Agenda item

To determine the application.

Alan Davies presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Matthew Hall, the agent. Mr Hall expressed the opinion that this site is an ideal infill development set between residential properties and there are no concerns raised in the report in this regard. He stated the site has not been used for agricultural land for over 50 years and in the last 10 plus years it has been used as part of the adjacent business for a forecourt area for selling cars and there is also a portacabin that has been on there for around 15 years and it has not been used as part of the garden for over 20 years.

Mr Hall stated that directly on the opposite side of this site 14 dwellings were approved in Flood Zone 3 in 2013 when the previous Local Plan was being superseded and the new emerging Local Plan was being referenced to. He feels when you visit the site on Station Road and view this site against the larger development with some large houses on the opposite side, this site is about ½ metre higher yet both sites are in Flood Zone 3 and within the independent flood risk report he submitted it states that the site is protected by the Middle Level barrier bank which was not considered during the preparation of the Environment Agency Flood Maps and when the Middle Level barrier bank is considered the site has a low probability of flooding and the development is considered to pass the sequential test.

Mr Hall stated that directly to the north of this site and abutting this site, planning approval was given by members in 2023 for up to 9 dwellings all in Flood Zone 3. He referred to the Google map which clearly shows it is within the built-up form of Manea, with the site just referenced being directly all to the north-east of this site and attempted to handed out a document that showed other sites in Manea that have been given approval in Flood Zone 3 in the last 3 years marked in blue.

Matthew Leigh interjected and stated that officers cannot fully assess what is being given out, members are allowed to accept it in theory but they need to give it the weight that officers have no ability to assess it and it could have been given to officers prior to the committee meeting. He feels it is intentionally being given out so officers are unable to comment on it and it needs to be given the appropriate weight.

Councillor Connor asked if members wanted to look at this document? Councillor Mrs French expressed the view that the choices are it is either looked at or not or the application is deferred. Councillor Marks expressed the opinion that it is known about flood zones in Manea and what has happened in the past with reference to Manea’s history and he does not think looking at it on a piece of paper is going to help much. He feels that the agent could perhaps tell members roughly the number of properties he believes have been passed in Flood Zone 3 in the past three years and that will suffice.

Mr Hall continued that looking at the map there has been 9 approved in 2023 in the area directly to the north-east, at last month’s committee there were 3 approved in Flood Zone 2 and 3 at Westfield Road, there was a larger dwelling approved in 2021 in Westfield Road right at the corner, there were 2 plots approved at Fallow Corner Drove and another 5 plots approved right at the end of Fallow Corner Drove in Flood Zone 3 and a further dwelling approved opposite that. He made the point that there are no technical objections, Manea Parish Council support the application and there are no objections from members of the public, with the site clearly being within the built-up form of Manea and, in his view, is ideal infill development.

Members asked questions of Mr Hall as follows:

·         Councillor Marks expressed surprise that the application is not for a bungalow as there are a number of bungalows along here and asked if a bungalow would have fitted on the site? Mr Hall responded that a bungalow could have sat on the site but as it is in a flood zone they have to have bedrooms on the first floor so that ruled out a bungalow and that is why it was kept to a chalet to keep it relatively low with bedrooms at first floor.

·         Councillor Gerstner referred to mention historically that it has been a car sales business and asked when this was? Mr Hall responded that the applicant owns the house directly to the south and the car servicing/repair garage further to the south and the forecourt has been there for 10-15 years selling cars. He stated that there were no cars when he visited last year but believes before then the last year or two cars were still being sold here. Mr Hall advised that there is also a portacabin that has been site for 15 plus years which was in connection with the car business. Councillor Gerstner asked if it would not be prudent to undertake a decontamination type test on this site? Mr Hall responded that if the application is approved a condition could be applied about undertaking a contamination report.

Matthew Leigh referred to the agent’s comments regarding the independent flood risk assessment, that was dated September 2024 where it states that taking into account existing flood defences it would be safe but in March 2025 there was a High Court decision in relation to a site in Suffolk and a decision was quashed where the council had considered that because of existing flood risk defences there was not a need to undertake a sequential test or that it would be acceptable. He made the point, therefore, that irrespective of what is in this report it predates a piece of case law which now state that this is incorrect.

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

·         Councillor Marks stated this is within his ward and he drives past it most days, the car sales finished approximately 3 years ago and no vehicles were parked out there in disrepair it was always kept very much as a clean car sales area and gravelled. He referred to the agent saying, rightly, that it is in Flood Zone 3, however, permission has been given to other applications in the vicinity and when there has been flooding in Manea that has not been the areas that have been flooded and there are pump stations across the road. Councillor Marks expressed the view that he cannot see anything wrong with this application and thinks it makes a good use of that land, tidying it up. He is surprised it is not a bungalow as he would have backed a bungalow as there are more bungalows along the road but feels it will free up another house for families.

·         Councillor Gerstner acknowledged the comments of Councillor Marks, but made the point that the fact is that a sequential test has not been undertaken correctly.

·         Matthew Leigh made the point that if it was a bungalow it would probably have failed the exceptions test being in a flood zone as there would not have been anywhere to escape to. Councillor Marks recognised this but made the point if it had been a bungalow he would have still supported it.

·         David Rowen referred to comments from the Environmental Health Team who say it is unlikely that the site would be affected by ground contamination and they are not recommending any condition.

·         Councillor Mrs French made the point that if it was car sales it would not have any contamination but if it was car repairs it would.

Proposed by Councillor Marks, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and agreed that the application be GRANTED against the officer’s recommendation, with authority delegated to officers to apply condition in consultation with Councillor Marks.

Members do not support officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel that other recent applications have been approved in Flood Zone 3 and this is an infill development.

(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. He further declared that the next door neighbour to this site works for him)

(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)