Agenda item

To determine the application.

The meeting reconvened at 2.34pm.

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

Sheila Black presented the report to members and drew their attention to the update report that had been circulated to them.

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

Matthew Hall thanked members for the opportunity to speak at today’s meeting. He stated that the site is located between and opposite existing dwellings and has not been used for agricultural purposes for some 40 years. The site is located within Flood Zone 1, has the support of Chatteris Town Council and no concerns have been raised by the Environment Agency, Environmental Health and the Council’s Tree officer. He confirmed that subject to planning approval, his client would be happy for a condition to be added to the planning permission requiring an ecological survey to be carried out.

Matthew Hall explained that the majority of trees will be retained on site and any that are removed will be replaced with additional landscaping behind the visibility splays. He added that the Council’s Tree officer has visited the site and has requested that an extensive landscaping design is required. He reminded members that the earlier planning application considered (F/YR18/0345/FDL) had many mature trees on site and that was recommended for approval by officers without the need for this.

Matthew Hall drew member’s attention to the aerial photo showing that residential dwellings surround the site currently. He informed members that as part of the application, an independent highways report had been submitted however the Highways authority denied ever being sent this report by officers and as a result, raised an objection to the application. Following this, he confirmed that he has engaged with an officer at the Highways authority to find an acceptable solution for the site and following this engagement, they have now removed their objection.

Matthew Hall reminded members that at the Planning Committee meeting on 9 October 2019, they had granted planning permission a similar application F/YR19/0684/O. He drew member’s attention to the similarities between this application and application F/YR19/0684/O and said officer’s had also recommended this application for refusal. One of the main concerns raised was whether or not the site was located within the village of Doddington and he highlighted that this site is located approximately 650m inside the ‘Chatteris’ road sign. He asked members to support the application today.

Members had no questions for Matthew Hall.

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

1.    David Rowen clarified Matthew Hall’s point regarding information not being passed on to the Highways Authority. He confirmed that it is the responsibility of the Highways authority to access any supporting documents via the Council’s Planning Portal.

2.    Councillor Benney agreed with Matthew Hall that the site is within the boundary of Chatteris and disagreed with officer’s opinion that it is situated in an ‘elsewhere location’. He said the site will provide desperately needed, good quality, housing stock to Chatteris and offered support to the application.

3.    David Rowen reminded members of a recent planning appeal decision in Westry, in which the Planning Inspector had stated that despite the presence of street signs, the site was located in an ‘elsewhere location’. He reiterated that whilst residents may consider a site to be located within a town’s boundary, it is about the character of the area and the built form of settlement and the location of road signs should not be considered.

4.    Councillor Benney disagreed with this and referenced application F/YR19/0684/O in which members had approved planning permission. He stated that the dwellings would enhance the town and the character of areas naturally evolves as development occurs.

5.    Councillor Hay said she had supported officer’s recommendation to refuse planning permission due to highways concern but as Highways have now removed their objection, she believes the road can afford to take the additional traffic from the site. She stated that as a local resident of Chatteris she considers the site to be located within the town and therefore supports the application.

6.    Councillor Sutton stated that he was unsure whether to support this proposal or not. He asked officers for clarification on the proximity of the site to the Hallam land boundary. Sheila Black indicated this location on a map for members. Councillor Sutton observed that this development would be adjacent to the built form of the Hallam Land, Chatteris.

7.    Stephen Turnbull observed that paragraph 6.1 of the report (page 89 of the agenda pack) states; Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires a planning application to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan for the purposes of this application comprises the adopted Fenland Local Plan (2014). He confirmed that officers have confirmed that this application is in breach of the Development Plan unless members are satisfied that there are other material planning considerations which outweigh this statutory obligation. 

8.    Councillor Sutton stated that that there is a dispute between members and officers in relation to the site’s ‘elsewhere location’ and there is nothing in the legislation that stops members disagreeing with officer’s opinion.

9.    Councillor Benney asked Councillor Sutton what his concerns were in relation to the proposal as the application is very similar to the application F/YR19/0684/O which Councillor Sutton had supported. Councillor Sutton explained that he assesses each application individually and whilst he is reluctant to go against officer’s recommendation, he will if necessary. He explained that previous long-standing Chatteris members had argued for many years about development in this location and he would give consideration to their opinions too.

10.David Rowen drew members attention back to recent planning appeal decisions and the Planning Inspector’s opinion on ‘elsewhere locations’. He highlighted that these appeal locations were located in a more urbanised area than this site and the Planning Inspector still described them as being in an ‘elsewhere location’ in line with officer’s opinion.

11.Councillor Hay disagreed and said residents of Chatteris view the site as being part of the town.

12.Councillor Sutton highlighted a planning appeal in Elm that was upheld by the Planning Inspector and said officer’s must provide members with all appeal decisions and not just those that agree with officer’s recommendations. David Rowen confirmed that the planning appeal in Elm did not relate to the site’s location and the cases he has referenced specifically relate to sites situated in ‘elsewhere locations’.

13.Nick Harding explained that members must seriously consider the consequences of making planning decisions based on the location of road signs. He explained that the Council’s planning policy makes no reference to the location of road signs but instead references the nature and character of the area. He highlighted that there is only sporadic development in this location which is distinct from the built-up urbanised area of Chatteris. Whilst members may choose to take this approach and grant planning permission, they must be aware of the consequences of uncontrolled ‘ribbon’ development across the district.

14.Councillor Benney highlighted that planning permission had been granted to a nearby garden centre which will provide a retail area therefore there will be amenities within close proximity to this development.

Proposed by Councillor Benney, seconded by Councillor Hay and decided that the application be GRANTED; against officer’s recommendation.

(Councillor Murphy declared an interest by virtue of the fact that he a friend of the applicant and left the Chamber for the duration of this agenda item)

(Councillor Hay declared an interest by virtue of the fact that she knows the applicant)

(Councillor Benney declared an interest by virtue of the fact that he knows the applicant)

(Councillor Connor declared an interest by virtue of the fact that he knows the applicant)

(Councillor Mrs Mayor, Councillor Meekins and Councillor Sutton abstained from voting on this item)

(Councillor Lynn left the meeting at 3.11pm)