Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes from the previous meeting of 20 June 2018.

The minutes of the meeting of 20 June 2018 were confirmed and signed.

To update the Committee with regard to the enforcement action being taken to control against the change of use of land.

Stephen Turnbull updated members on the enforcement action taken by the Council in relation to the site in New Bridge Lane, Wisbech. He confirmed that following a further court hearing on 13 June 2018, a full injunction was granted to prevent any person or persons, carrying out works for the creation of a caravan site. He added that the owner of the site had given a formal undertaking to the Court in support of this.

To determine the application.

The Committee had regards to its inspection of the site as agreed in accordance with the Site Inspection Policy and Procedure (minute P19/04 refers) during its deliberations.

David Rowen presented the report and update to members.

Members received a presentation in support of the application, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Alan Dixon (the Applicant).

Alan Dixon explained that he had been involved with the site since the age of fourteen and had been responsible for creating multiple habitats for wildlife throughout the farm. He said he was passionate about the site and his proposed plans are of a positive nature and will not cause harm to anybody. He explained that he currently runs free woodland walks on the site for members of the public, with over 550 people attending. He is keen to encourage the local community to explore the wildlife in the area and said the walks had received positive feedback from those that attended. He added that the local village school had attended the farm and he is keen to engage with them further, if planning permission is approved to expand the site. He informed members that although the planning application is for thirteen Ti-pee’s, he feels ten would be a comfortable amount for the site without impacting the surrounding habitat. He confirmed that work will be carried out to the entrance of the site in order to improve safety, if planning permission is granted.

Members asked Alan Dixon the following questions;

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws said the site visit had allowed her to understand the vision Mr Dixon has for the site. She said it was positive that he had engaged with the local school and would be interested to see this progress further. She asked for confirmation that the business element of the proposal would commence prior to the development of the dwellings, as discussed in the report. Alan Dixon confirmed this was correct.

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

1.    Councillor Murphy said Parson Drove and Church End are distinctly separate settlements and have developed in a predominantly linear form along the main road. He said the southern side of the road has remained undeveloped, as it is considered outside of the settlement boundary. He highlighted that the site is located in Flood Zone 3 and said public representation had discussed that the development would be built outside of the built-up area and would exceed the permitted limit for residential developments in the village. He said in regards to the Fenland Local Plan (FLP), the scheme does not comply with policy LP3 as Church End is another village where development is considered on its own merits, but would normally be limited in scale to single dwellings. He believes the proposed residential element of the application is not in accordance with LP12 as development would lead to the erosion of an important open-frontage and this could set an unwelcome precedent for future applications. He said policy LP16  ...  view the full minutes text for item P11/18

To determine the application.

The Committee had regards to its inspection of the site as agreed in accordance with the Site Inspection Policy and Procedure (minute P19/04 refers) during its deliberations.

David Rowen presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation in support of the application in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Chris Walford (The Agent).

Chris Walford explained that prior to the submission of this application; pre-application advice had been sought on a similar layout but for three-dwellings. Following discussions with the Tree Officer, the design was re-worked to overcome any issues raised. He highlighted that whilst the pre-application advice is over a year old, there have been no policy changes in this time. He confirmed that a specialist tree report had been carried out in order to show members that the development would have no adverse impact on the sites trees. He hoped the concerns raised by local residents, had been satisfied by the report findings and reminded members that a similar outline application had been recently been approved for a development located south of the proposed site. He concluded that the development would cause no adverse impact on the character or residential amenity of the area and asked members to support the officer’s decision to grant planning permission.

Members had no questions for Chris Walford.

Members asked questions made comments and received response as follows;

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws said as the proposal has gained approval from March Town Council, complies with the Neighbourhood Plan and has received no objections from the statutory consultees, the application should be approved.

2.    Councillor Sutton said whilst he is not in favour of development on this site, there is no planning reason to reject the scheme.

3.    Councillor Mrs Newell asked if any archaeological tests had been carried out on the site. David Rowen confirmed that this is would be covered under a condition if planning permission is granted.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs Laws, seconded by Councillor Sutton and decided that the application be APPROVED as per officer’s recommendation.

To determine the application.

The Committee had regards to its inspection of the site as agreed in accordance with the Site Inspection Policy and Procedure (minute P19/04 refers) during its deliberations.

David Rowen presented the report and update to members.

Members received a presentation in objection to the application, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, by Colin Richards.

Colin Richards said he is speaking as a concerned resident who will be negatively affected by the proposed development. He highlighted that both March Town Council and this Committee had previously rejected an application for development on this site. He showed members photographs of his garden which regularly floods during rainfall and believes this is caused by a pond that was once on the proposed site. As a result of this, he does not believe that even installing soakaways on the proposed site will prevent this from happening in the future. He explained that the suggested site entrance will be narrow and hazardous to vehicles entering and exiting the site. He highlighted that Elliott Road already suffers from congestion due to parked vehicles and believes this will only worsen if approval is granted. Due to his property’s proximity to the site, his privacy will be lost and he will suffer from noise pollution as the suggested parking areas for the dwellings are adjacent to his garden. He said Elliott Road currently has several sites with planning permission granted however the infrastructure has not been updated to cope with the impact of these developments and their residents.

Members asked Colin Richards the following questions;

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws asked Colin Richards if the flooding in his garden had worsened over recent years. Colin Richards explained that he had lived in his property for thirty-seven years and the flooding had worsened during this time. He clarified that the photos he had shown members were of his garden after only a normal level of rainfall.

Members received a presentation in objection to the application, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, by Councillor Mrs Jan French.

Councillor Mrs French explained that she had been a Ward Councillor for over twenty years therefore was well aware of the flooding issues in Elliott Road. She clarified that the photos of Colin Richard’s garden were taken during a period of normal rainfall and not during the flooding the area suffered in 2014. She highlighted that March Town Council are against the application due to the flooding issues and said the Environment Agency have not managed to resolve the problem either. She views the proposed site as ‘backland’ development and said the Council had promised to stop this type of development as part of the National Planning Policy amendments in 2010/11. Councillor Mrs French reminded members of the previous planning application on the site and asked them to reject this application on the same basis.

Members had no questions for Councillor Mrs French.

Members received a presentation in support of the application, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, by Chris Walford  ...  view the full minutes text for item P13/18

To determine the application.

(Members resolved to exclude the public from the meeting for part of this item of business in so far as it related to confidential papers which were circulated at the meeting on the grounds that it involved the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of scheduled 12A of the Local Government Act 1972)

The Chairman explained that a confidential document would be circulated to members once the registered speakers had finished their presentations. He made the public and press aware that they would be asked to leave the Council Chamber during this time, to allow members deliberation of the document. 

David Rowen presented the report and update to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Councillor Steve Tierney.

Councillor Tierney asked members to consider the people they serve and not bureaucracy when considering this application. He said the site deserves special consideration as The Retreat is a fantastic local business working in a tough area where other businesses have previously failed. He explained that he had recently attended a presentation at Meadowgate School where students were celebrating their work with The Retreat. He explained that the owners of the salon work hard to serve the community and he had personally spoken to hundreds of people who support them and their business. He highlighted that Wisbech Town Council had passed a motion to support the proposed application and the Mayor of Wisbech is in attendance today to show his support too. He said the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor David Oliver also backs the application. He said the public opinion is that the Council are putting bureaucratic barriers above helping a legitimate business and he reminded members that the site is located opposite a car-wash and between two nightclubs. The windows installed are attractive and shutters will protect the business from the anti-social behaviour problems they face. He highlighted that windows are expensive to replace when they are subject to vandalism and the Police cannot protect the premises at all times, therefore this application should receive special dispensation as they are in a situation through no fault of their own. He explained that the applicants had employed a firm to install the UPVC windows, who had assured them that they would apply for the appropriate planning permission on the applicant’s behalf. This firm is no longer in business and the applicants are left with the consequences of this. He asked members to go against officer’s recommendations and send a positive message to the public in relation to protection of local businesses against vandalism. He said the Committee should view this case as an exception. He disagreed that a precedent would be set by granting the planning permission as each application is assessed on its own merits and asked members to make a common sense decision. 

Members asked Councillor Tierney the following questions;

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws said Councillor Tierney had referenced the installation of shutters however the application  ...  view the full minutes text for item P14/18