Planning inspector rejects plan for homes, farm shop and commercial units in Meldreth

A planning inspector has turned down plans for new homes on the edge of Meldreth as it would “harm” its rural character.

Seven new homes, a replacement farm shop and new commercial units were proposed under redevelopment plans for Fieldgate Nurseries, in Station Road.

South Cambridgeshire District Council rejected the application last year, raising concerns over the “unsustainable location”.

The council said: “Future occupants would not have convenient and safe access by all modes to the nearest villages and wider areas due to the lack of safe pedestrian crossings to the villages and public transport modes.”

But Fieldgate Nurseries Ltd argued the site is well connected to Meldreth and Melbourn and appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.

It said: “While the site is outside the development framework of Meldreth and Melbourn, it is important to recognise that this does not inherently render the location unsustainable.

“The proposed development is in close proximity to existing infrastructure, such as established pedestrian paths and transport links (such as bus services and railway links) that connect the site to local facilities as well as larger neighbouring settlements (such as Cambridge and Royston).

“This proximity to existing facilities would ensure that future occupants have safe and convenient access to nearby villages and public transport nodes.

“Furthermore, the development aligns with the broader objectives of the local plan to promote sustainable growth by enhancing underutilised sites and improving infrastructure where necessary.”

But a planning inspector has dismissed the appeal, noting that while some of the new residents may walk or use the bus, they would “rely heavily on private motor vehicles to access employment, retail and other necessary day-to-day services and facilities further afield”.

The increase in the number of trips to and from the site “would not be insignificant” and “would cause some environmental harm”, the inspector said, adding: “The proposal would introduce development of a much greater scale and intensification of built form that would be at harmful odds with the site’s rural low-key character and appearance and the visual interests of its immediate surroundings.

“The proposal would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area and would conflict with [planning policies] insofar as they seek to protect and enhance the character of the local urban and rural area and respond to the context of the wider landscape.”