Fulbourn Neighbourhood Plan - submission version

Requested Change
It is requested that Draft FNP is amended to include a strategy to meet the identified affordable housing needs for those with a local connection and to ensure the delivery of an extension to the recreation ground and a new multi-purpose health centre, to achieve Planning Objectives No.4 and No.6.

Requested Change
In the absence of any mechanism for the delivery of the extension to the recreation ground, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Figures 8 and 19 and Policy FUL/14.
The site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance, and in these circumstances, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Figures 8 and 19 and Policy FUL/14.
It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.

Requested Change
The following changes are requested to Policy FUL/01
It is requested that the ‘locally important views’ designation at land off Home End (Ref. C8) is deleted from Bullet Point No.4 and from Figures 8 and 9.
It is requested that references to openness and appearance of fields that contribute to the setting of the ‘locally important views’ is deleted from Bullet Point No.5.
It is requested that reference to compliance with the Fulbourn Village Design Guide is deleted from Bullet Point No.6.

Requested Change
It is requested that Policy FUL/02 is deleted because it repeats development plan policies and national and local guidance on development outside village boundaries and design matters.

Requested Change
It is requested that Policy FUL/04 is deleted or revised.

Requested Change
It is requested that Policy FUL/07 and Policy FUL/11 are deleted.

Requested Change
It is requested that Section 10 is amended to include a clear commitment that all identified local affordable housing needs will be met by 2031, and to assess and allocate housing sites where affordable housing or a proportion of affordable housing can be delivered. If it is not possible to identify enough land to meet affordable housing needs because of policy constraints, then Section 10 should include a commitment to support the release of land from the Green Belt through the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan process to ensure the delivery of additional affordable housing in Fulbourn.

Requested Change
In the absence of any mechanism for the delivery of the extension to the recreation ground, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.
The site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance, and in these circumstances, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.
It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.

Requested Change
It is requested that Policy FUL/15 and the supporting text is amended to explain how the proposed multi-purpose health centre would be delivered, including an indication of sources of funding, potential suitable relocation sites, and potential suitable enabling residential sites. In the absence of any strategy or mechanism for the delivery of the multi-purpose health centre, it is requested that Policy FUL/15 is deleted.

REPRESENTATIONS TO REG.16 DRAFT SUBMISSION FULBOURN NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

Planning Objectives
OBJECT

Paragraph 5.6 of the Draft Submission Fulbourn Neighbourhood Plan (Draft FNP) identifies the planning objectives for the document. There are two planning objectives that are relevant to these representations for Hill Residential, which are as follows: 4. Have a mix of housing that is affordable, available, and suitable for all ages and appropriate to the village location; and 6. Improve amenities and community facilities.

As highlighted in the representations to Section 10: Housing, Draft FNP does not allocate any land for housing development, and the outstanding housing commitments for major development (at the Ida Darwin Hospital and land off Teversham Road sites) already define affordable housing obligations with only a small proportion specifically directed to those with a local connection to Fulbourn. As such, Draft FNP would have no influence on the delivery of affordable housing in Fulbourn because decisions about housing and affordable housing within the village have already been taken. Draft FNP does not seek to address the current identified needs for affordable housing for those with a local connection or the concerns raised by residents and employers about housing affordability. It is considered that Planning Objective No.4 is ineffective because affordable housing needs for those with a local connection will remain unmet during the plan period to 2031.

As highlighted in the representations to Policies FUL/14: Community Facilities and FUL/15: Healthcare Facilities, it is not clear whether there is landowner agreement for the proposed extension to the recreation ground, how or where the proposed new multi-purpose health centre would be provided, or where the community aspiration for additional allotments would be located. It is noted that the housing commitments at the Ida Darwin Hospital and land off Teversham Road sites already define planning obligations for health and community facilities, and include health service funding for Cherry Hinton Health Centre. Draft FNP contains no strategy to ensure the delivery or funding of these community facilities during the plan period to 2031, and as such Planning Objective No.6 is ineffective because the amenities and community facilities in the village would not be improved. Draft FNP ignores the fact that new recreation, health, and community facilities are typically delivered in conjunction with new development or funded in part by planning obligations derived from new development, but does not consider this approach to deliver new or improved facilities.

Requested Change

It is requested that Draft FNP is amended to include a strategy to meet the identified affordable housing needs for those with a local connection and to ensure the delivery of an extension to the recreation ground and a new multi-purpose health centre, to achieve Planning Objectives No.4 and No.6.



Figure 8: Neighbourhood Plan Policy Map Summary
OBJECT

Hill Residential owns the land east of Balsham Road in Fulbourn. A site location plan is enclosed with these representations. A part of this site is identified for a proposed extension to the recreation ground in Policy FUL/14 of Draft FNP. The land off Balsham Road has been promoted through the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan by Hill Residential for residential development including an extension to the recreation ground,

As set out in the representations to Policy FUL/14, the planning obligations for local sport and recreation facilities from the two committed housing developments in Fulbourn (at the Ida Darwin Hospital site and at land off Teversham Road) are already specified in the respective s106 Agreements, and do not relate to an extension of the recreation ground. There are no other large scale developments planned or proposed within Fulbourn, and the Draft FNP makes no allocations where planning obligations could be sought to contribute towards the proposed extension to the recreation ground. It is not explained how the proposed extension to the recreation ground would be delivered or funded in the absence of new development, and as such must be uncertain. There is no information provided in Policy FUL/14 and associated supporting text or any evidence document about the site selection process for the proposed extension to the recreation ground or details of discussions with the affected landowner, Hill Residential. There should be some evidence provided with Draft FNP that the land required for the proposed extension to the recreation has been discussed with the landowner and that there is at least an agreement in principle, but that is not the case. Therefore, the site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance. For these reasons, and as requested in Hill Residential’s representations to Policy FUL/14, the site allocation for the proposed extension to the recreation ground should be is deleted from Figures 8 and 19 and Policy FUL/14.

The option of funding and delivering an extension to the recreation ground with residential development was not considered or assessed in Draft FNP. It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.

Requested Change

In the absence of any mechanism for the delivery of the extension to the recreation ground, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Figures 8 and 19 and Policy FUL/14.

The site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance, and in these circumstances, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Figures 8 and 19 and Policy FUL/14.

It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.


Policy FUL/01: Protecting the Distinctiveness and Landscape Setting of Fulbourn
OBJECT

Policy FUL/01 seeks to protect the setting of Fulbourn, and refers to the rural setting of locally important views and the openness and appearance of fields. It also refers to the guidance provided in the Fulbourn Village Design Guide.

It is noted that the Green Belt and the Development Framework boundaries in the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 already limits the extent of development around the village, and severely restrict the possibility of any major new development coming forward in the future other than existing commitments which already have planning permission. The designated village amenity areas, local green space and important countryside frontage designations in the adopted Local Plan identify areas within the Development Framework boundary of the village where additional development of all types is prevented. It is considered that Policy FUL/01 and Draft FNP seeks to identify additional policy designations around all parts of the village to prevent any major development from coming forward or being allocated through the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan process.

Bullet Point No.5 of Policy FUL/01 seeks to avoid adverse impacts on the openness and appearance of fields that contribute to the setting of the ‘locally important views’. Hill Residential owns land east of Balsham Road, which could fall within the setting of the proposed ‘locally important view’ Ref. C8 (South eastwards from Home End across the Recreation Ground). There are two matters of concern with the proposed ‘locally important view’ Ref. C8, firstly there is no evidence to support such a designation in this location, and secondly this designation replicates development plan policy and national guidance that already controls development in this location.

Evidence Paper 1: Key Village Views, prepared to support Draft FNP, claims to provide the evidence for the ‘locally important views’ designation. However, it is noted that there are no photographs or illustrative material provided in Evidence Paper 1 to show those important views or to highlight their particular importance. The ‘view’ from off Home End and ‘locally important view’ Ref. C8 is of buildings, a paddock, a car park, and a sport and recreation ground including cricket and football pitches, a skateboard park, bowling green, tennis courts, and multi-use games area, an equipped play area, and a sports pavilion building. The ‘view’ from this location is dominated by the sport and recreation facilities, and there are no landmarks or features that make this ‘view’ particularly important to justify special protection. The land east of Balsham Road, owned by Hill Residential, is not visible from Home End because of the existing mature trees and hedgerows at the site boundary, which in any event would be retained as part of the promoted development. Paragraph 041 (Ref ID: 41) of the Planning Practice Guidance states that “It [neighbourhood plan policies] should be concise, precise and supported by appropriate evidence”. In the absence of any evidence the proposed ‘locally important view’ designation at Ref. C8 is not consistent with national guidance and does not meet Basic Condition (a). It is requested that the ‘locally important views’ designation from off Home End (Ref. C8) is deleted from Policy FUL/01 and from Figures 8 and 9.

The adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 includes policies on the Green Belt (Policy S/4) and Development Frameworks (Policy S/7). The adopted Policies Map defines the boundaries for both these designations. Policy S/4 refers to national Green Belt policy, which is set out in Section 13 of the NPPF. The principles of openness, preventing unrestricted sprawl and the coalescence of settlements, safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, and protecting the setting of settlements is already established in national Green Belt policy – see Paragraphs 137 and 138. Criteria (f) of Paragraph 16 of the NPPF states that plans should “serve a clear purpose, avoiding unnecessary duplication of policies that apply to a particular area (including policies in this Framework, where relevant)”. It is not necessary for Bullet Point No.5 of Policy FUL/01 to repeat development plan and national guidance on openness of the Green Belt or development plan policies restricting development outside village boundaries. Therefore, Policy FUL/01 is not consistent with national guidance and does not meet Basic Condition (a). It is requested that references to openness and appearance of fields that contribute to the setting of the ‘locally important views’ is deleted from Bullet Point No.5.

Bullet Point No.6 refers to the Fulbourn Village Design Guide. The Guide is adopted as a supplementary planning document, and provides design guidance for the village in the context of Policy HQ1: Design Principles of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. Therefore, any development proposals in Fulbourn would already be assessed against Policy HQ1 and the guidance in the Fulbourn Village Design Guide. Criteria (f) of Paragraph 16 of the NPPF seeks to avoid the duplication of policies, and therefore it is not necessary for Bullet Point No.6 of Policy FUL/01 to repeat existing development plan policy and adopted guidance, and does not meet Basic Condition (a). It is requested that reference to compliance with the Fulbourn Village Design Guide is deleted from Bullet Point No.6. Furthermore, the Fulbourn Village Design Guide was not informed by any landscape or visual evidence, and some of the terminology used in the document to describe parcels of land is not explained or robust. For example, Figure 17 of the Guide identifies the land off Home End as ‘fields with sensitive visual relationship with the village’ and as a ‘key outwards views from the village’. As set out above, the land off Home End is surrounded by buildings and a car park with sport and recreation facilities beyond, and as such the site is not sensitive and it has limited physical or visual relationship with the countryside and does not represent a ‘key’ outward view from the village. Therefore, the Fulbourn Village Design Guide does not provide the evidence to explain or justify the designations referred to in Policy FUL/01.

Requested Change

The following changes are requested to Policy FUL/01

It is requested that the ‘locally important views’ designation at land off Home End (Ref. C8) is deleted from Bullet Point No.4 and from Figures 8 and 9.

It is requested that references to openness and appearance of fields that contribute to the setting of the ‘locally important views’ is deleted from Bullet Point No.5.

It is requested that reference to compliance with the Fulbourn Village Design Guide is deleted from Bullet Point No.6.


Policy FUL/02: Development outside the Development Framework
OBJECT

As set out in the representations to Policy FUL/01, the Green Belt and the Development Framework boundary around Fulbourn are already defined in the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan, and the type and mix of uses permitted in these locations is already defined in development plan policy and national guidance. Policy HQ1 of the adopted Local Plan already adequately deals with design matters, and further guidance is provided in the National Design Guide and in Planning Practice Guidance. The Fulbourn Village Design Guide provides local guidance. Criteria (f) of Paragraph 16 of the NPPF states that plans should “serve a clear purpose, avoiding unnecessary duplication of policies that apply to a particular area (including policies in this Framework, where relevant)”. It is not necessary for Policy FUL/02 to repeat development plan policies or national and local guidance on development outside village boundaries or design matters. Therefore, Policy FUL/02 is not consistent with national guidance and does not meet Basic Condition (a).

Requested Change

It is requested that Policy FUL/02 is deleted because it repeats development plan policies and national and local guidance on development outside village boundaries and design matters.


Policy FUL/04: Protection and Enhancement of Natural Features
OBJECT

Policy FUL/04 seeks to protect and enhance natural features. However, the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan already contains policies relating to drainage, design, landscape character, and the natural environment; see for example Policy CC/8: Sustainable Drainage Systems; Policy HQ/1: Design Principles; Policy NH/2: Protecting and Enhancing Landscape Character; Policy NH/4: Biodiversity; Policy NH/5: Sites of Biodiversity or Geological Importance; Policy NH/6: Green Infrastructure; and Policy NH/7: Ancient Woodlands and Veteran Trees. Section 12 of the NPPF sets out national policy on design, and the National Design Guide and in Planning Practice Guidance provide further guidance on design matters. Section 14 of the NPPF includes national policy on flood risk and drainage matters. Section 15 of the NPPF sets out national policy to protect and enhance the natural environment.

Criteria (f) of Paragraph 16 of the NPPF states that plans should “serve a clear purpose, avoiding unnecessary duplication of policies that apply to a particular area (including policies in this Framework, where relevant)”. It is not necessary for Policy FUL/04 to repeat development plan policies and national guidance on drainage, design, landscape character, and natural environment related matters, and to do so does not meet Basic Condition (a). It is requested that Policy FUL/04 is deleted or revised.

Requested Change

It is requested that Policy FUL/04 is deleted or revised.


Policy FUL/07. Building and Landscape Design & Policy FUL/11: Housing Design Quality
OBJECT

Policy FUL/07 contains detailed design policy, which includes details relating to building heights, parking, and cycling arrangements, waste collection facilities, materials, and landscaping. Policy FUL/11 contains additional design policies for housing.

Policy HQ1 of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan already adequately deals with design matters relating to site context, materials, car parking, cycle parking, waste collection facilities, and landscaping. Policy H/8 of the Local Plan indicates an average net density of 30 dwellings per hectare for Minor Rural Centres, but subject to local circumstances. Policy CC/3 of the Local Plan sets requirements to reduce carbon emissions and the use of renewable energy. The adopted Fulbourn Village Design Guide already provides local design guidance. The adopted Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction SPD provides further guidance on carbon reduction, water conservation, and energy use for residential developments. There is further design guidance provided in the National Design Guide and in Planning Practice Guidance.

Criteria (f) of Paragraph 16 of the NPPF states that plans should “serve a clear purpose, avoiding unnecessary duplication of policies that apply to a particular area (including policies in this Framework, where relevant)”. It is not necessary for Policy FUL/07 and Policy FUL/11 to repeat development plan policies and national or local guidance on design matters. Therefore, Policy FUL/07 and Policy FUL/11 are not consistent with national guidance and does not meet Basic Condition (a), and as such should be deleted.

Requested Change

It is requested that Policy FUL/07 and Policy FUL/11 are deleted.


Section 10: Housing
OBJECT

Section 10 of Draft FNP relates to housing, and Policy FUL/09 relates to housing developments including local housing needs. In summary, Section 10 refers to housing needs data and committed housing developments in Fulbourn. It is noted that despite the current and longstanding need for affordable housing in the village, there are no housing allocations or strategy to deliver housing or affordable housing in Draft FNP.

South Cambridgeshire District Council’s ‘Housing Statistical Information Leaflet’ (December 2019) provides the most recent information on local affordable housing needs i.e. those with a local connection to villages in the District, including Fulbourn, Teversham and Great Wilbraham – see https://www.scambs.gov.uk/media/18316/affordable-housing-housing-statistical-information-leaflet-december-2019.pdf. The current, immediate, local housing needs for these three villages is as follows: Fulbourn – 65; Teversham – 21; and Great Wilbraham – 4. The Affordable Housing Needs Survey carried out by ACRE in December 2015 is out of date. The affordable housing needs of Teversham and Great Wilbraham could be met in Fulbourn, since these two villages are referred to in local connection criteria for recent affordable housing planning obligations. The current local affordable housing need should be stated as 90 dwellings. It should be noted that this current need does not consider future needs that are likely to arise during the plan period and these also need to be planned for.
Paragraph 10.3 refers to the number of dwellings to be provided at three existing housing commitments, and it is assumed that affordable housing needs would be met from these developments. However, as set out below, that is not the case. The details of the three committed housing commitments are as follows:
• App Ref. S/3396/17/FL: A rural exception housing scheme off Balsham Road for 14 affordable dwellings. The s106 Agreement includes a planning obligation requiring the affordable housing to be occupied by those that can demonstrate a local connection to Fulbourn. The development was completed in 2019, occupied by households with a local connection, and contributed towards reducing the affordable housing needs of the village.
• App Ref. S/0202/17/OL: An application for 110 dwellings off Teversham Road, with 30% affordable housing which equates to 33 affordable dwellings. The s106 Agreement includes an affordable housing obligation requiring the first 8 affordable dwellings only to be offered to those that can demonstrate a local connection, with the remainder of the affordable housing available for district-wide housing needs.
• S/0670/17/OL: An application for 203 dwellings at the former Ida Darwin Hospital site, with 40% affordable housing which equates to 81 dwellings. The s106 Agreement does not include any obligations specifying that affordable housing must be offered to those with a local connection, and therefore the affordable housing is available for district-wide needs.

Therefore, the Balsham Road site is occupied so is no longer available for local households in affordable housing need, a small proportion of the Teversham Road development is available for current local housing needs, and none of the Ida Darwin Hospital development will be specifically allocated to meet local housing needs. It is acknowledged that those with a local connection to Fulbourn, Teversham and Great Wilbraham might apply for an affordable dwelling at the Teversham Road and Ida Darwin Hospital developments, but it is likely that most affordable dwellings provided at these developments will be allocated to meet district-wide housing needs. The affordable housing needs of 8 households with a local connection to Fulbourn would be met from these two developments, and the affordable housing needs of some others with a local connection might also be met, but it is very likely that a substantial proportion of current local housing needs will remain unmet. It is inevitable that additional affordable housing needs will arise soon, from within Fulbourn, Teversham and Great Wilbraham and across the district. A fundamental role of the FNP must be to plan for those affordable housing needs to be met.

As set out elsewhere in these representations, there are existing development plan policies and national designations that limit the amount of new housing that can be provided within and on the edge of Fulbourn e.g. Green Belt, Development Frameworks, Conservation Area, Listed Buildings, Local Green Space, Protected Village Amenity Area, Important Countryside Gap etc, and Draft FNP seeks to create additional restrictive policy designations e.g. ‘locally important views’. Any rural exception housing scheme is still required to address impacts on Green Belt openness and satisfy all other policy designations, and is reliant on a willing landowner to gift land for this purpose. It is likely that any redevelopment or infill development opportunities within Fulbourn would be small scale and fall below the threshold where affordable housing is required. In these circumstances, it is not clear how, where or when the current identified affordable housing needs of the village will be met, and Draft FNP takes no action to ensure that affordable housing needs are met. It is considered that the problems and consequences associated with not providing enough affordable housing in Fulbourn – as highlighted in Paragraphs 10.18 to 10.20 of Draft FNP - will continue for the foreseeable future.

Paragraph 8 of the NPPF identifies the three strands of sustainable development, and the social objective includes meeting housing needs. Paragraph 15 expects plans to provide a framework for addressing housing needs. Paragraph 60 sets out the Government’s objective to boost significantly the supply of housing. Paragraph 62 expects planning policies to reflect the needs for different types of housing including affordable housing. As explained above, the affordable housing needs of Fulbourn are known, but Draft FNP contains no allocations or policies to ensure the delivery of additional affordable housing. Therefore, Section 10 is inconsistent with national guidance and so does not meet Basic Condition (a), and would not achieve sustainable development because affordable housing needs would remain unmet and so does not meet Basic Condition (d).

Requested Change

It is requested that Section 10 is amended to include a clear commitment that all identified local affordable housing needs will be met by 2031, and to assess and allocate housing sites where affordable housing or a proportion of affordable housing can be delivered. If it is not possible to identify enough land to meet affordable housing needs because of policy constraints, then Section 10 should include a commitment to support the release of land from the Green Belt through the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan process to ensure the delivery of additional affordable housing in Fulbourn.


Policy FUL/14: Community Facilities
OBJECT

Policy FUL/14 allocates land for an extension to the recreation ground, which is identified on Figures 8 and 19. The rationale for seeking an extension to the recreation ground is explained in Paragraph 12.5. Hill Residential own the land for the proposed extension to the recreation ground.
Firstly, it is noted that some improvements to community facilities will be delivered soon via planning obligations from the committed developments at the Ida Darwin Hospital site and at land of Teversham Road. The s106 Agreement for the Ida Darwin Hospital site includes planning obligations relating to open space and play areas to be provided on site, but there are no obligations relating to sport and recreation facilities. The s106 Agreement for the land off Teversham Road development includes a sports space contribution for the refurbishment or extension of the sports pavilion, but no obligations relating to land for sport and recreation facilities. There are no other large scale developments planned or proposed within Fulbourn, and the Draft FNP makes no allocations where planning obligations could be sought to contribute towards the proposed extension to the recreation ground. Policy FUL/14 does not explain how the proposed extension to the recreation ground would be delivered or funded in the absence of new development. Paragraph 93 of the NPPF expects planning policies to support the delivery of the social, recreational, and cultural facilities and services the community needs. The delivery of the proposed extension to the recreation ground must be uncertain in the absence of a delivery mechanism. For this reason, Policy FUL/14 is inconsistent with national guidance and so does not meet Basic Condition (a). In the absence of any mechanism for the delivery of the extension to the recreation ground, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.

Secondly, there is no information provided in Policy FUL/14 and associated supporting text or any evidence document about the site selection process for the proposed extension to the recreation ground or details of discussions with the affected landowner. Paragraph 042 (Ref ID: 41) of the Planning Practice Guidance allows a neighbourhood plan to allocate sites for development, but it also states that “A qualifying body should carry out an appraisal of options and an assessment of individual sites against clearly identified criteria”. Paragraph 048 deals with consultation requirements for neighbourhood plans, and states in part that “…Other public bodies, landowners and the development industry should, as necessary and appropriate be involved in preparing a draft neighbourhood plan or Order. By doing this qualifying bodies will be better placed to produce plans that provide for sustainable development which benefits the local community whilst avoiding placing unrealistic pressures on the cost and deliverability of that development”. There should be some evidence provided with Draft FNP that the land required for the proposed extension to the recreation has been discussed with the landowner and that there is at least an agreement in principle, but that is not the case. Therefore, the site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance, and so do not meet Basic Condition (a). In these circumstances, it is requested that the site allocation for the proposed extension to the recreation ground is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.

Hill Residential owns the land for the proposed extension to the recreation ground. Hill Residential’s call for sites submission and representations to the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan process did propose an extension to the recreation ground in conjunction with residential development. The option of funding and delivering an extension to the recreation ground with residential development was not considered or assessed in Draft FNP.

It is very likely that the proposed extension to the recreation ground will remain an undelivered aspiration without landowner support or a planning obligation from associated residential development. It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.

Requested Change

In the absence of any mechanism for the delivery of the extension to the recreation ground, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.
The site selection and consultation processes for the proposed allocation for an extension to the recreation ground were not consistent with national guidance, and in these circumstances, it is requested that this site allocation is deleted from Policy FUL/14 and from Figures 8 and 19.
It is requested that the proposed extension to the recreation ground is discussed with Hill Residential to explore how it could be delivered, including in conjunction with residential development.


Policy FUL/15: Healthcare Facilities
OBJECT

Policy FUL/15 relates to existing and future healthcare facilities in the village, and seeks to support additional health related facilities either on the site of the existing health centre or at another location within the village. Paragraphs 12.7 and 12.8 seeks to explain the rationale for additional health facilities, and refers to enabling residential development to support the delivery of additional facilities. The aspiration for a new health centre for the village has existed for several years.
It is noted that some improvements to community facilities will be delivered soon via planning obligations from the proposed developments at the Ida Darwin Hospital site and at land off Teversham Road. The s106 Agreements for both these developments include planning obligations towards the health services at Cherry Hinton Health Centre, but not for the Fulbourn Health Centre. There are no other large scale developments planned or proposed within Fulbourn, and the Draft FNP makes no allocations for residential development where planning obligations could be sought to contribute towards additional health facilities.

It is not clear whether any local health service or provider has identified a need for additional or new health facilities in Fulbourn and has a strategy to deliver such a facility; recent planning obligations have been directed to Cherry Hinton Health Centre. It is not clear whether funding is available to support the delivery of the proposed new multi-purpose health centre, either on the existing site or elsewhere within the village. If a new site is required, it is not clear whether land or a suitable site is available. There are no significant previously developed land opportunities available in the village, existing development plan policies and national designations limit development opportunities outside the village boundary e.g. Green Belt and Development Frameworks, and Draft FNP seeks to create additional restrictive policy designations e.g. ‘locally important views’. Furthermore, Draft FNP makes no allocations for residential development that might enable the delivery of a multi-purpose health centre. If there is no strategy or mechanism for the provision of a new multi-purpose health centre in the village it is unlikely that it would be delivered, and as such will remain an aspiration only.

Paragraph 93 of the NPPF expects planning policies to support the delivery of community facilities including health facilities and the delivery of health strategies. As set out above, the delivery of the proposed multi-purpose health centre is uncertain. For this reason, Policy FUL/15 is inconsistent with national guidance and so does not meet Basic Condition (a). Therefore, in the absence of any strategy or mechanism for the delivery of the multi-purpose health centre, including land for a new building or land for enabling residential development, it is requested that Policy FUL/15 is deleted.
Draft FNP does not consider the option of a multi-purpose health centre being delivered in conjunction with additional residential development. For example, if allocated for residential development the land owned by Hill Residential to the east of Balsham Road could make planning contributions towards additional health facilities in the village.

Requested Change

It is requested that Policy FUL/15 and the supporting text is amended to explain how the proposed multi-purpose health centre would be delivered, including an indication of sources of funding, potential suitable relocation sites, and potential suitable enabling residential sites. In the absence of any strategy or mechanism for the delivery of the multi-purpose health centre, it is requested that Policy FUL/15 is deleted.