Agenda item

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

David Rowen presented the report to members and drew their attention to the update report that had been circulated.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Mr Gareth Edwards, the Agent.

Mr Edwards explained that this area of Wisbech St Mary has seen a number of new developments erected, with the Parish Council having recommended approval for the proposal and have recently installed a length of footpath. He stated that it is hoped that over a period of time this will be added to, in order to provide a footway link to the remainder of the village and by adding more dwellings in the proposed location it will give more reason for the footpath to be further extended.

Mr Edwards stated that Cambridgeshire Highways have requested that a new footpath should be added along Rat Row to link with the current High Road footpath, which will provide a safe route for residents to access the bus stop at the front of the site. He stated that whilst he acknowledges that the site is within flood zone 3 on the Environment Agency maps, they have previously stated that the maps can prove to be misleading. He added that as maps provide modelling of the maximum values of flood depths, velocity and hazard rating, he has provided up to date maps of both the flood risk assessment and also in the sequential and exception test study which shows that the proposed site is unaffected by flood water in the year 2115 in both the 1 in 200 and 1 in 1000 and as this is the most up to date data, in his opinion, it should be within flood zone 1.

Mr Edwards expressed the view that the only site that was currently available was a site for three dwellings which currently has an old dwelling on it which is going to be utilised and the garden used for the three proposed dwellings which as stated within the exception test, are to achieve an A rated energy performance and he would be happy to accept a condition on this. He added that local developers provide local tradesman and due to larger sites and allocations they would not be able to purchase sites like this due to purchase prices and infrastructure costs.

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

·         Councillor Mrs Laws stated that when you read the details of this application it states that the Environment Agency and the Internal Drainage Board have no objection but  they will need to have formal land drainage consent and that will be required to form the proposed new access. She added that it was a very interesting site visit and on the visit all that could be seen is new dwellings as the site is overgrown and needs attention and on this occasion providing that the appropriate conditions are added, she expressed the opinion that the proposal would fit very nicely on this site and it would complement and enhance the other properties in that location.

·         Councillor Sutton expressed the view that not all of Fenland is at risk of flooding and members should consider their decision very carefully.

·         Nick Harding commented that this application is not classed as a settlement as it is given an ‘elsewhere’ label within our Local Plan and in accordance with our sequential test protocol we have had to widen the search area with regard to alternative sites at lesser flood risk to the whole district and not just the immediate location.

·         Councillor Hay expressed the view that she would find it very difficult to refuse this application, having just agreed to support 221 houses next to the River Nene in Wisbech. She added that North Level Internal Drainage Board and the Environment Agency have both said they are happy with the proposal and she will be supporting this application.

·         Councillor Sutton expressed the view that he appreciates that officers have to follow policies and with the application being on the edge of the hamlet, he would have agreed with the officer’s recommendation. However as the proposal is right in the centre of the hamlet and as sustainability is compromised by no pavement, but supplemented with a bus stop,he will be supporting the application.

·         David Rowen stated that from an officer’s point of view the recommendation was straight forward as the Local Plan clearly sets out a settlement hierarchy and does not include Bunkers Hill within it, with Bunkers Hill not forming part of the Wisbech St Mary settlement. The polices within the Local Plan state that elsewhere locations, such as this development, should only be allowed in certain circumstances, none of which are covered by this particular application. With regard to the sustainability aspect, Bunkers Hill has no facilities and, therefore, anybody residing in Bunkers Hill will have to travel by car to other settlements for their services, as there are no footpaths to link Bunkers Hill to Wisbech St Mary, it is a national speed limit road and the National Planning Policy Framework discourages the reliance on the use of car for a main means of transport.

·         Councillor Benney stated that, whilst it maybe a small hamlet, a small development like the proposal being discussed goes towards meeting the 5 year land supply and if there is no encouragement for the smaller hamlets to grow then they will disappear.

Proposed by Councillor Hay, seconded by Councillor Benney and decided that the application be APPROVED, against the officers recommendation as Members considered that the benefits of the scheme in terms of contributing to the sustainability of the settlement and recognising that the site lay within a developed hamlet providing additional housing outweighed flood risk and character considerations.

Members determined that officers be authorised to put appropriate conditions on the permission.