A new Lidl store and 74 homes are to be built on the old British Sugar site at Sugar Way after being granted planning permission.
Planning application was original refused in December 2018, primarily on the basis that the 15 per cent affordable housing being proposed by the developers was not sufficient, while there were concerns the new store would adversely affect existing businesses at the Valley Park Centre, anchored by Budgens.
Worries were also voiced about the loss of the main British Sugar building which is due to be demolished.
The 1970s building had been given a grade two listing in February, but this was recently dropped.
At Tuesday’s Peterborough City Council planning meeting head of development and construction Nick Harding said: “Since the original refusal the developers have come back with a revised offer of 30 per cent affordable housing.
“In all other respects, however, the application is exactly as it was when it was refused last year.”
Cllr Andy Coles, objecting, said: “If this application is given the go ahead we can be certain that many of the proposed 74 houses will have children moving into the area, but where are they supposed to go to school?
“The lack of education facilities in this area will cause serious concerns for this council when these families move in.”
Edward Vann, owner of the local Budgens, said: “I understand that Lidl see themselves as fair competition, but I can tell you now that if that store is built opposite the centre then I will have no option but to close my business with the loss of employment for my staff and my family. We simply won’t be able to compete.”
However, local resident Anne Cook said: “Lidl will be considerably cheaper than Budgens, so I welcome it.”
Committee member Cllr Christian Hogg said: “It seems to me the only real reason we refused this application first time around was because of the low ratio of affordable housing at just 15 per cent.
“The developers have reconsidered and addressed that, raising it to 30 per cent affordable housing. This is much needed throughout the city and in this area.
“Therefore, I can’t see any reason why we shouldn’t approve this application.”
The application was unanimously approved by the committee.