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 Councillor James Carney of Chatteris Town Council.

Councillor Carney stated that Chatteris Town Council believe that both applications should be seen in a favourable light and with regard to the Park Street application, which is in a prominent position along Park Street, the Town Council are pleased to see that the original frontage would be restored and in keeping with the rest of the street. He expressed the view it is a fine old house and it is encouraging to see the main part of the house being retained adding that at the rear of the house through the archway are the workshops which were an addition at a later stage and do not form part of the main fabric of the house.

Councillor Carney stated that on a previous occasion he has been inside the property and it is clear that the buildings to the rear do not add to the attractiveness of the dwelling and therefore, the Town Council do not feel that the comments raised by the Conservation Officer are valid, stating that the buildings detract from the street scene and the Conservation Area as you do not actually see the old workshops from the street itself. The Town Council are very pleased to see the proposal for the main building is to be kept and restored and have noted the comments made with regard to the lean to at the back of the building, which has different types of glass in it and a representative from the design company visited the Town Council to present on the proposals and it was asked whether the old glass could be used in some form or restored, but if that was not possible could it be gifted to the museum.

Councillor Carney added that regarding parking there were no concerns raised by the Town Council, as there would be parking through the archway and to the rear of the house and there is on street parking in the Town Centre.

Councillor Carney stated that regarding the Victoria Street aspect of the application, the developer has stated that regarding parking there are four spaces in place plus two additional spaces for visitors and made the point that there are other developments in Chatteris which have been approved which have no on-site parking at all. He expressed the view that the proposal has been designed to replicate other properties along Victoria Street and this has been welcomed by the Town Council as it will not be out of keeping with the rest of the street and area.

Councillor Carney added that the point regarding the site requiring an archaeological investigation may be raised later, but overall, the Town Council are of the opinion that the proposals will be an improvement on what is currently in place.

Members asked Councillor Carney the following questions:

·         Councillor Lynn asked Councillor Carney to clarify whether he had stated that the applicant had stated that they would be willing to keep some of the parts of the site that are historical and give them to a museum to reuse them? Councillor Carney stated that, in relation to the Park Street site, the developer has stated that the main part of the house will be kept as it is, with improvements to the windows and front door. He added that amongst the application there is some scope to try and use some of the salvaged materials. Councillor Lynn stated that he would hope the developer will contact the Heritage Team to review this further including discussions concerning the workshop. Councillor Carney added that the Town Council did not have any objection with the workshop being taken down and if there is scope for material to be reused then the developer will do. He referred to the last page of the Conservation Officer report, where they have stated that the principle of development in reuse is supported.

·         Councillor Cornwell asked for clarification that Chatteris Town Council are not interested in saving the workshop and Councillor Carney confirmed this was the case.

Members received a written representation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Mr Lawrence Weetman, an objector to the proposal, read out by David Rowen, the Development Manager.

“As chairman of Chatteris Past, Present & Future - the civic society for Chatteris - I would like to draw councillors' attention to the remarks submitted by the Archaeological Officer. Councillors should note that several apparently medieval human remains were found during a nearby archaeological dig that took place in 2011. That discovery was just 20m east of the proposed site, to the rear of 19 Victoria Street. Additionally, the proposed development will be on the site of the former medieval Chatteris Abbey. Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, and the likelihood of a burial site being present at this location, we believe that an archaeological dig must be required if councillors are minded to give approval for this application”.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Mr Tony Welland, the Agent.

Mr Welland thanked the committee for allowing him to speak in support of the application and also to ChatterisTown Councilfor speakingin support.  He stated that the applicationrelating to16 ParkStreet, whichis nota Listed Buildingbut withinthe Conservation Area,is forpermission todemolish theold workshopto therear ofthe mainhouse andnot for replacement windows or shop front, but the proposals would facilitate the refurbishmentof theproperty thathas seenlittle ifany repairto itthe last50 years. He accepts that thisneeds tobe donesympathetically toenhance the Conservation Areaand setting of adjacent Listed Buildings and stated that he does not require permission for this aspect of the proposaland, therefore,the officercomments regardinglayout andparking arenot relevantto the applicationbefore members.

Mr Welland stated that hewholeheartedly agrees thatthere isan opportunityto improve thispart ofChatteris ConservationArea andthis iswhat he is trying toachieve, supportedby the Town Council. He advised that he sought advice originally through a pre app to convert the existing building into flats which includedthe rearrange ofworkshop buildings, however,when helooked indetail atthe former workshops,which hadnever beenused forliving accommodation, he realised that,to bringthe building upto buildingregulations standardsit wouldbe costprohibitive andalmost impossible toachieve.

Mr Welland expressed the opinion that thesolution offeredby officersis notat allpractical andignores theharsh realityof economics, with the timberfirst floor beingin poorcondition, theground flooris brickover earth,there areno stairs andthe ladderused forthis hasmissing rungs, theexternal flankwall hasbrick bondingissues due tolater repairsand thegable wallis unstableand bowingout dueto theintroduction of3 window openings, thewindows needmajor repairsor replacement, thereis noroofing feltor ceilings orinsulation and, therefore, theout buildingthe Conservation Teamare lookingto retainand refurbish wouldneed tobe demolishedand completelyrebuilt, buttheir proposalwould atbest create twocompromised dwellingsakin toflats withno privateamenity orgarden spacefor a family townhouse or the dwelling behind. He stated that he does not think the town needs this sort of accommodation,which isalso theview oftwo localestate agents,and he does notbelieve itwould be inthe long-terminterest ofthe Conservation Area, with the only practical and viable use for theretention of16 ParkStreet being asa singledwelling

Mr Welland stated that regarding the application off Victoria Street, he has designed a scheme that reflects the comments made at the pre application stage with a detached frontage plot off Victoria Street anda Lshape pairof dwellingsmid plot withPlot 2having agable frontingthe parkingarea toreflect the lineardevelopment suggestedby officerswhich providesan interestingfocal point. He has retainedthe existingentrance whichwas usedfor theprevious businessuse andhas allowed for 2parking spacesper plot which isacceptable tothe HighwayAuthority.

Mr Welland stated that he isproposing a mixof two and three-bedroomhomes tomeet localneed withdesigns thatreflect thecharacter of Chatterisand thereare nosignificant overlookingissues fora centraltown location with all three new homes having good size gardens and private amenity space and will be built to a high standard offinish. He concluded that thetwo applicationsallow forthe regenerationof arun-down town housewhich willimprove the Conservation Areaandsetting ofadjacent Listed Buildingsand for theremoval ofan existingcommercial usein favourof three,low energysustainable homesin the centre ofChatteris and added that in discussionwith theTown Council,should theapplications beapproved, theside windowto the main house and the small pieces of glass used in the conservatory will be gifted to the ChatterisMuseum tocelebrate theAngel Familywho previouslylived atthe address and any materials that can be reused will be.

Members asked Mr Welland the following questions:

·         Councillor Benney asked why the proposal includes the retention of the old office in the middle of the plot, whereas if it was removed it would provide an additional parking place or a bigger garden for one of the dwellings? Mr Welland stated it was going to be retained and used for the garden shed of number 16.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·         Councillor Benney asked for clarification regarding the controlled parking that officers had referred to in Park Street as he was aware that there was a 30 minutes restricted parking area and asked whether this was what officers were referring to? David Rowen confirmed that this was he was referring to.

·         Councillor Cornwell asked whether the doors that front onto Park Street are wide enough to allow a vehicle through? David Rowen confirmed that they do appear narrow, but he was unsure of the width. Councillor Cornwell referred to the allocated parking for Park Street as being through the archway. David Rowen stated that the plans for 16 Park Street do not indicate any parking spaces and it is assumed that the because the two sites are in one ownership, 16 Park Street can utilise the access from Victoria Street and park in there, rather than try to take vehicles from Park Street itself.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that there is no controlled parking at this time and added she does think it is a material planning consideration for this application.

·         Councillor Mrs Davis added that obscure glass was mentioned and asked where this was going to be? David Rowen added it would need to be included at first and second floor levels due to the inclusion of ensuite bathrooms proposed and some consideration will need to be given from a practical point of view to the bay window to safeguard the privacy of the occupants in the living room area.

·         Councillor Benney added that the width of the driveway is narrow, but he is aware a small car can access it.

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

·         Councillor Cornwell stated that he is normally reluctant to say that history should be ignored, however, regarding the old workshop, the advice of the Town Council appears to be that they are not worried about protecting it. He added that Victoria Street, in his opinion, appears to be somewhat over developed and he will be interested to hear the views of other members.

·         Councillor Murphy stated that the building has always been an old building and nothing of heritage status with it having deteriorated over several years and requiring renovation. He added that people have complained over several years that nothing has been done and expressed the view that the report contains a large response from the Conservation Officer, which, in his view, needs to stop and developers should be left to develop the areas instead of bringing expensive ideas and ways of bringing the buildings back into use. Councillor Murphy stated that Chatteris has many redundant buildings which are becoming an eyesore because nobody can afford to renovate and repair the buildings because of the costs put on them by the Conservationists and he sees no reasons for the refusal of the application. He stated that he likes the style and appearance of the proposal and he cannot see why it has been recommended for refusal especially as the town of Chatteris want to see this go ahead and it should be approved.

·         Councillor Meekins expressed the opinion that it is a shame that the two applications are being determined together and he expressed the opinion that the Park Street application is a good application which he will support although it requires work. He stated that he also feels that Victoria Street is over developed, and it would be better suited to two dwellings rather than three.

·         Councillor Sutton expressed the opinion that he respects the comments of Councillor Murphy, however, there cannot be a policy in place where there is no consideration for old buildings. He stated the officer’s recommendation is correct and he agrees with the comments made by Councillor Meekins and Cornwell that Victoria Street is over developed, and he will be supporting the officer’s recommendation for both proposals.

·         Councillor Benney stated that the old workshop at the back of 16 Park Street is falling down, the brickwork is poor and if it is taken down to rebuild it, the footings would not be suitable and the whole building appears to be falling apart. He stated that the building has reached the end of its life and to remove it would be the best course of action. Councillor Benney expressed the opinion that by making it a 4 bedroomed house with a long narrow plot with a garden, it will become a quality dwelling, rather than a block of flats which would be over development.  He stated that an archaeological dig has been requested and he expressed the opinion that it should not be added as a condition as it would be a costly exercise. He stated that a body was found in one of the adjacent plot previously, which was dealt with appropriately and reburied and it dates to the Middle Ages and there is not the requirement to carry out archaeological digs, which will add additional costs to the proposal for the developer. Councillor Benney stated he agrees with Councillor Murphy that Chatteris has too many old buildings that are trying to be conserved and instead of doing that there should be the want to concentrate on the buildings that really need looking after, with this proposal bringing 16 Park Street back to life and it will no longer be derelict or full of vermin.

·         Councillor Miscandlon stated that he agrees with the comments made with regard to Park Street and stated that although it is in a Conservation Area, it will be brought back to a useable standard. He referred to the comments made by Councillor Benney and stated that when the foundations for the workshops at the rear were laid surely there was an archaeological dig carried out at that time. Councillor Miscandlon referred to the comment made by Councillor Meekins regarding the parking issues in Victoria Street and, in his opinion, that can be resolved. He stated that three dwellings could be classed as over development as the dwellings would be cramped, but there could be two very nice dwellings constructed on the site.

F/YR20/0824/F

Proposed by Councillor Sutton to refuse the application as per the officer’s recommendation, however there was no seconder to the proposal.

Proposed by Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Benney and decided that the application be APPROVED against the officer’s recommendation, with delegated authority being given to officers to apply appropriate conditions in consultation with Councillor Murphy and Councillor Benney.

Members did not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel that the style and appearance of the proposal will enhance the area and will not adversely affect the amenity of neighbouring users and future occupiers and the demolition of the rear annexe and workshop and proposed changes to the front elevation would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of the Chatteris Conservation Area and adjacent Listed Buildings.

F/YR20/0854/F

Proposed by Councillor Sutton, seconded by Councillor Cornwell that the application be refused as per the officer’s recommendation. This proposal was not supported on a vote by the majority of members.

Proposed by Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Lynn and decided that the application be APPROVED against the officer’s recommendation with delegated authority being given to officers to apply suitable conditions.

Members did not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel that the style and appearance of the proposal will enhance the area and will not adversely affect the amenity of neighbouring users and future occupiers, the car parking facilities are not deemed inadequate and the design, scale and siting of the proposal would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of Chatteris Conservation Area.

(Councillors Murphy and Benney declared an interest by virtue of the fact that they are both members of Chatteris Town Council but takes no part in planning matters)