Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Murray Graham, the applicant, and Rory Canham, the agent. Mr Graham stated that he purchased the 4-acre parcel of land in 2007 with the sole intention of keeping horses and chickens and for hobbies in a family, relaxing and stress freeway, with it never being the intention in the early years to apply for planning permission as the land was used just for stables. He explained that he is a March resident and has lived in the town all his life, with his wife being a third generation March resident.

Mr Graham stated that when he purchased the land in 2007 it was a small 4-acre parcel of agricultural land and was not sustainable for farmers on a commercial scale and his aspiration was to develop the land in a way which supported the environment. He explained that over the years a huge amount of work has been undertaken to transform the land which has included planting over 2000 native hedgerow plants across the front and some of the side boundaries, with some mature native trees also being planted in consultation with various organisations and following advice from environmental agencies he has planted all the boundaries with seed mix to encourage flora and fauna, and the boundaries are allowed to grow wild for most of the year.

Mr Graham explained that a few years ago he decided to plant 200 sapling tree and in addition there are two or three native honeybee colonies located in the bottom right-hand corner of the field. He stated that he has been adding nest boxes across the land to encourage nesting birds, and he leaves the stable doors open during the summer months to allow swallows and swifts to nest in the barns.

Mr Graham made the point that there are no main services on the land and that has been the case since 2007 and added that as a result he is using solar power and surface water for the animals. He stated that the reason he is looking to change the land use now is that he has suffered from many thefts and has submitted four crime reports because of break ins, with there being additional intruders on the site over the last few years and the losses he has encountered are estimated to be around £20,000 so far.

Mr Graham explained that Crime Prevention Officers have attended the site, and he has taken the advice provided to him and implemented that, including CCTV on the site and extra security measures have been included on the buildings and doors on the site. He stated that even with all of those additional precautions in place there are still instances of intrusions on the site with ongoing break ins because of the rural proximity the intruders are going on to the site during the night and go undisturbed for large periods of time which has resulted in large significant losses.

Mr Graham explained that when he has suffered from the thefts, the offenders do not worry about the associated damage that they do, and he explained that the offenders have broken down fences in the past and have built bridges over the dykes to remove equipment from his storage containers. He added that offenders have also driven through crops of sugar beet fields to gain access to his equipment and the CCTV system that he has on site does not act as a deterrent, with the offenders wearing hoods and balaclavas.

Mr Graham expressed the view the only way in which he is going to be able to protect his property is by living on site and his intention is to keep giving back to the land by planting more trees and adding more bird boxes as well as planting more shrubs and native hedgerows.

Members asked Mr Graham and Mr Canham the following questions:

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she knows that side of March quite well and she asked whether the Internal Drainage Boards have been consulted with regards to the dykes and ditches. Mr Canham asked whether that was in connection with drainage for the proposal. Councillor Mrs French stated that if you are surrounded by dykes and ditches then there does need to be consultation undertaken and she questioned how the surface water from the site is going to be dealt with. Mr Canham stated that the proposal indicates soakaways and treatments plants and, therefore, the water will be kept away from all dykes and will be similar to the current situation. Councillor Mrs French asked for confirmation that the surface water will not be going into any of the dykes at all? Mr Canham confirmed that is correct, they will also be grey water harvesting where at all possible in accordance with what is already on site.

·         Councillor Marks stated that, from the presentation, security appears to be a major issue, however, there does not appear to be any mention of crime reference numbers in the report, and asked for confirmation as to why that information is missing? Mr Canham explained that this was referred to in the design access statement, but it did not include any crime reference numbers as he was unable to obtain that information.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that he is a Chairman of Neighbourhood Watch scheme, and he explained that if something is not reported then it is not recorded. He added that Mr Graham had explained that he has been a victim of crime where he has lost in the region of £20,000 and if he had been in that position he would certainly have reported it. Mr Graham stated that he concurs with that view, and the four thefts that have taken place including the £20,000 loss which he referred to have all been covered by Police reporting and are all covered by crime report numbers. He made the point that during his presentation he was also referring to the multiple intrusions on the site which have been reported but he did not receive a crime number. Mr Graham added that all the thefts have been reported which needed to be done for insurance purposes.

·         Councillor Gerstner asked Mr Graham to confirm that the plan will be to build and live in the dwelling himself and what are the likely timescales for the dwelling to be built should planning be approved? Mr Graham stated that he has owned the land since 2007, and the dwelling will be a family house which he will live in for the rest of his life. He added that with regards to timescales, if approved then the costing exercise needs to be undertaken but he would want to move at pace to commence the development.

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that Mr Graham had mentioned in his presentation that he had received advice from environment agencies regarding what to plant and how to develop the site and asked Mr Graham to clarify whether he actually meant organisations? Mr Graham confirmed that the organisations he consulted with included the Woodland Trust who came and undertook a survey and provided a recommendation concerning what should be planted and where as well as advice concerning the diversification of the boundaries. Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that demonstrates how committed Mr Graham is to the site and how to develop it in the best way possible. She added that the trees and hedges will go towards assisting with any flooding issues should they occur.

·         Councillor Benney stated that when the site was purchased in 2007, it was agricultural land, and asked Mr Graham whether he had taken into consideration the security of the land before he purchased it? Mr Graham stated that when he purchased the land it was fenced to keep the horses on site and when he built the stables, the security was considered, however, over a number of years it has become apparent that gates can be lifted off and be destroyed as well as wooden gate posts can be hooked up to a transit van and ripped out of the ground. He explained that as he has gone though that learning curve, he has installed brick pillars and welded the gates and a specialist welding companies have visited the site and secured the storage containers as well as introducing type 10 padlocks on all of the buildings and stables. Mr Graham stated that due to the security problems he is no longer able to leave any equipment on the site and in order to maintain the land it requires equipment such as small vintage tractors, ride on mowers and petrol-powered tools and these have to be taken to his home address following the end of every use.

·         Councillor Benney asked whether it is a commercial enterprise which is in operation or is it more hobby based and just for his family’s personal recreation? Mr Graham stated that he makes no money, and he keeps horses, chicken and bees. He made the point that if he charged the correct price for a jar of honey it would be £700 a jar, and he stated that he makes no money out of the piece of land and he never has done. Mr Graham explained that he has no intention of making any money from his land, but he does want to protect what is his and what he has worked hard for.

·         Councillor Murphy stated that the land was purchased in 2007 and eighteen years later, the decision has been made that you now wish to add a building onto the land, and he questioned how many years it will be before the dwelling is built? Mr Graham explained that he sought pre-application advice several years ago from the council and Peter Humphrey Associates have visited the site over the last 10 years and have made suggestions in terms of what he needs to do with regards to making a planning application at some point. He stated that he would want to move quickly if approval was given, however, he cannot say that he would start building within the next 6 months as he has not yet had the property costed or secured a builder but the sooner he is on site the better as it means he can protect his property.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that Peter Humphrey Associates are a very well-known established company, and she asked Mr Graham to confirm what advice Mr Humphrey provided to him bearing in mind that the Fenland Local Plan was adopted in 2014 and it clearly states that there will be no development in the open countryside. Mr Graham stated that the advice given replicates the point made by Councillor Mrs French and that given the current circumstances it would be very unlikely that he would receive planning permission. He added that the reason that he is in attendance is to demonstrate to the committee that the piece of land is no longer viable because of all the thefts that are taking place and the only way that he can continue to be passionate about the hobbies that his family have is to live on site. Mr Graham stated that if officers come back with some recommendations he would except those as he wants to do everything possible to be sensitive to nature but also be able to secure the property.

·         Councillor Marks stated that Mr Graham has made the point that he wishes to be sensitive to nature, however, the proposal is to erect a dwelling in the middle of nowhere and he questioned whether that is seen as being sensitive to nature? Mr Graham explained that the proposal will include solar panels, grey water recovery and he will continue to plant boundaries and more trees, and, in his view, he can offset some of the potential harm. Mr Canham added that he has added some modest architectural size and massing to the proposal which has been referred to in the officer’s recommendation given the fact that the site is 4 acres and he has tried to create a modest detached dwelling for the applicant. He expressed the opinion that he has deliberately not created something that is excessively big and large which would be unnecessary for the site.   

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

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she sympathises with the applicant for having to endure the break ins and burglaries on his land, however, the site is in the open countryside. She added that she is pleased to hear that the advice provided to the applicant from Peter Humphrey Associates was the correct advice. Councillor Mrs French made the point that there is nothing within the officer’s report with regards to reported crimes and she added that she cannot support the application as it will set a very dangerous precedent across the whole of Fenland.

·         Councillor Benney stated that, with regards to LP3 of the Local Plan which refers to building in the open countryside, it can be interpreted in different ways, however, it is in the middle of the open countryside and the site is 4 acres of agricultural land. He stated that the reason a Legal Officer is present at the committee is because if the committee grant planning permission, the legal entity of the land is changed. Councillor Benney expressed the view that the application site is agricultural land, and the application is for a dwelling in the wrong place.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that on many occasions the committee have granted applications which are located in Flood Zone 3 and according to the officer’s report this application fails to comply with the sequential test. He added that when considering that fact as well as the application being located in an elsewhere location, whilst he feels sorry for the applicant who has taken steps with regards to biodiversity, in his view, the location is not the right place to build a dwelling.

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that she would like to support the application as she has seen how genuine the applicant is with regards to the commitment he has to the site, however, it would set a dangerous precedent for building in the countryside. She stated that she would like it noted that she has a lot of empathy for the applicant, and she would have liked to have supported the proposal.

·         Councillor Purser stated that he also sympathised with the applicant and had concerns with regards to the potential hazard from the hay bales on the site. He added that he agrees with the other members of the committee that it would set a precedent, and he will support the officer’s recommendation.

·         Councillor Murphy stated that he concurs with the other points raised by members of the committee.

·         Councillor Purser stated that it also appears the site is being used solely for hobby purposes rather than a business.

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

(Councillors Mrs French and Purser declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that they are members of March Town Council but take no part in planning)