Housing development approved in Cambridgeshire village despite previously being rejected

Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now
Fenland District Council’s planning committee went against planning officers’ recommendation to reject the application again

A new housing development in Manea has narrowly won the approval of Fenland District Council’s (FDC) planning committee after it rejected an identical proposal last year.

FDC planning officers recommended that councillors once again vote down the development – which will consist of up to 26 houses on land north of Westfield Road – but it passed with five votes to four.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Officers said that the new development would “introduce an urbanising effect” to the “predominantly rural and tranquil” area and that it would be “out of keeping with the development and character of this part of the village, which is predominantly countryside”.

Westfield Road will form the new development's accessWestfield Road will form the new development's access
Westfield Road will form the new development's access

Fenland's Local Plan says that only small village extensions which make a “positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the area” should be approved, they added.

Read More
125 new homes approved on fields in Cambridgeshire town

But the other reasons for the development's initial refusal – the possible impact on the area’s ecology and the lack of developer contributions – have been addressed by the applicant, Mark Stone of IFEX Engineering, they continued.

An ecology survey has now been carried out and £52,000 (£2,000 per house) offered to local GP practices, schools and libraries.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad
The 26-home development will sit at the edge of ManeaThe 26-home development will sit at the edge of Manea
The 26-home development will sit at the edge of Manea

On top of this, the development will now contain 25 per cent affordable housing (or seven units in total).

But the remaining issue – that the land is partly countryside – is simply “unaddressable”, Cllr Will Sutton (Independent) said, which FDC councillors agreed meant it shouldn’t be developed in June last year.

“I don’t see how the committee can go flip-flopping like they have done recently,” he said.

But the site has changed, other councillors contended, as nine new houses have since been approved nearby.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad
Another development (marked in blue) has been approved since the first rejection of the new development (marked in red)Another development (marked in blue) has been approved since the first rejection of the new development (marked in red)
Another development (marked in blue) has been approved since the first rejection of the new development (marked in red)

Although officers also recommended that these houses be rejected when they were proposed, they are now under construction and have “changed people’s idea about where the boundary of Manea is,” Cllr Ian Benney (Conservatives) said.

“To me, this is just filling in a piece of land that’s crying out to be filled in," he added.

Cllr Mike Cornwell (Independent) agreed that he doesn’t see “why one should be approved and the other not”.

The development has also won the support of around half of the land’s neighbours: of the 19 public comments received, 10 were in favour and nine against it.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Manea Parish Council objected, however, on the grounds of over development and the land being a greenfield site.

Before the development can proceed to the building phase, more specific details such as the house’s design and appearance must be submitted and approved.

The development’s access point has already been determined, though, and will be from Westfield Road.

The development itself will be just north of 96A to 100 Westfield Road.

Related topics:

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.