Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Grant 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 David Nicholas, a supporter of the proposal. Mr Nicholas informed members that he lived close to this location, probably 200-300 metres, and has lived here for 10 years, but farmed the land for about 30 years and his father farmed the land prior to this so he has experience of the land for the past 70 years. He made the point that in that time there has been no flooding whatsoever and he is a member of the local drainage board, so he is well aware of drainage matters, although he does not represent the drainage board.

Mr Nicholas expressed the view that there has been people trying to imply that there is not good road visibility but that is not true as they have farmed here for 70 years and they have never had a problem, with the visibility in both directions being very good. He stated that the one problem he has had with farming is theft but since he has moved on the farm that has virtually reduced and he can understand why Mr Harrison wants to live with his buildings with his equipment in to keep them secure because, in his view, in the Fens this is a problem.

Members asked questions of Mr Nicholas as follows:

·       Councillor Marks stated that he lives in Manea and travels Wimblington Road every day, he referred to access and vision along that road and asked if he would agree that, from Lion’s Drove, Boots Bridge and up to Poly Sports can be seen, probably a distance of 1.5 miles in total? Mr Nicholas agreed and stated it is approximately 1 mile to Boots Bridge.

·       Councillor Marks referred to Mr Nicholas’ property being the one that has been built further down Lion’s Drove, which is quite a large property with three garages, and asked if it was in keeping with the dwelling being proposed today, being of the same size and scale. Mr Nicholas responded that he could not comment on this.

·       Councillor Marks asked in relation to drainage boards if this comes under Wimblington? Mr Nicholas responded that it is the Curf and Wimblington Combined Internal Drainage Board. Councillor Marks continued that he has stated that he is unaware of any flooding within that area, which is in Flood Zone 3 and asked if the land is drained? Mr Nicholas responded that he did not know, it could well be, but he has not seen it flood.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Sam Harrison, the applicant, and Matthew Hall, the agent. Mr Harrison stated he wishes to build an occupational dwelling for himself, his wife and three children, two of which are in Manea school. He added that he has lived in Manea for just over 25 years and is proud to call it his home.

Mr Harrison stated that part of this application is for a storage shed and yarded area to be a secure base to run his equipment from and he is currently running out of his parents shed, which he has outgrown. He feels the need to have his own premises in a secure independent location for the future building of the business, and he was recently successful in being awarded a small business grant from FDC, which has already helped him in being able to purchase machinery that has secured him some additional contracts.

Mr Harrison informed members that he currently has himself and three full-time members of staff, with his father working part-time as well as part-time admin staff. He stated that he is not looking to build this to sell, it will be for himself and his family to live in and to be able to build and safeguard his business for the future.

Mr Hall made the point that the applicant has outlined his personal circumstances and his business which is expanding with contracts in Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire and been awarded a small grant by Fenland District Council. He referred to the report where Cambridgeshire Constabulary confirmed that this area is in a medium crime risk area, not low.

Mr Hall stated that there are numerous objections to this application, as seen in the report, however, when you view these they are all very similar and a lot of them are from empty properties in Doddington and March, with this being raised with officers and Carol Pilson. He made the point that there are no technical objections to this application and the applicant is happy to sign a legal agreement and pay a fee as this is clearly a self-build property where the applicant has been heavily involved with the design, is going to build it and live in it and knows the conditions regarding self-build.

Mr Hall stated that they are not applying for a residential dwelling and using this site is logical, the applicant lives in Manea and this site is next to the shed he uses, with this shed also lying within Flood Zone 3 as are the adjacent buildings as is Mr Nicholas’ dwelling, with the Environment Agency having no objection to this application. He made the point that the proposal is for an established business that wishes to expand with further on-site storage for equipment and there are three full-time staff employed plus the applicant, with some part-time staff.

Mr Hall expressed the opinion that the design in relation to National Planning Policy Paragraph 84 would enhance the setting, it does not create any adverse impact on neighbouring properties, no-one has objected from the adjacent sites and also it is a very similar size to Mr Nicholas’ property. He reiterated that it is an established business that was started by the applicant 17 years ago who has outlined his personal circumstances.

Members asked questions as follows:

·       Councillor Marks referred to the mention of it being an established business and that over the years he has probably expanded with more contracts and equipment and have outgrown their current facilities and asked what benefit this extra area will give him? Mr Harrison responded that they are hoping to further expand in time, he does not want to be one of those that grows the biggest and falls the quickest, with steady expansion being his intention. He stated that he is currently based out of his parents shed, he has almost evicted everything of his father’s out of the shed, so he is housing him and his father wants his shed back hence the application. Mr Harrison stated that the one proposed shed is slightly bigger, and he is hoping to further fill it with more equipment, more employment for themselves and more work.

·       Councillor Marks asked if the land is drained and, as a garden business, does he have a flail where he can keep the dyke tidy? Mr Harrison responded that they have undertaken projects on the existing land and have come across land drains across the site. He added that he does have equipment to flail the dyke out but only to a certain reach, all of their equipment is compact and classed as light goods, and they already maintain the front roadside dyke as it does get overgrown if they do not.

·       Councillor Marks referred to Ghant Farm being ½ mile up the road and security issues here have been that CCC have now agreed to a hard gate being installed because of break ins and issues. He asked if this was similar to Mr Harrison? Mr Harrison responded that his father’s property has been secure but previously there have been two guard dogs there, which have now passed away, and his father is away a lot more as well as his family which is leaving all the equipment exposed. He does not live on site, so it is becoming a factor of concern that it is now starting to get vulnerable and with the equipment not being able to all fit in the barn there are mini diggers and vans sitting outside which are vulnerable. Councillor Marks agreed with this as he travels the road most days and can see the equipment sitting there.

·       Councillor Benney referred to it only being an opinion on drainage and whether it drains or not and asked for assurance that there is a drainage scheme here, whether it is building the land up so that it safeguards it from flooding, and there is a technical solution, irrespective of whether the land drains or not, to flooding of the property that is proposed. Mr Hall responded in the affirmative, it is a large site, a lot of it is permeable area, with a large amount of area for soakaways which would be in accordance with Building Regulations, there is also a drainage ditch at the front riparian ditch but he would suggest that it will be on-site drainage and it is likely that there will also be some rainwater harvesting from the shed which can be used in the business. He added there are no mains drains here, and it would be a treatment plant, which is one of the reasons the site has been made so large is for the drainage.

Members asked officers questions as follows:

·       Councillor Marks referred to 1.2 of the officer’s report where it is considered there is insufficient evidence for information submitted to demonstrate the proposal is essential for a rural worker as required in an elsewhere location such as this, therefore, the proposal is considered unacceptable in principle contrary to policies LP3 and LP12, however, members have heard from the applicant regarding security on site and the business is actually running from next door so how would it be established that it is not needed if he erected a shed? Alan Davies responded that the application was not accompanied with the information that the applicant has discussed so the justification on the basis of security was not with the application, but it also is not a material planning consideration. He made the point that it is a self-build, custom dwelling in an elsewhere location so the principle of this is based on whether it is appropriate within that location.

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

·       Councillor Marks stated that he knows the area as he travels it twice a day at least and this is a proposal for a business that is expanding and has been supported by FDC in the past, which will provide a home for a young family and provides the comfort factor of security and extra assistance regarding parking. He made the point that, in relation to flood zones, there have been previous applications regarding workplace homes where they were built out of the ground so high you needed a ladder to walk into the front room, and members have heard from the agent that there is mitigation that can be implemented and from a supporter that the area does not flood. Councillor Marks expressed the view that the proposal should be supported as committee has done with many others.

·       Councillor Mrs French expressed the view that it is good that this is a young farmer prepared to invest, especially with what they have had to go through over the last 18 months.

·       Councillor Benney made the point that this is a business that wants to grow, with it being hard enough being a businessman currently and this provides employment for local people. He expressed the opinion that there are no technical reasons that cannot be worked around, and it is known the plant is very nickable and a theft could finish the business so the best security there is, is living on the premises. Councillor Benney stated that this is the applicant’s site although there might be other locations, but this is helping a business, it is not in an elsewhere location and will be the applicant’s home. He stated that he will be supporting the proposal.

·       Councillor Marks expressed the view that the visibility splays are very good unlike the application that committee considered further along at Poppyfields, it ticks all the boxes and the ground is also land drained, with the applicant going to keep the drain clear. He expressed concern over the various dubious letters that were submitted and hopes they do not get the outcome they wanted.

·       Councillor Connor commended the application being for a young family wanting to invest in business, with Fenland being Open for Business and it would be a travesty if this was refused. He stated that he would be supporting the proposal.

Proposed by Councillor Marks, seconded by Councillor Benney and agreed that the application be GRANTED against officer’s recommendation, with authority delegated to officers to apply conditions in consultation with the Vice-Chairman and for the applicant to enter into a Unilateral Undertaking.

Members do not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they do not feel this is an elsewhere type location, it is a good use of land, it provides security for the business which is a growing business and mitigation can be undertaken for the site lying in Flood Zone 3.

(Councillor Benney declared that the agent has undertaken work for Chatteris Town Council and himself personally, but he is not pre-determined and will consider the application with an open mind)

(Councillor Imafidon declared that the agent is undertaking work for him, but he is not pre-determined and will consider the application with an open mind)

(Councillor Marks declared that the applicant’s parents are known to him, but he does not know or socialise with the applicant and 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 Manea Parish Council but takes no part in planning.)