· 11 min read
Grafton Centre regeneration and investment strategy is a key project within Cambridge's Kite neighbourhood. The historical context of urban redevelopment is essential for understanding the motivations behind its transformation, particularly during the rise of privatisation and urban entrepreneurialism. The shift toward a market-driven approach has resulted in significant pressures on social infrastructure, including housing. The government's involvement in addressing housing supply issues, particularly after 2006, emphasised financialisation as a solution to social challenges.
Since its designation as an “Area of Major Change” in 2014, the Grafton Centre’s redevelopment initially focused on retail and student accommodation. However, increasing demand for laboratory space driven by the Oxford-Cambridge Arc and a shortage of facilities in the region led to a shift in focus. With investments exceeding £500 million, private developer Pioneer Group is leading the creation of innovation-driven spaces. These change comes with significant impacts, and require necessary preconditions to be met, funding mechanisms, and cumulative progression in order to reach the Smart Growth goals in regeneration. The ultimate goal is to align economic, social, and environmental priorities to ensure the Grafton Centre's success as part of Cambridge's long-term urban development.
Opportunities and risks
The “Quadruple Helix Model” (Figure 1) (Schütz, Heidingsfelder and Schraudner, 2019, p. 128) applied for the Grafton Centre’s redevelopment case helps analyse the different stakeholders involved and their varied levels of efficacy - a useful discussion for future policy design and implementation.
Strengthened connectivity with innovation clusters
The shared effort from public authorities and private partners to improve the existing built infrastructure has led to an approximate £520 million in Research and Development investment between 2021-2021 (See Figure 1) (HM Government, 2024). This drive for innovation has led the Grafton Centre project to expand lab space in urbanised, densely specific zones. It is important to note that the boundaries of the Specific Plan District (SPD) are determined by the public-private partnership between the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Council and Pioneer Group. The goal is to advance the Grafton Centre as part of Cambridge's existing twelve clusters, fostering connectivity and growth. This aligns with Duany, Plater-Zyberk, and Speck’s concept of concentrated growth within neighbourhoods, which aims to narrow the gap in lab space (2.2 million square meters) within the Oxford-Cambridge Arc (Duany, Plater-Zyberk and Speck, 2000). The initiative is further supported by the Greater Cambridge Deal’s Devolution Agenda, which targets £500 million to attract technological infrastructure and labour capable of supporting the “knowledge economy” (Jones and Evans, 2008, p.55). Moreover, Figure 1 emphasises, how coordinating actions within the Grafton Centre project—from the initial gathering to the “referendum and neighbourhood plan” can foster public interest and knowledge exchange, thereby alleviating the pressures of innovation and labour shortages in Cambridge (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2015, p. 19). This is further consolidated by the potential improvements in transportation and mobility around the Kite area, including the addition of 1,160 new cycle parking spaces, safe paths, and streets (Corstophine & Wright Architects, 2023).
Revitalisation of green and public spaces
The Grafton Centre aligns its design with the Cambridge City Council Planning Committee (2014) by proposing a circular approach focused on restoring and repurposing the built environment. Although the Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted social and economic preferences among the four members of the Quadruple Helix, particularly due to increased commuting distances and changes in work patterns. Rather than building fewer houses within the Kite and delaying the response of the construction industry and housing market, it is crucial to prioritise the repurposing of materials while interacting with the project’s audience in the design process (Downs, 2005). For example, the open space inside the Grafton Centre will be transformed into a life sciences quarter with collaborative areas and the creation of green spaces accessible to the public (Corstophine & Wright Architects, 2023). This commitment is evident in the subcontracting of Macgregor Smith for the proposal to plant 22 new trees (excluding the SPD) and the inclusion of a green rooftop on the Centre’s sixth floor (Cambridge City Council, 2024). Therefore the positive interplay of the four main actors within the “urban growth boundary (UGB)” concentrates on sustainable and innovative outcomes for the Kite area – Figure 1 (Weber and Crane, 2012, p.421).
A project driven by progress or profit?
The Grafton Redevelopment project and its role in forming part of the knowledge-intensive clusters in Cambridge may result in potential negative externalities, as uncertainty arises over whether this shift is driven by genuine innovation measures or market incentives. According to Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, the success of a knowledge-intensive infrastructure project depends on its ability to maintain community cohesion, accessibility, and the economic activity of other services in the area – see Figure 1 (Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, 2021). Currently, there are approximately 5,300 lab-intensive firms in Cambridge, generating a turnover of £51 billion and employing over 219,000 workers (Cambridge Ahead, 2024). Competitive efforts and diversified activity, specific from the mature Cambridge lab spaces such as Granta Park, the Wellcome Genome Campus and the Brabraham Research Campus, account for 59 per cent of the total R&D activity in Cambridge (Cambridge Ahead, 2024). This market dominance increases barriers to entry in the innovation sector. In the case of the Grafton Centre, still in the early phase of incubation, it is characterised by high risk and uncertainty, including the potential underestimation of any Initial Public Offering (IPO) following planning committee approval (Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, 2024). This makes it challenging for Pioneer Group and other private corporations to match such high levels of profit and employment turnover. This disparity is also shown when comparing the floor space dedicated to labs and innovation between existing science campuses and the Grafton Centre. The Grafton Centre fulfils only 12 per cent of the required 415,400 square meters stated in the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning – Iceni report (2024) (Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, 2024).
An ineffective repurposing of space?
At a national scale, citizens are ageing longer than ever before, yet parents are delaying having children (Jones and Evans, 2008). Both trends contribute to a reduction in the average family size. As a result, the decrease in household size and the rise in the household population are putting greater pressure on the supply of housing. In this case, the Greater Cambridge Local Plan suggests that to meet Cambridge’s affordable housing target, 550 new homes need to be built yearly (Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, 2021). However, the repurposing of the Grafton Centre’s floor space into lab space, retail, and leisure facilities (including a hotel with 4,604 sqm and a cinema with 3,391 sqm), along with the demolition of residential housing at 11-12 Burleigh Street, leaves no space to address this housing issue (Corstophine & Wright Architects, 2023). The Greater Cambridge Shared Planning report (2024) emphasises the importance of ensuring that workers have proximity to their workplaces to retain the local labour supply, which the Grafton Centre will therefore struggle with. Furthermore, the shift from retail and commercial sectors to knowledge-intensive activities primarily targets highly educated, skilled labour, which effectively displaces lower-skilled workers who previously occupied positions in these services (Powell and Spencer, 2003).
“Property-owning democracy”, is defined as the freedom and prosperity associated with owning one’s own home (Moore, 2023, p.35). This concept emerged in the 1970s when privatisation became the newly established order in the UK. Building on this, the incentives for existing homeowners in the Kite area to hold on to their properties for as long as possible, due to the potential increase in land value and the shortage of supply, will make the housing market within the Kite increasingly exclusive. These market forces could displace lower-income households, resulting in the commodification of once-communal spaces to a value-creating environment (Powell and Spencer, 2003). This trend contradicts The Equality Act 2010, which asserts that the ideal vision is one where land development and the built environment belong to the public (Cabinet Office, 2021).
Figure 1: (Cambridge City Council, 2017, 2024; Schütz, Heidingsfelder and Schraudner, 2019, p. 1; Greater Cambridge Shared Planning, 2024).
Shaping a 2040 vision for regeneration and investment strategy in Cambridge
The Grafton Centre has highlighted the existing stakeholders involved and the potential positive and negative externalities that can arise from responding to market pressures within the innovation sector. In this section, Figure 2, titled ‘2040: Informing Regeneration and Investment Pyramid’, offers a comprehensive strategy for redevelopment for local councils aimed at achieving the ultimate Smart Growth goals (Shrivastava and Sharma, 2012).
Inclusivity in affordable housing practices
Figure 2, demonstrates the baseline conditionality on how reaching a state-led program for smart growth policies contributes to governance capacity, public objectives, circular approaches, and economic security (O’Connell, 2008 cited in Weber and Crane, 2012).
From a public partner perspective, this strategy demonstrates Cambridge’s urgent need to address housing affordability, an issue that should have been incorporated into the Grafton Centre’s agenda-setting phase. This approach can encourage the actors involved to focus on contributing to the provision of affordable housing, particularly where the market fails to do so. Figure 2 highlights the importance of stakeholders recognising the council’s objectives and engaging with appropriate social priorities within the investment strategy for future knowledge-intensive redevelopment projects. In this context, local authorities can leverage the national government’s “New Home Bonus” scheme to further commit to the introduction of council housing (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2015, p. 13). From a Smart Growth Policy perspective, the delivery of council housing should not be solely aimed at low-income groups; instead, no income-level distinction should be made in housing planning (Weber and Crane, 2012). This approach requires a shift in policy thinking, prioritising social values over financialisation; learning from international examples, such as Singapore, where nearly 80 per cent of the population lives and has access to state-provided homes, the government also benefits by collecting rent value from these properties (Moore, 2023).
Local stewardship and community assets
The strengths of the Grafton Centre redevelopment, and that of any local authority, should be rooted in treating every citizen as a heterogeneous identity, each with distinct needs and expectations from regeneration efforts. This idea is supported by Early, who emphasises the adaptation of “community asset” (Figure 2), to advance cumulative progress and connectivity throughout the implementation and agenda-setting phases of redevelopment projects (Early, 2023, p. 11). Acknowledging that state-driven community awareness in policy can be abstract, it is important to propose proxy measurements that local authorities and private developers can use when setting the agenda and future implementation for regeneration projects. For example, this could include a focus on the built environment’s impact on vulnerable populations.
For instance, the Children and Young People (CYP) association argues that over 7 per cent of young people are underrepresented and face barriers to urban inclusion and set to increase by 2045 (Pojani, 2023). This issue is highlighted by the UN Sustainable Development Goals of 2016, which granted children and young people the right to participate in all stages of the policy cycle. In the case of the Grafton Project, however, little attention was given to the nearby schools such as Parkside Community College, Brunswick Primary School (located on Newmarket Road), or St. Matthews School on East Road, all of which are hubs of local education and social activity in the Kite (Kite Community Action, 1976). Recognizing these community proxies could help prevent both physical and psychological displacement in redevelopment. Moreover, on the other end of the age spectrum, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of the elderly community, compounded by the growing “senior surge” (Pojani, 2023, p.79). This demographic shift requires local authorities and private developers to adjust their planning strategies to foster connectivity amongst all age groups in the SPD (Figure 2). In the case of the Grafton Centre, the construction of lab spaces in the Kite seems to target the young, highly-skilled sector of the population, potentially sidelining the activities and needs of older generations, and thus affecting community good preferences (Lennon, 2022).
Figure 2: ( Downs, 2005; Huxley, 2009; Weber and Crane, 2012; Early, 2023; Gibson, 2024)
Recommendations and concluding remarks
Conceiving a 2040 Regeneration and Investment Strategy should be based on the capacity of stakeholders to identify the means to achieve the ends; Smart Growth Goals, with a focus on coordination and inclusivity, particularly at the beginning of the redevelopment phases (Figure 2). Aligning with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), the strategy should encourage a push for alternative growth policies, which can be supported by funds from Single Budget Programmes and/or “Value Capture Finance” measures (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2015, p. 13). These measures can be tailored to address specific pre-investment social and infrastructure strategies. Moreover, given the current and future context of globalisation and neoliberal pressures, where cities are increasingly competitive in knowledge-intensive sectors, the 2040 strategy should seek to balance both investor and consumer desires within the project. It is not enough to rely on simplistic or market-driven approaches to inclusively address social, environmental, and economic interests. For example, local authorities could use tools from Figures 1 and 2 alongside the collaboration of public authorities and private developers to establish neighbourhood land trusts, enabling communities to take tenure of assets, as well as reinvest in third-party local organisations (Marks, 2024). This would empower the residents to actively administer and preserve communal infrastructure in the future.
In conclusion, the Grafton Centre Redevelopment is an ambitious project aimed at transforming the Kite into a smaller-scale version of Cambridge’s renowned Science Parks. With a mix of commercial and lab-space schemes, it offers the potential benefits of significantly reshaping the built environment, contributing to the existing innovation clusters and reconstructing green and public spaces. However, this innovative aim comes with the potential risks of gentrification and competitive pressures mostly felt by the lower-income households in the Kite. As discussed in Section 4, the 2040 Investment and Regeneration Strategy encourages, local stewardship, effective communication, and coordination among stakeholders during both the pre and post-application phases of redevelopment projects. Therefore, hoping to interconnect the four elements of the ‘Quadruple Helix Model’, providing mutual benefits and shared risks for the targeted urban area.
illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.
