Additional reporting: Paul Brackley

Proposals for 58 retirement apartments in Cambourne have been rejected after a wide range of objections.

How the retirement homes would have looked Pictures: McCarthy Stone Retirement Living

McCarthy Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd applied to build the homes on the vacant plot next to the Holiday Inn Express off Back Lane, claiming the scheme would provide “much-needed” retirement accommodation.

But concerns over the scale and “box-like” design, the impact on the character of the area, the safety of pedestrians and the loss of the land for a potential community facility prompted South Cambridgeshire district councillors to refuse permission at their planning committee last Wednesday (12 August).

Hertford brewer McMullen was given planning permission to build a pub on the site next to Lambert Lake in 2018, when consent for the hotel was also granted. While the hotel is open and running, the pub has never been built.

This week McMullen’s managing director Heydon Mizon told the Cambridge Independent: “We don’t have any plans to build a pub currently.”

Cllr Helene Leeming (Lib Dem, Cambourne) told the committee the site was “one of the last unallocated parcels of land” in the town centre. She argued it was “a town that desperately wants more places where people can meet and spend leisure time”, adding: “Earlier plans to build a pub there were supported, but a residential block like this removes the opportunity for this piece of land to be available to the community. Cambourne needs more than just housing to thrive.”

Pointing out that 61 objections had been made to the scheme, she described the design of the proposed retirement apartments as “overcrowded, uninteresting and blocky”.

An urban design officer agreed, noting the four-storey building would rise to 46.5m, meaning the site would be “over-developed”.

“The scale and massing of the proposal is unacceptable and does not positively respond to the surrounding area. The proposed building is standard in shape and box-like in appearance. This is suitable for an urban environment, but not for a settlement like Cambourne,” the officer added.

How the retirement living apartments would have looked. Picture: McCarthy Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd

Cllr Michael Booth (Lib Dem, Cambourne) told the committee that the development would be “fundamentally unsafe”.

“The lack of provision of adequate crossings for elderly residents would inhibit their access to daily services without asking them to take risks on their own safety on a regular basis,” he said.

On resident told the council in a written objection that there were “still many unsold McCarthy Stone retirement flats in their other Cambourne developments” and said the was the “last available space” in the town centre, so the plans could have a “big impact on the community”.

Another written objection said: “The last thing Cambourne needs is another retirement development.”

Julie Ayer, speaking on behalf of Cambourne Town Council, said the design of the development “simply doesn’t fit”.

She said: “Cambourne is a vibrant, active community which embraces development and accepts and encourages change – but not at any cost. Unfortunately, the application before you today is not one of a quality that Cambourne Town Council feel they can support for several reasons. The design and form of this proposed development is poor and doesn’t enhance the character or have any social inclusion benefits within it.”

Anglian Water objected, saying the site is located within the catchment of the Uttons Drove Water Recycling Centre (WRC), which “currently lacks the capacity to accommodate the additional flows that would be generated”.

A tree officer was also concerned about plans to chop down trees around the lake.

NHS Cambridgeshire and Peterborough requested £46,343 to deliver additional healthcare floorspace to serve residents of the new development as there is “not sufficient existing primary healthcare capacity locally to address demand generated by the development”.

The council planning officer recommended rejecting the plans, and the committee unanimously did so.

For details of planning applications in your area, visit the Public Notice Portal

---

---