£81.2m regeneration of Arbury Court and Kingsway in Cambridge advances after assurances for traders

The £81.2million regeneration project for the north of Cambridge took a step forward after city councillors expressed support.

And claims that the project amounts to “gentrification” of what has been described as one of the “most deprived” parts of the city were challenged.

Councillors agreed to approve the indicative capital budget, subject to Homes England funding being received.

The project will involve building up to 410 new homes, including at least 206 council homes, to replace existing “substandard” housing.

The new homes will meet modern space standards, be more energy efficient and cheaper for tenants to run but it will require the council to demolish 149 existing council flats at Arbury Court, Kingsway and Brackley Close to achieve it.

The project is split into two main parts.

There would be redevelopment at Arbury Court, with 213 new homes, including 107 council homes - a net gain of 95 council homes. Existing open space, the Gurdwara and the library would be revamped and there would be a phased development of new shops to replace the existing stores.

This part of the project could cost £38.2m.

There is also potential for a further 200 homes, including 100 council homes, on part of the neighbouring North Cambridge Academy site, the council has said.

The second main part of the project is in Kingsway, including parts of Brackley Close, Rutland Close and Verulam Way.

Here the council wants to build about 197 new homes, including at least 99 council homes - a net loss of 34 council homes.

This part of the project could cost £43m.

It is hoped that funding from Homes England could help pay for the regeneration project.

At the council’s cabinet meeting on 21 October, Jocelynne Scutt asked councillors to confirm what support would be offered to Arbury Court traders, as she said it was “vital” the current businesses were retained.

Michael Page, chair of the Hurst Park Estate Residents’ Association, warned councillors if they lost the traders the “community will lose something special”.

Cllr Geri Bird (Lab, East Chesterton), cabinet member for housing, said there would be a range of measures to support traders, including the opportunity for them to stay in existing shops until the new premises were finished, at which point they would have support to move..

She said traders would have “bespoke one-to-one packages” of support during the transition and a rent reduction for the first two years after the move to the new units.

The same amount of commercial space would be provided and all businesses will have the right to return to the new units, she confirmed.

Cllr Bird said the council wanted Arbury Court to be a “thriving centre” for people to do their shopping and called the scheme “more than a development project”. It would be about “regenerating a whole area” to look after “residents, tenants and traders”, and supply better housing.

She recognised the changes would still be hard for people and promised the council would look after them.

Council leader Cllr Cameron Holloway (Lab, Newnham) said people had told the authority that they wanted to see money spent in the area.

He recognised that while “significant investment” is planned, the changes would be “difficult” for some people, particularly those who would have to move but pledged that the council would “work as closely as possible with those directly affected and in surrounding communities”.

Cllr Antoinette Nester (Lab, Castle) said existing buildings at Arbury Court dated from a time when building standards were “very different” and they could not be repaired to the standards that “residents deserve”.

She said: “Every person has the right to live somewhere that protects their health, dignity and wellbeing. Regeneration means temporary upheaval, but in the long term this is how we protect those human rights.”

Cllr Mike Todd-Jones (Lab, Arbury) said he had lived in the Arbury area for around 60 years and described the Arbury Court and Kingsway buildings as “iconic”. But he was in no doubt that some council homes are of “really poor quality”, adding tenants deserved better.

He was “reassured” by the support on offer to traders.

Cllr Anna Smith (Lab, Coleridge) stressed that when they were talking about the council homes being in a “poor condition” it was a “comment on the stock, not a comment on the tenant and how they are looking after their homes”.

She challenged claims from some residents that the project amounted to “gentrification”, noting that council tenants were “entitled to live in nice homes” and having a good quality home “should not just be for the rich in our community”.

Cllr Jamie Dalzell (Lib Dem, West Chesterton) was pleased by plans for “smooth” transition for traders but felt there was “still more assurance being sought”.

Cllr Tim Bick (Lib Dem, Market), leader of the Liberal Democrat opposition, asked how confident the council was of Homes England funding

Ben Binns, assistant director of development at the council, said the plan was for a strategic partnership with Homes England to allow more flexible funding mechanisms.

Funding was not guaranteed, he said, but described the city as being in a strong position, although other funding channels would be available.

Mr Binns said: “We are pretty confident we will get Homes England funding one way or another, the question is how much and in what form, which is a question I cannot answer right now.”

Cllr Naomi Bennett (Green, Abbey) suggested the traders should be offered specialist business advice to make them better equipped to handle the disruption, which Cllr Holloway asked officers to consider.

Cllr Dave Baigent (Ind, Romsey) felt it was “fantastic” that more council homes would be built. But he questioned why the council was not asking the government for funding to make all the properties council homes, rather than building some to be sold off privately.

Cllr Holloway said they would be applying for as much funding as they could get, which would determine what the authority could build and offer at either social rent or affordable rent.

He acknowledged it was “not a perfect situation” to be building some homes to sell privately to pay for the council homes, but said by doing this it meant they had been able to keep building new council homes in Cambridge in recent years.