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 Mr Matthew Hall, the Agent.

Mr Hall stated that the application site is surrounded on three sides by well established, 2-storey residential properties. He made the point that the Environment Agency Flood Map indicates that the whole of Turves is in Flood Zone 3 and at a previous Planning Committee a development had been approved in Wisbech, which is covered by Flood Zones 2 and 3 and next to a major river, however, applications in the villages of Turves and Benwick, which are also in Flood Zone 3 have been recommended for refusal. He stated that on review of the Environment Agency Flood Map, Turves although in Flood Zone 3, also benefits from flood defences at the Nene Washes Barrier Bank.

Mr Hall stated that when the application was submitted, the Planning Officer had initial concerns with regards to the size of the dwelling and the location of it, but the officer has been proactive and worked with him and as a result the design and position have now been revised, which can be seen in the officer’s report. He stated that an independent Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted as part of the application, which has been approved by the Environment Agency.

Mr Hall stated that the site did have previous planning approval in 2005 for a residential dwelling and expressed the view that whilst the officer’s report states that Whittlesey Town Council have concerns over the application, they were consulted on the first design which was for a larger dwelling, however, he does not think they have been reconsulted since the proposal has been scaled back. He drew members attention to the map on the presentation screen, and highlighted the red hatched area, which indicates the location for the proposed 2-storey detached dwelling, and then he drew members attention to the extreme right of the map, hatched in dark blue, which was the site that David Rowen had referred to in the officer’s report, which was approved for a pair of semi-detached dwellings in 2020, but this site is not on the market and no works have commenced. He stated that the site also had a Flood Risk Assessment, a sequential and exemption test, and that was approved.

Mr Hall referred to the green hatched area on the map, which is less than 100 metres from the proposed dwelling, where in 2019 planning permission was approved for a pair of semi-detached dwellings, which has now been built out and one of the properties has been sold and the other is for sale.  He stated that a Flood Risk Assessment was carried out for that site and approved by the Environment Agency and added that those properties are in close proximity to the application being determined.

Mr Hall expressed the view that when driving through the Turves, there does not appear to be any plots available for sale. He concluded by stating that there have been no objections from neighbours, highways or the Environment Agency and expressed the opinion that the application is an infill development in accordance with the Local Plan and officers are happy with the design and the layout.

Members asked Mr Hall the following questions:

·         Councillor Sutton asked Mr Hall to clarify, that should the application be approved, what mitigation measures he is proposing in the exception test? Mr Hall stated that his understanding is that in the Flood Risk Assessment it refers to raising the floor levels by 0.3 metres above the ground and the normal level is 0.15 so in this case the floor level is being raised by an additional 2 courses of brickwork and there has also been a request for other flood mitigation measures, which include waterproof plasterboard and sockets, and covers over vents. Councillor Sutton asked for further clarity with regard to the exception test and Mr Hall stated that various renewable energies have been included to make the building highly insulated above the requirement of Building Regulations.

Members asked officer’s the following questions:

·         Councillor Lynn asked how the application could fail the sequential test if there are no other plots of land available? David Rowen stated that the adopted Supplementary Planning Document in respect of flood water and flooding sets out what is deemed to be acceptable and the policy is clear in its statement that it is purely sites with planning permissions which are considered to be sequentially preferable.

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

·         Councillor Benney stated that whatever building takes place in Turves is going to be located in Flood Zone 3. He added that he did have concerns with regards to water run off, but is pleased to hear Mr Hall has confirmed that he is going to build 2 bricks high. Councillor Benney stated that the reason for refusal appears to focus on the sequential test and, in his opinion, the application site would suit a dwelling and he can see no reason to refuse the application. He added that the sequential test aspect of the refusal is irrelevant when two applications for dwellings in the vicinity have been approved over the last couple of years, with site mitigation measures being in place which the agent has outlined. Councillor Benney stated that it is a good application, it is another house and the villages need people moving into them to support them. He expressed the view that he understands the flood risk that has been highlighted, however, there are already houses all around the application site and he will be supporting the application.

·         Councillor Connor stated that he concurs with the comments made by Councillor Benney and added that there is no land for sale there and 99.9% of land in Turves is in Flood Zone 3, but the application site is worthy of a dwelling. He added that there are numerous dwellings all along Burnt House Road and he will be supporting the application.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she agrees with the comments made by Councillors Benney and Connor, however, she does have concerns with regard to flooding in the area. She added that if the application is approved, she would hope that proper drainage is put in place as much of the recent flooding episodes in March have been caused by surface water issues. Councillor Mrs French stated that she was on the Planning Committee when the Red Barn development was built and there were issues at the time, it has now been built for several years. She expressed the view that she cannot see anything wrong with the proposal before Members today and she will support the application.

·         Councillor Sutton stated that he agrees with the point raised by Councillor Mrs French that consideration must be given with regard to flooding as to where development is approved, but there are already 60 dwellings in the vicinity and other sites have been approved. He referred to the sequential test and the policy that David Rowen had referred to, where it states available sites, either the same or similar, and added that the site next to the public house is not the same or similar. Councillor Sutton expressed the view that he will be supporting the application in this case.

Proposed by Councillor Benney, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and decided that the application be APPROVED against the officer’s recommendation with delegated authority being given to the Chairman, Councillor Benney and Councillor Mrs French to apply suitable conditions in consultation with officers who will supply a draft list of conditions for consideration.

Members did not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel that the officers have not demonstrated that there are alternative sites in Turves, the proposed site is surrounded by development and there are other applications in the vicinity that have been approved which has set a precedent.

(Councillor Benney declared an interest in this item, by virtue of the fact that he knows the Agent, Matthew Hall, in a professional capacity only, but this would not affect his decision making when determining the item)

(Councillor Cornwell took no part in the discussion or voting on this item due to a loss of IT connection)

(Councillors Mrs Mayor and Miscandlon declared an interest in this item, by virtue of the fact that they are both members of Whittlesey Town Council Planning Committee who has commented on the application, and took no part in the discussion or voting on this item)