Agenda item

To determine the application.

Gavin Taylor 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 Matthew Hall, the agent. Mr Hall stated that there have been 12 dwellings approved in this immediate area in the last 4 years and made reference to the presentation screen which displayed a map and highlighted to the committee the application site outlined in red. He added that there were five dwellings approved in Stocking Drove, 2 dwellings in facing Ferry Farm either side, another at The Grange right next to the application site and on the opposite side there are three plots which he has been involved with, with the development having commenced, making the point that once all the sites are built out there will be 26 dwellings at that location without including the proposal before the committee.

Mr Hall referred to Policy LP3 and stated that there are 14 properties at the moment in the area of Chatteris and 12 further planning approvals which have all been given by the Planning Committee. He expressed the opinion that the current proposal is part of Chatteris under LP3 and not in an elsewhere location as there are existing established dwellings in the location all of which are occupied, with there being an existing footpath along the frontage of the site and all along London Road and to the best of his knowledge the footpath has been there quite a while.

Mr Hall stated that the site is adjacent to a cluster of existing homes and Policy LP16(d) states that development should make a positive contribution to the character of the area, with the indicative layout demonstrating four family style executive dwellings on large plots with open frontages and large gardens which will make a positive contribution to the area. He explained that the land is paddock land and not agricultural land, and the application has the full support of Chatteris Town Council.

Mr Hall made the point that a concern has been raised by the neighbour of The Grange which is to the west of the site and is located 42ft away from where an indicative dwelling has been shown on the plan, but explained that the dwelling could be changed to a bungalow and it could also be moved further away if that should help when the technical details are submitted. He added that the site is all located in Flood Zone 1 and the proposal is for a linear development which is similar to all adjacent dwellings in that part of Chatteris and, in his view, the principle of development has been established by those applications which have been approved previously.

Members asked Mr Hall the following questions:

·         Councillor Imafidon asked Mr Hall whether he would consider the location to be an elsewhere location and if not why? Mr Hall stated that there are 14 dwellings located in the area at the moment, referring to the site plan and highlighting the purple shaded area which is the new garden centre in Chatteris. He added that there is a footpath link all the way along London Road and a number of dwellings and he does not consider the area to be an elsewhere location.

·         Councillor Marks referred to the presentation screen and asked for confirmation that the land is paddock land as, in his opinion, the presentation slide looks like a cut corn field. Mr Hall stated that when he went to the site it looked to be a grass field and this was confirmed by viewing the presentation slides.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·         Councillor Imafidon asked officers to clarify how they consider the application site to be an elsewhere location, with Mr Hall advising that there are recent approvals and developments which are ongoing. Councillor Imafidon stated that he has visited the site and, in his opinion, it is not an elsewhere location and asked officers to provide an explanation. Gavin Taylor stated that contained within Policy LP12 is a footnote which sets out when something is or is not inside the settlement. He added that when you look at the development along this area it is clear that there is not a continuation of built frontage leading from the main settlement to the application site, with there being no other development on the southern side of the road until you reach the main area to the north. He explained that on the other side of the site there is sporadic loose knit dispersed dwellings, and they are not continuous as there are various areas of land which separates them and, therefore, it does not technically comply with the definition of the built settlement. Gavin Taylor added that the policy is very clear and sets out that if it is not within the continuous built area then it is an elsewhere location. Councillor Imafidon questioned whether the properties situated opposite do not count and that maybe the view of an elsewhere location is down to personal interpretation.

·         Councillor Marks asked for clarity with regards to the 14 different applications which have yet to be built out or are being built at the moment in the area. He added that whilst he has sat on the committee, officers have advised that the location is elsewhere, however, permission has still been given and he questioned whether it could now be classed as an elsewhere location. Gavin Taylor stated that he would refer the committee back to the Local Plan and the planning policies as the starting point for any decision making. He explained that the fact that there have been previous approvals given may be a material consideration, but it is down to the decision maker to consider that accordingly. Gavin Taylor stated that officers do not consider that there is sufficient weight to have regard to the previous permissions to indicate that this is not an elsewhere location having regard to the criteria as set out in LP12. He made reference to the application in Tydd St Giles which had previously been refused by virtue of the fact that it was considered an elsewhere location to now make a different conclusion based on a single barn, in his view, is difficult to balance. Gavin Taylor stated that when considering the current application if members are minded to say that the site is in the settlement then they would need to be clear as it does have implications as detailed within the officer’s report with regards to the remaining area of land leading back into Chatteris and noting the emerging Local Plan, which whilst can only be given limited weight to, the settlement boundary for that does not include the area of land either and whilst that may change in the future as it currently stands when considering the current adopted Local Plan the application does not conform to an ‘in the settlement’ scenario in the opinion of officers.

·         Councillor Marks stated but now there are 26 extra properties surely some weight needs to be given to that and, in his opinion, it does not feel like the application site can be considered as an elsewhere location. Gavin Taylor stated that he is not familiar with the circumstances concerning those applications and it is for the committee to consider that for themselves.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that there have been 14 previous dwellings approved and he questioned whether those approvals were given by the Committee or under delegation to officers. He expressed the view that if those dwellings have been approved under delegated powers by officers then, in his opinion, that must give weight to the current application. Gavin Taylor stated that it is his understanding that planning permission for the residential dwellings in that location were approvals made by the Planning Committee contrary to the officer’s recommendation. He added that the Garden Centre may have been an approval but that is a different type of development and is also on a brownfield site that already had a history of being a garden centre and, therefore, has a completely different criteria of assessment.

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

·         Councillor Benney stated that the application site falls in his electoral ward and he has sat on the committee for all of the other applications which have been committee overturns. He added that the application being considered is no different to any of the other applications which have been discussed today and, in his opinion, the committee need to be consistent with their decision making. Councillor Benney expressed the view that the application will provide nice homes as they enter into the town of Chatteris and the street sign which says Chatteris is a mile further out of town and way past the Garden Centre. He stated that the field which is between that and Chatteris is shown as Hallam Land which is going to be development land and, therefore, will link it to the town, and he does not see anything wrong with the application and it should be approved.

·         Gavin Taylor stated that members need to consider whether the application is within the settlement for consistency and also to remain mindful that the application is for a permission in principle and, therefore with reference to nice houses, that cannot be considered when looking at land use as to whether residential land use at the location is agreeable or not. He made reference to the Chatteris street sign being a mile away and to the earlier application in Tydd St Giles where the village sign was quite a bit further north of that. Gavin Taylor explained that the Hallam Land site is 300 metres away from the application site and with regards to the footpath and nearest schools it is approximately one and a half mile walk and, therefore, he advised members to consider just how sustainable they consider the application site to be.

Proposed by Councillor Benney, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and agreed that the application be GRANTED against the officer’s recommendation.

Members do not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal as they feel that the committee need to be consistent in their approach, with it passing several other applications in this area, they do not feel that the application site is in an elsewhere location and the application will enhance the street scene and the area.

(Councillor Benney declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that he is a member of Chatteris Town Council but takes no part in planning)

(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)