Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Great Shelford Village Charity agrees that specialist housing should be at sustainable sites with access to services and facilities. We support plans to increase numbers of accessible/adaptable homes (e.g. via application of M4(2) building standards).

P214-215, Policy S/CBC clauses 14, 17 and 18 – we are broadly supportive of plans to expand the CBC, recognising the local employment and wider medical research benefits that this will bring. However, almshouses, open space, allotments and a community garden owned and managed by Great Shelford Village Charity offer direct views north across arable fields and Nine Wells Local Nature Reserve to the CBC so we are concerned about the visual impact of development at the southern fringe. The cumulative breadth, density and height of buildings at the CBC will increasingly present a ‘concrete wall’ to the south, which no amount of dense planting will be able to soften. Greater consideration needs to be given to ‘fingers’ of trees and other plants penetrating into and through the site from the southern fringe to break up the visual and environmental impact of this concrete wall.

P214, Policy S/CBC 14a – greater specificity should be given to the phrase “appropriate transitions in height, scale and landscaping”. Information in ‘Appendix 1 Skyline and tall buildings guidance’ does not alleviate these concerns, supporting the tallest of all buildings within Greater Cambridge on the Addenbrooke’s Campus (Appendix 1, para 5.6) and validating the use of building height as a status symbol. This appears contradictory given that Appendix 1 simultaneously notes that consideration should be given to the impact of tall buildings on long-distance views from the greenbelt, from high vantage points and strategic views towards Cambridge (e.g. Little Trees Hill and the wider Gog Magog Hills) and approach routes.

P214, Policy S/CBC clause 16c – Great Shelford Village Charity is concerned that a lack of building height restriction will encourage taller and taller buildings over time, reduce views towards the City from the south and from key viewpoints, and overshadow/dominate the soft edge and greenbelt to the south.

P215, Policy S/CBC clause 17d – Great Shelford Village Charity supports the provision of a vegetated landscape buffer within the Strategic Enhancement Area to the south of the campus (S/SEA/CBC). This will be key to securing Policy S/CBC clause 18a.

P462, Policy BG/GI clause 5(13) – as a provider of allotments and community gardens at More’s Meadow in Gt Shelford, Great Shelford Village Charity strongly supports the inclusion of allotments and community gardens as an identified priority for enhancing strategic green infrastructure across Greater Cambridge.

Great Shelford Village Charity is broadly supportive of this policy but notes that the open space designation at its own open space at More’s Meadow, Gt Shelford (site ref. ZA 032) is in the wrong place. The designation incorrectly applies to land which has been developed since 2021 by Great Shelford Village Charity as affordable almshouses and should instead be immediately to the NW of this on land allocated to allotments and a community garden. Please amend the designation accordingly.

Great Shelford Village Charity is broadly supportive of this policy.

Great Shelford Village Charity is a charitable almshouse association providing exclusively affordable housing at one site in Gt Shelford. As such, it is unclear whether and how this policy would apply to us. If it is applicable to our situation, it would be a strong deterrent to the Charity increasing its number of almshouse units in the future. Below, we explain why almshouse charities should be treated fundamentally differently to developers and, therefore, exempt from the obligations set out in this policy.

It is deeply regrettable that the draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan makes no express provision whatsoever for housing provided by charities, and in particular almshouse charities. Whilst almshouse charities were historically a form of charitable provision of accommodation for the poor elderly, in the 21st Century almshouse charities provide accommodation for financially disadvantaged people of all ages, including families. Such charities provide a significant number of units of accommodation, and many charities would wish to increase their provision when they are able to do so. Great Shelford Village Charity provides a total of 53 affordable houses in Great Shelford, with our most recent 21 units being completed within the last 5 years. Charities in other villages, such as Girton, provide similar or greater numbers. Cumulatively, the charities’ contribution to affordable housing is not insignificant.

It is imperative that these properties continue to provide accommodation to those in need. There is no question of the houses being subject to a right to buy or otherwise ceasing to be available. The administration of the provision is largely provided by volunteers, albeit with professional assistance, and the trustees of such charities are bound to act in the best interests of the charities they oversee and are the subject of Charity Commission oversight.

Demands for planning obligations or CIL contributions seek the use of charitable funds in a manner which serves to potentially benefit people who would have no entitlement to benefit individually from those funds. Furthermore, debates and disputes regarding such demands may often require expert input and a consequent unnecessary use of charity funds.

It is wholly inappropriate to bundle charitable providers with developers generally, not least due to those matters set out above and the absence of any question of profit. We request an express expectation that charities will not be required to meet the demands which would normally be made of commercial developers. In turn, this would potentially increase the amount of charity funds remaining available for the provision of affordable housing in the long term.

Great Shelford Village Charity strongly supports the principle of affordable housing. However, as a charitable almshouse association providing exclusively affordable housing at one site in Gt Shelford, it is unclear whether and how this policy would apply to us. If it is applicable to our situation, it would be a strong deterrent to the Charity increasing its number of almshouse units in the future. Below, we explain why almshouse charities should be treated fundamentally differently to developers and, therefore, exempt from obligations set out in this policy.

It is deeply regrettable that the draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan makes no express provision whatsoever for housing provided by charities, and in particular almshouse charities. Whilst almshouse charities were historically a form of charitable provision of accommodation for the poor elderly, in the 21st Century almshouse charities provide accommodation for financially disadvantaged people of all ages, including families. Such charities provide a significant number of units of accommodation, and many charities would wish to increase their provision when they are able to do so. Great Shelford Village Charity provides a total of 53 affordable houses in Great Shelford, with our most recent 21 units being completed within the last 5 years. Charities in other villages, such as Girton, provide similar or greater numbers. Cumulatively, the charities’ contribution to affordable housing is not insignificant.

It is imperative that these properties continue to provide accommodation to those in need. There is no question of the houses being subject to a right to buy or otherwise ceasing to be available. The administration of the provision is largely provided by volunteers, albeit with professional assistance, and the trustees of such charities are bound to act in the best interests of the charities they oversee and are the subject of Charity Commission oversight.

It is wholly inappropriate to bundle charitable providers with developers generally, not least due to the absence of any question of profit. We request an express expectation that charities will not be required to meet the demands which would normally be made of commercial developers. Without such clarity, debates and disputes regarding such demands which may require expensive expert input would result in an unnecessary use of charity funds and potentially decrease the amount of remaining charity funds available for the provision of affordable housing in the long term.

Great Shelford Village Charity objects to clauses 1 and 4. These clauses do not consider the specific circumstances of charitable almshouse associations in providing affordable housing. For example:
• clause 1b – our constitution determines our tenure: our almshouse residents are not tenants but occupants who pay a monthly maintenance charge which, in our case, is set at 50% below the market rate
• clause 4a – our constitution determines our ‘local area’, which extends beyond the parish in which our scheme is located and into neighbouring parishes
• clause 4b – our constitution requires that local connection criteria are retained throughout the lifetime of a property.

More broadly though, it is deeply regrettable that the draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan makes no express provision whatsoever for housing provided by charities, and in particular almshouse charities. Whilst almshouse charities were historically a form of charitable provision of accommodation for the poor elderly, in the 21st Century almshouse charities provide accommodation for financially disadvantaged people of all ages, including families. Such charities provide a significant number of units of accommodation, and many charities would wish to increase their provision when they are able to do so. Great Shelford Village Charity provides a total of 53 affordable houses in Great Shelford, with our most recent 21 units being completed within the last 5 years. Charities in other villages, such as Girton, provide similar or greater numbers. Cumulatively, the charities’ contribution to affordable housing is not insignificant.

It is imperative that these properties continue to provide accommodation to those in need. There is no question of the houses being subject to a right to buy or otherwise ceasing to be available. The administration of the provision is largely provided by volunteers, albeit with professional assistance, and the trustees of such charities are bound to act in the best interests of the charities they oversee and are the subject of Charity Commission oversight.

In such circumstances a requirement to provide professional reports of ‘need’ in order to advance rural exception site applications demands the use of charity funds to demonstrate something of which the trustees have already satisfied themselves fully by reason of their responsibilities as such and in which they have no personal financial interest. Debates and disputes regarding such requirements may often require expert input and a consequent unnecessary use of charity funds.

It is wholly inappropriate to bundle charitable providers with developers generally, not least due to those matters set out above and the absence of any question of profit. We request an express expectation that charities will not be required to meet the demands which would normally be made of commercial developers. In turn, this would potentially increase the amount of charity funds remaining available for the provision of affordable housing in the long term.

Great Shelford Village Charity cannot provide the housing mix as set out in this policy. We seek clarification that, as a charitable almshouse association, we – and organisations like us – would be encompassed by exceptions set out in clause 2 and permitted to deviate from the type and mix of housing set out in clauses 1, 3 and 4. There is an opportunity to clarify this in paras 9.36 and 9.38.

It is deeply regrettable that the draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan makes no express provision whatsoever for housing provided by charities, and in particular almshouse charities. Whilst almshouse charities were historically a form of charitable provision of accommodation for the poor elderly, in the 21st Century almshouse charities provide accommodation for financially disadvantaged people of all ages, including families. Such charities provide a significant number of units of accommodation, and many charities would wish to increase their provision when they are able to do so. Great Shelford Village Charity provides a total of 53 affordable houses in Great Shelford, with our most recent 21 units being completed within the last 5 years. Charities in other villages, such as Girton, provide similar or greater numbers. Cumulatively, the charities’ contribution to affordable housing is not insignificant.

It is imperative that these properties continue to provide accommodation to those in need. There is no question of the houses being subject to a right to buy or otherwise ceasing to be available. The administration of the provision is largely provided by volunteers, albeit with professional assistance, and the trustees of such charities are bound to act in the best interests of the charities they oversee and are the subject of Charity Commission oversight.

In such circumstances a requirement to provide robust evidence to justify deviating from the housing mix stated within the policy (as per para 9.37) would demand the use of charity funds to demonstrate something of which the trustees have already satisfied themselves fully by reason of their responsibilities as such and in which they have no personal financial interest. Debates and disputes regarding such requirements may often require expert input and a consequent unnecessary use of charity funds. This would potentially decrease the amount of remaining charity funds available for the provision of affordable housing in the long term.

It is wholly inappropriate to bundle charitable providers with developers generally, not least due to those matters set out above and the absence of any question of profit. We request an express expectation that charities will not be required to meet the demands which would normally be made of commercial developers.