Draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan

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. 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’. The Site falls within zone ‘KK’ of that document (Annex 4), which states a parcel size of 2.14ha (gross) but has not been considered for any form of redevelopment on the basis that it is deemed to be unavailable: ‘Single land ownership. Discussion with landowner confirms that there are no plots within this development parcel which will be available for redevelopment during the Plan period due to existing leaseholder agreements’. For the reasons set out in the earlier introduction, this is incorrect. Both buildings are likely to be available within the first half of the Plan Period. We therefore would request that GCSP reconsiders its assessment of potential for Buildings 270 and 296, which together could feasibly have redevelopment potential for 10,000 – 12,000m2 (subject to assessment, modelling and design). Given that the existing buildings currently offer approximately 5,500m2 GIA, it is considered that redevelopment could provide an increase of 4,500 – 6,500m2 GIA. We think it might also be useful for the table to refer to the recent consent (S/0630/15/FL) that was achieved on part of site KK (excluding Building 296), which would provide some context to what has previously been considered in terms of quantum, layout, density and scale.

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 Buildings 270 and 296 are 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 would then step-down to 4 storeys on the Site’s edge near the A14, as recommended. 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 The Vitrum Building (‘Vitrum’) on St John’s Innovation Park (‘SJIP’). 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. Vitrum is 3-storeys in height, of approximately 3,200m2 (GIA), built in the 2000s. The building is currently leased, with the earliest opportunity for vacant possession in 2024. 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 Vitrum 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 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

SJIP is formed around 2/3 storey large footprint buildings, with a large central amenity green space at its centre, and dense landscaping and generous car parking provision around its edges. The most recent addition to SJIP was the construction of the Maurice Wilks building, currently occupied by Darktrace, an office building of 4/5 storeys in height totalling 7,049m2 (GIA). There has also recently been a planning application submitted on the adjoining site to the west of Vitrum for two new office buildings of 5/6 storeys in height totalling 30,734m2 (GIA). This is currently awaiting determination. 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.

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 SJIP. One of the current issues with the SJIP is that people use it during core hours of work e.g. 0800 – 1800, Monday to Friday. However, during the evening and at weekends SJIP 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 SJIP. The centres will therefore help foster greater activity and vibrancy around the SJIP (for instance, new places to eat and drink might extend the time people stay in the SJIP area, 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 SJIP.