Self-build home and business shed at Land West Of Burnlea House, Wimblington Road, Manea

The site and surroundings

The site is grazing land in an open rural area, with the existing grounds maintenance business on adjacent land and the site in Flood Zone 3.

“The site is currently used as grazing land. The surrounding area is characterised largely by open and undeveloped land used for agricultural purposes. There is a complex of buildings housing the existing grounds maintenance business to the south of an existing dwelling named Burnlea House.”

“The proposed access construction has been commenced with hardstanding placed on the land to build up to the access to the level of Wimblington Road. Additionally, utilities have been placed on site in the approximate location of the grounds maintenance business outbuilding.”

Officer report

Planning history

There was no relevant planning history for the site.

“There is no site history relevant to the determination of the application.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers found insufficient evidence of an essential rural-worker need, landscape harm, flood-risk policy failure and no enforceable self-build arrangement.

“It is considered that insufficient evidence and information have been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal is essential for a rural worker, as required in an ‘Elsewhere’ location such as this. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be unacceptable in principle and contrary to Policies LP3 and LP12 of the Fenland Local Plan, 2014 and Paragraph 84(e) of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2024.”

“In the absence of a legal agreement or other enforceable mechanism to secure the delivery and occupation of the proposed dwelling as a self-build unit, the development fails to meet the definition and requirements of self-build housing as set out in the Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended).”

Officer report

Objections and support

Five objections raised countryside, highway, security, flooding, family and working-hours concerns, while ten supporting comments cited business, security, design, access and employment benefits.

“Objecting Comments Officer Response The site is in the open countryside This matter will be addressed in the Principle of Development section. Unlit 60 mph road with no pavements in vicinity of site and poor accident record. This matter will be assessed in the Highway Safety and Parking Section. The argument for “business security” is unconvincing This matter will be assessed in the Site Security section. The site is in Flood Zones 2 and 3 and no sequential test submitted.”

“Supporting Comments Officer Response The business is already running on site and is in a suitable location. This matter will be addressed in the Principle of Development section. Having a dwelling on site would reduce the possibility of theft and would benefit the business and community. This matter will be addressed in the Principle of Development section. Scale of property in keeping with others in area. This matter will be addressed in the Layout and Design section.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A supporter, the applicant and the agent spoke about drainage, road visibility, security, business growth, employment, personal circumstances and the self-build proposal.

The decision

Members rejected the refusal recommendation and granted permission, delegating conditions to officers and requiring a unilateral undertaking.

“Proposed by Councillor Marks, seconded by Councillor Benney and agreed that the application be GRANTED against officer’s recommendation, with authority delegated to officers to apply conditions in consultation with the Vice-Chairman and for the applicant to enter into a Unilateral Undertaking.”

“Members do not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they do not feel this is an elsewhere type location, it is a good use of land, it provides security for the business which is a growing business and mitigation can be undertaken for the site lying in Flood Zone 3.”

Minutes