractor between the two locations, with it being a small site it is not very viable for farming outside of where he lives.

Mr Boyce made the point that he consulted the Fenland District Council plan which states that Leverington Parish Council is indicated in LP56 (02) in the plan so he consulted with Leverington Parish Council who provided their own comments and thoughts to him, and they received the initial correspondence along with further correspondence regarding the referral to committee due to the fact that they are the statutory consultee as opposed to Wisbech which was outlined by officers. He referred to a map from the Boundary Commission shows that Leverington Parish Council area is where his land sits and he explained that the applicant is looking to build a house with equestrian facilities on it in order to maintain some of  ...  view the full minutes text for item P81/24

To determine the application.

Gavin Taylor presented the report to members and drew attention to the update report which had been circulated.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that it is a site which has seen development previously as she is aware that there used to be a pub on the site called the Horse and Jockey which was later removed in late 1995. She made the point that the site is prime for development but in her view not at the proposed scale and she explained that it would be better to see 2 or 3 executive homes then that would be fine. Councillor Mrs French stated that the site is located on a ridiculous blind corner and the access is located by a very deep ditch which is probably 6 or 7 feet deep and whilst there is no problem getting rid of surface water, the whole scheme is over development in a 60mph zone. She made the point that the road is in a very poor state and reiterated the point that the site is ripe for development but not for 19 homes and she highlighted that again there is no Section 106 mentioned so who is going to pay for the facilities required for that amount of home. Councillor Mrs French added that the officers have made the correct recommendation, and she expressed the view that it is a shame that so many of the trees were removed by the landowner, even through some of them were self-sown.

·         Councillor Benney stated that he agrees that officers have made the correct recommendation, and he expressed the view that he does not think that this is the right location to concentrate any development for March.

Proposed by Councillor Imafidon, seconded by Councillor Sennitt Clough and agreed that the application be REFUSED as per the officer’s recommendation.

(All members of the committee made an en bloc declaration that they are all members of the Conservative Party and whilst the Conservative Party rents an office from MJS Investments Ltd, who are the applicants, they do not visit the office)

(Councilor Mrs French registered, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that she is a member of March Town Council but takes no part in planning)

To determine the application.

Gavin Taylor presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Liam Lunn-Towler, the agent. Mr Lunn-Towler stated that the application proposes to remove an existing metal shed for the hay store and with associated boundary treatment, with the hay stored in the building being for the applicant’s horse in the field opposite and the application has received no neighbourhood objections and there is no technical consultee objection to the proposal and Doddington Parish Council support it. He stated that the hay store is screened by existing mature trees to the north of the site to reduce visibility from Swan Cottage and the new replacement which is located north of it and the visibility is from Dykemoor Drove, with Dykemoor Drove primarily used to access farming land and to provide a link between Benwick Road and Primrose Hill and, therefore, a hay store, in his view, is appropriate in this location.

Mr Lunn-Towler stated that with regards to the proposed boundary treatment, lining the west of the site opposite Dykemoor Drove is a 1.8-metre-high close board fence and the reason for the appearance of the fence is to reduce the visibility from the road to increase the privacy and security of the applicant’s land. He explained that the need to reduce the visibility is to the screen the area from Swan Cottage which reduces the overall continuous visual monitoring of the land.

Mr Lunn-Towler concluded that the application is supported by the Parish Council and the proposed development is considered to be suitable in the location.

Members asked Mr Lunn-Towler the following questions:

·         Councillor Marks stated that whilst he does not have an issue with the application, however, it does appear to look quite stark. He added that when you travel further along the road there are other metal constructed buildings which are pained black as well as a chicken farm which has low buildings. Councillor Marks asked whether the applicant would be prepared to paint the structure black or at least take the colourant out of the shed? Mr Lunn Towler stated that the applicant would be prepared to paint the store green in order for it to blend in with the landscape.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he agrees with the point made by Councillor Marks that it does appear to be quite stark. He referred to the presentation screen and added that there does appear to be a vehicle stored within the store and, therefore, should the application be approved then it must be used as a hay store and not for storing vehicles or used as living quarters. Councillor Connor added that he does agree that the store could do with toning down or maybe consideration could be given to plant some trees to go towards improving the street scene. Mr Lunn-Towler added that an enhancement scheme could be added in order to assist with the application being considered for approval. Councillor Connor stated that there will be further debate from  ...  view the full minutes text for item P83/24

To determine the application.

Gavin Taylor presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Jackson, the agent. Mrs Jackson explained that the application seeks outline planning permission for up to 2 dwellings and members will recall an application for residential development on land to the south east of site where it was resolved to grant planning permission on the basis that the proposal would not harm the character of the countryside and that it would make a positive contribution to the distinctives of the area upon the entry into Chatteris. She explained that she is the agent acting on behalf of that application and the submission of the conditions discharge application is imminent and with a view for the plots to be sold and reserved matters submitted.

Mrs Jackson expressed the view that in much the same way as the neighbouring application the proposal will make a positive contribution to the approach into Chatteris, and it presents an opportunity site to provide bespoke high-quality houses which sets the scene on the approach into the town. She made the point that the site feels like the last puzzle piece in terms of the approach into Chatteris on this side of the highway with the natural end of the development being defined by Highfield Lodge to the rear and the parameters of the existing paddock, with the scheme comprising a logical addition to the area and would enhance the immediate setting by allowing the opportunity to provide high quality homes.

Mrs Jackson stated that there are no technical objections to the proposal and, in her view, the only issue is there being a matter of interpretation as to whether the development would comprise urbanisation and sprawl. She expressed the view that in much the same way as you consider the site to the southeast the proposal would not harm the character of the countryside and would make a positive contribution to the distinctiveness of the area upon the entry into Chatteris.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed the view the officers have made the correct recommendation of refusal. She added that the proposal will totally destroy the outlook of the farmhouse which is already there.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he agrees with the point made by Councillor Mrs French, and he made reference to the approval given by the committee for the last scheme there and at that time members agreed that there would no further development there. He added that it appears to be sprawling out further and further and the farmhouse is located way back and has been a farmhouse for its entirety, and it had a reason to be there as a farmhouse. Councillor Marks stated that as you go further round there is another farmhouse which stands back on quite a site as well and he made the point the speed limits have been reduced but there have been recent bad accidents along there. He stated  ...  view the full minutes text for item P84/24

Matthew Leigh, Head of Planning, explained that F/YR21/1497/O came before the committee at a recent meeting, which was an outline application for up 120 dwellings with associated development and during the debate members raised some significant concerns in relation to highways safety particularly during the construction period and requested that Condition 45 be amended. He stated that after the meeting the applicant advised that if the decision notice included that amended condition then they would consider appealing the decision and look for an award of costs. Matthew Leigh explained that is now a material consideration for members and officers are recommending that the application is determined in accordance with Section 12 of the original officer’s report in relation to delegating the final conditions to the Head of Planning alongside the completion of a Section 106 as shown in Appendix 1.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that this is something that was wished for and was not something that the committee knew could be insisted on. She added that another application in 2003 had a recommendation of the introduction of a roundabout, however, that never came to fruition and twenty years later there are now traffic lights. Councillor Mrs French made the point that she hopes that the same situation does not arise, and a roundabout actually becomes a reality.

·         Councillor Benney expressed the view that the committee find themselves in a position again where bad decisions cost money and if members do not agree with the officer’s recommendation then the application will go to appeal, and the Council will lose. He stated that the committee has done the best that they can for the residents of March and if the application goes to appeal then members will end up with what it did not want, and it will end up costing the Council a lot of money. Councillor Benney expressed the view that committee cannot make bad decisions that cost money and members should agree with the officer’s recommendation.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he agrees with the points made by Councillor Mrs French and Benney and added that that he hopes that the developers are receptive of the points being made by the committee today and they will show an element of goodwill going forward during the development.

·         Councillor Connor stated that the Legal Officer has advised that costs are not a material consideration and the committee’s decision should not be based solely on the risk of incurring costs.

·         Councillor Marks added that safety and disruption to others is not a planning issue, however, he would like to think that the developers will take that into consideration.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and AGREED that condition 45 relating to the roundabout is withdrawn and that the Planning Committee delegates authority to the Head of Planning in relation to the Section 106 and then subsequently the conditions as in the original recommendation.

(Members considered this report as an  ...  view the full minutes text for item P85/24