Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Requested Change

Redrow requests that land east of Hauxton (HELAA reference 40283) be allocated in the Local Plan with the following requirements:
• Site area: 12.44 hectares
• Indicative capacity: up to approximately 150 dwellings, including a policy compliant proportion of affordable housing and provision for self/custom build plots

This submission is supported by a Vision Document. The Connectivity/Transport and Framework Masterplan diagrams demonstrate that land east of Hauxton is physically contained by durable features, benefits from direct and safe pedestrian, cycle and public transport links to local services, and can be delivered through a landscape led masterplan that retains and strengthens green corridors, integrates SuDS, and provides extensive public open space. These attributes confirm a “grey belt” context with very limited contribution to Green Belt purposes (sprawl, coalescence, or historic setting), and show that harm can be avoided and, in places, positively remedied by creating a permanent, defensible and greener settlement edge. The scheme is immediately deliverable, supports early housing and affordable housing supply, and improves access to local facilities, thereby satisfying the NPPF’s “golden rules” for Green Belt release. On this basis, the site should be released from the Green Belt and allocated in Policy S/RRA.

Object

Redrow is advancing proposals for land to the east of Hauxton, situated immediately beyond the defined village framework. Although the site lies within the Green Belt and is not identified for development in the draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan (GCLP), its promotion highlights important strategic considerations.

Redrow objects to Policy S/RRA on the basis that the draft Local Plan fails to allocate sufficient land within the rural area to meet the uplifted housing needs identified elsewhere in these representations, and that the policy does not provide a mechanism for including additional sustainable village edge sites such as land east of Hauxton.

Redrow is promoting this site (HELAA reference 40283) located immediately beyond the Hauxton village framework and within the Green Belt, as an additional allocation necessary to support the deliverability, flexibility and soundness of the emerging GCLP. As demonstrated throughout these representations, the overall housing requirement should be increased, greater emphasis should be placed on distributing growth to the most sustainable villages, and the Plan should release appropriate areas of Green Belt, including “grey belt” land, to address significant housing and affordable housing needs. Reflecting these overarching principles, Policy S/RRA should be amended to include the land east of Hauxton as an additional allocation in the rest of the rural area.

The promoted site is appropriately categorised as grey belt, in accordance with paragraph 143 of the NPPF and the accompanying Planning Practice Guidance, which define grey belt as Green Belt land that does not strongly contribute to purposes (a), (b) and (d).

The Hauxton site makes only a very limited contribution to these purposes. It does not facilitate unrestricted sprawl of a large built-up area (purpose a); it plays no role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (purpose b), as it is physically and visually separated from Cambridge by significant landscape buffers, strategic infrastructure and established field patterns; and it does not contribute to the setting of a historic town (purpose d). In addition, the site carries no other designations that would inhibit its development. Its classification as grey belt therefore aligns directly with national policy, including the NPPF’s requirement (paragraph 148) that, where Green Belt release is necessary, previously developed land and grey belt should be prioritised.

The development of the Hauxton site also satisfies the “Golden Rules” for Green Belt development set out in paragraphs 155–157 of the NPPF.

First, it proposes development on grey belt, rather than land performing essential Green Belt functions. Second, there is clear unmet need for both market and affordable housing in Greater Cambridge, including the significant shortfall identified in the 2025 Housing Needs Report. Third, the site is demonstrably sustainable: it benefits from excellent walking, cycling and public transport links, offers direct and safe access to schools, services and employment, and sits in close proximity to major transport corridors and rail connections.

Fourth, the scheme is capable of delivering the high levels of affordable housing and green infrastructure expected under paragraph 157, including extensive new public open space, landscape restoration, biodiversity enhancements and active travel routes. In line with paragraph 158, developments that satisfy these criteria should be given significant weight.

In landscape terms, the site performs extremely weakly against the Green Belt purposes, and its development would not harm the open countryside setting or long term settlement separation. On the contrary, Redrow’s emerging framework masterplan proposes strengthening local landscape character, restoring field patterns, integrating substantial green infrastructure and retaining more than 60% of the land as open space. Far from weakening the edge of Hauxton, the scheme would provide a managed and softened settlement boundary that enhances the transition between the village and open countryside.

Importantly, land east of Hauxton also represents an early delivery, medium sized site capable of supporting local services, schools and community facilities at a time when the Plan relies heavily—and precariously—on large, infrastructure dependent strategic sites to deliver its housing trajectory. Hauxton Primary School, for example, is operating significantly under capacity, with 30 spare places, and would benefit from nearby pupil growth that can be safely accessed on foot. The site is well located to contribute to local vitality and to meet specific local affordable housing needs that cannot realistically be met through small infill plots within the existing settlement boundary.

In addition to its physical suitability, the site is fully capable of being supported by a robust evidence base. At the planning application stage, comprehensive assessments—including Flood Risk, Drainage, Landscape & Visual Impact, Ecology, Archaeology, Heritage, Contamination and Transport—would be provided to demonstrate that development can be delivered responsibly, sustainably and in accordance with both national and local planning requirements, as expected by Policy S/RRA’s clauses on mitigation, infrastructure contributions and site specific design.

For these reasons, Redrow considers that the allocation of the land east of Hauxton is necessary to secure a sound Local Plan—one that is positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy. The site represents an opportunity to deliver sustainable, landscape led development in a location that aligns with the NPPF, contributes to identified housing and affordable housing needs, and strengthens the resilience of the Plan’s housing trajectory. The site should therefore be identified within Policy S/RRA as an allocation in the rest of the rural area.

Requested Change

Redrow requests that land east of Hauxton (HELAA reference 40283) be allocated in the Local Plan with the following requirements:
• Site area: 12.44 hectares
• Indicative capacity: up to approximately 150 dwellings, including a policy compliant proportion of affordable housing and provision for self/custom build plots

This submission is supported by a Vision Document. The Connectivity/Transport and Framework Masterplan diagrams demonstrate that land east of Hauxton is physically contained by durable features, benefits from direct and safe pedestrian, cycle and public transport links to local services, and can be delivered through a landscape led masterplan that retains and strengthens green corridors, integrates SuDS, and provides extensive public open space. These attributes confirm a “grey belt” context with very limited contribution to Green Belt purposes (sprawl, coalescence, or historic setting), and show that harm can be avoided and, in places, positively remedied by creating a permanent, defensible and greener settlement edge. The scheme is immediately deliverable, supports early housing and affordable housing supply, and improves access to local facilities, thereby satisfying the NPPF’s “golden rules” for Green Belt release. On this basis, the site should be released from the Green Belt and allocated in Policy S/RRA.