Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes from the previous meeting of 26 June 2024.

The minutes of the meeting of 26 June 2024 were signed and agreed as an accurate record.

To determine the application.

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

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Jackson, on behalf of the agent. Mrs Jackson stated that the application is before committee with a recommendation of approval and it is for the change of use of agricultural land to equestrian use with the formation of an associated access track. She made the point that it is a countryside use within a countryside location, which is supported in principle by Policy LP3 of the Local Plan.

Mrs Jackson stated that the application proposes to change the use of the land to enable the stationing of horses for grazing and as part of the development an access track from Creek Fen is proposed, with works to the track having already commenced and the horses are in situ. She stressed that the proposal is not a commercial enterprise and there is no intention for the land to form a livery, with the situation being that the landowner rents the land to one person who puts a maximum of 4-5 horses on site and this complies with the ACAS recommendations of one horse per 0.5 of an acre.

Mrs Jackson stated that the number of horses accommodated within the site due to its size is restricted by the Animal Welfare Act 2006, with the proposal being entirely domestic in scale and as stated previously there is no intention for a commercial or business use to take place on site and as such the movements to and from the land will be limited. She made the point that the proposal has the support from the local Highway Authority on this basis and it is understood that there are neighbour concerns regarding damage to Creek Fen road, however, this is an adopted highway and this issue would be for the County Council to resolve.

Mrs Jackson expressed the opinion, as per the officer’s report, that the proposal is an acceptable form of development which complies with policies of the development plan. She requested that planning permission be granted as per the officer’s recommendation.

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

·         Councillor Hicks stated that he visited the site and all the questions he had have been answered by the agent so he is happy with the proposal, it will have little impact to the area and he will be supporting it.

·         Councillor Imafidon stated that he supports the proposal, he acknowledged that there were fears that it might be a commercial venture but these have been allayed.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he also supports the application, he cannot see anything wrong with it, there will only be 3 or 4 horses on the land and as long as it is not a commercial venture and let to one person he is satisfied

Proposed by Councillor Hicks, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and agreed that the application be GRANTED as per the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P14/24

To determine the application.

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

Members received a presentation, from Councillor Ruth Hufton, of Doddington Parish Council but also as a local private resident. Councillor Hufton expressed the view that there a number of reasons why this development should be refused, Doddington is designated as a growth village in the current Local Plan and the task was to build an 127 additional homes to reach the 15% target and the village has already achieved 196. She made the point there should be three affordable homes built within this development and lack of viability once again means that these will not be built so questioned whether this is a cop out for developers.

Councillor Hufton expressed the opinion that dirt and noise while the buildings take place will be an issue, access through to the site through Wood Street is narrow and does not allow two vehicles to pass without difficulty, especially when HGVs are involved. She stated that the access onto High Street opens into a Puffin crossing where children cross to and from the village school and there a constant parking problems in both Wood Street and High Street.

Councillor Hufton stated that both the developer and the health impact assessment speak of this development as being perfect for the elderly and downsizing residents, but she feels that the only way that future residents can access the village centre with it shops, pubs, churches, hospital, surgery, bus stops, etc will be by having to walk some 1500 metres through Juniper Close along the length of Wood Street and into High Street, there is no other access. She expressed the view that the demographic of Doddington already shows an imbalance of elderly people and what the village really needs is affordable homes to attract and retain young people into the village and to ensure its future.

Councillor Hufton referred to biodiversity and, in her view, the site is already teeming with wildlife, from Muntjac, Roe Deer, badgers, foxes, hedgehogs, tawny and barn owls, jays, woodpeckers, buzzards, red kite not to mention the more common birds, frogs and toads and a myriad of butterflies, moths and dragonflies and if people do not believe her to come and sit in her garden. She expressed the opinion that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the site of the proposed developer contributions will mitigate against the loss of these, with the intention being to build a wildlife pond questioning who will maintain this when it becomes choked with duckweed and green algae and is a nursery for larvae that will become mosquitos.

Councillor Hufton referred to Anglian Water being concerned that the used water network has not been addressed properly and could pose a risk of flooding and pollution, with the site together with homes at The Larches, Wood Street and in her garden have experienced serious flooding for two years now, something not seen for the 40 years she has  ...  view the full minutes text for item P15/24

To determine the application.

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

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Kier Petherick, the applicant. Mr Petherick stated that he has come to answer questions in case there are any outstanding points. He made the point that Chatteris Town Council are in support of the application and the site is a built form and will continue to exist as a functional area which delivers employment, with changing its use delivering a net gain to the Council via the fact it will pay business rates.

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

·         Councillor Benney stated as a Chatteris ward councillor he fully supports this application, it is an established use and an established business offering employment to Chatteris for many years and will continue to do so. He feels the proposal is just a simple change of use and understands why it is before committee but does not feel time should be wasted by members and officers debating it and a decision can be made.

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed surprise at this application being before committee, it is an established use and as far as the footpath is concerned that is a public footpath and bridle way and it is the County Council’s responsibility to upkeep it.

·         Councillor Hicks stated that he was impressed with the neatness and tidiness of the site, which is immaculate and everybody could move into the site tomorrow without anything having to be undertaken.

·         Councillor Marks stated as a ward councillor also for part of Chatteris he fully supports the application and he knows of a business that was trying to move into the site 12 months ago and had to relocate elsewhere because planning was held up so there are tenants ready to move onto the site. He referred to the pathway, Aerotron employ around 200 people and there is a crossing with the A141/2 and there is not a pathway so why is this being reflected on when there will be lesser people at this site.

·         Councillor Connor stated that Fenland is Open for Business and it wants people to bring light industry to Fenland to make the District’s aspirations higher.  

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Hicks and agreed that the application be GRANTED as per the officer’s recommendation.

(Councillor Sennitt Clough declared that the applicant rents land that she owns and left the room for the duration of the discussion and voting thereon)

(Councillor Benney declared that he knows the applicant but is not pre-determined and will consider the application with an open mind. He further declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that he is a member of Chatteris Town Council but takes no part in planning)

(Councillor Marks declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that he attends Chatteris Town Council meetings but  ...  view the full minutes text for item P16/24

To determine the application.

This item had been withdrawn.

To determine the application.

This item had been withdrawn.

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report and drew members 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. Mrs Jackson stated that outline planning permission for a dwelling on this site is established and this proposal seeks approval of Reserved Matters in relation to the construction of a single dwelling, with the proposal being described by officers as a two-storey dwelling, however, from the submitted drawings what is being proposed is a chalet or a single-storey dwelling with rooms in the roof space. She referred to a planning appeal determined in 2018 that she feels is pertinent to this proposal in which the LPA provided comments within its statement which were “the constraints of the site result in limited options for the location of a proposed dwelling as such a single storey dwelling is not considered able to be reasonably accommodated with sufficient private amenity space or reflective of the large bungalows in this area” so in this grounds of appeal the LPA made it very clear that it did not want a bungalow and the appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the proposal was for a house so with this in mind the only option available to them was to provide a chalet dwelling and they are, therefore, disappointed that the scheme before committee is with a recommendation of refusal.

Mrs Jackson made the point that the dwelling has been carefully designed so that no windows overlook the neighbouring properties, sufficient parking and garden space has been provided in accordance with the adopted drawings and the dwelling has been set back from the neighbouring properties. She referred to concerns being raised by officers that the proposal would result in an overbearing impact on the neighbouring property at No.7, however, she reiterated that their hands have been somewhat tied in that the Council has confirmed in the previous submission that the proposal could not be a bungalow.

Mrs Jackson expressed the view that they have carefully considered the impact on No.7 and as a result half hipped the roof in this location where it is closest to the neighbour, which has resulted in a much lower height dwelling and coupled with the distance from the rear boundary and the 1.8 metre high close boarded fencing on this boundary they would argue this is sufficient to alleviate concerns in relation to an overbearing impact. She made the point that it is clearly not an issue for No.7 and they have not objected to the scheme and she stated that there are no other objections to the proposal other than the seemingly subjective issue with regard to there being an overbearing impact.

Mrs Jackson expressed the opinion that the proposal would be built by a local builder using a local workforce and local materials, which would result in a high quality dwelling within a sustainable location and should be applauded. She expressed the view that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P19/24

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Councillor Steve Tierney, District Councillor for the area. Councillor Tierney stated that he assumes members have been out and visited the site so will have seen the nature of the site and he would like to challenge that this planning development is in keeping with the street scene, in his view, it is not, it is totally different to the other buildings most of which are lower than this and a completely different structure. He expressed the view that it clearly overdevelopment as it can be seen what a tight squeeze this proposed development would be on this small piece of land.

Councillor Tierney stated that when the proposal was for just one dwelling he found this acceptable but to then change the land to cram two where previously it was planned for one is greedy and it has been undertaken because it was previously approved and they have decided to try and chance it. He feels it is important that a message is sent because the Council has got to try and let people develop where they can and make places for people to live but there is also showing fairness to people who already live there and not allowing development to be crammed into every available space with the maximum number of dwellings that can be achieved, which is what is going on here and why residents are upset.

Councillor Tierney stated that he is one of three District Councillors for the area but both the other councillors, Councillors Wallwork and Hoy, have echoed his concerns by e-mail to the committee and he has spoke to them today and they have asked him to speak on behalf of them also. He stated that all three councillors oppose this proposal, they think it is the wrong message to be using a small piece of land to cram too bigger a development in and he is also concerned about the potential overlooking that there might be, with the proposal being too much for this piece of land and he hopes committee say no to the proposal so the developer goes back to their one dwelling proposal which he feels was far better.

Members asked questions of Councillor Tierney as follows:

·         Councillor Marks stated that the road is a fairly busy road and there was a proposal for one property with a garage which would have turning to stop vehicles reversing in and out and asked how busy is the road as this proposal would mean vehicles reversing in or out onto a highway. Councillor Tierney responded that it is not as busy as the A47 for example but for a residential road it is plenty busy, there are lots of properties in the road together with businesses and there are lots of reasons why people want to access the road and there are already concerns about how vehicles negotiate the area.

·         Councillor Imafidon  ...  view the full minutes text for item P20/24

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Councillor Tim Taylor, a District Councillor. Councillor Taylor stated that this proposal is a 2-bed annexe for the retired age of the farming family and farmers live in a rural location all their lives and have got farming running through their veins. He expressed the view that there are no drainage issues because the site is on its own sewage treatment plant.

Councillor Taylor asked members to imagine retiring and having this little annexe built to open your curtains in the morning to look out onto your open fields that you have built, designed and created, looking out over the cows feeding or calving or the sheep grazing and lambing. He expressed the view that what better way to retire than to the life you have become accustomed to and used to all your life.

Councillor Taylor stated that he visited a friend in Peterborough and he could not stand being in his house any more than 20 minutes as he could not cope with the noise and he said that when he visits him he is exactly the same as his home’s location is too quiet. He made the point that it is what people have been used to and feels there are two choices, it is a farm in the middle of nowhere, it has no public view and it is not going to be seen unless people are walking down a bridleway so the application can either be refused and the people have to live elsewhere or is it a case of saying they have lived all their life on the farm, employed local people, supported local communities, fed the nation so have a happy long retirement looking out of this little annexe onto the land, farm and industries that they have created and still feel part of the countryside and part of that farm.

Councillor Taylor stated that the family is still going to live in the main house, with the annexe being 10-15 yards away but if you are in the annexe that is not connected to the main house the person has the feeling of independence and is not tied to the main house but close enough to shout for help if required. He expressed the view that this type of project is something the Farming Committee and Planning Committee should be working together on across the District.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Matthew Hall, the agent. Mr Hall expressed the view that the principle is acceptable but it appears that the position and the scale are of concern and he has submitted some private medical evidence to show that this is for a family member and for future generations. He stated that the proposal is for a 2-bedroom annexe, with the second bedroom being, as and when required, for a live in carer and it has also been designed  ...  view the full minutes text for item P21/24

To confirm and sign the Confidential minutes of the meeting of 26 June 2024.

The confidential minutes of the meeting of 26 June 2024 were signed and agreed as an accurate record.

(Members resolved to exclude the public from the meeting for this item of business should it need to be discussed on the grounds that it involved the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972)