Agenda item

To determine the application.

Richard Fitzjohn presented the report to members.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she does have concerns with regards to the flooding issues in Elm Road, with the last time it flooded being in 2020 with raw sewage, which was an issue for Anglian Water and she is surprised that the County Council Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) are sanctioning a pumping system. She added that for many years there was a pumping system, which still exists, but it has cost the County Council hundreds of thousands of pounds to correct it down Sycamore Close in March West and for over 20 years as soon as it rained heavily, the pump shut down and the houses were flooded. Councillor Mrs French expressed the opinion that it will be a case of buyer beware and the people who buy the properties should be made aware that they are going to have to maintain it and that should the pump develop a fault or break down then they are likely to be flooded. Harry Pickford from the County Council’s LLFA stated that, with regards to the pump station, the applicants undertook some pump failure modelling which is a requirement for using pumps to remove water from off a site. He explained that the requirement is quite onerous, and it looks at the one hundred years plus climate change event with the storage at half capacity and zero discharge from the site. Harry Pickford added that they have looked at whether the water will pond on the site in that situation and it demonstrated to be held fully within the red line boundary and within the curtilage of the highway itself. He made the point that from the modelling which has been undertaken by the applicant it should not be flooding any properties in the development and should not be shedding any pumped water off site. Councillor Mrs French stated that there can be no guarantees that bad weather is not going to close the pumps down which is what happened at Sycamore Close for over 20 years and there were possibly 10 to 15 homes which suffered from constant flooding, so she is not convinced. She added that Middle Level Commissioners (MLC) are also not convinced, and she is pleased that they have provided an update.

·         Councillor Marks stated that in the officer’s report it explains that during a significant flood event, the downstream may take 5 to 10 days to return to normal and during this time discharge of any kind may not be possible with half drain times becoming unachievable. He asked officers to explain what happens to the water during the 5 to 10 days? Harry Pickford explained that the attenuation on site is provided to accommodate for the storm durations and the half drain times have also been included within the modelling. He made the point that when they have modelled the system it has been designed to accommodate the half drain times within the receiving network as well. Harry Pickford added that they have modelled it with half drain times and the calculations have all been included and they have demonstrated that they have the capacity during the 100 years plus climate change storm for the drain down time within the system.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that with regards to the pumping there are nationwide issues with regards to pumps breaking down as well as the automation not working correctly, the communication and data links not being configured correctly as well as a breakdown in the software. He added that this has happened a number of times in the Lake District and, in his view, modern technology today should ensure and test the resilience of the pumps, the communications and the data systems. Councillor Gerstner asked whether it is the normal now that modern technology is software driven and if a pump breaks down in the middle of the night would an on-call engineer be notified? Harry Pickford explained that with regards to pump functioning they do come with a residual risk, with the LLFA not generally supporting the use of pumps unless they are necessary to get water off a site and he appreciates the concerns regarding their functions during storm events. He added that with regards to their maintenance in perpetuity, they do generally have alarm systems which are triggered when they are failing. Harry Pickford explained that with regards to their long-time monitoring, the County Council do not take on pumps themselves and, therefore, they do not have any maintenance responsibilities. He explained that to the best of his knowledge of how pumps work if they do fail an alarm is triggered and normally within 24 hours an engineer is sent out to repair them and get them functioning again. Harry Pickford added that pumps do generally have a backup secondary pump as well which is driven from a different main circuit to what the main pumps use and the manufacturer does try to make them as robust as possible, but they are accompanied with that residual risk.

·         Councillor Marks referred to 5.16 of the officer’s report which refers to Network Rail, however, it does not mention that this railway line may become a live rail line in the future and he referred to the presentation screen, highlighting the boundary of the old rail line which is very close to the development and added that he has safety concerns and as a result would like to see a 6 or 8 foot fence erected along that length. He added that it needs to be specified now due to the fact that in years to come Railtrack will only erect a wire fence and that does concern him as it could become an issue in the future. Richard Fitzjohn expressed the view that Network Rail would have it in their gift to provide a fence along their land if they have any concerns about access or safety issues with the railway track. He added that the proposed houses would erect boundary treatments as part of their curtilage and there are publicly accessible areas where there would be access to the railway line. Richard Fitzjohn explained that if members wish to impose a planning condition which requires the developer to erect a fence along that boundary that is within their gift to ask for that condition to be added to the recommendation should they wish to.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that it is very unusual for there to be no applicant or agent present at the meeting to address the committee.

·         Councillor Connor referred to the roads, path and lighting that are not due to be adopted by the Highway Authority and he does not want to see the roadways left in a condition where they are not to adoptable standard. He added that he cannot see a path coming off of Elm Road into the application site. Richard Fitzjohn explained that as part of the scheme the Highway Authority have requested that some of the existing footpath is widened and he indicated on the presentation screen where there is a footpath which leads into the site on either side and follows the majority of the site apart from the shared surface areas.

·         Councillor Connor stated that in the management plan there is a wheel wash facility but there is no direct request for a road sweeper. He added that Elm Road is a very busy road and when he undertook a site visit, he was surprised by the amount of traffic which was using the road. Councillor Connor added that if a wheel wash is used correctly, it will stop a great deal of the debris from going onto the road, however, he would still like to see a road sweeper at least twice a day. He stated that as it is a main road he does not want to see any debris on the road, and he would like to see a robust management plan included as part of any conditions.

·         Councillor Connor added that both he and Councillor Marks discussed at their briefing earlier that they did not wish to see lorries queuing on the road to access the site and it was felt that there should be somewhere for lorries to wait off the highway to prevent congestion issues on the busy highway. He added that this is another condition he would like to see added if the application is approved and he made the point that the condition needs to be robust.

·         Councillor Marks stated that with regards to construction on a Saturday morning he believed that the commencement time was 8am, however, this time now appears to have altered to 7.30am and he is receiving numerous complaints with regards to construction works in Manea where deliveries are arriving early so he would like to see that time changed to 8am. He added that if the pavements are going to be extended then the likelihood is that there is going to be a situation where there will be half a road closure across the neighbouring properties which are already there and he has been made aware that the Highway Authority have changed the design of the kerb stones which are being installed where there appears just to be one continuous run of beam, which then means that properties cannot be entered for up to 3 to 4 days whilst it sets into place, which as a result causes parking problems and charging issues for any residents with electric cars. Councillor Marks added that he would like to see this built into any conditions that access needs to be permitted to residents during those periods of time.

·         Councillor Mrs French responded to the point made by Councillor Marks and stated that in theory that would be welcomed but it will not work. She explained that at the current time work is taking place on Upwell Road which resulted in the road being closed for three or four days which had resulted in an ambulance having to undertake a 14-mile detour which, in her view, is totally unacceptable when new estates are developed.

·         Councillor Mrs French made the point that it mentions in the officer’s report that a new bus stop is being installed and it also mentions there was going to be a bus shelter, however, nobody would assume responsibility for it but March Town Council were never asked to adopt the maintenance of it and, in her view, the information is wrong although she made the point that they would not assume the responsibility for it anyway.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that the road has a 60mph speed limit on it and there is going to be a minimum of 50 to 60 cars coming out of the site and she would like a speed reduction implemented, even if the speed can be reduced to 40mph, because, in her view, it is a horrendous road.

·         Councillor Mrs French added that she also has concerns with regards to road adoption and, in her view, she believes that it may end up becoming another road such as The Croft in Christchurch which was developed in 2003 and still has ironworks in place. She expressed the opinion that there will need to be some very stringent conditions applied to this application.  

·         Councillor Connor referred to the non-adoption of roads, paths and streetlamps and added that there are too many roads in Fenland which have been left with raised iron works which cannot be allowed to continue.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he is going to propose that out of the 37 dwellings, the last 7 cannot be occupied until the road, paths and street lighting have been brought up to an adoptable standard in order that residents are not left to pick up the pieces in a few years’ time. Richard Fitzjohn stated that he considers that request to be acceptable.

·         Councillor Purser stated that the officer’s report refers to the fact that in extreme weather some of the pumps have a tendency to burn out which he does find worrying. Harry Pickford explained that this is not an ideal situation for managing surface water and they do come with a residual risk which is why the applicant has been asked to look at a pump failure scenario. He added that they do have back up pumps and safety pumps installed within them as standard and they come with alarms in the event of failure, however, that does not mean that they will not fail. Harry Pickford explained that due to the risk of failure the applicants have been asked to undertake the pump failure modelling to ensure that they can manage the water within the red line boundary to ensure that the properties do not suffer from flooding at all. Councillor Purser stated that the due to the modern technology that exists there would be equipment in place which can negate any issues prior to pumps burning out. Harry Pickford stated that he totally agrees but made the point that the pumps that are installed in sites are designed as a standard piece of equipment and his team does not have any influence on the pumps that are installed but explained that maintenance has been requested to be included as part of the conditions and, therefore, there should be further maintenance details which come forwards as part of a future conditions application.

·         Councillor Purser stated that the report indicates that the site is located in Flood Zone 1 which is a low flood zone, however, the report does state that some of the site is prone to flooding and the flooding does not go away for several days. He made the point that the report also states that the drainage board require further detail with regards to on and off-site water levels could be risk managed and maintained, and he questioned whether officers have any details with regards to that request. Richard Fitzjohn stated that as Harry Pickford has mentioned there is a drainage condition regarding the maintenance of the drainage scheme and there is a detailed drainage scheme that would need to be agreed as part of a condition as well. He added that any information will be contained within any discharge of conditions application should the application be approved.

·         Councillor Purser stated that he noted from his site visit that the width of the pathway is narrow and could cause issues for pedestrians, pram and wheelchair users and he questioned whether consideration has been given to the safety implications. Richard Fitzjohn stated that the views of the Highway Authority have been sought, and they have requested that there is some widening of the footpath along the frontage of the site as he indicated on the presentation screen. He explained that further south leading into March, the Highway Authority did comment that it is acknowledged that the footpath is narrower along there and there are some points along the footpath where they would not be able to viably widen. Richard Fitzjohn explained that Highways did not consider it necessary in terms of highway safety that this planning application requires any sort of further widening of existing footway further to the south as part of the application. He added that any condition for widening of the footway would need an element of it being reasonable and necessary to the development and unless there is robust justification it would not be reasonable on the basis of Highway comments to request any sort of further footway widening other than what highways have requested.

·         Councillor Marks referred to the presentation screen and the entrance of the two self-build properties and he questioned whether the Highway Authority have considered that should the railway line ever be reopened there will not be an issue due to the proximity to the new crossing point. Richard Fitzjohn stated that he has not received any specific comments from the Highway Authority with regards to the proximity to the railway line and any impacts of any future reopening of the railway line. He added that the Highway Authority have considered the details of the planning application, and he is not aware whether that includes any consideration or future reopening of the railway.

·         Councillor Mrs French questioned whether a speed reduction can be insisted upon if the application is approved? Matthew Leigh stated that the Highway Authority have been consulted, and they have not indicated that it is something that they feel is necessary for this application and, therefore, that is not something that would be able to be requested because there is not any evidence according to Highways to state that there is a need. Councillor Mrs French stated that she appreciates the point made by Mathew Leigh, but in the event of any issues on the A47 or the A141 then Elm Road is used as the road to get back into March and whilst the County Council only record incidents resulting in fatalities, there are very many other minor road traffic collisions accidents which do occur. She expressed the view that if the application should be approved then the developer should consider reducing the speed because it is a very fast road.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he concurs because on the site visit he witnessed some of the speeding which was very excessive. He made the point that there will be an additional 70 or 80 cars at least once the dwellings are built out and a speed reduction should be considered. Councillor Connor stated that there does not appear enough detail in the report with regards to the provision of a management company and, is his view, the applicant must ensure a management company is formed as soon as possible and he would like to see the attenuation pond being adopted by Anglian Water ideally. He added that as other members have mentioned if the pump fails then the attenuation pond will need to take up all of the slack and as has already been mentioned it could take 5 or 10 days for the water level to recede and, in his view, maintenance and adoption of the attenuation pond is paramount. Richard Fitzjohn explained that one of the conditions which relates to drainage includes the requirement of the full details of the maintenance and adoption of the surface water drainage system which would include the attenuation basin. He explained that officers would not be able to insist that Anglian Water adopt the basin as that would fall under the jurisdiction of the applicant as it may end up with a private management company who assume responsibility for it but that would form part of the planning condition.

·         Councillor Connor stated that there have been instances where attenuation ponds have not been adopted and probably not produced to the right specification to be adopted when application sites have been built out and have been lived in for several years. He asked whether there could be any timescales included as part of the condition to state that the basin needs to be adopted before the first house is occupied. Matthew Leigh explained that the condition already requires full details of the maintenance and adoption of the surface water drainage system to be provided to officers and to be agreed. He added that as part of that it would require an agreement of when the basin would be adopted and, therefore, if it was not adopted or not implemented it would conflict with any of the points that have been agreed through the maintenance and the adoption and would be a breach of planning control. Matthew Leigh expressed the opinion that the condition already covers that matter and will be left to officers as part of the delegation process, but he does not think that it would be likely that an adoption would be accepted many years after development as that would not be reasonable.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that there are many sites within the District which have breached planning approvals and are not in accordance with the original plans and no action has been taken.

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that with regards to attenuation ponds she has seen many of them which do not contain any water, however, there are some that have water in. She added that when considering safety measures would it be possible to add a condition so that the developer takes steps to make it safe by adding a fence around the pond. Richard Fitzjohn stated that if members consider it to be a safety issue then a condition could be added requiring a fence to be erected around it.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that he notes from the officer’s report that the land is agricultural and he asked whether officers could confirm when the land was used for such purposes or has the land been left fallow for a period? Richard Fitzjohn stated that he did not know when the land was last used for arable purposes.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that the land has not been used for many years and due to the size of the land it is not viable for farming.

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

·         Councillor Marks expressed the view that fencing is a must along the rail track as looking forwards in years to come there could be issues regarding it. He added that with regards to the attenuation pond if a ball goes into the pond and it is fenced off then children will climb over the fence, but he agrees that it would be a deterrent.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he thinks that it is imperative to have a waiting area for vehicles wishing to enter the application site due to the volume and speed of the vehicles that use Elm Road. He added that he would also like to see the working hours on a Saturday morning increased to 8am out of a courtesy to those residents who live in the vicinity of the site.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that his main concern is that the developer has not attended the meeting in order to present to the committee and to give the committee the opportunity to ask questions.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she also agrees that it is a pity that there is nobody for the committee to pose questions too. She made reference to the lack of Section 106 contributions, with it clearly stating that the three GP practices are full and cannot cope and she does not know how all the additional residents are going to find a doctor’s surgery with space, making the point also that all the schools are full and there are no new schools which are coming forward. Councillor Mrs French stated that the £78,000 of contributions is going to be between the 39 dwellings and she questioned where those monies will be spent.

·         Councillor Connor stated that during construction he would like to see a very robust flooding plan included from the start of build. He explained that management companies do worry him and they are put in place by the builder for the length of time the build takes place and then there have been instances where they have gone bankrupt and he would like a condition which sets out that a management company needs to be in place at the start of the build.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that there are going to be a high number of children who will live in the new houses and over the last couple of days she has been watching the Central Government debates concerning the new planning policy, with the Government appearing to be pushing the fact that there should be good play equipment installed, however, it is still not clear as to whether that will be legislated. She added that the application site is located nearly two miles outside of the town and, in her opinion, there should be some play equipment included on the development but she does not know whether it can be conditioned but she would like to see it if possible. Councillor Connor asked whether a condition would be possible? Richard Fitzjohn explained that in theory it can be conditioned, however, it should accord with planning policy requirements as set out within the Local Plan and that determines which type of application, including size of applications, require play equipment to conform with policy. He added that a condition can be added to provide play equipment but that is not to say that it would comply with planning policy in the Local Plan.

·         Councillor Marks stated that there are two other aspects to consider which includes a speed reduction as, in his view, Elm Road is a fast road and he has researched as to whether you can have railway crossings in a 60mph zone and they are permitted. He made the point that should Network Rail reinstate the railway then consideration may or may not be given to reduce the speed limit along the road. Councillor Marks added that there also appears to be a lack of street lighting along the road and, therefore, the development is located two miles out of town with young and elderly residents with minimal street lighting.

·         Councillor Purser referred to the attenuation basin and explained that many domestic dwellings have ponds located in their gardens which for safety reasons are netted and he wondered if that was possible instead of fencing. Matthew Leigh explained that it is important to note that most attenuation basins are empty and in theory that would mean that a piece of net would be lying on the ground and, in his view, the fence does not meet the planning test in relation to need.

·         Councillor Connor added that theoretically the basins should be dry but in the weather episodes that sometimes occur there could be occasions where that is not the case. He added that it is difficult to consider conditions with no applicant or agent present to answer members questions for a decent size planning application in Fenland it is a disservice to the committee that nobody has chosen to attend the meeting.

·         Councillor Mrs French referred to a supplementary planning document which was adopted from 26 February 2015 for developer’s contributions and on Page 17 it makes reference to children’s play areas and should the application be approved, she would like officers to investigate whether a quality play area can be insisted upon.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she would like to make a proposal to approve the application, however, she added that she would like to add the following recommendation as set out in the officer’s report so that the committee delegates authority to refuse the application in the event that the applicant does not agree any necessary extensions to the determination period to enable the completion of the Section 106 legal agreement, or on the grounds that the applicant is unwilling to complete the obligation necessary to make the development acceptable.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he is happy to second that proposal, however, he also wished to add further conditions to the application, he would like officers to explore the inclusion of play equipment on the development, that a management company be formed as soon as possible as well as a robust flood plan to include an attenuation pond and if officers feel that it is appropriate to include fencing around or a net over it as suggested. He added that Councillor Marks has requested that a 6ft or 8ft solid fence should be erected on the boundary with the rail line which he would like to see conditioned and he would also like to see a road sweeper twice a day to ensure that highway safety is maintained especially on a 60mph road. Councillor Connor stated that he would like it conditioned to reflect that only 30 houses are to be occupied until such times as the road, paths and lighting are brought up to adoptable standard.

·         Councillor Marks added that he would also like a condition to reflect that working hours on a Saturday can only commence at 8am as well as off road parking for HGV vehicles on arrival at the site and he would like to see that from the commencement of development as he does not want to see HGV lorries waiting on Elm Road in order to deliver especially when considering it is such a fast road.

·         Councillor Connor questioned whether the reduction of speed limit on Elm Road could be considered under a Local Highway Improvement (LHI)? Councillor Mrs French explained that March Town Council are no longer undertaking any more LHIs due to the significant time frame that it takes and the Town Council are still waiting on 22 applications for improvements.

·         Councillor Mrs French referred to the point made by Councillor Marks concerning the delivery of supplies to sites, making the point that it did become an issue for a development in Wisbech Road for 118 dwellings which included a three-way traffic light system in operation, however, residents took it upon themselves to move the traffic lights. She added that the County Council had to make numerous trips to keep the road clean so there needs to be an element of monitoring when conditions are added to ensure that they are adhered to.

·         Matthew Leigh stated that he has noted 8 suggested conditions which have been put forward by members and with regards to the play equipment, planning policy does not require it for a scheme of this size and the management company, flood plan and attenuation pond are all covered by conditions already.

·         Councillor Marks added that the time period needs to be included because a management company can be set up on the last occupation and he would like it to set up from day 1. Matthew Leigh explained that the requirements for all of that level of detail has to be submitted to officers and that will be required as part of the agreement.

·         Councillor Marks stated that means that the developer is advising officers what they are going to do as opposed to the committee telling the developer what they want. Matthew Leigh explained that is not how conditions work, and it is within the gift of the developer to make suggestions to officers and officers can then refuse to agree the details. He added that it does have to be reasonable and in accordance with planning policy and officers very rarely explicitly say what is required and it is in accordance with the details submitted. Matthew Leigh explained that this application is the same, the information will be required, and it will either be acceptable or not.

·         Councillor Benney added that the committee are asking for conditions to be added, however, the developer can appeal them as a variation of condition and ask for them to be removed and if the committee make the conditions too onerous then that means that officers are tied down with paperwork. He added that there has been a significant amount of debate which has never been the case before, and he stated that with regards to the play equipment it does not meet the criteria because there are not enough dwellings proposed to require it. Councillor Benney added that concerns regarding attenuation basins have never been raised before, and applications have just been passed, making the point that if conditions are made too onerous then the applicant will submit a variation of conditions application and if that then goes to appeal, he does not see how that is going to be supported.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he does not recall an application for 39 houses where there has been no attendance from the agent or applicant to present to the committee. He added that whilst he takes the point made by Councillor Benney and appreciates that the applicant can appeal them, in his view, they are not excessive conditions.

·         Matthew Leigh stated there needs to be consistency and several of the points being suggested by the committee are above what is required by planning policy, and they are above what has been required on any other application for larger schemes since he has been at the authority. He added that he is concerned that the committee appear to be taking a different approach and one of the key points about planning is supposed to consistency and a number of the suggested conditions appear to go above and beyond what policy requires or what the Council requires. Matthew Leigh stated that the fact that an applicant has not turned up at the meeting to address the committee is not a material consideration and should not impact the members thoughts on what conditions are applied to an application. He added that anything that an applicant states has no merit at all in the decision-making process and the application should be dealt with in the same manner as any other application.

·         Councillor Connor stated that the play equipment and fencing around the attenuation pond will be disregarded as it appears that those conditions are not consistent. He added that the management company and a robust flooding plan still needs to be conditioned as well as the boundary fence by the rail track for safety reasons. Councillor Connor stated that he would still like to see a sweeper included for highway safety and for consistency as that has been included before in other applications, he would like a condition included so that it states that only 30 out of the 37 houses can be occupied until the roads are brought up to an adoptable standard.

·         Matthew Leigh explained that the point with regards to the fencing by the railway line is very specific to this application, however, if members consider that it is necessary then it is within their gift to impose a condition in relation to that. He made the point that with regards to the request for a sweeper twice a day and off-road parking for lorries both of those aspects would normally be dealt with by the construction management plan. Matthew Leigh explained that there is a condition requiring that which can be amended to include those points but, in his view, it does not need its own separate condition. He added that he does have concerns with regards to the provision of a sweeper twice a day through the whole development because there will be times when that does not happen, explaining that if the road is adopted and the developer is still working on other properties then there could be a sweeper on site even though it may only be internal works being undertaken on the dwellings, with him having concerns in relation to the onerous level of such a blanket condition regarding road sweeping. Matthew Leigh added that when considering the point made concerning flooding and whether it is the management company or the flood plan, in his view, he considers the current conditions already cover those aspects like they do on every other application and there does not need to be additional ones for them.

·         Councillor Connor referred to previous applications where the road surface did require a sweepers presence, and he stated that he would still like the sweeper condition included. He added that the road is a 60mph road and the fact that it is unlikely that the speed limit will be reduced he would still like to see the lorries taken off the road for highway safety reasons.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he is under the impression that the sweeper is for the highway and not the actual estate itself. He expressed the view that it is a health and safety issue as is the lorries parking up on the highway and the fence against the railway line.

·         Matthew Leigh clarified that the point that he was trying to make was that members are requesting for a sweeper to attend the site twice a day where in theory the estate could be built out and it is just the internal works which are being undertaken. He added that the wording is not proportionate to what the harm is, and, in his view, it should just be as normal and dealt within the Construction Management Plan (CMP). Matthew Leigh added that within the CMP it can explicitly say that with regards to a sweeper and off-road parking that those details will be required to be agreed by officers and a standard condition which just states during construction a road sweeper must sweep twice a day is not proportionate to when there would be harm from dirt, mud and detritus. He stated that there is a requirement for it to be proportionate as it forms one of the six tests and it is part of the standard CMP. Matthew Leigh added that he is concerned that members feel that this application, which is a lot smaller than some of the others that members have determined, appears to be being seen as so much more harmful in relation to dirt.

·         Councillor Connor expressed the view that members are being consistent with other applications which have been considered.

·         Matthew Leigh stated that it is not consistent to add a specific condition regarding this and what is consistent is to have it included within the CMP which is what officers have suggested. He made the point that it would still require a sweeper to attend if there was detritus on the road through the normal process and the point he is trying to make is that to require a sweeper twice a day for the whole construction process is not appropriate.

·         Councillor Purser stated that any mud on the road could be very dangerous and cause a serious accident, and he does feel quite strongly about that from a health and safety perspective.

·         Matthew Leigh explained that the CMP will normally require sweeping and there will still need to be details, but to require sweeping for the whole of the construction period is not proportionate because there will be significant period of time when there will not be any construction work which lends itself to cause excess mud and dirt and that is where members need to be proportionate when considering the application.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he takes the point being made and added that if it is a very robust CMP then he will agree.

·         Councillor Benney expressed the view that the committee are being very harsh when considering the application and they have determined far bigger applications previously and they have never debated them like this. He added that a CMP is in place and are nearly always standardised and can be adapted to include specific requirements. Councillor Benney added that he agrees with the lorries being taken off the road, however, if the lorries are parked on the road it does slow the traffic down. He made the point that in all the time he has been a committee member he has never known a debate to go on for so long, with the application being just for 37 houses and the CMP will be what it is and it does not need adapting or adjusting as, in his opinion, it works in every other case.

·         Councillor Marks questioned whether the CMP does actually work and he knows other application sites where the CMP was not specific enough and is now causing issues with local residents and, in his opinion, developers need to have it in writing as to the views and requirements of the committee.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he agrees with Councillor Marks as the same issue arose at another site on Wisbech Road.

·         Councillor Benney stated that if you have a good CMP and the agent places his contact number on the front of the site then if there are any issues local residents can make contact and, in his experience, they are very responsive and do come back. He added that if there is a good Site Manager they will take steps to alleviate issues and if there is a bad Site Manager he will not adhere to any number of conditions which are added to the CMP.

·         Councillor Connor stated that those instances it is where enforcement action needs to take place, but he would like to see a robust CMP.

·         Matthew Leigh expressed the opinion that the management company and the flood plan is already covered through the standard conditions. He added that out of the 8 original proposed conditions the ones which members are suggesting are the fence adjacent to the railway line, no more than 30 dwellings to be occupied in relation to highways and the change of working hours.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Connor and agreed that the application be GRANTED as per the officer’s recommendation with officers to apply the additional and amended conditions as agreed.

(Councillor Mrs French and Councillor Purser declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that they are members of March Town Council but take no part in planning)