Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes from the previous meeting of 6 April 2022.

The minutes of the meeting of the 6 April 2022 were confirmed and signed as an accurate record.

To determine the application.

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Mr Matthew Hall, the Agent.  Mr Hall stated that Force One has been operating in March for over seventeen years and at present it is located in Thoreby Avenue where the offices are located in a built-up area and the present restricted depot is based in Longhill Road which it has outgrown. He stated that currently 60 people are employed by the company, and this has grown from 44 employees over the last two years.

Mr Hall stated that the company works nationwide and is all based in March, providing safe working suction vehicles for most major infrastructure projects, such as Hs2, Sizewell C, Network Rail, nuclear industry airports and the chemical industry and the company also undertake local works for residential, commercial, and industrial projects. He explained that the company intend to employ a further 40 people by December 2023 and they have placed orders for £6,000,000 of plant investment which is due for delivery by December 2023, adding that Force One is an expanding company who wish to stay in the March area.

Mr Hall noted that within the officers report it makes reference to the fact that the site is within a rural location but referred to the ordnance survey plan and pointed out the proposed site and the offices of the Middle Level Commissioners in Flood Zone 3, along with Fen Coaches and a builder’s depot. He explained that there are further businesses as well as Foxes Marina down Whittlesey Road and Marina Drive and when you go further west towards Turves there is a large business called Ken Thomas located further beyond the site.

Mr Hall explained that he has provided a detailed arboricultural report due to the existing tree on the site and the access concerns, with the report confirming that mitigation measures will be taken to protect the tree and that the access can be set. He added that various discussions have taken place with Cambridgeshire County Council Highways Department regarding the access to the site and a highways consultant has provided a detailed scheme survey and detailed design, which the County Council have approved. He made the point that the company currently has sixteen suction vehicles, three light goods vehicles, twenty light commercial vehicles as well as company cars and the suction vehicles are currently parked when not on site, at Longhill Road, which they have now outgrown.

Mr Hall pointed out that the vehicles can often travel along Wisbech Road, Dartford Road and Station Road to get to the depot in Longhill Road, with the other route which is used being along the Twenty Foot Bank. He explained that the proposal will allow for vehicles to exit the bypass onto a short stretch of Whittlesey Road to enter the site, removing vehicles from coming into March, with the site having been developed with a one-way system and adequate parking.

Mr Hall explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item P106/21

To determine the application.

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

Members asked officer’s the following questions:

·         Councillor Sutton noted within the report that the Cambridgeshire County Council Minerals and Waste Planning Authority have advised officers to contact Anglian Water with regards to the closeness of the development to the works and he asked whether that has taken place? Nick Harding clarified that the issue arose with the pre-application proposal that he was engaged with, and he contacted Anglian Water with that particular proposal, and he never received a reply from them. He added that it is on that basis that officers have not gone to specifically contact Anglian Water over this particular application and the approach that officers have taken as set out in the report is to look to see whether or not colleagues in Environmental Health have any odour complaints in respect of the treatment works and there is no evidence of that, hence the officer’s recommendation. Nick Harding added that given that the Council manages those buildings, not only would the Council receive complaints as an organisation that has responsibility for Environmental Health there would have also been complaints as part of the Council’s landlord responsibilities and the Council have received neither. Councillor Sutton stated that he wanted to ensure that the issue has been dealt with either at the pre- application stage or with this application before the committee today.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that on the application that members have just determined there appeared to be a great level of detail in the officer’s report from the Middle Level Commissioners or West Fen Internal Drainage Board, however, in this application there does not appear much information from the Nightlayers Internal Drainage Board, and she questioned whether there was a particular reason for this? Nick Harding stated that officers cannot control whether a consultee responds to the consultation or not and the statutory consultee in this scale of application is the Lead Local Flood Authority and they pull rank over the Internal Drainage Boards when it comes to surface water management. Councillor Mrs French added that this application is also in Flood Zone 3 and she just wanted to check whether any information had been received from Nightlayers IDB.

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

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed the view that it is good to see that businesses are thriving in the current climate and that the Council has the insight to submit this application. She added that she hopes that more businesses will look to rent properties at this site going forward and she fully supports the application.

·         Councillor Cornwell stated that he presumes that the Council is planning ahead and there is a demand for this type of building. He added that if that is the case then local businesses should be supported and this application should be approved, and works should commence as soon as possible.

·         Councillor Miscandlon stated that he fully supports the application to bring smaller businesses which then  ...  view the full minutes text for item P107/21

To determine the application.

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

Members asked officer’s the following questions:

·         Councillor Cornwell asked whether there are any changes to the parking arrangements for the property as he noticed an element of over parking at the location. Alison Hoffman stated that the existing garage is maintained at ground floor level and the level of accommodation changes and whether that will place further demands on parking is not known but the officer has not highlighted any particular issues with parking. Councillor Cornwell questioned whether an increase in the building does not therefore mean the requirement to increase the amount of parking. Alison Hoffman stated that the existing property is already four bedrooms, and it would take it into the requirement of three parking spaces and even an increase over and above the four bedrooms would still only require the three parking spaces which is in line with the Council’s parking standards.

·         Councillor Sutton stated that on page 78 of the officer’s report, it shows an area stating FF only and he questioned whether this is correct? Alison Hoffman clarified that this is an error, and the proposal is for a 2-storey extension. Councillor Sutton made reference to the parking concerns, and he stated that he always thought an extra bedroom would mean an extra parking space and he asked for confirmation on this point. Alison Hoffman confirmed that the parking standards are in two tiers and a four bedroomed dwelling parking requirement is three spaces. Councillor Sutton stated that there already appears to be a parking issue at the location and, in his opinion, the officer’s recommendation is correct. He added that he is confused with the recommendation made by Whittlesey Town Council as they have recommended for the application to be approved, however, they recommended refusal for the previous application at the site which was consequently withdrawn.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she agrees with the comments made by Councillor Sutton with regards to the concerns over parking. She added that it is a shame as it is a nice location and the house opposite is very nice, however, with the Civil Parking Enforcement scheme being brought in there are likely to be problems in the road.

·         Councillor Cornwell stated that once the civil parking enforcement rules coming into force then the vehicles will not be able to park on the footpath. He added that the plot is not large enough to facilitate the number of cars and he will support the officer’s recommendation.

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

(Councillor Mrs Mayor registered, under Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that she sits on Whittlesey Town Council’s Planning Committee, and therefore, took no part in the discussion and voting thereon)

(Councillor Miscandlon registered, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that he is Chairman of Whittlesey Town Council’s Planning Committee, and took no  ...  view the full minutes text for item P108/21

To determine the application.

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Councillor Bill Haggata, a Chatteris Town Councillor.  Councillor Haggata stated that the application is for the replacing and redesign of the shop front following a ram raid and robbery to the business which resulted in the loss of trade whilst the building was secured. He explained that the building trades as a NISA supermarket and serves as an important part of the population of the Chatteris community as it is in a prominent location.

Councillor Haggata explained that he is the Chairman of Chatteris Town Council Planning Committee, and the application received the unanimous support for the proposal to go ahead when brought before the Planning Committee. He expressed the view that the Town Council are very disappointed with the officer’s recommendation for the application to be one of refusal on a conservation issue and that as a responsible Planning Committee and Town Council they understand the conservation of eligible buildings, but they also understand the need for the retail business to progress and move forward with modern up to date retail requirements such as the need for a modern shopfront which attract and enable easy access for all parts of society and to enable business to remain viable and in fair competition with its competitors in what is currently a very difficult time for the high street.

Councillor Haggata expressed the view that the conservation issue appears to be the location of the business on the corner of the intersection of Park Street, Market Hill, and East Park Street, within this location and immediately opposite is the old Barclays Bank which is a Listed Building which is undergoing conversion to Chatteris Museum. He made the point that when it was a bank it had alterations to the internal entrance door with up to date stainless steel and glass entry doors fitted, which was likely to be for security purposes, along with a cash machine with stainless steel surround which was on show day and night to meet today’s trading conditions, and would not have been there when the building was built.

Councillor Haggata explained that along Market Street there is the old Lloyds Bank building which has a modern frontage, as well as the Post Office and Cafe in the High Street both of which have modern frontages. He added that further along the High Street there is a restaurant with a completely new shop front and in East Park Street there is a new shop front of similar design which has obtained planning permission and sells similar products to that of the proposal before members and is also within sight of this application.

Councillor Haggata expressed the view that the Town Council do not see anything out of character with the application and believe the alterations will improve the appearance of the location and they understand the requirement for such alterations in the 2022 competitive trading environment, especially after  ...  view the full minutes text for item P109/21