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 Liam Lunn-Towler, the agent. Mr Lunn–Towler stated that during the application process the scale of the dwellings were reduced following discussions with the Planning Officer which has enabled a recommendation of approval. He explained that the application is before the committee due to the number of neighbour objections with the main reason of objection being down to the highways concerns.

Mr Lunn-Towler explained that during the application process in the middle of November he received concerns from the Highway Authority with regards to access and then very shortly after that those issues were resolved and found to be agreeable with them. He stated that the amended drawing and highways comment was not uploaded until early March and during that time lapse the neighbours raised objections with regards to the initial highways concerns.

Mr Lunn-Towler expressed the view that the application is considered to be in the heart of the village, within walking distance of local amenities and is surrounded by residential properties and as a result the proposal is a logical development which produces a minimal impact and supports local services. He explained that the Parish Council have raised no objection to the proposal and the applicant and family are long term residents of the village who are looking to develop the land for their families’ homes.

Mr Lunn-Towler expressed the opinion that the development is within a residential area and the design of the dwellings is supported by officers and he asked the committee to support the proposal.

Members asked Mr Lunn-Towler the following questions:

·         Councillor Connor referred to paragraph 5.1 where Wimblington Parish Council have stated that the three large scale dwellings are not in keeping with the surrounding area of both new developments and pre-existing historic dwellings along Kings Street, with them also making reference to the close boarded fencing and the effect on natural light. He added that on 17 May Wimblington Parish Council have added a further comment which states that they have had the opportunity and ability to compare the old and the revised plans and they have no further objections to this application. Councillor Connor referred to 5.3 of the report where it details a shared access and stated that it is imperative that a Section 38 Agreement is in place as he wants the roadway adopted by the Highway Authority. He added that the Highway Authority have numerous Section 38 Agreements which are outstanding, and he would like to see that the applicant and agent give concrete assurances that they will take steps to get the road adopted. Mr Lunn-Towler stated that he has no control with regards to what Reason Homes do to that road, but he can deliver what has been proposed but they have not proposed that it will be to an adoptable standard. Councillor Connor made the point that at 5.3 it states that it is the developer’s intention for it to be adopted, and as result the Highway Authority have been approached regarding a S38 Agreement, with the shared private driveway needing to be at least 5m wide for at least an initial length of 8m from the Willow Gardens. Mr Lunn-Towler stated that he is proposing permeable paving which is not highway standard and expressed the view that the point made in the report is referring to the Reason Homes site which is not currently adopted.

·         David Rowen stated that he understands from the officer’s report that the reference is being made to the developers of Willow Gardens who have applied for a Section 38 Agreement in respect of the adoption of the roadway serving the wider development. He added that it is the applicant’s intention as per the submitted drawings that the actual access road from Willow Gardens to serve the development is to be a shared surface which would not be an adoptable road and, therefore, a private driveway. David Rowen expressed the opinion that the obligation to get the applicant to make the section of Willow Gardens up to an adoptable standard would be unreasonable in the wider context of the Reason Homes development given that there are between 50 and 60 homes which are being served by a road which is not adopted and he cannot see what harm would be added by including a further three dwellings being served by unadopted roadways.

·         David Rowen referred to the Willow Gardens development and explained that there was a requirement through a condition which stated that before any dwelling was occupied the road surface needed to be made up to binder course which has taken place and there were also details to be submitted with regards to interim management arrangements if the roadway was not going to be adopted by the County Council. He made the point that whilst there is the intention for adoption as members are aware there is no obligation on the planning system to require a road to be made up to an adoptable standard and it is not a reasonable requirement from a planning perspective.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that the applicant is not Reason Homes, it is Sarah Palmer and Mr Lunn-Towler is the agent, although the bulk of the development is Reason Homes and they have been operating for many years. She expressed the view that most of their developments are made up to an adoptable standard and are then taken over by the County Council. Councillor Mrs French added that members have seen the roads which are unadopted and that has been the case for many years where residents in those particular roads are sometimes left without street lighting. She made the point that this is a large concern when roads are left unadopted and whilst she appreciates that it cannot be enforced, in her opinion, agents and developers need to consider this issue in order to try and get the roads adopted.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·         Councillor Imafidon stated that with regards to the Section 38 issue, he has seen roads which have been left unadopted for decades which have also meant that the raised ironworks are left protruding and many roads with no street lighting, and he asked officers if they could explain the issue further. David Rowen explained that there is no obligation and there are no powers through planning legislation to require a road to be actually adopted and the best that can be done is to ensure that there is at least a binder course level added so that people can access their properties on a reasonable standard of road and if the road is not adopted then at least there should be if possible a fallback management arrangement in place which is what has happened with the Willow Gardens development.

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

·         Councillor Hicks expressed the view that he does not see how the application can be refused as it makes sense to add the dwellings to the site in order to finish the site off.

Proposed by Councillor Hicks, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and agreed that the application should be APPROVED as per the officer’s recommendation.