Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to make responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

The proposed vision for the Cambridge Northern Fringe East (CNFE) reflects the Councils' intention to support new development in what is currently the largest brownfield site in the city (excepting it straddles South Cambridgeshire District Council's administrative boundary). From a simple planning perspective, the promotion of new development on a large previously developed site in a highly sustainable location in one of the Country's growth locations is entirely sensible. In such a context, the aspirational vision set out on page 9 of the consultation document reflects the need to make the best use of a scarce resource, i.e. brownfield land, for new development. This will ensure that Cambridge continues to play an important role in bringing new jobs and investment into the city area and importantly into an area where people want to live.

The current hearings taking place on the Examination to both Local Plans have heard detailed evidence from a number of parties who have asserted that both Councils have significantly underestimated the housing requirements over the plan period. The consequence of an Inspector concluding that significant housing is needed over and above the current figures in the draft plans is to force the issue of providing new jobs. In the circumstances where the "golden thread" runs through the Councils strategy to align the number of new jobs and the number of new homes, this places greater importance on the Councils need to identify major new employment sites.

The focus for new employment in general within the Cambridge Northern Fringe East is therefore supported although it can only play part of the role in accommodating new development. Indeed this is borne out by the concerns expressed by the College and St John's Innovation Centre who Savills also represent, about the realistic proposition that the area will provide significant amounts of new employment and housing as expressed within some of the options. With Anglian Water being the largest landowner in the area and containing a land use which has an impact on the nature and location of surrounding uses, it is clear that decisions made by them will dictate the timetable, shape and form of new development; whilst the planning system might provide the context for the planning policy against which development proposals are considered, ultimately it is the decision of the landowners (including Anglian Water) as to when or indeed if such proposals come forward.

Development proposals for this part of the CNFE have been mooted many times before and the likelihood of major change occurring remains the same as it has been in the past - if sufficient finances are in place for landowners (and in particular Anglian Water in terms of their regulatory framework), then presumably those landowners would look to adopt a position in terms of bringing development sites forward. Anglian Water have a more complicated position in terms of either contracting on site or relocating elsewhere.

The vision as expressed on page 9 is exactly that - it is a vision. Indeed the broad elements of the vision could in fact be applied to most areas of regeneration, i.e. the need to make development successful (however that is defined), to meet residential and commercial need, to provide for high quality sustainable transport to create a well-connected and visual place and to enhance the environmental area.

The second part of the "progressed vision" lists a series of other characteristics of the CNFE that are being sought as a result of the plan's intentions.

One matter which does not appear to be expressed within the vision is the intention to consolidate existing development through plot intensification. This particular phrase is referred to in the keys accompanying the four options within the document. The notation applies to Cambridge Business Park for Options 1 to 4 but only in options 3 and 4 for St. John's Innovation Park. (This is inconsistent with the Councils' own appointed consultants SQW who do not appear to have made any differentiation as to which Option should only encourage plot densification on the Innovation Park - see paragraph 1.29 and 1.34 of SQW's report "CNFE Employment Guidance for the Area Action Plan"). Whilst the term "regeneration" is used within the vision we consider that the vision should be more explicit in terms of referring to plot densification as an approach that is being applied to the area.

Accordingly whilst we broadly support the proposed vision we consider that the opportunities afforded by increasing floorspace and thereby new jobs and investment within existing employment areas is equally valid as the creation of new employment areas. To that end we consider that a new bullet point be inserted in the second paragraph to read:

"That optimum use of existing employment areas within the CNFE is made through plot densification where appropriate."

In this context it is noted that the St John's landholding east of Milton Road and west of Cowley Road including the St John's Innovation Centre is proposed to fall within the CNFE. In the same way that the Cambridge Business Park is identified as having potential for plot densification within all 4 options it is considered that this approach should also be applicable to the St John's land. This specific issue is covered elsewhere within the representations being made by our client.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to make response to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

The broad objectives cover the matters that are considered relevant to the new development within the boundary of the Area Action Plan. However we consider that it is important to stress the importance of ensuring that there is an appropriate relationship between each of the land uses that are intending to come forward in each of the options. There is a danger in this context that whilst each of the different areas may come forward in different timescales, it is vital that the consequences and implications of development are assessed in terms of the impact upon the neighbouring land uses.

Whilst there is reference to a new neighbourhood being "well integrated with the wider community", it is possible to simply assume that this relates to the new residential areas near the station given the reference to "neighbourhood". A more focussed objective which acknowledges the importance of securing appropriate relationships between different uses within the plan area seems to be relevant in our view. This is partly due to the College's concern about the proximity and relationship of any proposed "Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility" to the existing B1 uses on their landholding on the west side of Cowley Road. These specific issues are raised under separate representation.

In the light of the above and the need to express the need for proper planning of the area and the need to ensure appropriate land use relationships between both new and existing developments and indeed new adjacent developments to one another, it is recommended that Proposed Objective 1 be amended to read:

"Deliver a place that fosters a range of new development which is integrated into wider community and where appropriate land use relationships are secured between new and existing development."

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to make response to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

The current AAP includes the St John's College's landholdings east of Milton Road. On the basis that the St John's site is acknowledged to have potential for further development, i.e. "plot densification" as termed within the options, then it is appropriate to be included provided that there are no more onerous conditions or policies applied to this plan area compared to those which do not fall within the area. Representations have been made to the Plan to ensure that the St John's land has the same opportunity to create new and additional floorspace in the same manner as the Cambridge Business Park.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to make response to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

It is difficult to see the direct relevance of the Science Park to the significant development opportunities that exist further to the east. Whilst it is accepted that traffic entering and leaving the AAP area will affect traffic in and out of the Science Park, we are unsure why its inclusion is relevant. This is particularly the case when a policy in the new emerging South Cambridgeshire Local Plan already supports additional floorspace on the site.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

We are unsure as to whether the inclusion or not of this site will have any real effect on the delivery of the development near the station although if this area of land is required to ensure necessary and relevant links to the CNFE as a whole and particularly the new station, then it should be included.. If the intention is to secure a comprehensive delivery of the railway station and the important connections to the south, including the Chisholm Trail, then it is clearly needed to secure consistency of approach to include it in the plan area.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

We consider that Cambridge North Station would be the best name of the alternatives provided. Another option that might be worth considering is Cambridge Science Parks as the term "science park" is a generic term.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

It is clear that there are a large number of issues and constraints that are relevant to future development proposals and indeed it is the presence of these that have been the determining factors in why development has not progressed in the area to date despite many plans and proposals over the years.

As noted in separate responses to other questions, the issue of landownership and a commitment to those landowners to bring forward land for development remains a critical feature of the Plan. The discussions will be affected by a whole series of issues not least the values that would accrue from any change in land use having regard to all the technical and environmental issues raised in your paragraphs 6.3 to 6.16. In such a context as far as the College is concerned, it is the environmental impact of the neighbouring land use that is a critical issue in the circumstances where the Anglian Water site is retained in its present form but with a new Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility. The relationship between B1 offices (including the research and development uses) on the land at the Innovation Park and the water infrastructure facilities across the road is a key one. Having said that, it is the case that St John's College secured planning permission last year for some 4400 sq m of B1(a) office floorspace on the Innovation Park so there is clearly no objections in principle for such uses to come forward in circumstances where mitigation measures can be put in place. The College cannot sanction a strategy which would make such a relationship more sensitive and therefore strong objections are raised to the siting of such a new Recycling Centre as shown in the four options. These matters are raised in separate responses to other questions.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

We have made responses already to Q1 on the objectives including suggested wording to refer to the need for the strategy to reflect plot densification. On the specific issue of the College's interest, it is important that this section on Development Proposals reflects the opportunities provided to increase economic activity and deliver additional employment space to cater for new business - maximising employment opportunities is a main objective of the AAP and the St John's land must fall within such a scope. Separate representations are made to the Plan to ensure that the reference to plot densification should also apply to the St John's land.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

This option relates to the lower level of development whereby Anglian Water resolve to remain in situ. Their presence in the central and northern part of the site has a major bearing on potential adjacent land uses having regard to the character of the infrastructure and the consequent cordon sanitaire that is in place within the Minerals and Waste LDF plan and which provides for a safeguarding area around the edge of the site.

There are effectively two main issues that are of concern to the College in the context of this Option 1.

Firstly, and as stated in separate responses to other questions, it is noted in this Option 1 (and indeed in Option 2) that the St John's land does not benefit from the proposal for plot densification that is applicable to the Cambridge Business Park. We cannot see why any differentiation is made when comparing the two areas. Indeed the current St John's Innovation Park density is considerably lower than the Business Park - the opportunities that are afforded by increasing floorspace in both those areas is consistent with Objective 3 of the Plan. Consequently we feel that the key and the plan for Option 1 needs amending to ensure that plot densification also applies to the St John's land. Indeed work undertaken by SQW on behalf of the Council's "CNFE Employment Guidance for the Area Action Plan" and which is the supporting material for the Issues and Options Report makes it quite clear at paragraphs 1.29 and 1.34 that intensification of the St John's Innovation Park is acceptable without affecting the quality of development. (There is no logic as to why plot intensification could not come forward now. It is not dependant on anything that might or might not happen with the Anglian Water landholding and which is implied by Options 3 and 4)

Secondly, the option shows a new "Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility" to be located to the north of the Anglian Water site. It is surprising that there is no definition of this facility within Appendix 3 (Glossary of Terms) and we consider that it requires specific reference. At the Public Exhibition, Officers confirmed that the facility was essentially a relocation of the current Butt Lane facility at Milton. Such a use clearly has to be carefully sited and in this context, the College is particularly concerned to see Option 1 include such a facility located close to the offices and other businesses at the Innovation Park. In the circumstances where alternative locations exist either within the new or existing areas to the south of the Anglian Water landholding then this would seem a more appropriate location to site such a facility. Locating such a use with its attendant characteristics including noise, dust and traffic close to high technology offices and buildings does not make for logical planning and consequently from a business perspective, dilutes the profile of the Innovation Park. This is the absolute antithesis of what we are seeking to achieve and consequently we cannot support Option 1.

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

As with the College's response to Q10, it remains the case that the College's landholdings at the Innovation Park should be considered in Option 2 as having the same potential for the intensification of employment provision in the same way that the Cambridge Business Park has been identified, i.e. plot densification. We cannot see why any differentiation is made when comparing the two areas. Indeed the current St John's Innovation Park density is considerably lower than the Business Park - the opportunities that are afforded by increasing floorspace in both those areas is consistent with Objective 3 of the Plan. Consequently we feel that the key and the plan for Option 2 needs amending to ensure that plot densification also applies to the St John's land. Indeed work undertaken by SQW on behalf of the Council's "CNFE Employment Guidance for the Area Action Plan" and which is the supporting material for the Issues and Options Report makes it quite clear at paragraphs 1.29 and 1.34 that intensification of the St John's Innovation Park is acceptable without affecting the quality of development. (There is no logic as to why plot intensification could not come forward now. It is not dependant on anything that might or might not happen with the Anglian Water landholding and which is implied by Options 3 and 4)

Additionally the proposed location of the Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility remains in the same location as shown in Option 1 and where the College have strong concerns about the appropriateness of such a new facility in that location having regard to the proximity to the offices and research activities at the Innovation Park.