Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report to members and drew members attention to the update report that had been circulated.

The committee had regard to its inspection of the site (as agreed in accordance with the Site Inspection: Policy and Procedure (minute P19/04 refers)) during its deliberations.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Mr Andrew Hodgson, the agent. Mr Hodgson explained that he was asked to review the application following a technical issue concerning one of the flood risk conditions regarding contamination which had not been addressed previously and, in his opinion, the site should be built out by now but when it was reviewed by officers, they determined that the contamination issue had not been resolved. He stated that the detail of the application has not changed at all, and the layout is the same as previously submitted.

Mr Hodgson explained that the only changes are technical changes which have become necessary due to changes in planning policy. He explained to the committee that there is some on site diversity net gain which was not on the scheme previously and the site now shows the digester and the attenuation basin which deals with the drainage scheme and was not shown on the plans previously.

Mr Hodgson stated that the site still provides an efficient use of land, and it is only a technical issue dealing with contamination that has caused the delay with the build.

Members asked Mr Hodgson the following questions:

·       Councillor Sutton made reference to the digester and stated that in the conditions there are details concerning a management company looking after the roads and other elements of the development but there is no reference made with regards to the digester plant and he asked whether that is maintenance free? Mr Hodgson explained that the way the digester works means that it may have to be an annual maintenance requirement which would be undertaken by the management company. Councillor Sutton stated that the detail surrounding that maintenance needs to be considered by officers when adding conditions.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that she has seen a comment in the officer’s report concerning the March West and White Fen Internal Drainage Board, of which she is a member, with the report stating that a 5-metre-wide maintenance access strip has been provided for landowners beside the watercourse and she asked Mr Hodgson whether he was aware that the Middle Level Commissioners will not allow anything less than nine metres for maintenance? Mr Hodgson stated that is something that will need to be addressed, however, the Middle Level Commissioners have not made any comment on the proposal to date.

·       Councillor Mrs Davis asked whether there was going to be a contamination report and Mr Hodgson stated that the reports have all been undertaken. He added that there is a condition which states that there is a requirement to report any contamination should any be found once development commences.

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

·       Councillor Sutton stated that the nine metres for the access maintenance strip does need to be resolved and this is required for the large equipment that is used. He added that the management plan must also include the digester bio equipment as that will not be maintenance free in the long term.

·       David Rowen stated that the issue of the maintenance strip is a separate matter outside of the consideration of the planning application. He added that if the application is granted then it will be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain a resolution with the Internal Drainage Board for a narrower maintenance strip or to resubmit an amended plan.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that at a recent meeting she attended with the Middle Level Commissioners they have insisted on a nine-metre access strip. She explained that the dykes and drains were dug out hundreds of years ago and they have to be maintained and it is down to the applicant to have further discussions with Middle Level.

Proposed by Councillor Skoulding, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and agreed that the application be APPROVED as per the officer’s recommendation with authority delegated to officers to formulate suitable conditions in consultation with the proposer and seconder.

(Councillor Mrs Mayor declared that she is a personal friend of one of the applicants, Councillor Mrs Laws, and she took no part in the discussion or voting thereon on this item)

(All remaining members of the committee present declared that they know the applicant, Councillor Mrs Laws, in a professional capacity only, which did not impact on their decision making on this application)