Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes from the previous meeting of 10 October, 2018.

The minutes of the meeting of 10 October 2018 were confirmed and signed, subject to the following comments;

·         Councillor Mrs Bligh stated than in relation to the declaration noted in minute P37/18, she is not a member of Wisbech St Mary Parish Council but had attended the meeting.

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, by James Burton (the Applicant’s Agent).

James Burton explained that the scheme had evolved throughout the pre-application and application process and had carefully considered all comments raised by residents and the Parish Council. He confirmed that they had worked closely with officers and the consultees to ensure the proposal complied with all policy requirements. As a result of this, they have received no objections from consultees and have officer’s support on the application. The site has a positive planning history and is located within the urban development area of Wisbech. The site sits predominately in Flood Zone 2 with a marginal area along The Chase in Flood Zone 3; however the proposed dwellings are all located within Flood Zone 2 and the Sequential and Exception tests have been deemed satisfactory.

James Burton said the proposed scheme comprises of 10 dwellings with a mixture of 4-6 bedroom family homes split over 2 to 2.5 storeys. This is a reduction from the 16 dwellings approved with outline planning permission in 2009 and as a result, allows for a high-quality scheme that retains trees, green spaces and habitats throughout the site. He confirmed that the site had been configured to ensure the 2.5 storey dwellings will be positioned away from neighbouring properties to ensure that the amenities on these residents is not impacted. In addition, the 2.5 storey dwellings will be screened from view by trees.

James Burton highlighted that the proposed layout technically splits the site in half, this has been a conscious decision to ensure the impact on the Highway is minimised. He reminded members that the Highways officer is happy with the proposed access point for the site and confirmed that Topographical and Level surveys have been submitted with the application. He said throughout the process they have listened to any comments or concerns and as a result there has been a reduction from 11 to 10 units, a reduction in scale of the buildings and an updated site layout to give greater distance between neighbouring boundaries. Following work with Highways, the Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA), North Level Internal Drainage Board and Tree and Wildlife officers, they have managed to design a scheme that has achieved an officer’s recommendation for approval.

He concluded that the proposed dwellings will provide high-quality family homes in a sustainable location within the urban area of a primary market town and asked members to support the application today.

Members had no questions for James Burton.

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

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws confirmed that any concerns she had in relation to consultee’s comments had been satisfied by the proposed conditions.

2.    Councillor Mrs Laws asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item P42/18

The Committee had regard 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 asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor Connor said he was shocked to see that as a result of the viability assessment, there were no S106 contributions on a site of this size.

2.    Councillor Sutton said as a satisfactory viability test has been carried out, members must accept this. He added that in an ideal world every scheme would receive contributions however unless the Committee question each viability assessment, it must be accepted as correct. Chris Gordon confirmed that this would be outside of the Planning Committee’s remit to question viability assessments.  

3.    Councillor Mrs Laws highlighted that the application had gone through the planning process successfully and members are not in a position to comment on the viability assessments and must accept the expert’s opinion.

4.    Councillor Murphy said he could not see any reason to refuse this application.

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

The Committee had regard 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, by James Burton (the Applicant’s Agent).

James Burton introduced the scheme and highlighted that the proposal for outline planning permission is recommended for approval by officers. He explained that the application had been referred to Planning Committee due to Leverington Parish Council’s concerns about the development not being in-keeping with the area and concerns that the two access roads into the site are excessive for the number of dwellings. He confirmed that whilst the application is for up to four dwellings, these will be subject to detailed design and plans being submitted at reserved matters stage.

As part of the application, James Burton highlighted that there had been no objections from the statutory consultees and Highways had raised no concerns regarding the two access roads into the site. The scheme proposes the demolition of the existing industrial building on site and the site is located in a built-up residential area. He informed members that the business currently operating on site is relocating locally and will remain in the village.

He stated that the site is located in Flood Zones 1 & 3 and Sequential and Exception tests have been submitted and deemed satisfactory. He said the proposal will result in the removal of a non-conforming unit from a residential area and contribute up to 4 dwellings in a sustainable location. He explained that the illustrative layout has demonstrated that 4 dwellings can comfortably be accommodated on site and will have no adverse impact on neighbours. He concluded by asking members to support the application today.

Members had no questions for James Burton.

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

1.    Councillor Mrs Hay said she was pleased to hear that the current business on-site is relocating locally and felt the proposed development will be a good use of the land. She added that she believes the scheme will improve the area.

2.    Councillor Mrs Bligh said that she cannot see any reason why the application should not be approved as it sits comfortably within the building line.

3.    Councillor Mrs Laws said the site visit showed a mixture of bungalows and houses within the area and therefore the proposal will not be out of keeping with the area.

4.    Councillor Murphy said he believed the development would improve the look of the existing site and could see no reason to refuse the application.

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

The Committee had regard 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, by Andrew Hodgson (the Applicant’s Agent).

Andrew Hodgson said he was pleased with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application and highlighted that there were no technical objections to the application. He said he was happy to answer any specific questions members had in relation to the scheme.

Members asked Andrew Hodgson the following questions;

1.    Councillor Mrs Laws asked if a flood risk assessment had been submitted with the application. Andrew Hodgson confirmed that a surface water assessment had been submitted with the application. David Rowen clarified that as the site is located in Flood Zone 1, there was no requirement for this.

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

1.    Councillor Connor said he could see no issues with the proposal as the site sits amongst residential dwellings and there are no planning reasons to refuse the application.

2.    Councillor Mrs Laws said the site is in a good location and cannot see any reason to refuse the application.

3.    Councillor Mrs Hay agreed and said once the agricultural buildings are demolished, the area will be enhanced.

4.    Councillor Mrs Bligh agreed and believes the proposed development will fit in with the local area and improve the outlook for residents in neighbouring streets.

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

The Committee had regard 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, by Councillor Jan French.

Councillor Mrs French explained that the application is for retrospective planning permission as the applicants had been unaware that planning permission was required when they erected the shed. She confirmed March Town Council and local residents are in favour of the application, with a petition attracting over 100 signatures of support also. She said during her 19 years as a Councillor, she cannot recall any other occasion where a planning application for a shed has gained so much public support.

Councillor Mrs French explained that that Highways comments in the report are incorrect as the access has not been moved. She explained that the applicant has owned the property for 13 years and the dropped kerb was in situ when they purchased the property. The property was originally owned by Fenland District Council and the dropped kerb had been installed during this period of ownership. The report states that the application undermines Local Plan Policy 16 (LP16) however Councillor Mrs French said the shed does make a positive contribution to the area as the owners have greatly improved the property. She asked members to approve the application as refusing it would send the wrong message out to local residents trying to improve their properties.

Members asked Councillor Mrs French the following questions;

1.    Councillor Connor asked if all of the letters received in support of the application were from local residents. Councillor Mrs French confirmed all letters of support were received by residents who live within the vicinity of the property.

2.    Councillor Connor asked if the petition had been signed by local residents only. Councillor Mrs French confirmed all signatories were local residents and added that the Applicant had visited neighbouring properties to seek support for the application.

3.    Councillor Connor thanked Councillor Mrs French for confirming the level of public support.

The Chairman thanked Councillor Mrs French for her presentation.

Members received a presentation in support of the application, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, by Mark Mueller (the Applicant).

Mark Mueller thanked members for giving him to opportunity to speak today and made it clear that it was never his intention to deceive the Council by not obtaining planning permission. He confirmed that he had purchased the property from Roddons Housing Association and the restrictive covenants attached to the property included; restrictions that prevented the land being used for anything other than garden land, restrictions on signage being displayed at the property and restrictions on erecting any other building or structure on-site except a single garden shed. Based on this, he said he was unaware that he would need to do seek any further approval for the shed. He explained that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P46/18