By affirmation, the Planning Committee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development. Subject to the final wording being agreed with the Committee Chair and Vice-Chair, Members agreed the reasons for refusal as being the height, scale, massing and character of the site, the lack of open space, concern about the location of the affordable housing, and concern about flooding.
By eight votes to two, the Planning cttee refused the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development. Members agreed that the refusal should be based on
1. The failure to demonstrate that Comberton can sustain an additional convenience food store and that it would not impact on the viability of other convenience stores providing a similar offering in the village: the proposal is therefore contrary to policies E/21 (Retail hierarchy) and E/22 (Applications for new retail development) of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018; and
2. A significant adverse impact on highway safety because of the proposed store’s location opposite Comberton Village College and the lack of a safe crossing point.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to
detailed in Appendix 1 to the report from the Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development; and
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to
1. The prior completion of a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring
(a) A contribution of £8,718.84 towards the improvement of library services
(b) a contribution of £30,300 to provide an additional 15.15 square metres of floorspace to accommodate the additional 221 anticipated population increase
(c) the financial contributions listed in an appendix to the report
(d) the affordable housing thereby secured being for those with a connection to Toft and Comberton only, subject to statutory exceptions and “staircasing” provisions
2. The Conditions and Informatives referred to in the report; and
3. It being referred to the Secretary of State in advance of the decision being issued as the proposal represents a significant departure from the Local Plan and a major development on Green Belt land.
The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee noted that this application had been withdrawn.
The Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities), subject to it being advertised as a Departure from the Development Plan and to no adverse material comments being received as a result. Planning Consent would be subject to a number of safeguarding Conditions relating to, among other things, the hours of construction.
Upon the Chairman’s casting vote, the Committee refused the application for the reasons set out in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and New Communities).
The Committee gave officers delegated powers to approve the application subject to the provision of a minimum of 50 new car parking spaces on site, and subject to the Conditions referred to in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities).
The Committee approved the application contrary to the recommendation in the report from the Corporate Manager (Planning and Sustainable Communities). Members agreed the reasons for approval as being the proposal’s compliance with Policies HG/1 and DP/2 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework 2007.
Minded to approve as report, the application being referred to the Secretary of State as a Departure from the Development Plan.
Refused as report.
Refused