Huntingdonshire District Council planning applications
Data as of 5 November 2026
Huntingdonshire District Council decided more than 2,200 planning applications in the twelve months to 5 November 2026. It refused 11% of those it approved or refused, about the same as the middle UK council (9%), and took a median of – to decide one.
Look up one application
Search by reference or address on Huntingdonshire District Council’s own planning portal. Or ask Claude, with the PlanningLedger connector, to find it and read its officer report and decision notice (mcp.planningledger.com).
Recent major decisions
-
29 October 2026 · Approved
Alconbury Weald Ermine Street Little Stukeley · 26/00240/REM
-
26 October 2026 · Approved
Land North West Of Spittals Way And Ermine Street Great Stukeley · 25/00727/REM
-
23 October 2026 · Approved
Land South Of Blenheim Grove Offord Darcy · 25/01738/OUT
-
19 October 2026 · Approved
Land At Eagle Business Park Broadway Yaxley · 26/00973/REM
-
15 October 2026 · Approved
Land North West Of Spittals Way And Ermine Street Great Stukeley · 25/00728/REM
-
28 September 2026 · Approved
Alconbury Weald Ermine Street Little Stukeley · 25/01417/REM
Figures for Huntingdonshire District Council
| Applications decided | more than 2,200 |
|---|---|
| Share refusedof those approved or refused | 11%middle UK council 9% |
| Median time to a decisionfrom the valid date | –middle UK council 55 days |
| Householder applications refusedextensions, lofts, outbuildings | 6%of more than 480 decided |
| Appeals decidedin the last three years | 150 |
| Appeals allowedof those decided on their merits | 34%about one in three |
| Officer reports and decision notices searchable | back to 2019 |
| Local Plan policies held | 98plan adopted 2019 |
What inspectors decide appeals on
In their own words, from recent appeal decisions on Huntingdonshire District Council’s planning applications.
-
“The main issues are: • whether the appeal site is suitable for housing, having regard to the character and appearance of the area; • the effect of the proposed development on highway safety; and • the effect of the proposed…”
-
“The Council set out seven putative reasons for refusal. Prior to the hearing, it was confirmed that matters relating to highway safety and flooding and drainage had been addressed and were no longer at issue. Consequently, I have not treated…”
-
“The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon highway safety.”
-
“The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.”
-
“The main issues are: • The effect of the development proposed on the character of the surrounding area and the countryside; • The effect of the development proposed on trees and hedgerows; • The effect of the development proposed on…”
How we count, and what each figure leaves out: methodology. The council’s own register is the record, and each application links to it.