Manea council calls for S106 on five‑home developments

Manea’s parish council says rapid housing growth is delivering “no community benefit” because Fenland District Council is failing to secure enough developer contributions – and is now demanding that funding be sought from schemes of five homes or more.

In a detailed statement, Manea Parish Council chair, Cllr Ben Bonos, warns that Fenland secures the lowest level of developer contributions in Cambridgeshire, despite the village expanding quickly.

He argues that new national guidance introduced in February is clear that councils should now consider developments of five properties or more eligible for contributions, and says Manea Council formally notified Fenland of its intention to pursue this back in March.

Manea Parish Council chair, Cllr Ben Bonos posted this graphic highlighting some of the sites that currently have planning permission in the village without developers having to contribute to the village infra-structure. (Image: Cllr Ben Bonos)

Parish councillors say their request for contributions was “not taken seriously” at last week’s planning committee meeting, where it was suggested the parish council had no right to ask for funding.

Cllr Bonos insists that without money from developers, the village cannot update or extend ageing community buildings to meet growing demand, as renovation and building costs are too high to be met from council tax alone.

Cllr Bonos says the five‑property threshold is crucial for a rural community like Manea, where a series of small schemes are coming forward rather than large estates.

He lists applications at various stages for seven developments of nine homes, one of eight, two of seven and three of five – a total of around 100 new properties.

He said: "One hundred new properties, no joined up thinking, no coherent utility/infrastructure impact planning and no community benefit either via funding or affordable housing.

"At least seven developments specifically designed to avoid giving anything back to our community."

Cllr Bonos adds: “If you agree that this should change, please like and share."

He is urging residents to get involved in the conversation so pressure can be put on Fenland to revise its approach.

The dispute has erupted over a specific housing development in the village but reflects a wider row about Section 106 (S106) funding, which is intended to help pay for local infrastructure and community projects linked to new development.

Parish councillors say they are seeking contributions towards a new community pavilion, which has been identified through consultation as the most‑supported change residents want to see in Manea, but feel they are being blocked by district‑level policy that only looks to secure S106 money from schemes of 10 homes or more.

Fenland District Council’s planning committee defended its stance, saying current policy and national planning guidance do not allow it to seek S106 or affordable housing contributions from developments of fewer than 10 dwellings, and warning that demanding money from smaller schemes would be unlikely to stand up if challenged.

Local MP Steve Barclay has also waded into the fray and, as reported in the Cambs Times last week, accused Fenland District Council of being a 'soft touch' in its approach to Section 106 agreements.