Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Matthew Hall, the Agent. Mr Hall stated that members will have noted from the officer’s report that there are no technical objections to the proposal, with the applicant trying to achieve executive self-build style properties which are similar in style to those at the front of the site and although the site plan which was shown as part of the presentation is indicative, the proposal is likely to be for bungalows or chalet bungalows and not full two storey properties. He stated that in the Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan it states that development proposals which make a provision for self-build and custom build housing will be supported and schemes which provide executive homes as part of a wider housing mix will also be supported which is what the applicant is trying to achieve, and any design of the properties would be agreed with officers.

Mr Hall stated that the officer’s report refers to the proposal as being in the open countryside, butd directly to the east of the site there is a proposal for in excess of 200 houses on land that abuts this site all to the east and is set far back from March Road as the proposal before the committee. He stated that the proposal would not result in a loss of agricultural land as it iss currently used as grassland and is maintained by each property and the application still retains large gardens to the rear of the existing dwellings which are located at the front of the site.

Mr Hall pointed out that the land is all located in Flood Zone 1 and there has only been one objection received to the proposal which he has reviewed, with the proposed site being in excess of 85 metres from the objector. He expressed the opinion that the officer’s report appears to be a positive report and it confirms that there are no technical objections to the proposal, and he pointed out that he has received a number of enquiries from persons wishing to purchase the site or individual plots which confirms that there is interest in the development to be built out.

Mr Hall stated that under 1.3 of the officer’s report it confirms that a policy compliant scheme could be achieved at the site in relation to highways, refuse collection, flood risk, ecology, residential amenity, and drainage.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·       Nick Harding pointed out that there was also an objection submitted from Whittlesey Town Council.

·       Councillor Benney asked officers to clarify that the application is adjacent to the big site that is earmarked for development further out as stated in the SHELA report in the draft Local Plan? Nick Harding confirmed that is correct. Councillor Benney asked officers to confirm that as that is the case then if the proposed piece of land does come forward as a development it would be between the built-up form and the new development and Nick Harding confirmed that is correct.

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

·       Councillor Mrs Mayor stated that she knows the area very well and, in her opinion, officers have made the correct recommendation. She added that the access is dreadful and the four properties that have already been built are superb executive properties, but to place an access between two of those properties to build behind them, in her opinion, is not suitable. Councillor Mrs Mayor stated that she will support the officer’s recommendation and added that she can understand why people wish to build beautiful properties but to include an access which will go through the driveways of two of the existing properties is not right and she cannot agree to the proposal.

·       Councillor Miscandlon pointed out for clarification purposes only that the access to the proposed site is actually up the back end of the last property and it is actually not over two properties.

·       Councillor Mrs Davis stated that she agrees with the officer’s recommendation and added that notwithstanding that the field next door stands to be built out under the new Local Plan which cannot be taken into consideration as that is still out for consultation.

·       Nick Harding explained that because the first draft version of the Local Plan is out for consultation virtually no weight can be given to the emerging Local Plan. He added that as the plan works through the process then more weight can be given to it when making decisions where there are no objections to a particular policy or allocation that is in play that is pertinent to the application at the time.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that she agrees that officers have made the correct recommendation and she expressed the view that she thinks that the application is slightly premature, and the applicant should maybe have waited until the new Local Plan is in place.

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

(Councillor Miscandlon declared that he is the Chairman of Whittlesey Town Council Planning Committee and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon on this item)