Greater Cambridge - science, housing and infrastructure
- Jul 5
- 19 min read
Future Cities Forum held a panel discussion on the issues affecting innovation, district and housing development across Cambridge and the region - at its recent event, hosted by the Wellcome Genome Campus..
Those contributing included Bethany Dugdale, Deputy Chief Executive, Cambridge Growth Company, Dr Geoff Darch, Head of Strategic Asset Planning, Anglian Water, Cllr Bridget Smith, Leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council, Ed Watson, Interim Managing Director, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Judith Barker, Director of Place & Economy, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority and Matt Nicholson, Director of Planning, Wellcome Genome Campus.
The Greater Cambridge Development Corporation has just been launched, with the aim of driving growth across Cambridgeshire. There has been a mixed reaction to the Corporation's creation with over 60 per cent of individuals surveyed in the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation: Analysis of consultation responses and next steps (published on 3rd June 2026) - rejecting the proposal.
However, Bethany Dugdale, who joined our panel discussion, pointed out that within the full range of responses to the consultation, among local government respondents, 48% were opposed and 38% supportive; among private sector respondents, 8% were opposed and 81% supportive; and among interest groups or voluntary organisations, 42% were opposed and 39% supportive.
The wider context is set out in the Government’s consultation response, including its discussion of the issues raised about democratic accountability and the proposed role and powers of a Development Corporation.' The consultation statistics, questions and feedback is here
:Greater Cambridge Development Corporation: Analysis of consultation responses and next steps - GOV.UK
Bethany spoke about her vision now that the GCDC has launched.
'I think the important starting point is the economic benefit that the knowledge industries are providing for the UK and for the UK's economy, but also to put the UK on the global map and to really help attract more investments and more R&D into the area. So it's important to realise that it is very specifically an economic premise that generates the rationale for the Development Corporation. What we are looking to do is try to get the right blend of saying what is that economic potential, but how do you marry that up with good growth, with growth. How do you make sure that you are looking at the needs of the area, responding to the needs of councillors, but also of existing and future communities, and how can you address some of the challenges that have been a barrier to growth and are actually starting to put pressure on quality of life at the moment in Cambridge?
‘It is about putting infrastructure in place to address transport congestion, water, environmental issues, et cetera, the big picture. It's a very long-term ambition. It needs to be. I think it won't be achievable unless we take that long-term view and also attract players in the market who will invest and have that patient capital approach as well as part of that. So that's how we're approaching it, obviously. It's a really significant opportunity, but one that we want to work with local communities, with leaders, and Bridget's been on our advisory council for quite some time already to make sure that we do it locally and do it in a joined-up way.’
On the question over the GCDV wanting to take planning out of local authority hands, when planning has been considered to be very successful to date in Cambridge, Bethany responded:
‘So, absolutely. The Greater Cambridge area has built almost twice the national average from a housing perspective, but what we're trying to understand is what actually should the growth be within the area, and comparing to national averages shows that the employment growth also outstrips the national average so looking at one metric gives a partial picture of the situation on the ground. The planning powers are split into two sections, so there's development management and then the plan-making. I think we're very clear, and we fed back into the government, as the Cambridge Growth Company, as it was the government who lead on consultation, and said we are keen to see that the development management powers are absolutely targeted at the strategic sites.
‘We need to create the definition of that as we move forward. So as government works on the planning statutory instruments, to start to address matters raised about those powers and making sure that actually the planning authority is still taking responsibility for most of what they're doing at the moment, but we get the right split of the strategic sites that the development corporation will be involved with.
‘I think on the plan-making, number one, we are absolutely supportive of the local plan that's going through at the moment, and we are looking to follow on from that. So it's almost a phased approach, with that delivering the first phase of the growth plans. I think the challenge is the need to have certainty for both the markets to come in and have the long-term investment opportunities, be able to bring in the national government balance sheets as well, and have the long-term plans that help to justify the level of public sector investment that we're trying to bring in over and above what's been able to be achieved locally. So we are starting to look at things like Mass Rapid Transit, starting to take that infrastructure-first approach to actually bring in that change in infrastructure provision that hasn't been enabled to date.
Bethany answered a question on why some people feel that through the measures mentioned, housing development is going to slow down considerably, not speed up:
‘I think the first thing we did when we came into the area was work locally around some of the challenges that were present with water, and there were objections to a lot of the housing developments, and through the creation of the Water Scarcity Group, that has been a collaboration of local government, national government, water companies, environmental groups, etc., we were able to work through a lot of the housing development that was sorted at the time.
‘The reason that we are saying that we want to follow on from the local plan is very much that we see the importance of not slowing down plans that are in train at the moment, and actually trying to really support those. So some of our funding to date has gone into enabling activity to help with that, to support things like progressing the Transport and Works Act Order on the CSET (Cambridge South East) transport scheme, so we're very much trying to help and enable.
‘We also worked with the Waterbeach scheme to connect some funding from Homes England, as we're currently a subsidiary of Homes England, to help with the relocation of the train station, which is also a problem for housing development, so we've been trying to both look at the holistic pictures, but also then look at how do you help and unblock some of the pieces that are slowing along the way.’
On the issue of funding new water infrastructure to help with house building, Bethany said:
‘I'm very pleased that our Chief Executive is an expert in water and is coming over from DEFRA, where he's been DG and interim Permanent Secretary, so actually that's hugely helpful because the coordination, particularly the coordination within Whitehall, within some of the regulatory bodies, will be absolutely essential to help to unlock this. Some of this is about the regulatory framework and the way in which the planning for infrastructure actually is undertaken in this country, and we're trying to check where we can make some changes to that, so actually we can avoid the lag of infrastructure coming later on down the line, and actually forward thinking around enabling that infrastructure at an earlier stage.’
Image: CGI of Fens Reservoir, courtesy of LDA Design
Dr. Geoff Darch, Head of Strategic Asset Planning at Anglian Water, joined the discussion and was asked to comment on the goals of creating better water infrastructure in the Cambridgeshire region:
‘It is a real challenge, the water infrastructure. I think everyone's fairly familiar with it or has become with it in the past few years. We want to get to a better pipeline, to better understand what is required and when, and it's Beth who said in this conversation, the Water Scarcity Group has been hugely impactful. This is partly because we've had the local stakeholders around the table, but actually also the intervention of the government, MHCLG and DEFRA in particular, who obviously can exert some influence over some of the other stakeholders, which has been enormously helpful in unlocking that.
‘Yes, there's progress being made, but there's still a long way to go, and hearing about some of the things like data centres and other things that need to come online, how are we going to supply all of the development, and unifying the waste water side of things is also a significant constraint.’
Geoff was asked how he felt about the government putting their hand in their pocket and trying to fund some of the rest of this infrastructure?
‘Well, it's a really interesting question, particularly the question around the waste water treatment plant relocation, and the potential that there was at one time when the government put some money into that and then it was withdrawn. Currently our focus is on the existing site and ensuring that we create the capacity that we know is required.
‘But I think there are some bigger questions going into the future around how do we fund all of this? The model that we have at the moment in England is that water company customers tend to pay for development or treatment capacity, but as everyone knows, there's a lot of other pressure on water company bills at the moment. There are some real questions around affordability and how we support people who can't necessarily afford their bill. So there is the potential and I think it's right to ask, should developers pay more than they currently do for water infrastructure?
‘We've had this conversation with government on the net zero space in particular and I think there's some emerging clarity that where very large volumes of water are required, and you could extend this to waste water as well, that some of those projects will have to pay, not just for the last mile kind of connection, which is pretty standard, but actually pay for some of the treatment infrastructure, which historically is paid for by water company customers.
Geoff was also asked whether the UK government should find solutions for the environment and food. He said:
‘Absolutely. I mean, it was interesting hearing about the Norwich Research Park because East Anglia is the key bread basket of the UK, but also we have chalk streams and a very important totally water-based national park within our area as well. So there's lots of pressure on water at exactly the same time that we're seeing the impacts of climate change and changing water availability. Of course, we've just had one of the driest springs on record, even though we've had a bit of rain this month. So yes, how we kind of square those things off is increasingly challenging. I think the point Beth made about regulatory flexibility is going to be key because we're not in the same world we were when a lot of these regulations were developed.
‘I think the challenge for us now is that, yes, the DCO is still there, so it's still alive until 2030, but we now need to – as there's such a lag on creating the infrastructure that, frankly, we just need to get on with what we know is in front of us, which is creating capacity in Cambridge. So that's where our focus is in a lot of feasibility studies, looking at the existing site. But of course, by using that existing site, we have, effectively locked out that land or a large part of that for our facilities, and that's an important decision.'
The discussion continued with Cllr Bridget Smith, Leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council discussing the issues around water infrastructure and the house building programme:
‘So we've been asking Government to come and intervene on the big blockers to grow for the last four years. So it's taken quite a long time to get to this stage. I'm not sure this is the right stage, though. Water is a crisis. We're very grateful for the water shortage group and the work they've done. It is only a sticking plaster though. We had 9,000 houses at Bourn Airfield on hold with the poor developers absolutely baying to go, and we couldn't because we just couldn't release it. We couldn't get the final approval for it. So what we have now is a tenuous agreement that that development can go ahead and probably the development in the current local plan can go ahead. So we've got 39,000 permissions, well, 39,000 permissions granted in the current local plan. We've got 77,000 houses, new homes identified in the emerging local plan, which will go to Regulation 19 (the formal pre-submission stage of a local plan) in a couple of months' time, hopefully, now that we've got a local transport strategy. Thank you, Judith. But, you know, we haven't got a full solution to those 77,000.
‘There are considerable risks over DevCo, and I met with the Minister (Matthew Pennycook) for the last time last Tuesday in a number of conversations. It feels like a sledgehammer trying to crack the wrong nut at the moment. We are officially the best planning authority in the country. 150 people, absolute experts. We're probably the only fully staffed planning committee. I'll just mention the four-day week, which actually played quite a large part in that, in our recruitment and retention issues. And we are more successful than anywhere else in the country in delivering for everyone.
‘I've been leader for eight years. I was elected originally on a high-growth, pro-growth ticket. I've just been, last month, elected for the third time, still on a high-growth, pro-growth ticket. So staff at Cambridge and Cambridge City are up for it, and they understand the reasoning for it. There is massive confidence in our planning authority, and what we're already seeing, and which I was talking to the Minister about on Tuesday, was that we're already seeing the wobbles in the market at the moment.
‘So, developers who are doing things like this (at Wellcome Genome Campus), which is incredibly exciting, and I'm so proud of what's going on here, are already going, well, what do we do? Do we keep on submitting our planning applications to you? Because, actually, come the end of the year it won't be you deciding it. Do we hold fire? You know, do we wait for the DevCo? What's actually going to happen? So, we're already seeing signs of a slowing of growth and uncertainty being introduced into the market.
‘Now, going back to the water issue, what we need government to do, and we do need them, is to unblock these big blockers. The water supply, the wastewater I mean, it was a disgrace that the half billion pounds was withdrawn for the wastewater treatment plant to be removed. You know, if I was being cynical, I'd say that that money's just been moved over to the DevCo. So, is the DevCo actually new money, or is it the money that was allocated towards Anglian Water to move the waterworks? I'll leave you to be a judge of that.
'So we've got short-term solutions. I have no doubt that they will build the Fens reservoir and so on, but the reality is that very, very large-scale strategic developments, which we have in our new emerging plan, we cannot time in until late 2040s, 2050, because the water is not going to be there in time.
‘We've got this historic deficit, a massive historic deficit in transport infrastructure. The city deal, which is over 10 years old now, was awarded to start dealing with the infrastructure deficit in the existing local plan, but of course, because of the timescales, it's now not enough. So we're £164 million short to deliver CSET (Cambridge South East Transport Plan), which is what will benefit all these very exciting sites in the south of Cambridge. So government are going to have to step up with the money. I do have my own views about whether actually they should be subsidising the water companies, but that's another one. But if they want to optimise the growth here, they are going to have to come up with the money, and the money that's on the table at the moment is paltry and lamentable, and they're going to have to wake up to the reality of the billions this will cost.’
Image: Hinxton village adjacent to Wellcome Genome Campus, courtesy Pictures of England
Bridget was then asked about the preservation of the historic villages around Cambridge and the move to create new housing, which potentially could turn out to be identikit:
‘So again, the Minister was very keen to reiterate again on Tuesday that there will be high design codes and so on. We have put in our emerging local plan 20% biodiversity net gain, which now conflicts with the new NPPF rules, and I didn't mention this to him. So I don't think we're going to get that through. The reason we've put in 20% is that the south of Cambridge has fewer trees than anywhere else in the country, so we have a massive natural capital deficit, and we've got to do something dramatic, and one of our policies is to double nature. That probably brings us up to the national average, whereas if this is going to be the exciting place that we all want it to be, where people choose to come rather than going to Boston, rather than going to all these other whizzy places, it's got to be a great place, and it's got to be a great place as far as the natural environment is concerned, as well as the built environment. So there are big threats there.
‘I think our local plan, the 77,000 houses and the however million square foot of employment space we have identified in the local plan, is absolutely evidence-led. The government have been very shy about talking about numbers. Michael Gove talked about 250,000. Other people have talked about 150,000, but this government have never actually said how many houses they want here. Now, the reality is that they're definitely looking around Cambridge. Now, around Cambridge is all greenbelt, and we have a very unique greenbelt here. It's about preserving the historic situation of Cambridge itself. So surround it with lots of very high rise stuff, and you lose that setting, the historic setting of Cambridge. So if they want us to double or triple the number of houses that we're building here, where do they go? They are going to go in the greenbelt. There is no two ways about it, and that's going to be very difficult for the people living here, whether they're living in Cambridge City or whether they're living in South Cambridgeshire.
‘My local plan absolutely protects the villages. We've got over 100 villages. We have seven major strategic sites here, more than any other district in the whole of the country. We're building the biggest new towns anywhere in the country, with Northstowe, Waterbeach, a potentially massive expansion at Cambourne once the station's there, Bourn Airfield, which has finally got off the ground, and a number of others. So the government, I'm sure, don't want to build in the villages, but they've introduced this extraordinary 250-home threshold, which the minister says is because there might be some sites linked to their, whatever the strategic sites are they finally settle on, which might essentially be ‘ransom sites’.
‘They need to be able to intervene, and I was able to intervene. My response to him was, well, why don't you come and talk to me about it, because actually I could have said, I'll sort that for you, because I have compulsory purchase powers as well. So I can sort this stuff. I don't need government to suddenly take away all our planning powers for everything over 250, which kind of leaves us with the little diddly ones and garage extensions.
‘I cannot keep a planning team of 150 people going because they might be needed. So I think there needs to be a reality check, and the minister has agreed that we will have a workshop now between his senior people and my senior people, where hopefully they'll try and thrash out what I think are consequences that actually government hasn't fully thought through. But yes, we do need them to sort out the issues. I just worry that they're going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg, and we are the goose.’
Ed Watson, Interim Managing Director, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, joined the conversation to talk about the need to attract investment and talent to the Campus and the region:
‘Cambridge Biomedical Campus is blessed by being partly in South Cambridgeshire with Bridget and partly in the city. So, we are a real beneficiary of the excellent shared planning service that's worked across Cambridge over recent years. And in principle, we welcome any change to the organisation and decision-making capabilities around Cambridge that will deliver the infrastructure that's necessary to support the growth that will take place at the campus should conditions be favourable.
‘I think it's worth remembering that we are, as you say, in a competition globally to attract investment, and people aren't thinking about whether they'll come to Biomedical Campus or Norwich or Wellcome. They're thinking about will they come to the UK and the super cluster and the Growth Corridor as opposed to going to the West Coast, Boston or China or Singapore.
‘So, we really are in that kind of global competition. In order to be in that competition and to have discussions, we need to be able to offer to potential investors and potential businesses who might want to locate here a kind of a package of both capability in terms of the skills and the amazing special scientific capabilities we have across both Cambridge, Oxford and the UK more generally, but also what I would call the hygiene factors.
‘That's about being able to attract talents and talents to go somewhere where they can find a reasonably priced home, and they can then make a sustainable journey, preferably when the reasonable timescales get to their place of employment. I think Cambridge has done a really, really good job over recent years of trying to work within some of the constraints that it finds itself with, but we're kind of at tipping point now, and we, certainly on campus and elsewhere, can't grow unless we have some of those big picture hygiene factors addressed, particularly transport is the one that's at the top of the list.
‘The Development Corporation is in its nascent period. The Growth Company has been set up for a couple of years, and the Development Corporation is not yet coming to being, but it's very much being seen, I think, by government as part of Oxford and Cambridge, joined with the opportunities in the middle at Milton Keynes and so on, as a holistic offer to see how the economic potential can be realized if government supports an intervention.
‘I think a critical thing that's happening in that Arc is about the opportunity for East West Rail, because East West Rail, in my view, is not about brainy people wanting to travel from Oxford to Cambridge, it's about actually people who could work in either Oxford or Cambridge, or Milton Keynes being able to travel sustainably from new points of significant home delivery into places of work relatively easily. So for us, the delivery of schemes at Tempsford will be really, really critical. That's in the kind of medium to longer term. Shorter term, schemes like CSET is really, really, really, really vital.
‘The government has only relatively recently realised what the opportunity is on the doorstep. And actually, I think under the leadership of someone like Lord Vallance, actually, he has played a really good hand in terms of bringing a pan-super-cluster, let's call it, focus within government, across government departments, for what is necessary in order to make things happen. And these are long-term benefits. We were talking earlier about whether the amount of floor space that we're delivering at the moment, and we're planning to deliver, is going to be enough for the market. Well, these are 25, 30-year benefits in terms of how we put the infrastructure into them and realise the long-term delivery of that benefit and that value. And so, I think we're only at the very beginning of that journey.
‘The government's made a decision, and the individuals in the Growth Company and the Development Corporation have been working, I think, very effectively in a collaborative way, both with the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service and the Mayor and Combined Authority, in order to see how we can realise these ambitions together.
Judith Barker, Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority, spoke on the panel about collaboration:
‘Just building on what Ed said, ultimately, what we have to do is collaborate and overcome some of those complexities. And I think anybody that's operated in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough space knows that it's very complicated. You know, we have seven constituent authorities who are the members of the Combined Authority, and within that, we have other bodies that are really critical to some of the work that we do. It's already complicated. I think what's really, so what's beholden on us all as individuals is to collaborate rather than compete and have an eye on what is the impact. What are the best outcomes that we can build upon? And I think Bridget and other people around the table have brought out some of the things that are really important in that space.
‘But I think one of the really critical things that Ed also touched on is how we need to work together to make that case, to get the investment. So we have been, as a combined authority, working really hard on transport, but it is quite clear that the amount of money that we need to deliver those transport solutions and to deliver the water solutions and the infrastructure is going to be really considerable. And yes, there will be contributions from developers, but that's not going to be enough to do everything that we require, particularly if we want to take an infrastructure-led approach, so we don't want that lag between those and the infrastructure.
‘What we need to do, I think, is be really clear on the opportunity that Cambridge is providing to UK PLC, Cambridge with its wider partners. The fact we've got 35 science parks around Cambridge is a huge opportunity. We need all of them to fire on all engines, and the only way we can do that is by working together collaboratively, making that ask of government, in order to bring in as much money as we can. And I think that kind of collaboration in that place, to work together to secure that infrastructure, I think the DevCo does give us an opportunity, and certainly over the recent years, we've been working really, really closely as a combined authority with DevCo, really, to achieve that. We've all got our eye on the same outcomes, and the best outcomes that we can achieve for the community's business, and so sort of collaborating around that goal to get the most out of government is really what I try to do.
‘As a combined authority, we're a politically-led organisation. We have a mayor who is elected. And obviously, as we go forward, the mayor and the political leaders, as Bridget's already indicated, will be speaking regularly with ministers in order to shape some of the details of governance. But I do think what is really critical is that all are focused on the same outcome.
‘So if we are focused as a combined authority through our local growth plan, in terms of delivering growth that works for the businesses and the communities, the mayor, how we have written into our constitution is to double the Cambridge area piece for economy. The mayor has stated in his local growth plan that he wants to go beyond that. So we'll work with anybody proactively to deliver those ambitions. And that will be the steer. And there will be bumps in the road. There always are. You know, there's going to be difficulties, differences of opinion. And that's quite right, because we'll only form the right decisions if we've checked and challenged one another. But ultimately, our role as a combined authority is kind of clued in the name. That combined, we need to work together to collaborate.’
Finally, Matt Nicholson of the Wellcome Genome Campus commented that he thought the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation would help to ensure that investment is driven to the right place:
‘There has been 25 years of innovation, science, and discovery at the Wellcome Genome Campus and we now need to plan for the next 25 years. We are investing to the point that was made earlier. We are competing with the U.S., Europe, and other markets so we need to ensure that our offer remains compelling for occupiers and investors, and one part of that is the need for enhanced public transport accessibility to the southern cluster.
'The Combined Authority's draft transport strategy talks about public transport and other investment in the long term when interventions are required int he short and medium term. I think the Urban Development Corporation has a role to play in questioning whether the right investment is going to the right place at the right time.
Matt was asked whether he thought there is a positive aspect to the creation of the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation?
‘I do, yes, because the government obviously recognises how important the future growth of the various scientific ecosystems is alongside jobs and homes for the region. I hope they will be able to leverage private funding or secure government backed investment, to get key infrastructure projects moving as quickly as possible. But yes, at a very high level, I think it does provide confidence to inward investment and future employers and occupiers who are considering basing themselves in this area.'
Future Cities Forum would like to thank all its contributors to this important discussion.
Comments