It comes as no surprise to anyone that the Cambridge City Council Planning Committee rubberstamped the Kett House Karbuncle five votes to one
You can watch the planning hearing here and come to your own conclusions.
The only councillor objecting was Cllr Mike Todd Jones (Lab – Arbury) – but don’t worry, I’m not going to do a hatchet job on the committee. I’ll leave it to them to explain *why* they voted the way they did given the looming local elections in three months time. (The spirit of Puffles the Dragon Fairy’s house rules that are over 15 years old, are still relevant – perhaps even more so in this toxic age of online abuse?)
“The results indicate that specific design features – particularly repetitive façade features – can robustly predict visual stress.”
“Given the officer’s recommendation of approval, it’s not like they had much choice”
That’s up to them and their supporters to explain to their electorate, giving them a crash course on the planning system.
“I saw the contribution of the lead planning officer warning against refusing … That there were no grounds of ‘significant harm’ for refusing; and that the other two Station Rd sites which were originally refused and then went to appeal had been expensive losses for the Council.”
Above – former Queen Edith’s Cllr Sam Davies MBE on birdsite
This relates to the Wilton Terrace case down the road, demolition of which was refused by the Planning Committee following a huge local campaign to save the Victorian Terrace from Brookgate’s wrecking ball. The problem was when the outline planning permission was secured for the Cambridge Station redevelopment, it included provision for demolishing Wilton Terrace, with the planning permission for the redevelopment of that address being a reserved matter. Despite the best efforts of the late Cllr John Hipkin that Brookgate would simply appeal and win huge costs, the councillors refused, Brookgate appealed, and Cambridge City Council was faced with £250,000 bill.
The existing Kett House building, which I don’t like either, was built in the late 1960s, so Cambridge is stuck with this bland bulky monster courtesy of Stanhope who engaged
- Bennetts Associates as architects
- Bidwells for planning, heritage, and townscape
- KMC Transport for transport
- Robert Myers Associates for landscape architects
- Marengo Communications for stakeholder and public communications
That to me tells me that they did not want the public to see what they proposed lest there be any pushback. And few people did. Broken local government structures, broken local media systems (actually, extend that to national and international as well), and combination of high population turnover and high costs of living means few people have the time to spend wading through a huge volume of documents – this application having 155 documents accompanying it.
Furthermore, I’ve learnt from too many public consultations that anything promoted by Bidwells is going to be of an architectural style I will find hideous, and anything involving Marengo Communications will more than likely involve having a conversation with a highly-paid consultant who knows next to nothing about the city or its challenges.
Now that we have a development corporation approaching plus some new national design guidance which feels like a step-up from anything I’ve seen before, I hope these will hopefully mean we can demand better from industry. I look forward to some ***splendid designs*** being promoted by Bidwells representatives (i.e. far, far better than merely ‘acceptable’ or ‘meets the minimum standards…’ , and some locally-based consultants commissioned by Marengo Communications so that residents don’t have to keep on re-educating consultants on things they should already know. Because at the moment the visual built environment welcomes into Cambridge are absolutely miserable.
Welcome to Cambridge – home of disaster capitalism design!
Cambridge from the South
Anyone coming into Cambridge from Addenbrooke’s will get to see some of the worst buildings in Cambridge that demonstrate contempt for both residents and tourists alike.
Above – from the Consultant’s Report for Cambridge City Council on The Marque, p26 – Cambridge Acorn are acting on behalf of members resident in building ‘E’ because the design and construction of the social housing was so poor that it is resulting in heating and damp issues.
Above – Kwartet of Karbuncles
- The Belvedere which when built had huge hoardings that said “45 minutes from King’s Cross” (Questionable claim at the best of times as my commuting experience told me) with the hideous Travelodge in the foreground
- Cambridge Leisure Park by Land Securities which managed to make some much-needed amenities (eg a bowling alley) look so awful on the outside that, along with the Travelodge ***are now up for comprehensive redevelopment*** because LandSec figured out their investment isn’t doing as well as it had hoped.
- The Marque – the less said the better
Cambridge from the East
Newmarket Road is one of the most miserable of thoroughfares at the best of times – so much so that I think rebuilding the gasometers of old would be an improvement. Today it’s a car-filled alley of the blandest of budget hotel architecture from the early 21st Century – something that RailPen are proposing adding to.
Above – I moaned about RailPen back in Sept 20204 here
Cambridge from the north – Histon Road
Above – Mount [un]Pleasant House by St Edmund’s College – which somehow managed to build an even more bland design for a replacement to the building that was there before
And it doesn’t get much better on Milton Road
Above – Milton Road looking south, from G-Maps here
“I get the sense that Cambridge’s ugly gateways are not a new issue”
Back in 2024 I asked:
“Why are the main routes into our city filled with dull buildings?”
…and noted that in 2020 the Place Alliance published a report
- “New housing design is overwhelmingly ‘mediocre’ or ‘poor’ – Because the improvement is from a low base, today the design of new housing developments are still overwhelmingly ‘mediocre’ or ‘poor’ (three quarters of the audited projects).
- “Many schemes should have been refused – One in five of the audited schemes should have been refused planning permission outright. The design of many others should have been improved before relevant permissions were granted.”
You can read the full report and the summary from https://placealliance.org.uk/research/national-housing-audit/
“Is it all bad news?”
Depends who you talk to.
The Government has launched a consultation on a new national design guide which you can view here – deadline for responses is 10 March 2026
Above – Government consultation on a national design guide
Do have a look because it has some ***really interesting things*** in it. I wrote a few things about it here but having had a more detailed look it, there are some useful pointers on all things heritage – even though it’s too late for most of Cambridge, most of our interesting town heritage having been demolished.
Above – Design and Placemaking draft guidance (HMSO 2026) pp55-57
I also really like how the guidance is laid out and illustrated too. I think I stumbled across this while talking to the manager of the wonderful new Oz & Isle bar at the back of the Old Police Station which for the first time in ***years*** was a historical space not only restored but more importantly ***enhanced*** by the conversion.
Above – ***Isn’t this marvellous?!?***
I even made an IG Reel and over 200 people have seen it!
See? The construction industry can design and build nice things!
Anyway, my next blogpost is on the long-awaited consultation on the development corporation.
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:
The Cambridge Town Owl 