SPD response: Healthcare

HEALTHCARE

This is a guide to submitting an effective objection to the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the Land East of Gamston and North of Tollerton. It focuses on Healthcare provision, which is a key Material Planning Consideration.

Scroll down for the ‘How to structure your objection’ guide!

­ Why Healthcare Provision Matters

A development of 4,000 dwellings will generate approximately 9,200 new residents. According to British Medical Association (BMA) guidance, this would require:

5.4 Whole Time Equivalent (WTE) GPs

4 WTE clinical staff

10.6 non-clinical staff

2 WTE additional roles staff (e.g. physiotherapist, mental health, social prescriber)

40 car parking spaces

A building of 954m2 over two floors, built to NHS standards (HBN11-01, BREEAM Excellent)

­ Concerns with the SPD

The SPD mentions a GP surgery but fails to provide a viable or deliverable plan. Key concerns include:

No defined location: The SPD vaguely places the surgery on Vistry land, but Vistry’s own planning application denies the need for a GP practice.

No delivery model: There is no clarity on who will fund, build, or operate the facility—RBC, developers, NHS England, or a private GP LLP.

No NHS contract: There is no evidence of engagement with NHS England, the BMA, or the Integrated Care Board (ICB) to secure a contract.

No business case: GP practices are private businesses contracted to the NHS. A robust business case is required before NHS England will approve a new practice.

No contaminated land strategy: NHS buildings must meet BREEAM standards. Contaminated land would prevent certification and approval.

­How to Structure Your Objection

Use your own words, but try to include the following elements:

1. Quote the SPD

Refer to section 5.2 (pages 81 and 82) that mentions healthcare provision and the GP surgery.

2. Highlight the Gaps

Explain that the SPD lacks:

A defined site and delivery model

Engagement with NHS England or the ICB

A business case or contract for a GP practice

A contaminated land strategy to meet BREEAM standards

A pharmacy licensing and delivery plan

3. Explain the Risks

Say why this matters:

The healthcare facility may never be built

Residents may be left without access to GP services

The SPD is not deliverable or legally compliant

4. Refer to Planning Policy

Mention:

  • NPPF Paragraph 93 (promoting healthy communities)
  • Rushcliffe Local Plan Policies GP1 and GP2 (sustainable development and climate impact)
  • Health Building Note 11-01 and BREEAM Excellent standards

5. Request Specific Changes

You could ask for:

A detailed healthcare delivery plan with funding and operational model

Evidence of NHS engagement and contract negotiations

A contaminated land remediation strategy

A separate planning application for the health centre

­Example Phrases for Reference

Please do adapt these into your own words:

“The SPD does not provide a viable or deliverable plan for healthcare provision.”

“There is no evidence of NHS England engagement or a contract for a GP practice.”

“Without a contaminated land strategy, the building cannot meet NHS standards.”

“The SPD risks leaving 9,200 new residents without access to primary care.”

Where to Send Your Objection:

This is the email address for comments to Rushcliffe Borough Council on the SPD: localdevelopment@rushcliffe.gov.uk