Bedford
The town's Station Quarter comes under our microscope in this week's EG. The council is proposing a £130m regentation of the site but has yet to find a developer, or assemble large chunks of the site.
It's not the only large scale development trying to take flight in the town. Melanie Smith has also looked at the progress of St Modwen's Town Centre West. Last month the council extended its agreement with the developer presumably to give St Modwen some breathing room to get the 19-acre scheme going. Some are building such as Goodman and Unilever at the Colworth Science Park (pictured), although already has EEDA backing and two universities signed up.
- Luton
Daniel Cunningham asks whether the long awaited renaissance of the town has ground to a halt. He analyses progress at Napier Park and Butterfields business park.
- Industrial
Last year's take up is nearly half the 2008 level, and Daniel finds that when asked to name requirements agents draw a blank. That said, Canmoor which bought a portfolio of four indsutrial estates from SEGRO is looking to speculative develop. To find out why they think this is a good idea read this week's EG.
Potential occupiers at Colworth Science Park need to be aware that until the Goodman/Unilever Joint Venture faces up to its responsibilities to the residents of Sharnbrook there’s no chance that Colworth will be permitted to grow in any substantial way.
Both the JV and EEDA are aware that large-scale expansion of the site would instantly breach the Borough’s Local Development Framework as it’s located in a wholly unsustainable location, surrounded by a self-evidently inadequate road and public transport infrastructure (just ask the staff that daily struggle to get in and out of the site).
Local Highways officers have stated – unequivocally - that a dedicated A6 Link Road is the only feasible solution that could allow the site to expand in any substantial way. A ray of hope appeared in 2008 when the JV submitted a proposal to the Allocations process to double the GFA of the site within 5 years, a proposal that would have allowed full, strategic examination of infrastructure issues.
After informal discussions with the planners – when it probably became apparent that there was no chance of the proposal being accepted - it was withdrawn and replaced, instead, with a request for ‘mere’ 20% increase in site area... plus permission for, wait for it, up to 61 houses.
Exactly what message does that send to potential occupiers and partners about the JV’s commitment to achieving EEDA’s vision for Colworth Science Park as a ‘national centre of excellence in Food, Health and Wellness’ and a ‘regional hub for Open Innovation’? Not a positive one I'd venture...