Decision

Councillor William Scantlebury recused himself from taking part in the consideration of this application and left the Council Chamber for the duration of this planning application.

By unanimous vote in favour of the officer recommendation of refusal, the Committee refused the application for the following reasons:

·       The application site lies outside the defined development framework of Hardwick and within the open countryside. The proposal would introduce residential development on an unallocated site beyond the village framework, resulting in an urbanising encroachment that would harm the rural character and appearance of the countryside and erode the settlement's established edge.

No exceptional circumstances or site-specific justification have been demonstrated to support residential development in this countryside location. The proposal would therefore conflict with the spatial strategy of the development plan, which seeks to direct growth to sustainable locations, and would undermine the plan-led distribution of development. Page 104 Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to Policies S/2, S/3, S/4, S/5, HQ/1 and NH/2 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 and the National Planning Policy Framework's objectives for protecting the countryside and achieving sustainable patterns of development.

·       The application site lies outside the defined development framework of Hardwick and within the countryside. The proposal comprises residential development that has not been demonstrated to accord with the circumstances in which development outside settlements may be supported under Policy S5 of the NPPF (2026). In particular, the site has not been demonstrated to represent a sustainable location for development and there is no identified unmet housing need to justify the release of the site, having regard to the Council's ability to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.

The proposal would therefore constitute unjustified residential development in the countryside, contrary to the plan-led spatial strategy which directs development to sustainable locations. Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to Policies S/2, S/3 and S/6 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 and Policies S3, S4, S5 and L2 of the NPPF (2026).

·       The proposal fails to successfully integrate surface water mitigation measures within the wider design, thus failing to demonstrate that potential onsite flooding can be adequately mitigated ensuring the development would be safe from flooding. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to policies CC/7, CC/8 and CC/9 of the Local Plan and policy CC3, and F7 of the NPPF (2026); and

·       Delegated authority to officers to make minor amendments to the reasons for refusal as drafted in the officer’s report; and

·       Delegated authority to the Director of Planning in the event that an appeal is lodged against the decision to refuse this application, to allow officers to negotiate and complete the Planning Obligations set out in the officer’s report and the Amendment Sheet; and

·       Delegated Authority to the Director of Planning in the event an appeal is validated by the Planning Inspectorate prior to the decision being issued that officers are authorised to defend the appeal on the basis of the reasons for refusal set out in the officer’s report.