Four workplace dwellings at Land North Of 10 Primrose Hill, Doddington

Summary of planning committee decision

Deferred by Fenland Planning Committee on 10 Dec 2025.

F/YR25/0729/PIPDeferred

The site

The site is fallow agricultural land beside Doddington, with fields around it and parts within Flood Zones 2 and 3.

“The site is situated immediately to the west of the built form of the settlement of Doddington and is in fallow agricultural use. Adjacent development consists of dwellings at Turnpike Close to the east, and 10 Primrose Hill to the south-west. Arable fields are located to the north, west and south of the site. The site is…”

“The site topography slopes gently away from the highway with a drain located to southern frontage of the site. The site is located in Flood Zone 1, 2 and 3, with two of the four dwellings located in in Zones 2 and 3 toward the west of the site. The western half of the site is subject to a low, medium and high annual likelihood of surface water flooding.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An earlier nine-dwelling Permission in Principle application was withdrawn, and a later application for up to nine dwellings was refused.

“Reference Description Decision F/YR22/0812/PIP Residential development of up to 9 x dwellings involving the formation of 2 x new accesses (application for Permission in Principle) Withdrawn – 14 July 2022 F/YR23/0113/PIP Residential development of up to 9 x dwellings (application for Permission in Principle) Refused – 27 April 2023”

Officer report

Why officers advised refusal

Officers considered the proposal an urbanising linear extension into open countryside and found that no flood-risk sequential test had been submitted.

“Development of this site would introduce a formal, linear extension into the open countryside, which does not respect the rural character or sporadic settlement pattern as the village is exited, it would result in an unacceptable urbanisation and set a precedent for future development, further eroding the open character of this area.”

“The site lies partially within in Flood Zones 2 and 3; Policy LP12 Part A (j) seeks to ensure that developments would not put people or property in danger from identified risks, such as flooding.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected over highway safety, ribbon development and biodiversity, while highways and several other consultees raised no objection at this stage.

“Objection – The Parish Council expresses concerns regarding: Highway Safety Ribbon Development…”

“No objection – After a review of the submitted information and indicative highway boundary extent in the area. I have no objection to the principal of the developments access location or the construction of a footway along the Primrose Hill leading to the village of Doddington. Whilst I have no objections to the principle of the development and its associated infrastructure, to facilitate its construction.”

Officer report

Residents’ views

One neighbouring property objected, while seven supporters cited the settlement’s proximity, workplace housing need, housing need and local economic benefits.

“Seven comments of supports have been received. Three are from Doddington, on Benwick Road, Turf Fen Lane and Askham Row. Two supporters are from Chatteris, on Gull Way and Lode Way. One supporter is from Brewin Avenue in March, and one is from Williams Way in Manea. The nearest supporter is nearly 800 metres from the proposal site.”

“Supporting Comments Officer Response The dwellings are in close vicinity to the settlement. This will be addressed in the Location section. Similar proposals are nearby. This will be addressed in the Use section. There is a need for occupational dwellings. This will be addressed in the Use section. There is a housing need in the area. This will be addressed in the Use section. This will benefit the local economy This will be addressed in the Use section.”

Officer report

The committee’s discussion

The committee received legal advice that the application should be deferred because conditions could not currently regulate the development.

“The Legal Officer stated that he has advised the committee that this application should be deferred due to the fact that the Council cannot currently impose conditions to regulate the development and a deferral will enable discussions to take place with the applicant.”

“Members confirmed that they agree with the legal advice provided to them.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Mrs French proposed deferral, Councillor Marks seconded it, and the committee agreed.

“Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Marks and agreed that the application be DEFERRED.”

Minutes

Sources

  • Fenland Planning Committee minutes, 10 December 2025
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Fenland's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Fenland
Date
Wednesday 10 December 2025
Recommendation
Officers recommended refusal
Committee decided
Deferred
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)
Application
The application (council website)

This committee's year

40 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 21 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →