Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Grant 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 the application is for planning in principle development to try and establish a principle of residential development at this site within the growth village of Manea. He added that the application complies with Policy LP3 and is for a small development.

Mr Hall explained that he has listened to the debate this afternoon concerning flood risk and none of the properties are located in Flood Zones 2 and 3 as they are all located in Flood Zone 1 as is the parking for the dwellings, along with the swale and turning area. He explained that the existing entrance to the site is in the flood zone and is not changing and the existing property which was on the site would still be left with a 40 metres long garden which is over half of the plot area which would be left to garden.

Mr Hall stated that the access to the site is going to be improved and will be 6 metres wide for the four properties, with there being no objections from Highways, and it is the front section of the access which is located in a flood zone as are nearly all the properties located in Fallow Corner Drove. He stated that there is mature vegetation along the northern boundary of the site which abuts where an application for 100 dwellings may be coming forward and the mature vegetation is within the ownership of the applicant and, therefore, the development would not be visible from the north or, in his view, from the street scene.

Mr Hall referred to 10.1 of the officers’ report where it states that the principle of development is acceptable under policy LP3, and he referred to the presentation screen where the map displayed identifies the adjacent approvals and, in his view, the application site is not in isolation. He made reference to an earlier application where the long driveway to that particular site is located and indicated to members where it is be located.

Mr Hall referred to the presentation screen and made reference to some previous approvals, including a development in Westfield Road, where the five dwellings extend well back from the frontage development which was approved under delegated powers as was the site depicted in blue which was for three chalet bungalows and a bungalow which are almost completed. He explained that the site-coloured orange was a brownfield site which is a site for over 20 dwellings which has been approved, making the point that next to the entrance of that site an application came to the committee in February which was deferred and was in a flood zone and the properties also extended back and was also recommended for refusal by officers and was not frontage development and that the development extended back in a flood zone and the application was deferred.

Mr Hall expressed the view that he does not think that the application site is in isolation and none of the properties are in a flood zone. He stated that when you look at other properties in Manea some of the developments are located in Flood Zones 2 and 3 and they have a long driveway which is similar to the application and the refuse freighter will be able to access the site as he has already checked that point.

Mr Hall made the point that it cannot be seen from the street scene and is set well behind an established line of dwellings and, therefore, in his view, the site is not in isolation.

Members asked Mr Hall the following questions:

·         Councillor Marks referred to Fallow Corner Drove and stated that as far as he is aware apart from the area shaded in brown on the presentation screen, which was a new estate, there is no other back garden development until you get way past FJS Services which is at least half a mile. Mr Hall expressed the view it is about a third of a mile further on, but he added that he agreed that there is no development between the estate and the application site. Councillor Marks asked Mr Hall to clarify that he believes that there is back garden development towards Westfield Road. Mr Hall explained that there are areas off Westfield Road and the large estate off Fallow Corner Drive, where development has been allowed in the back, but he agrees that there is nothing going towards Purls Bridge.

·         Councillor Marks stated that in the officer’s report at 1.6 it states that insufficient justification has been provided to demonstrate that development of the site is necessary in this instance having regard to national policy, making the point that it is his understanding that the site was purchased recently by the occupants who are now looking to undertake the development. He expressed the view that he is aware that there has been quite a bit of social media publicity including from the applicant who has requested that the village support the application as the applicant has stated that they do not like the area and are looking to dispose of the property. Mr Hall stated that the applicants have only owned the property for less than a year and added that in the officers report at 1.6 of the officer’s report it relates to flooding, and none of the proposed properties are in a flood zone.

·         Councillor Marks stated that the point he raised was with regards to the reasoning for the property and now the justification for the extra properties on the site.

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

·         Councillor Marks stated that he attended the Local Parish Council meeting when this application was discussed, and he heard what had been said and has seen what has been written on social media since. He expressed the view that he agrees with what the Parish Council have stated which is that they feel that the application is for back garden development and there is nothing else along the road that is close to the application site. Councillor Marks added that having read the report it would appear that the applicant is trying to benefit by knocking down a garage, building three houses and then leaving the village with three dwellings that do not fit into Manea. He expressed the opinion that he wholeheartedly agrees with the officer’s recommendation of refusal.

·         Councillor Connor expressed the view that it is back land development and there is nothing there, which the aerial photograph clearly demonstrates, and he agrees with the offciers recommendation which he will support.

·         Councillor Benney stated that if the Parish Council and the Local Councillor are not supportive of the proposal then, in his view, those are good enough reasons to refuse the application.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Marks and agreed that the applicated be REFUSED as per the officer’s recommendation.

(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.)

(Councillor Imafidon declared that the agent has undertaken work for him personally, but he is not pre-determined and will consider the application with an open mind)

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