Outcry as site is boarded off and residents told of fresh bid to build on long established Whittlesey play area
- Credit: Archant
Homes next to a piece of open space in Whittlesey fear a renewed bid to build on it.
The land in Hemmerley Drive was left vacant in the late 1980s when permission was given to Rose Homes for 31 homes but was left for youngsters to play on.
In 2008 Fenland Council refused Rose Homes (EA) Ltd to build on the vacant plot -a decision confirmed on appeal.
But now residents say they have been approached by a prospective buyer who wants to build there – and mysteriously the land has since been boarded off.
Pary Nightingale lives next door and says when he bought his home in 2007 he was assured it was and would remain open space.
You may also want to watch:
“We had someone round telling me was thinking of buying this land, if he got permission to build on it,” said Mr Nightingale.
“Next thing we knew there was wooden fencing erected around it. It should remain and has always been a play area. I’m told Fenland Council failed to adopt it – so my argument is that if they failed to do so does it mean I have to sue the council?
- 1 Woman delighted to finally be a mum after infertility heartache
- 2 7 questions that could decide if you truly are from the Fens
- 3 Rowdy passengers force train cancellation
- 4 Wisbech to March light rail signalled in radical ‘levelling up’ bid by Mayor
- 5 Woman 'cannot afford to lose' over £3,000 through builder
- 6 Burglars led police to £170,000 cannabis factory
- 7 Man, 20, rapes woman as she slept, court told
- 8 Daughter sets fire to father's bedroom after food outrage
- 9 St Neots murder to feature in 24 Hours in Police Custody
- 10 Tributes to retired CEO who 'worked tirelessly' for town
“Another house here would be totally out of character.”
Another neighbour said the play area “is an essential part of the original permission. “Fencing off the land prevents children using it and they have taken away a safe amenity space during the school holiday.”
In 2009 the inspector who conducted the appeal noted that despite the council putting conditions on the original application they had failed to lay the site out for children’s use and failed to identify it as a play area in their policy documents.
But he insisted it was “clearly intended to be an open area for the benefit of the residents and was not just a gap reserved for later development”.
The inspector said: “I consider the site is an area of open space that is of public value and it does, in my view, add variety to the urban response of the street scene breaking up an otherwise built up frontage.”
He concluded developing the site “would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area”.
Rose Homes said no one was available to comment.