Emerging proposals from Mission Street for their development on the old Coldham’s Lane Tip and the cement works are missing that all-important rail/light rail transport link
[*Updated to add*] -> You can watch the debate about this site by Cambridge City Councillors on East Area Committee here
You can see their updated proposals here
“Always going on about planning permissions you are!”
This spoof retired chap is my new hero! (Not the one in the still, the other one!)
Above – Waterford Whispers spoofing people who respond regularly to minor planning applications
“Old slab-of-meat lane again?”
Yep – covered in 2021 here, and then applauding Cherry Hinton residents who grilled the developers three months ago when the developers unveiled their proposals at the now closed-for-renovation Cherry Hinton Library.
The bit in green below from their materials here shows the location
Above – detail of the location
The railway line in dark grey on the map above is the Cambridge-Newmarket line. I made a video about the opportunity available when going to Plurabelle Books on Coldham’s Road (where you can get ***lots*** of local history books on Cambridge) near the railway junction.
Above – me with a train going past, en route from Cambridge-Ipswich along a route that passes
- The Beehive Centre where RailPEN want to build a sci-tech park
- Mission Street’s proposals for Land South of Coldham’s Lane / Cherry Hinton Innovation / Project Newton / watch this space for future name changes
- The Longfellow Group’s emerging proposals for Fulbourn Hospital and Capital Park
The opportunities were set out by Rail Future East in their document about Newmarket Vision
Given where East West Rail is progressing, and their predictions for Cambourne and a new town at Tempsford, for me it’s essential that the three science park proposals are connected by rail or light rail. Yet as things stand, the developers have not published anything in their plans about a new station for their development.
“Does it matter?”
Yes – look at the predicted number of new jobs.
At the upper end – and given the bubble it’s not unreasonable to assume the upper limit will happen, we’re looking at over 2,000 in-commuters from outside Cambridge City, and South Cambridgeshire District.
And that’s just for one of the three science park proposals. The Beehive Centre alone is planning for at least 5,000 jobs. What analysis has been done on the transport needs of all of these net additional jobs? Therefore in my humble opinion as local grumpy middle-aged angrybloke, the science park developers and land owners should be contributing substantially towards transport infrastructure improvements.It’s lucky that Cambridge Connect have a workable plan.
Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire – and the neighbouring districts (including those over the county boundaries Suffolk, Essex, Herts, Beds) need to assess the cumulative impact of the developments, and then make clear to the developers what the cumulative need for transport, arts, leisure, green spaces, sports, and public services will be. Do we know what this is? Do the councils have any powers to compel contributions for large facilities that serve not just the city, but the county and region? If not, then councillors and local MPs need to make the case to ministers for a change in government planning policies and guidance – if not the law itself.
Note at the same time the Cambridge Biomedical Campus is still going strong
Have a watch of the latest presentation to councillors on 21 June 2023 here. I also covered it briefly in an earlier blogpost here which has links to documents that ***really need scrutinising*** only I don’t have the headspace.
In fact as former councillor Clare King noted, keeping up with them all is not easy for anyone. Especially residents.
And looking eastward – which supports the case for upgrading rail infrastructure, there are even more – if I recall correctly Jane Hutchins of the Cambridge Science Park said there were around 30 that she knew of in the Cambridge Sub-region. Hence why. I believe there should be a collective effort to work out what their collective offer is on regional level facilities and infrastructure given that so many of their staff will be commuting in from across the region. Because at present there are some themes emerging – ones I picked up from the first presentation to Cambridge City Council from the Cambridge International Tech Park. (See the write up in the Cambridge News here)
Things like:
- Yoga classes
- Pocket parks
- Community rooms
- Multi-activities area
- Flexible space
- Hub-and-cafe
And it all feels ever so…bland.
As I mentioned in an earlier post:
“A gym and a few yoga classes in every new sci/tech development won’t meet Cambridge’s sports & leisure needs”
Cambridge Town Owl 21 June 2023
How do we go about formulating a grassroots response to what could become exclusive, identikit communities that exclude-by-design the people who don’t ‘fit’ into the sci-tech communities of interest but who live in the local neighbourhood and for whom this is home? Hence there is a democratic legitimacy and involving communities meaningfully at design stage to solve the problems that inevitably emerge with any new development.
Food for thought?
If you are interested in the longer term future of Cambridge, and on what happens at the local democracy meetings where decisions are made, feel free to:
- Follow me on Twitter
- Like my Facebook page
- Consider a small donation to help fund my continued research and reporting on local democracy in and around Cambridge.
The Cambridge Town Owl 