With a planning hearing looming for the proposed redevelopment of the Beehive Centre, the public comments (both in support of, and in objection to) are worth a browse.
Image – For those of you who want an olden days crash course in town planning
I moaned about it here and in a host of other blogposts as I have been following this application and turned up in person to a number of public consultation events – basically giving their transport proposals a metaphorical thrashing because you’d have thought the Railway Workers’ Pension Fund would have been up for ***building a new railway station*** to support their long term investment.
Cambridge Past Present and Future’s sustained objection
See here and scroll down/Ctrl+F for ‘Beehive’
“Adopted Policy 40 (Development and expansion of business space) does not identify the Beehive Centre as a location for offices and R&D development. It therefore requires development to be considered on its merits. We consider that the need for the development is not justified. The Council’s evidence shows that there is sufficient development in the pipeline to meet the need and longer-term requirements should be identified through the Local Plan. Notwithstanding changes to the design and the reduced building heights, we consider that the buildings are still overpowering from some views and have a negative impact on the Conservation Area contrary to policies 60 and 61.“
Above – Cambridge PPF, referring to the Cambridge Local Plan 2018 and the policies within it.
Like me, they also have issues with transport access for the thousands of people who will need to access the site, a large proportion of whom will be highly skilled workers that the existing labour market cannot provide for. Hence the further pressure on housing demand and commuting/transport infrastructure.
“We still consider that this is an inappropriate location for a high-density employment development because of the limited accessibility by public transport. The proposal is of a regional scale and density and so requires public transport accessibility from the wider region, such as proximity to a main line train station or other mass-transport system. The Greater Cambridge Growth Sectors Study (Iceni September 2024) concludes that for both life sciences and ICT, development should be located where there is good public transport connections and rail connections are a priority for businesses needing a London connection.”
That Iceni Report (Sept 2024) was featured in Cambridge City Council’s press release here
I picked up on it at the time when Addenbrooke’s AGM highlighted the intolerable stresses that A&E is under. Which comes back to the concern Cllr Seb Kindersley of Cambridgeshire County Council made in that lots of people are talking about Cambridge Growth but they are not talking to each other about it – and specifically they are not doing enough to deal with the problems that such fast growth inevitably causes.
Cambridge City Council is not happy with the public art proposals
The recently updated submission I think from the public arts officers are striking – in that they are demanding far, far more from the developers. Which is splendid!
It’s in the document posted on 15 Jan 2025 and states:
“To…comply with the Public Art SPD, it is essential that the budget is revised to reflect the scale and significance of the development. We recommend that the developer submits the Capital Construction costs as required, using this as the foundation for budget negotiations and further revisions to the Strategy. Only with adequate funding and a wider artistic approach can the Strategy deliver on its promise of creating a vibrant and meaningful public art programme that supports Cambridge’s aspirations and mitigates the impact of development.”
I hope this is something that the wider Cambridge arts communities pick up on.
“Can they do better than the giant vertical poo statue in South Cherry Hinton for ARM and Peterhouse College?”
Above – the residents of Cherry Hinton have been having fun and games with the above image.
Anyway, keep an eye out on the meetings calendar for the next set of Planning Committee meetings because the comments of the councillors will be interesting – as will the officers’ recommendation.
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 BSky <- A critical mass of public policy people seem to have moved here
- 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 