They are selling short the ratepayers of March

At the Fenland District Council meeting held on January 29 I was astounded by the cavalier attitude of the planning committee when the subject of “Developers Rule 106 Obligations” was discussed.

For clarity I have shown a short copy of the rules in the following paragraphs:

Planning obligations, also known as Section 106 agreements (based on that section of The 1990 Town & Country Planning Act) are private agreements made between local authorities and developers and can be attached to a planning permission to make acceptable development which would otherwise be unacceptable in planning.

Section 106 agreements are negotiated between a developer and council to help make new home schemes more attractive to communities.

It can be used to help fund affordable housing as well as roads, parks and youth services.

Section 106 itself does not say who ‘must’ sign a S106 agreement.

It merely says that ‘anyone with an interest in land’ may do so.

On the face of it, there is no legal requirement to bind in all parties who have interests in the application site.

For the proposed development of 28 dwellings north of Berryfields, March, the developers are contributing £10,000 to Estover Playing Field.

A noble gesture maybe? Unfortunately this is just a fraction of the actual amount of money that should be paid by the developer.

FDC’s planning committee agreed that £10,000 was enough money to compensate the local ratepayers for this unwanted and much protested development.

As a ratepayer will the FDC allow me to pay just a fraction of my rates? I don’t think so?

They are selling the ratepayers of March short because this sets a precedent for future developers to “get away” with the financial obligations to the Fenland community.

Plus it is an insult to all the residents who have objected to this development from day one.

John Tuerena,

March.