The redevelopment of Melbourn Science Park to replace "ageing" research buildings has been given the go ahead, despite concerns about the "dominating" size of the new facilities.
The application to redevelop the science park was submitted to South Cambridgeshire District Council by Bruntwood SciTech Melbourn Limited.
The plans proposed to demolish a number of the existing buildings within the science park, in order to replace them with larger research buildings, increasing the overall amount of technology research space.
The new research buildings are proposed to range in height, with the tallest planned to be 17metres high.
Some of the existing buildings are proposed to be kept, but are due to be refurbished and extended.
The plans also included building a six-storey ‘mobility hub’, set to be 21.2 metres in height, and contain 822 car parking spaces.
Objectors to the redevelopment argued the planned heights of the buildings would have an "overbearing impact" in the surrounding area, and raised concerns about the impact on highway safety, due to the increased number of people travelling to and from the science park for work.
The group Cambridge Past, Present and Future raised concerns that the six-storey car park would have a “dominating impact” on the countryside.
Melbourn Councillor Jose Hales said the design of the redevelopment was "metropolitan" and was not a "village development".
However, a representative of the developer said without improving the science park facilities, it could fall into “managed decline”.
They said: "The current park is ageing, and while well maintained most of the building stock is no longer fit for purpose in terms of current and future needs for life science occupiers.
"The proposals involve a significant element of replacement buildings and a more efficient use of the site through the rationalisation of the car parking, which allows the enhancement of the existing park land setting and the introduction of new village green, larger and high quality, beautiful buildings.
“Overall, this allows an increase in the quantum of floor space on the site, while retaining and reinforcing the attractiveness of the currently mature landscape.
"Crucially it allows for the development to become more environmentally efficient, addressing biodiversity, energy, and water scarcity targets, whilst also respecting the character of the location at the edge of the village."
Councillors considered the application at a meeting of the district council’s planning committee this week (March 13).
Councillor Heather Williams said: “We know there is need for the expansion of science and given where we are we can’t say no to every science based application.
"I think there is support and acceptance of where the science park is and it is a source of employment from people locally, and that is a positive thing.
"The car park is too high in my view.
"It needs to be lower, I appreciate there are commercial reasons why developers will want to not go into the ground and have basement car parking, but I think to make this an acceptable development it needs to be lower down."
Councillor Bill Handley said he was also worried about the building heights, and said he would like to see the developer come back to the committee with more mitigation for this.
However, other councillors said they believed the developer had done what they could to reduce the proposed heights.
Councillor Peter Fane said: "Of course we would like the developers, if they can, to find a way of reducing the height of that building in particular, but we have to realise we are here to consider what is before us, not what we may wish was before us."
READ MORE
- Motion to tackle period poverty approved by South Cambs district council
- Tolkien letter which could fetch £10,000 to be auctioned in Royston
Councillor Dr Tumi Hawkins said the expansion of research space at the park would go towards meeting a shortfall identified in the emerging Local Plan.
She said: "We might not like it but I think the applicants have done what they can do to make this proposal work."
The majority of councillors voted to approve the plans, with seven voting in favour and three voting against.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here