Convenience store plan taken to appeal
Market Hill - Credit: Archant
DEVELOPERS who saw plans to build a convenience store turned down by a council are appealing the decision.
The Manhattan Corporation saw its scheme, which would see a store and flats built on the site of the old cattle market, on the corner of Market Hill, turned down by North Herts District Council’s planning committee last year.
However an appeal has been submitted, and is set to be heard next week.
The convenience store plans were opposed by Royston Town Council, as well as some local residents and businesses.
Campaigner Clive Porter, who helped collect a petition of 500 signatures against the scheme, said: “The current plan still represents a gross over development of an extremely important site that lies at the centre of the southern gateway to a historic town, and is surrounded by a profusion of heritage buildings from various periods of our past.
“If approved, the structure would become a crass, uncharacteristic blot on the surrounding landscape, towering above the adjacent 19th century Corn Exchange, which is, after the parish church, probably the most important heritage building in Royston.”
Mr Porter also expressed concerns about the impact the store would have on other businesses in the vicinity.
Most Read
- 1 Three dogs including pregnant Jack Russell stolen from Wimpole kennels
- 2 Family of patient who died from drug overdose speak out after inquest
- 3 Strictly for Charity fundraising event gets people's toes tapping for Home-Start
- 4 Platinum Jubilee: Hertfordshire's royal visits in pictures
- 5 MP visits Royston lab to learn about local success story
- 6 Extra trains to Tottenham Hotspur Stadium for Betfred Challenge Cup final
- 7 Royston Photographic Society announces latest competition winners
- 8 Council confirms first monkeypox case in Hertfordshire
- 9 Explained: What the cost of living support package means for you
- 10 Stevenage's Lister Hospital changes maternity visiting guidance
Colin Blundell, director of the Manhattan Corporation, declined to comment on the appeal.