Draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan

Broadly Support: Introduction These repre entations relate to the site currently occupied by Building 140 on the Cambridge Science Park (‘CSP’). A Site Plan, showing the boundaries outlined in red, accompanies this submission (Annex 1) (‘the Site’). South Cambridgeshire District Council (‘the Landowner’) own the freehold of the building on the Site. Building 140 is 2-storeys in height, built in the 1980s, and modernised/refurbished in the 2010s. the building is currently leased, with the earliest opportunity for vacant possession in 2030 (unless the current tenant exercised their break clause in 2025). The plan period for the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (NEC AAP), is expected to cover the next 20 years, and it is likely that the Landowner will wish to consider redevelopment of Building 140 at the start of the second half of that plan period (or sooner if the tenant opts to leave). The purpose of these representations is therefore to seek suitable development parameters for future redevelopment, particularly in terms of scale/height, density, and parking, in order to provide developer confidence for any future planning application process. CSP is currently going through a process of regenerative change. An application (20/03444/FUL) is currently under consideration on an adjacent single storey building (127 – 136 CSP) for the provision of a new 5/6-storey of 6,279m2 GIA. The Landowner broadly supports the vision, spatial framework (Annex 2) and strategic policies of the NEC AAP, but seeks the following clarifications from the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Services (‘GCSP’) team / changes to draft Policy:

Strongly agree

No answer given

Mostly yes

CSP was founded on the basis of establishing strategic structural landscaping for the Park as a whole, coupled with landscaping for each plot, low rise / low density buildings (in terms of plot ratio) of typically 1 – 3 storeys, and generous levels of car parking for each building. Since the introduction of the Busway and Cambridge North Station, there has been a trend in the redevelopment of older building stock, with taller buildings (typically 4-storeys), lower car parking levels (due to improved pedestrian, cycle and public transport accessibility), and significantly lower on-plot landscaping (on the basis that occupiers will have access to the established strategic structural landscaping nearby). The whole of the NEC AAP area will be within a 10-minute cycle ride or a 30-minute walk from Cambridge North station and Busway. The street network will enable a seamless transfer from public transport to walking and cycling, ensuring that those who commute into the area don’t need to drive to work. The NEC AAP includes new and improved crossings across Milton Road, the A14, the Busway and other major routes, linking surrounding neighbourhoods with the new ones that will be forming. The NEC AAP will lead to a positive step-change in how older building stock is optimised in redevelopment; significantly enhanced connectivity will enable plots to offer lower levels of on- site car parking (but higher cycle parking) and, along with taller height parameters (between 4 – 6 storeys), it will create opportunities for higher density / finer urban grain in the area. The higher density will be supported by the legacy of established strategic structural landscaping around CSP.

Mostly yes

We support the proposal for the creation of new centres, to provide walkable access to new services and facilities for existing and newly redeveloped businesses on the CSP. One of the current issues with the CSP is that people use it during core hours of work e.g. 0800 – 1800, Monday to Friday. However, during the evening and at weekends CSP has extremely low levels of use. People tend to travel in and leave work by car (mostly), often all at the same time – which in itself leads to the very high levels of peak-hour congestion on to Milton Road. Furthermore, many businesses have their own café/canteen, meaning that staff remain within their building for lunch / meetings. As such, there is very little integration between the various businesses on the CSP. The centres will therefore help foster greater activity and vibrancy around the CSP (for instance, new places to eat and drink might extend the time people stay on CSP, going to a café after work to socialise with co-workers), and will encourage workers to be more physically active (for instance, by leaving the office and walking to a sandwich shop for lunch), helping to promote healthier lifestyles for people working on CSP.

Mostly yes

We broadly support the proposed use of CSP for business-led development (see Annex 3). We would query the 72,250m2 of business space, shops and local services that is indicated in the plan for CSP. This figure appears to have been derived from Appendix A of the ‘Typologies Study and Development Capacity Assessment January 2020’ (‘TSDCA’). The Site falls within zone ‘CC’ of that document (Annex 4), which states a parcel size of 3.14ha (gross), and that a ‘discussion with landowner confirms that there is/are plot(s) within this development parcel which will be available for redevelopment during the Plan period. Landowner has confirmed that the intention is to intensify existing land uses within this site and not to introduce residential development’. Site CC is identified as having potential capacity for 7,850m2 (NIA). It is not clear from the TSDCA plan which plots are considered for this, and we would welcome clarification from GCSP on this point. Building 140 is approximately 2,790m2 (GIA), and offers potential to increase floorspace significantly, by increasing its height to 6-storeys (max) and utilising a large element of its current car park.

Mostly yes

We would like to query why the plan takes a more cautious approach to heights than is recommended in the ‘Landscape Character and Visual Impact Appraisal January 2020’ (‘LCVIA’). For the area in which Building 140 is positioned, the LCVIA recommends ‘up to 6 storeys – 18m’ (Annex 5) and we think the plan in question 6 might follow this approach and simply state ‘up to 6 storeys’ rather than ‘typically 4 – 5 storeys, maximum 6 storeys’ (Annex 6). This change in reference would make it clear what the general upper height parameter should be (rather than the current format which implies that only in special and limited circumstances will 6 storeys be deemed acceptable), thereby creating a positively-worded policy that will help optimise economic development across the CSP.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Broadly Support: Introduction These representations relate to the site currently occupied by Buildings 270 and 296 on the Cambridge Science Park (‘CSP’). A Site Plan, showing the boundaries outlined in red, accompanies this submission (Annex 1) (‘the Site’). South Cambridgeshire District Council (‘the Landowner’) own the freeholds of the two buildings on the Site. Building 270 is 2/3-storeys in height, built in the 1980s, and currently vacant, having been formerly occupied by WorldPay, who have since moved into a new office building on an adjoining site. It is envisaged that Building 270 will be refurbished and then offered for let on a short/medium term basis in 2021. Building 296 is 2-storeys in height, built in the early 00’s, and is currently occupied, with the earliest opportunity for vacant possession in 2027. Building 270, in addition to the Johnson Matthey building to the east, formed part of a hybrid planning application (S/0630/15/FL) that was approved in March 2016 for the provision of a new 4-storey building and a new decked car park (detailed consent), both of which have been built, and occupied by WorldPay – and two new replacement buildings (for Building 270 and the Johnson Matthey building) of four-storeys each (outline consent). Planning permission was given for 17,219m2 GIA across the three buildings, 497no. car parking spaces, and 602no. cycle spaces. The plan period for the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (NEC AAP), is expected to cover the next 20 years, and it is likely that the Landowner will wish to consider redevelopment of Buildings 270 and 296 during the first half of that plan period. The purpose of these representations is therefore to seek suitable development parameters for future redevelopment, particularly in terms of scale/height, density, and parking, in order to provide developer confidence for any future planning application process. The planning consent provides a baseline that indicates 4-storey redevelopment is acceptable in this location, but given the wider strategic aims of the NEC AAP particularly in seeking to reduce the significant levels of existing car parking, optimising development opportunities for economic and social benefits, and maximising connectivity across the AAP area, it is considered that the Site might offer the opportunity for increasing the quantum of floorspace further. The Landowner broadly supports the vision, spatial framework (Annex 2) and strategic policies of the NEC AAP, but seeks the following clarifications from the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Services (‘GCSP’) team / changes to draft Policy:

Strongly agree

No answer given