Agenda item

To Determine the Application.

The Committee had regard to its inspection of the site 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 Gareth Edwards (the Agent).

Mr Edwards explained that the application before Members today is for a maximum of 60 dwellings in Coates Road, Coates. There have been ongoing discussions with the Planning Officers which have been very helpful and constructive and an agreement as to where the line of development should stop. During these discussions it was also agreed that the development should be consistent with the developed lines already approved to the west with Lakeside Gardens and Halcyon Drive which are towards Eastrea and further away from the village centre, with the proposed development filling the gap between these developments and the village centre. The Applicants for the application live in the village or have an association with it. The statutory consultees have been worked with which has received a great deal of support. With regard to school numbers, contained in the report under paragraph 10.45, the County Council has provided details which have confirmed the evidence that the agents were aware of. The site falls within flood zone 1 which allows for a mixed development and will attract both young and old residents. Mr Edwards summarized that as the site is in flood zone1 which as the NPPF directs residential development in preference, the site can be served by safe and effective access and is accessible to natural green and play space and public byway, promoting health and leisure opportunities. The site is remote enough from heritage assets above ground and is suitable proximity of local services which can accessed on foot or by public transport and is of sufficient scale to incorporate affordable housing.

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

·         Councillor Murphy commented that the proposal if approved will mean it will go over the threshold for the village and asked whether this will set a precedent going forward with planning applications. David Rowen explained that thresholds are a complicated matter and the issue of thresholds in the Local Plan was never to put an absolute cap on development and the intention was to give a small element of control to local residents over what development could take place in their villages. As time has moved on, in particular with the appeal decision in Manea which identified that unless there is substantial planning harm which can be identified, the threshold issue itself is not one on which planning permission can be refused. Each application needs to be considered on its own merits and will be considered in that way going forwards.

·         Councillor Murphy commented that with regard to the open space and play area he would like it noted that Fenland District Council will not be responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of these areas and a maintenance company should assume responsibility.

·         Councillor Sutton commented that again comments have been made concerning the pro activeness of Officers working with Developers to reach a satisfactory scheme.

·         Councillor Sutton commented that it is a big scheme in a small village but if schemes like this are not supported in villages, there will be the 5 year land supply issue problem again in his opinion because the developments in towns are going longer than was originally thought when the Local Plan was first agreed. Councillor Sutton commented he does not think this proposal can be referred to as a small scheme; however he believes it is an acceptable scheme.

·         Councillor Mrs Laws commented that although the development is going over the threshold it is to keep the individuality of each village and the important thing is to keep Coates, Eastrea and Turves separate from Whittlesey.

·         Councillor Mrs Laws commented that as a precedent has been set due to Lakeside Gardens, there would be an issue if the proposed development was refused. Villages need to be kept vibrant and alive and different homes such as starter homes and social housing need to be offered.

·         Councillor Mrs Laws commented that there is a large piece of County Council land which houses a village school, which comes up on high league tables and it is a pity that children are being taken out of the village to be bussed into Whittlesey to go to school.

·         Councillor Mrs Laws commented that with regard to drainage, she would like assurances that arrangements for surface water drainage system are in place.

·         David Rowen commented that with regard to drainage the LLFA have indicated that they are happy with the conditions and with regard to education issue, his understanding is that there are proposals to expand the school in Whittlesey.

·         The Chairman commented that with regard to the footpath access via Fieldside to the A605, there is no mention of that piece of road being upgraded in any way to make it pedestrianized or walkable  as the road is in a poor condition and not suitable to walk a child or use a pushchair along it. The developer should look at bringing that road up to a level which can be used by members of the public.

·         Councillor Mrs Laws commented that there was a community consultation, however the letters of support received were not even from residents of the village and she would hope that the Officers have taken that into consideration. David Rowen responded that about 100 letters were excluded from the Community Consultation exercise due to that reason.

·         David Rowen highlighted that any contribution of open space assets to be off site towards existing facilities rather than anything actually on site.

·         Councillor Murphy queried the contribution for the children’s play area. David Rowen clarified that it will be an offsite contribution to an existing play area.

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

(Councillors Miscandlon and Mrs Laws stated they were Members of the Whittlesey Town Council but take no part in planning matters.)