Green belt retirement community plan for Comberton rejected amid concern it would create ‘senior ghetto’

Proposals for a new retirement community in the green belt on the edge of Comberton have been rejected by councillors, one of whom said it would have created a “senior ghetto”.

Concerns were also shared about the impact hundreds of older people moving to the village would have on the GP surgery and health services.

Developer Endurance Estates (Comberton) Ltd applied to South Cambridgeshire District Council to build the retirement community of 200 ‘extra care’ units on land off Branch Road, arguing it met a “significant need for older person housing”.

The developer also proposed facilities, such as a cafe, restaurant, meeting/activity space, treatment rooms, clinical treatment space, a gym, swimming pool and fitness studio, which it said would also be open to the rest of the village.

Representative Ellen Pearce told the planning committee last Wednesday (15 January) there were “very limited housing options” for older people in the area, which could lead to them staying in an unsuitable home, going into a care home or having to move away from their community.

“This proposal addresses these issues, providing an attractive alternative to your residents,” she said.

She argued the benefits of the development represented the special circumstances needed to build the community in the green belt and highlighted plans for a clinical room on site, which she said would be offered to the GP surgery - although she admitted no agreement on this had yet been reached.

Ms Pearce also said the developer would provide more than £2million of investment in the area through Section 106 contributions to deliver “once-in-a-generation improvements to Comberton”.

But a number of objections were raised by residents, the GP surgery and council officers.

The GP surgery said it was already at capacity.

The council’s housing strategy officer objected, claiming the development did not meet the specific needs of Comberton and would lead to an “over concentration of older people within a small village”, rather than creating more places for them across the district.

Cllr Jessica Marshall, from Comberton Parish Council, said there were concerns about the impact on the GP surgery and criticised the design as “very urban”.

Claire Michel, from Comberton, was concerned it would “worsen” the situation with the sewage network, noting that it already overflowed from manhole covers after heavy rainfall.

Anglian Water, however, said there is capacity .

Cllr Heather Williams (Con, The Mordens) said she had never seen so many objections to a development from such a broad spectrum.

She recognised the need for supported housing for older people, but said this should be in a “variety of places” rather than concentrated.

Cllr Peter Sandford (Lib Dem, Caxton and Papworth) said they should not be trying to “dump” everyone in one village.

He said: “According to Google the current population of Comberton is 2,200 and a significant number of those are already over 65.

“Add another 300 seniors and you are talking about a village that is 30, 40 per cent over 65. It’s creating a senior ghetto.

“I think we know the facilities in Comberton - public transport, buses - are pretty erratic. There is a village shop, but it is a long way from the site. That is before we even look at the harm to the green belt. This is an inappropriate application in the wrong place.

“We definitely need to be looking at smaller facilities closer to the villages around the district, not dumping everyone onto one smallish village. That is not the way to go.”

Cllr Anna Bradnam (Lib Dem, Milton and Waterbeach) agreed that supported housing should be “dispersed across the district”, while Cllr Dr Martin Cahn (Lib Dem, Histon and Impington) was concerned the development would be “not well integrated” as it would be on the very edge of the village, meaning people would have to rely on driving to access services.

Cllr Dr Tumi Hawkins (Lib Dem, Caldecote) said the result would be “hundreds of people with significant needs on the edge of a village” and the proposed clinical space would not be sufficient to “meet the significant health needs of people in that age group”.

“This is not the right provision in the right place,” she said.

Councillors unanimously voted to reject the application.