What next?
We were on BBC Radio Cambridgeshire this morning, 10th December, as the dust settles on the approval of the outline planning permission by the Secretary of State following Railpen’s lobbying of the Government and investigations by the Planning Inspector. In principle, the outline planning permission has been granted.
Here are a few points from that interview:
We should be proud. We pushed the developers from the start, questioning the accuracy of the initial plans and asking about heights, and following up on the developer’s obfuscation, the site could have been developed to a much larger scale, affecting urban heat islands and biodiversity, setting a height and scale precedent for all of the city and beyond.
We don’t think the developers would have reduced the scheme's volume anywhere near as much as they did without the volume of protest which held them to account.
We are pleased that the Secretary of State acknowledges that homes bordering the site would suffer significant daylight loss and overshadowing if the development were built to the maximum permitted heights under the outline consent. A condition that ensures any future detailed design does not worsen daylight or sunlight, or cause overshadowing of properties in the illustrative plan, is welcome. The Secretary of State gives this harm significant weight, and the applicant should be conscious of harm at the Reserved Matters stage.
The other noteworthy condition concerns open space and noise, as an early presentation indicated that tall buildings would prevent noise pollution. One cannot be traded against the other. Any use of open spaces for events must comply with environmental standards.
We are disappointed that it’s lab space and remain uncertain about its future proofness, and believe housing would be better. We always understood the site would change.
It also shows how critical it is for residents to be aware of how developers operate in calling in planning applications and overturning planning processes, and speaking up.
It means more work at Reserved Matters to ensure the conditions to not reduce light at boundary properties are met.
We have felt this was a David-and-Goliath battle, and it has taken a toll on our well-being. We’ve been called small but vocal, yet we’ve remained honest, calling out inaccuracies such as Abbey being one of the most deprived areas in Cambridge, which has never appeared on any poverty maps. We remain cautious.
People may think they don’t want to live around Silverwood Close or the York Street area, but we say ‘do’ because it has a strong sense of community and support. We speak up and look after each other.
We intend to keep the Better Beehive website open so we can keep people informed on the key information around reserved matters and what steps to take to ensure our community voices are heard.
In summary, each building on the Beehive site required planning permission, which is why future stages remain significant and why we’re here for 'reserved matters'. At this point, the plans will include separate detailed planning applications for each major building, each requiring planning permission, so there will be an opportunity to comment in the future.