Homes plans for Leverington rejected over highways fears

Fenland’s planning committee has yesterday afternoon unanimously rejected plans for 33 homes in Leverington.

Flooding, highways safety, and lack of information on the possible impact the development would have on reptiles on the site off Sutton Road, were the grounds for the councillors’ decision.

Gareth Edwards, of Swann Edwards Architects, who was acting as agent for the applicant Mr Goodale, tried to convince the committee to approve the outline proposal.

However, councillors were not to be swayed from the officers’ recommendation to refuse the plans.

In a report to committee the officers explained a large portion of the site was within flood zone 3 – the highest level for risk of flooding.

It also pointed out that highways had raised concerns both over the access to the proposed development which would be between accesses to existing properties, and also a pinch point at the entrance to the residential development.

Highways were concerned that the internal road on the planned estate could not be provided without resulting in the risk of collisions due to inadequate space.

Councillors at yesterday’s meeting were concerned about lorries accessing the site as the entrance would be just 2.9metres wide.

Mr Edwards admitted there would need to be some changes to the proposed access which would involve amendments to one of the existing property’s accesses, but they had not approached either property owner to discuss the matter.

He said there had been a number of neighbours’ objections and they did not want to “exacerbate the situation”.

However, committee chair Cllr David Connor questioned whether that was like “putting the cart before the horse”.

Cllr Jan French said: “With the reports we have got in front of us there is no way I can support this application.”

Cllr Charlie Marks agreed and pointed out that highways had raised “quite serious concerns”.

A vote followed Cllr French proposing the committee go with officers’ recommendations and refuse the application and the vote was unanimous in going with that decision.