‘Potential legal challenge’ emerges to 110 homes approved on appeal for Fulbourn

There could be a “potential legal challenge” to a decision made by a planning inspector to grant permission on appeal for more than 110 homes in Fulbourn, a councillor has revealed.

Outline permission for the development off Teversham Road was approved by South Cambridgeshire District Council in 2017, but when the detailed plans came before councillors they were refused due to flooding concerns.

One speaker at a planning committee had described the site as a “swamp” and said there was visible standing water in the field for around five to six months of the year.

The speaker argued that there was the potential for their own home to become “uninsurable and unsustainable” due to flooding.

But the applicant, Castlefield International, was “very confident” the development would not increase the flood risk on neighbouring properties, and appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.

As reported last month, a planning inspector agreed with the developer, concluding: “I am content, at least in principle, that the appellant has suitably demonstrated that the reserved matters scheme could be delivered while also providing a satisfactory scheme of surface water drainage.

“I am also satisfied that the proposal would not result in flood risk to neighbouring land or properties.”

At the council’s cabinet meeting on Monday (July 11), Tim Andrews, a member of South East Cambridgeshire Labour party, said he lived in Fulbourn and was “disappointed” by the planning inspector’s decision.

“As one of many people that are directly affected by the substantial flood risk arising as a consequence of this development proceeding I would like to ask, either [council leader] Cllr Bridget Smith or Cllr Dr Tumi Hawkins, what their reaction is to this decision and what do you think the council would do differently another time,” he said.

Cllr Hawkins (Lib Dem, Caldecote), the lead cabinet member for planning, said that after Mr Andrews had submitted his question, the authority had been made aware of a “potential legal challenge” to the appeal decision.

She said: “[In this] the council would be an interested party, and for that reason and whilst we are still reviewing the submissions made and on the basis of the legal advice received, unfortunately I do not consider that it is appropriate to make any further comment on this matter at this point in time.”