Archaeology ‘must be considered’ alongside homes plan for site in Doddington

Archaeological investigations should be carried out before any building takes place if planning permission is granted for nine homes on a village site.

David Whyatt for Construct Reason Ltd has applied to build the homes on land south of 28 to 29 Juniper Close in Doddington. The application also seeks a chance of use of land for domestic purposes at 9 Sutton Way.

The application submitted to Fenland District Council this week has garnered a number of comments from locals who are unhappy with the plans.

A design and access statement in support of the proposals explains the aim is to build seven three-bedroom bungalows and two two-bedroom bungalows on the site, described by objections as “meadow land”.

Cambridgeshire Archaeology, one of the statutory consultees, said they had no objections to the homes being built on the site.

However, they did point out that the proposed site “lies in an area of high archaeological potential”.

They commented: “Within the northern portion of the proposed development is the clear remains of medieval ridge and furrow visible using lidar imagery.

“Just to the west of the proposed development is the Grade II listed Doddington Windmill an early 19th century example. Just to the north of the proposed development, archaeological evaluations found a number of ditches containing abraded Roman Pot.”

The comment continues: “Whilst we do not object to development from proceeding in this location, we consider that the site should be subject to a programme of archaeological investigation secured through the inclusion of a negative condition.”

They want to ensure that no demolition will be started until a proper programme of archaeological evaluation has been completed to safeguard any archaeological assets within the site’s boundary.

The design and access statement explains the site has already been subject to a number of previous applications and that this latest proposal seeks to address concerns raised in the most recent which was for 14 dwellings.

It says: “The scheme has been substantially revised to comply with LP16 by being respectful to the character of the area and making best use of the available site whilst respecting the existing trees and heritage assets. The proposal has increased the amount of green space, reduced the number of dwellings from 14 to 9 (a 36% reduction) and increased the distances between residential development and the adjacent Grade II Listed Mill.

“Additional existing trees have been retained on the revised scheme, further enhancing the character of the site and maintaining the open character to the northern end of the site.”

The statement concludes: “The proposed development will be of a good architectural quality and has been carefully thought out to provide a quality development that will enhance the character of the immediate area whilst respecting the existing dwellings and residents.

“The scheme has been carefully revised and adapted to take on board comments raised in the previous application under F/YR23/0500/F, with the density and layout being carefully addressed.

“The proposed development will be sympathetic to the existing scale and character and additional landscaping will be used to enhance the appearance of the proposal.”

However, a number of residents have already raised objections including flooding concerns, fears of the road infrastructure, lack of sewer capacity, and the negative impact on wildlife and the area.

One person said: “This area of meadow land has free roaming wildlife which is exactly what meadows in villages should have.

“The area of meadow floods for two months of the year and our property also has run off of water. Additional concrete in the ground will increase the excess water flow.

“The very small and narrow road of Wood Lane twice per day is already packed from parked vehicles mostly for parents of the school and tractors and other agricultural vehicles struggle to squeeze by.

“This road really is a track for the farms and the Anglian Water site. The erecting of these dwellings will negatively affect the area of beauty and harm the amount of wildlife. This estate of dwellings must not be placed in this area.”