Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 211825

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 22.d - The allowance for contributions to be secured via section 106 contributions or a CIL payment is supported. Policy should provide flexibility to enable infrastructure to be delivered in a timely, efficient, and proportionate manner, reflecting site-specific circumstances and viability considerations.

Comment

Representation ID: 211826

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 23 - The scope for water re-use in healthcare is extremely limited. This approach was tested through applications for Cambridge Cancer Research Hospital.
Additional text is proposed to recognise this, and that any such approaches to water management will have to be cognisant of the types of uses it is supporting.

Comment

Representation ID: 211827

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 24 - The LCG are committed to delivering sustainable development that reduces carbon impact. However, the use of the word ‘possible’ implies that such principles and measures should be used in all circumstances where it is physically possible to do so. Recognition must be given though to the budget constraints that healthcare development is under, and that whilst it may be possible to deliver certain measures from an engineering or technological perspective, the cost of doing so may not be feasible. The amended text provides
some greater flexibility to allow for such scenarios to be
accommodated.

Comment

Representation ID: 211828

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 25 - CUH shares the view of GCSP that the Amenity Strategy and Infrastructure Delivery Strategy should be comprehensive and give clear and binding commitments on the timely delivery of amenities
for the campus, open spaces/green infrastructure and sustainable transport proposals. CUH wishes to invite GCSP and the Cambridge Growth Company to facilitate further detailed discussions about the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy, to reach as much common ground as possible. It is recognised that that some flexibility is needed in the policy, but some guide rails are considered
necessary.

Comment

Representation ID: 211829

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 27 - CUH is supportive of GCSP’s position that a range of matters need to be addressed before any significant developments are brought forward on campus. Whilst we would naturally promote the need for flexibility and pragmatism, we are concerned that if key principles are not resolved at a masterplan level, there is a risk that the desired outcomes will not be achieved. We are clear that this will necessitate considerable work to agree
the principles of the framework masterplan, the transport strategy, detailed triggers for delivery of key items, but in the absence of a clear agreed plan, of what each parcel of land should contribute towards in terms of the overall objective, we are concerned that the outcome will risk being sub-optimal.

Comment

Representation ID: 211830

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 27.a - In line with our comments above at para 27, we support the need for a campus-wide Framework Masterplan. Whilst this necessitates an amount of joint working between all parties, we will need to reach agreement on a framework masterplan (with appropriate flexibility) to guide individual applications for major
development as they come forward.

Comment

Representation ID: 211831

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

27.b - CUH feels that this can be satisfied in preparation of a Framework Masterplan.

Comment

Representation ID: 211832

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 27.c - We agree with other LCG members that the word ‘full’ implies a level of detail and granularity that will goes beyond what is possible or even appropriate for an outline planning application. We would be more comfortable with the term “Framework Phasing Plan(s)” as these are necessarily indicative, and are a baseline against which proposed changes can be assessed and considered.

Comment

Representation ID: 211833

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 27.d -The requirement to consider ways to consolidate logistics and servicing trips associated with the Campus is already covered by part 20(e) and the need to adhere to a trip budget. It therefore does not need to be repeated here.

Comment

Representation ID: 211834

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Paragraph 27.e - The Spatial Framework shows one way in which the Campus could be effectively regenerated and expanded. It is described in paragraph 3.2.19 as being “indicative high-level”. It should not be mistaken for a definitive blueprint, and therefore reference to the “Campus enhancements set out in the Spatial Framework” should instead refer to the same as set out in the
Framework Masterplan. That is the much more appropriate reference point for what should be delivered.
CUH is particularly concerned to ensure that there is clarity on the content of the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy prior to publication of the Regulation 19 Submission Draft Plan. Further work is required to reach agreement on what infrastructure is required when, who will deliver and fund it, and to establish the mechanism for securing this.