Road safety fears spark lengthy debate over homes plans for Meadowgate Lane in Wisbech

Fears over highways safety led to councillors deciding to send officers back to the drawing board over plans to build 10 homes in Wisbech

A lengthy discussion at yesterday's (Wednesday) Fenland planning committee on proposals by Mr and Mrs Humphrey to build the houses on land south of Meadowgate Academy resulted in members agreeing approval but with the proviso officers can get Cambridgeshire Highways to approve a road scheme linked to the development.

The meeting, held via Zoom, heard from planning officer Nick Thrower who said the road scheme included in the outline application, for which full permission was being sought, was a compromise and admitted the county's highways authority was not happy with it.

Councillors agreed they were happy to approve the plans for the homes, but were deeply concerned about the proposed road scheme, which would have seen pedestrians vying with cars and lorries as they shared part of the footpath, to enable vehicles to pass each other beyond the school and at the entrance to the site.

Mr Thrower explained the compromise scheme had been drawn up to protect the character of the site with the retention of a ditch and the trees and bushes lining it.

Fenland officers' recommendation was for approval of both the homes and the road scheme, while highways called for a deferment to resolve issues with the planned access road.

A highways report on the scheme said: "The Meadow Gate Lane access arrangement results in an intimidating environment for pedestrians and particularly for pedestrians within vulnerable user groups.

The arrangement also results in a confusing layout for motorists, with a gradual taper from two way traffic to single vehicle flows which could inadvertently force motorists into the path of pedestrians along the proposed shared use footway."

Adding: "The proposed shared surface arrangement along Meadow Gate Lane is not suitable to serve a 10 dwelling development and is unsafe for pedestrian users."

It called for deferment concluding: "The proposed layout results in highway safety issues. The proposed also results ongoing highway construction problems that will be difficult to resolve at detailed design stage. The proposal will also result in highway maintenance issues and potential insurance claims which will become the responsibility of the local highways authority to action/rectify.

Coun Will Sutton also called for deferment and said: "We have a lengthy report from local highways which is in direct conflict to the recommendation."

He said the author of the highways report should have been invited to attend the meeting so he could answer questions and explain his concerns.

Coun Mike Cornwell was concerned the highways objections could leave the road unadopted but planning officer David Rowen said highways had agreed they would honour the planning decision and adopt the road.

Coun Kay Mayor said she was worried by the conclusion from the highways authority and also called either for a deferment to allow for an amended plan or for the application to be refused on highways grounds.

However, Coun Ian Benney praised the officers for coming up with a compromise and said: "If officers feel this is right then I will be supporting this."

But Coun Sutton said it was wrong to put ecology, trees and bushes above the safety of people.

Coun Andrew Lynn said he was keen to approve the homes plans, but was not happy to do so while their were concerns of road safety.

After an ongoing discussion on the pros and cons of the road scheme it was finally agreed the application would be approved but officers must go back to highways and ask their approval of an alternative road scheme, which had previously been looked at by Fenland officers but dismissed because of the effect it would have on the character of the site.

The scheme, shown in a slide as part of Mr Thrower's presentation, would see the dyke filled in and a path provided.

Fenland's head of planning, Nick Harding, assured councillors that if highways are not happy with that scheme then the application would be brought back to committee.

Members therefore voted to approve the application by 10 votes to one, with one abstention.