Redevelopment of Clarendon House in Cambridge approved despite residents’ privacy concerns

Approval has been given for the redevelopment of Clarendon House in Cambridge into a new office block, despite neighbours’ concerns that it will dominate the area and affect their privacy.

There were 56 objections to the plans from Prudential UK Real Estate and Wrenbridge, which said the existing 1980s office block in Clarendon Road was in need of “significant investment”.

The existing three-storey office block and undercroft car park will be partially demolished and a new office development built in its place, ranging in height from three to five storeys, which will step down to the street. It will also feature undercroft parking.

The developers said they will reuse the existing steel frame “to reduce the embedded carbon in construction”.

Francesca Leadlay, a spokesperson for a group of neighbours who objected to the plans, told Cambridge City Council’s planning committee last Wednesday (24 July) that it will be an “over-development” of the site and “dominate the surrounding houses”.

She told councillors they were concerned about a loss of privacy due to overlooking from the new office block, which will feature large windows and roof terraces

But council planning officers did not feel the new office block would “significantly harm” the neighbours’ residential amenity.

They argued that the design of the proposals and the “reduced scale” at the front of the building meant it would “successfully knit into the surrounding context”.

Cllr Katie Thornburrow (Lab, Petersfield) felt the roof terraces could be “quite disruptive for residents nearby” and suggested a restriction in their use. Cllr Naomi Bennett (Green, Abbey) shared concerns.

It was agreed to impose a condition that they should only be used between 11am to 7pm, from Monday to Friday.

Cllr Nadya Lokhmotova (Lib Dem, Trumpington) welcomed the retention of the steel frame, and felt it was something that should be seen in more redevelopments. She called on the developer to “make all efforts to reuse what is possible from the existing building”.

Cllr Mike Todd-Jones (Lab, Arbury) was “unconvinced” by the plans, raising concerns about the “mass, scale and size” of the building in relation to its surroundings.

But a majority of the committee agreed to approve the application.

‘We’re concerned about overlooking’

Residents spoke of their concerns about the Clarendon House development following the city council’s decision to approve it.

Francesca Leadlay told the Cambridge Independent: “We’re very disappointed in the decision. The height, scale and massing would dominate surrounding houses and flats, leading to serious impacts on neighbours’ living conditions.

“We’re concerned about overlooking and noise from multiple windows and high-level roof terraces, loss of privacy, an excessive increase in office space, loss of mature trees and overdevelopment on a residential street.”

She pointed out that the current office block has a floorspace of 29,267 sq ft and will be replaced by an office block 2.4 times larger, stretching over 71,300 sq ft..

Residents are also concerned that the car ramp has been moved to the south of the site, close to the boundary with Orchid building, which is part of the Kaleidoscope flats.

“Moving the car ramp to the south of the site would cause noise pollution, as windows of neighbouring flats are very close to the boundary,” said Francesca. “Given its highly sustainable location, the 20 car parking spaces should have been reduced, particularly when Brooklands, from the same developer, has 11 spaces.”

The residents were also concerned about the use of materials.

“We still maintain that chalk-white ridged cement cladding and white metal panels for the prominent front block are out of keeping with the conservation area,” Francesca added.

“Neighbours remain concerned the cumulative impacts from the nearby major development from the same developer, which is still under construction, haven’t been adequately assessed in terms of increased traffic congestion, air pollution, parking stress, and water issues.”