Horsey Bridge: Councillors asked to reconsider rejecting controversial business park

Controversial development plans will be voted on again by Peterborough councillors after being rejected.

The council’s planning committee turned down an application to build a business park at Horsey Bridge in Stanground in March.

But the same committee will vote on the plans for a second time on Tuesday, 27th June.

A council report says that the committee will be advised on the “robustness of the reasons for refusal put forward when the application was considered” by planning officers in the light of legal advice sought after their rejection.

There is a “realistic” chance the applicant, Barnack Estates UK Ltd, could successfully appeal their decision, it adds – which could prove expensive for the council.

The proposed development, comprising around 20 buildings off Whittlesey Road, has received hundreds of public objections.

It was also raised by three of the seven councillors who resigned from the Conservative group after May’s local elections.

Cllrs Ray Bisby (Peterborough First, Stanground South), Brian Rush (Peterborough First, Stanground South) and Gavin Elsey (Peterborough First, Wittering) all said handling of the application bolstered their decision to leave.

After the planning committee rejected the application (six votes to two, plus one abstention), three councillors – all of them Conservatives – “called in” the decision, meaning they wanted it looked at again.

They then withdrew these call ins in the wake of their colleagues’ resignations.

Council leader, Cllr Wayne Fitzgerald (Conservatives, West) defended their decision, saying they “didn’t feel the applicant got a fair hearing”.

Among those who had criticised it was planning committee chair Cllr Chris Harper (Peterborough First, Stanground South) who said the call ins “disrespect the committee’s debate and the vote”.

Cllr Harper also criticised Cllr Fitzgerald’s desire to appoint more Conservatives to the planning committee after his group strengthened its numbers on election night, attributing some of the group’s resignations to concern over that.

Cllr Fitzgerald responded by saying that there’s “nothing wrong with me wanting to impose or see through the policy of the Conservative group”.

He has also defended the council against accusations of “bribery”.

Rob Facer, founder of Barnack Estates, is also the chair of the Peterborough Conservative Association, and a Conservative donor, but Cllr Fitzgerald says that has nothing to do with the handling of his company’s planning application.

“There are suggestions of bribery and all sorts of things which are completely ridiculous and quite frankly hurtful to those members involved,” Cllr Fitzgerald said. “It is a terrible thing to say.”

Despite conversations around adding more Conservatives to the planning committee in early May, its membership remains similar to when they rejected it the first time.

Cllr Jackie Allen (Conservatives, East) has been added to the committee, joining the three Conservatives who called in the decision.

Cllr Rush has left the committee, while Cllr Hiller is now a member of the Peterborough First group rather than the Conservatives.

Council officers want the committee to change its vote on the basis that lawyers have advised it that Peterborough’s Local Plan (LP) – which lays out the city’s planning policies – can be interpreted as supportive of the development.

Councillors rejected it partly because they said it would contravene the LP, but a catch-all policy around employment site proposals means that it could be considered in line with it, a council report says.

All of the employment land specifically allocated in the LP is, moreover, used up, while a small amount remained at the time of the last vote.

Barnack Estates has previously said it “won’t give up” on building the development.