Huntingdonshire District Council support Greater Cambridge’s intention to continue development at existing strategic sites as allocated in previous plans, for example Darwin Green, North West Cambridge, Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne, Bourn and The Genome Campus. These strategic developments will deliver housing and employment over an extended time period providing long-term certainty of delivery. The addition of a 10% buffer also provides security in the event of stalled or slowed delivery as a result of unexpected market fluctuations.

National planning policy says at least 10% of an Authority’s housing requirement should be accommodated on sites no larger than 1 hectare, unless it can be shown that there are strong reasons why this cannot be achieved. Greater Cambridge notes that “The site commitments we have and new proposals suggested in this consultation, together with windfall sites expected to come forward would mean we exceed this requirement by some margin.” Huntingdonshire District Council supports this statement as long as delivery on development sites for the plan period can be achieved.


There appears to be some uncertainty regarding the delivery of the strategy set out in the First Proposals Document. Two key examples included in the document are identified on:
• page 44, where it is stated that the proposed strategy is “heavily informed by the location of existing and committed public transport schemes. For example, locating growth at Cambourne takes advantage of the proposed East West Rail station and Cambourne to Cambridge Public Transport Scheme; equally, North East Cambridge is made more sustainable by the presence of Cambridge North Station, the proposed Waterbeach to Cambridge North Public Transport Scheme, and Waterbeach Greenway. Beyond this, we have undertaken transport modelling to understand whether additional infrastructure and policies, beyond these proposals, would be required to address the transport impacts of the preferred development strategy. Transport infrastructure and policy requirements associated with specific proposed allocations are set out in each allocation policy within this chapter.”;
• Page 42 which notes that “The Councils have been, and continue to, engage with the relevant bodies responsible for water supply planning, including Water Resources East, the Water Companies and the Environment Agency to ensure they understand the significance of the issue. We are taking every opportunity to raise this at the most senior level with all key parties, including government through its focus on the Oxford-Cambridge Spatial Framework, that will also have to address this issue. If it is concluded that it is not possible to demonstrate an adequate supply of water without unacceptable environmental harm to support development ahead of strategic water infrastructure being in place, there may be a need for the plan to include policies to phase delivery of development; and
• Relocation of Marshall Airport to fully deliver Cambridge East (Policy S/CE)

Taking these key delivery issues into consideration it is suggested that a stepped trajectory and phased delivery of development would be the best approach to delivering the strategy for Greater Cambridge and the surrounding areas. This is especially so in relation to the issue regarding water supply, this is not solely a Greater Cambridge issue and will be likely to affect all surrounding districts to varying degrees, therefore it would be difficult to justify that level or speed of delivery in or around the Greater Cambridge area, if the issue is not resolved.

Additionally, any unresolved issues regarding the transport impacts of the preferred development strategy, would also provide similar issues in neighbouring authorities.

Huntingdonshire District Council supports Greater Cambridge’s focus on employment uses such as Life Sciences (including healthcare, biotechnology and biomedical activities) associated research and development laboratory space and life science related advanced manufacturing.