Estate Management and Building Service

Estate strategy

2007

CONTENTS

Page

CHAPTER 1 THE BACKGROUND 3

CHAPTER 2 THE CURRENT ESTATE: CONTEXT 4

CHAPTER 3 STRATEGIES FOR THE ESTATE 11

CHAPTER 4 OPERATION OF THE ESTATE 24

CHAPTER 5 RECOMMENDATIONS 32

ANNEX A IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ESTATE 34 STRATEGY

2

CHAPTER 1

THE BACKGROUND

1.1 This Strategy covers the operational and non-operational estate of the University of Cambridge. It does not include the Colleges. Neither does it include the University Press, Local Examinations Syndicate, nor properties outside Cambridge which are held in the investment portfolio.

1.2 The Estate currently comprises more than 300 buildings ranging from Grade 1 Listed buildings to agricultural type buildings with a total net assignable area of some 360,000m2 and gross built area of 650,000m2 in the operational estate. The current estimated replacement value of the Estate is £1.2bn. The University’s maintenance and utilities budgets for 2006/07 are £15M and £10.6M. The ‘non-operational’ estate comprises properties held for the general purposes of the University (e.g. residences) and land and property that could be needed in the foreseeable future for the operational estate. The properties are generally leased or rented out. The current capital value of the non-operational estate is £60.2M and the forecast net income to the Chest in 2006/07 is £1.5M.

1.3 HEFCE’s Circular 00/04 ‘Estate Strategies: A Guide to good Practice’ contains the following guidance:

An estate strategy draws its aims from the institution’s corporate plan, and establishes the estate needs to achieve these aims. It looks at the buildings and facilities available and addresses potential shortfalls in space, surplus space, and unsuitable or inappropriate space. It also considers opportunities for development, rationalisation or reconfiguration of the estate.

1.4 A time-frame of five academical years (2007-2012) has been adopted for this Estate Strategy. In addition, the Strategy looks ahead in outline terms for 25 years, and more, in relation to strategic long-term land holdings and land-use planning.

1.5 This new Strategy has been prepared in parallel with the preparation of a new University Strategic Plan, and has been informed by material contributed by the Schools and Non-School Institutions in connection with that Plan through the Planning Enquiry conducted during 2006-07.

1.6 This Estate Strategy was produced under the supervision of the Planning and Resources Committee during 2006-07 and approved by the General Board and Council. It should be noted that the strategies and policies described in the Strategy are subject to development and change over the two year plan period.

3

CHAPTER 2

THE CURRENT ESTATE: CONTEXT

2.1 Cambridge is a compact dynamic city with a thriving historic centre. Its unique historic character derives primarily from the College and University buildings in the centre. The other key qualities are the green spaces within it and the green corridors which run from open countryside into the urban area. Through the presence of the University the City is a centre of excellence and world leader in higher education and research. The challenge facing the Cambridge sub-region is to foster dynamism, prosperity and expansion of the knowledge-based economy whilst protecting and enhancing the historic character and setting of Cambridge. The University has a key role in this.

REGIONAL CONTEXT

2.2 The University is generally accepted as one of the region’s greatest assets. Cambridge is respected as perhaps the most impressive cluster of knowledge- intensive company spin-off and start-up activity in Europe, and the University’s pivotal role in this is widely appreciated. When talking about the region, Cambridge and Cambridge University are the names that are most likely to achieve instant recognition, associated, as they are, with innovation and academic excellence around the world. The Greater Cambridge sub-region has a unique combination of attributes, which contribute to a widespread sense that Cambridge is one of the most exciting places in the UK to live. The physical, academic, business and social conditions at the heart of Cambridge’s success are unique.

2.3 Throughout its interactions, the University needs to convey the clear message that it can make the strongest contribution to the region by:

• Remaining a world-class international institution. • Continuing to: contribute significantly to the success of the Cambridge sub-region, encourage the extension of this impact further into the region, as circumstances allow. • Playing a collegial and strategic role within the region as a whole. • Using its influence to secure the closest possible inter-working between the regions, and in particular the three regions of the greater South-East, which form a reasonably coherent economic and social unit.

4

2.4 In relation to the estate, the University engages actively with the planning authorities and regional bodies with a view to:

• Maintaining a planning policy background at the regional, county and district level, which is favourable to the direct interests of the University (predominantly in Cambridge or very close to Cambridge). • Ensuring that the planning authority understands the local, national and international roles of the University. • Seeking improvement to the transport infrastructure in the Cambridge sub- region. • Seeking to maintain an environment in the Cambridge sub-region, which is attractive to existing and potential staff and students. • Giving support and expert advice where appropriate to the development of regional strategies to demonstrate interest in the region and build good relationships with the authorities.

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING CONTEXT

2.5 The University’s infrastructural planning and development activities can be grouped into three main areas:

• The provision of a land supply to meet requirements for relocation and expansion of University space in the short, medium and long term. • The development of new built space. • The maintenance of existing built space.

2.6 The planning, development and use of University land and buildings takes place within the context of new and other Town & Country Planning legislation, policies, proposals, designations and guidance from the national to the local levels. The legislative framework has recently undergone significant change. The University shapes this context through its involvement in revisions to planning legislation and documents.

National Level

2.7 Government has introduced a major reform of the planning system through the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Act has four main implications for University development:

• The introduction of a statutory purpose for planning – the achievement of sustainable development. • Regionalisation of strategic planning. • A new form of local planning – the replacement of Local Plans with Local Development Frameworks, comprising a portfolio of local planning documents, some of which will have development plan status. • Changes to the development control process.

5 2.8 The Government’s Sustainable Communities Plan was launched in February 2003 and seeks to tackle housing supply and affordability issues in the Southeast. Identified strategic challenges for the East of England Region include addressing the issues of high house prices and their impact on the recruitment and retention of staff in and around Cambridge, and improving transport infrastructure to meet the needs of economic growth. The Government has identified London-Stansted-Cambridge-Peterborough as a growth corridor.

Regional Level

2.9 Regional Planning Guidance for East Anglia (RPG6) was published in November 2000. Policy for the Cambridge Sub-Region is to develop a vision and planning framework for the Sub-Region that will:

• Allow the sub-region to develop further as a world leader in research and technology based industries and the fields of higher education and research. • Foster the dynamism, prosperity and further expansion of the research and technology based economy. • Protect and enhance the historic character and setting of Cambridge and the important environmental qualities of the surrounding area. • Provide a more sustainable balance between rates of growth in jobs and housing, allowing the sub-region to accommodate a higher proportion of the region’s housing development. • RPG6 also calls for a review of the Cambridge Green Belt, and identifies an order of preference for housing and related development, including development on the periphery of the built up area of Cambridge. The plan requires a net increase in dwellings of 2,800 per annum in the Cambridge Sub Region to 2021.

2.10 The draft Revision to the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East of England (The East of England Plan, 2001 - 2021) contains policies for the Cambridge Sub- Region that are based upon policies in RPG6 and the 2003 Structure Plan. A Public Examination into the draft RSS was held in September 2005 and adoption is due in summer 2007¹.

County and Sub-Regional Levels

2.11 The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan, adopted in October 2003, establishes the broad requirements for development in the County from 1999- 2016. (The Structure Plan is available at www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/environment/planning/.) The Plan sets out a strategy for the Cambridge Sub-Region, identifying a requirement for 47,500 additional dwellings, of which 8,900 are to be provided in the built up area of Cambridge and 8,000 on the edge of Cambridge. The Plan identifies locations for land to be released from the Green Belt, including land between Madingley

¹ As at 2008 the RSS is not yet adopted.

6 Road and Huntingdon Road, which it designates a Strategic Employment Location, to be reserved for “predominantly” University-related uses and only brought forward when the University can show a clear need for the land to be released. The Plan requires a masterplan to be prepared for the site, and land not required for development by 2016 to be designated as safeguarded land to meet longer-term development needs.

Local Level

2.12 The reviewed Cambridge Local Plan, adopted in 2006, sets out planning policies and proposals that affect the University’s estate, including:

• Policy and proposals for the development of land between Madingley Road and Huntingdon Road (known as North West Cambridge) for a mix of “predominantly” University related uses. • Policy and proposals for the development of the Southern Fringe of Cambridge, including up to 14 ha of land for biomedical and biotechnology activities, related higher education and research institutes, and other medical research. • Policy and proposals for the development of the West Cambridge Site, Mill Lane/Old Press Site and the New Museums Site. • Policy to support the release of properties on the fringes of academic sites to return to non-academic uses, such as residential, retail or community uses. • Policy and consultation zone designations to protect the Mullard Radio Astronomy Observatory from harmful development.

2.13 The City Council has designated a number of Conservation Areas in Cambridge for areas of special architectural or historic interest. These cover a large proportion of University land in central and western Cambridge.

2.14 South Cambridgeshire District Council adopted its second Local Plan in February 2004. The Plan conforms with the 1995 Structure Plan, as preparation started before the Structure Plan review. The Plan therefore sets out planning policies and proposals only to 2006, and does not include strategic Green Belt land releases as the University requires. A fresh Plan review is taking place, in a new style Local Development Framework format, to conform with the 2003 Structure Plan.

2.15 Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District Councils are preparing an Area Action Plan for the development of the University’s site between Madingley Road and Huntingdon Road at North West Cambridge. The Plan is likely to be adopted in 2009. Depending the Councils’ selection of Preferred Options for the development of the site, the University may wish to refine its draft masterplan framework and submit an outline planning application in 2008 for a decision soon after the adoption of the AAP.

7

2.16 The University will work with Cambridge City Council to prepare a Comprehensive Development framework for the Mill Lane/Old Press Site. Development surveyors will be appointed during 2007 to identify development opportunities.

2.17 Development of the West Cambridge Site will continue to be brought forward in line with the West Cambridge outline planning permission and masterplan. produced: it is the intention to produce such plans for all major University sites over the next five years.

RURAL ESTATE

2.18 Natural, farmed and landscaped areas within the estate will be managed responsibly taking advantage where possible of Countryside Stewardship and other funding schemes. The aim will be to protect and promote biodiversity, make provision for teaching and research in the natural sciences, and establish advanced planting in areas of the land bank which will eventually come forward for built development (e.g. North West Cambridge). A Rural Estate Plan is in preparation and is intended to be finalised in 2007.

TRAVEL PLANNING

2.19 The University’s Travel Plan was given general approval by the Council in November 2000. The purpose of implementing a travel plan is to help make travel to and from work as convenient, fast, safe and inexpensive as possible and to reduce the adverse impact of traffic on people, the organisation and the environment. The University Travel Plan describes the background issues, sets out the achievements to date, and proposes actions under five objectives, which are to:

• Ensure the University has the necessary information to make appropriate policies. • Foster and encourage the cycling culture within the University. • Ensure information is disseminated to visitors and staff so as to encourage measures that maximise the use of transport modes that will reduce pollution and congestion. • Promote public transport. • Optimise the management of car parks.

The Travel Plan is published on the University website at www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/embs/travel/plan.html.

2.20 The University Travel Plan is currently under review, and the new version is expected to be approved in 2007. Within the overall policy framework of the University Travel Plan a number of Site Travel Plans have been produced: it is the intention to produce such plans for all major University sites over the next five years.

8

2.21 The University is an active member of the Cambridgeshire Travel for Work Partnership, which supports and promotes travel planning in the County.

2.22 As part of the wider activity on sustainability and the University's carbon footprint, work will be started during 2007 to consider whether to develop policies on travel at work, including international air travel.

PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS - OVERVIEW

2.23 The Planning and Resources Committee have decided that:

• Growth projections for this version of the Estate Strategy are to be as follows: Undergraduate numbers to grow at 0.5% a year; Postgraduate numbers to grow at 2.0% a year; Unestablished staff to grow at 2.0% a year. • The University of Cambridge ‘space norms’ will be used to assess the amount of space that should ideally and optimally be provided; to be applied at the level of 90% of the ‘norm’ for new build and the Gap Analysis.

2.24 It is currently assumed that the Colleges will continue to provide a principal place of work (PPW) for University Teaching Officers who have no University accommodation, on a similar basis as hitherto. The provision of teaching and research space within Colleges is an integral part of the arrangements which underlie the continued public funding of College fees. The principal place of work arrangements were reviewed during 2004 by a Working Group which recommended as follows:

• The provision of Departmental office space for academic and research staff should be monitored explicitly through subject reviews and periodic surveys. • Consideration might be given to revising the space cost basis of the RAM to balance the economic drivers of space allocation between Departments and Colleges, but recognising the constraints arising from the fact that Cambridge is a collegiate University. • The University space norms for the arts, humanities and social sciences should be sensitive to changes in research activity and to practice on PPWs.

The Planning and Resources Committee have approved these recommendations, and actions for taking them forward.

FUTURE TRENDS/DEVELOPMENTS

2.25 Flexible working patterns are likely to impact on space needs where staff work for a higher proportion of their time at home and share office accommodation.

9 Technological advancements, particularly in IT, are beginning to alter the teaching patterns. Neither factor is expected to have a significant effect on the demand for space in University buildings over the Strategy period. However, the trend in modern working towards greater use of open space will have some effect, particularly in new building design.

SUSTAINABLE ESTATE

2.26 The 2000-01 Estate Plan, approved by the Council, addressed the question of the sustainable size of the estate, noting that space is an expensive resource both in initial capital cost and ongoing operating costs. It introduced a ‘Business Plan’ approach with new capital projects requiring option appraisal and a cash- flow plan including an assessment of whole-life operating costs prior to authorisation to proceed. The Plan concluded that the operational estate was broadly the correct size in total extent, but that it was already at the limit of sustainable size, and with a very active capital programme in hand (£480M of major projects were completed in 1999-2006). It recommended that future additions to the estate should be accompanied by compensating disposals unless shown by a Business Plan to be fully self-financing or shown to meet an approved and directly associated increase in the volume of activity. The Capital Projects Process introduced in 2002 has formalised such a process of approving new capital building projects.

2.27 New arrangements have been introduced in 2007 to ensure the detailed scrutiny of capital projects in their early stages, through the use of dedicated space analysts in EMBS, review of their analysis by the Space Management Advisory Group, and formal approval of the size and scope of new capital projects by the Resource Management Committee.

2.28 With the Planning Enquiry process now well established and providing a strategic framework for the RAM, the Capital Projects Process and the new space management arrangements, the conditions are now in place to succeed in achieving a sustainable size of estate for the needs identified for the five year period. There is now also the opportunity to model the impact of planned changes to the estate using the University Financial model.

2.29 Work will also be undertaken to assess the value to Cambridge of the work published in 2006 by the UK Higher Education Space Management Group (SMG) and to benchmark Cambridge's estate using SMG's Model of the Affordable Estate (www.smg.ac.uk).

2.30 Continued attention will be needed to control the size of new buildings, deal actively with space surpluses and deficits at the departmental level, and seek better utilisation of space. The quality and condition of the University’s built space are generally appropriate; the extent and disposition need determined management.

10 CHAPTER 3

STRATEGIES FOR THE ESTATE

UNIVERSITY MISSION

3.1 The mission of the University of Cambridge is to contribute to society through the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

3.2 This Estate Strategy supports the mission by setting out the strategy for providing the buildings, facilities and general environment needed to achieve the University’s aims and objectives.

OVERALL ESTATE STRATEGY

3.3 The overall estate strategy is set by eight principles set out in 1989, which guide decisions on the disposal or acquisition of University land and buildings in the Cambridge area, as follows:

(a) The University must make the best use of all its land holdings whether for academic or for investment purposes. Land and buildings must be actively managed to produce the maximum income return, taking account of all relevant circumstances including academic needs. (b) University land lying within the Central Conservation Area should not be sold. This area constitutes the City’s ‘inner core’ which will always remain of primary interest to the University. (c) Other land and buildings for which there may be a future academic need should be retained and such needs must normally override all other considerations. Taking account of the overall value of the Estate there may be instances, however, where the University should consider the release of land for commercial development, using the proceeds of such sales to acquire other property. In particular, the University may need to consider the sale of land of lesser academic importance to finance the purchase of land of greater academic importance. (d) Land and buildings which are not at present in academic use, and for which no such use can be foreseen for the near future, should be let on a lease whose length should be related to an estimate of the period during which the University is unlikely to wish to use it for academic purposes. (e) Land and buildings which appear unsuitable for future academic use and which are not adjacent to an area of direct University interest should be disposed of, preferably on long lease rather than by outright sale. The timing of any such disposal should have full regard of the market conditions to ensure that proceeds are maximised. (f) Funds obtained from the sale of land and buildings should be used, where appropriate, for the purchase of other land or buildings.

11

(g) The University should make every effort to acquire any site identified as vital for its own development or when the probability is that it could be valuable or of strategic importance in the longer term. (h) Where the construction of new departmental buildings in turn releases existing properties, the University should assess the alternative uses for these properties, including the granting of short or longer term commercial leases that would generate income and capital receipts.

SUSTAINABILITY

3.4 Concern for sustainability and the relationship with the environment is a core value, which guides the planning and operation of the estate. Increased attention is now being given to positioning Cambridge in the forefront of sustainability, working with local and international partners. During the period of this Plan proposals will be developed to deliver significant improvements in the University's sustainability performance. This will require additional funding.

3.5 The University has adopted a Policy on Environmental Issues, which was originally published in the Reporter of 26 June 1996. It was updated with relatively minor amendments by the Committee for Environmental Management in October 2004 and subsequently endorsed by the Buildings Sub-Committee on 15 December 2004, as follows:

In achieving excellence in teaching and research, the University of Cambridge aims to manage its activities, buildings and estates to promote environmental sustainability, to conserve and enhance natural resources and to prevent environmental pollution to bring about a continual improvement in its environmental performance. The University will comply fully with environmental legislation and officially approved codes of practice, and will make continued efforts: • to promote sound environmental management policies and practices in the work of all Faculties, Departments, and other institutions; • to increase awareness of environmental responsibilities amongst staff and students; • to work with other agencies locally, nationally, and internationally to promote appropriate environmental policies; • to minimise waste and pollution, and to operate effective waste management procedures; • to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels; • to reduce water consumption; • to promote a purchasing policy which will give preference, as far as practicable, to those products and services which cause the least harm to the environment;

12 • to avoid use, wherever possible, of environmentally damaging substances, materials, and processes; • to maintain the grounds and buildings of the University estate in an environmentally sensitive way; • to have regard to environmental factors as far as practicable in respect of the growth of the University and the integration of new developments into the local environment; • to encourage modes of transport by staff and students which minimise the environmental impact.

3.6 The Policy is implemented through an Environmental Management System, which includes a 3-year Environmental Plan. This sets out a number of key Objectives and Targets that are intended to bring about improvements in environmental performance and minimise the potential for enforcement action by the Regulatory Authorities, in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Policy. Progress against the stated Objectives and Targets is monitored and assessed by the Committee for Environmental Management on a regular basis in accordance with the management review requirements of the Environmental Management System.

3.7 Revised guidance for the design and construction of environmentally-sustainable new buildings was approved by the Buildings Sub-Committee in December 2004. The guidance will play a key role in the design process to assist project managers and design teams in understanding and implementing University requirements for environmentally sustainable new buildings. One of the key elements of the guidance is that a BREEAM assessment should be carried out on all new buildings of over 1000m² with a target to achieve a rating of 'Excellent' with a minimum rating of 'Very Good' in cases where there are good and explicit reasons why an excellent rating could not be achieved.

3.8 University policy, coupled with recent increases in the scope and severity of environmental legislation, and the active prosecution policy of the Environment Agency, has ensured that the University proactively complies with regulatory requirements to minimise the possibility of enforcement action, through the development of environmental auditing and monitoring protocols. These initiatives are supplemented by a range of Environmental and Pollution Prevention Guidance Notes, which are available on the Environmental Office website. (www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/environment/)

3.9 Cambridge is one of 18 Universities who have been working with the Carbon Trust in the first phase of the Higher Education Carbon Management (HECM) programme. As part of the programme, the University has developed an Implementation Plan that aims to cut emissions by 10% over the next 5 years through a range of emission reduction opportunities.

13

3.10 A renewable energy strategy is being developed to address the recently introduced planning requirement that 10% of the energy requirements of new buildings over 1,000 m2 should be provided by on-site renewable sources, and to achieve a challenging reduction in the University's carbon footprint.

OPERATIONAL ESTATE: SITE LOCATIONAL STRATEGY

3.11 The University’s long-term overall locational strategy is as follows:

a) To develop sites near the University Library for most of the arts and social sciences. b) To concentrate the humanities and social sciences on the Sidgwick, New Museums and Downing sites. c) To concentrate the biological sciences on the Downing site and the rear of the Old Addenbrooke’s site. d) To develop the West Cambridge site for physical sciences and technology departments, and associated support functions. e) To continue to add to medical research facilities on The Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust site. f) To consolidate Central Administration on three sites, namely The Old Schools, part of the Old Press Site and Greenwich House, and to reduce the use of houses in central Cambridge for administrative purposes. g) To redevelop the Mill Lane site for mixed uses including University operational purposes, collegiate and commercial, and to redevelop the New Museums site with the introduction of some non-operational uses. h) To reduce the amount of leased accommodation occupied for operational purposes. i) To add to the stock of residential accommodation, providing a range of tenures and accommodation types. j) To establish land which could be used for future expansion, notably at North West Cambridge.

3.12 Management of the Estate has always been done largely on a disaggregated basis i.e. addressing particular space needs for a Department, developing a building or a site, or an infrastructural function. A key action in this Plan is to develop and implement a strategic implementation plan to guide a systematic programme of estate improvements.

SPECIFIC SITE STRATEGIES

Mill Lane/Old Press Site (1.1 ha)

3.13 This site comprises two discrete but adjoining areas. The northern part of the site bounded by Trumpington Street, Mill Lane, Silver Street and the river frontage is known as the Old Press Site. The adjacent area to the south is separated from the Old Press Site by Mill Lane and is bounded by Trumpington Street, Little St Mary’s Lane, and Granta Place. Together they are known as the Mill Lane Site. 14

3.14 The 2006 Cambridge Local Plan sets out the planning policy framework for the site. Policies in the Local Plan permit the development and redevelopment of the site if this allows improved facilities, a reduction in parking, improvement to the external environment and amenity space and better use of land. The Plan indicates that an element of mixed use will be supported in order to enhance the attractiveness of the public realm. This suggests that not only is there scope to consolidate the University’s operational activities on the Mill Lane site, but in addition, to introduce new residential, commercial, retail and community uses. A number of Colleges have already indicted an interest in developing collegiate residential accommodation on the site.

3.15 Agreement has been reached with the City Council to work jointly on the preparation of a comprehensive development framework to guide the future development of the site. This will be adopted by the City Council as a Supplementary Planning Document. To support this work action is under way to appoint a firm of development surveyors, to advise on the formulation and appraisal of development options.

3.16 Previous work on the future use of the site has indicated a need for around 5000m² of office space for the UAS and staff/student services. Colleges have identified a requirement for 3500m² of residential space plus up to 1500m² for other college facilities. Work will be undertaken during 2007 to review the University's requirements for the site, including assessing whether the UAS and staff/student service space would be better located on the New Museums Site.

New Museums (1.6 ha) and Downing Sites (3.2 ha)

3.17 The future use and development of the New Museums and Downing Sites was reviewed during 2002-03 by a Working Group set up by the Planning and Resources Committee.

3.18 The report identified a possible sequence of moves within the long-standing strategy of concentrating the Biological Sciences on the Downing Site. The key was a move of Earth Sciences and Geography off the site into new accommodation elsewhere. This would create the possibility of redeveloping the south-east corner of the site. Since that time the plans for Geography have changed, and it is now intending to remain on the Downing site. As a result the long-term planning of the Downing site needs to be reconsidered, and it is proposed to develop plans during 2007-08. These will need to focus particularly on the southern part of the site, and to address a number of issues including: the refurbishment or redevelopment of the Geography building; the future of the Sir William Hardy Building; and the provision of space for new developments in the biological sciences and to allow refurbishment of existing buildings.

3.19 Immediate plans on the New Museums Site centre on providing space for the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, which plans to concentrate activities on the eastern part of the site. The proposed relocations of Materials Science, Chemical Engineering and the possible move of the Central Science Library will 15 open the way for a major redevelopment of the New Museums Site. Plans will be developed during 2007-08, including an assessment of whether the UAS and staff/student services should relocate to this site.

Trumpington Street/Old Addenbrooke’s Site (2.2 ha)

3.20 The Old Addenbrooke’s Site has five main uses:

• The Judge Institute of Management is housed in the refurbished and extended former hospital buildings. • New buildings have been constructed for the biological sciences since the 1980s. • The three former staff hostels in the north-east of the site are let for student housing on long leases. • There are a number of commercial lettings including Brown’s restaurant, a café, and sub post office. • Keynes House and former houses on the Trumpington Street frontage are in operational use by administrative and academic departments.

3.21 Action is under way to vacate as much operational space in the Trumpington Street former houses as possible mainly because of their unsuitability for current purposes. The policy has been to retain the freeholds, and let the properties on long leases or alternatively on commercial leases. The disposal on long leases of 21/22 Trumpington Street, and 2/3 and 4/5 Bene't Place was approved by the Regent House in 2003.

3.22 Following a strategic review of the former houses in Trumpington Street in 2006, the Finance Committee approved the promotion of a Grace for the freehold disposal of 2 Fitzwilliam Street and 28 and 29 Trumpington Street, and agreed that the future use of Trumpington Street houses should be in priority order:

1. Residential conversion for letting to staff, postgraduate students or visiting scholars; 2. Lettings on commercial leases (of up to 20 years) for office-based activities; 3. Retention in operational use for specialist uses or 'churn' space.

During 2007-08 option appraisals with business plans will be prepared for the future use of specific properties or groups of properties.

3.23 Previous policy on the former hostels is to retain them in residential use. The leases have end dates or break clauses which allow the University to regain possession in 2010 and again in 2040. The Planning and Resources Committee took a decision in 2001 to extend the lease of the Bridgets hostel for disabled students to 2040 to allow a major refurbishment scheme. That scheme did not proceed and the hostel has since closed, giving an opportunity to review the policy. A study is under way to investigate the feasibility of redeveloping one or more of the hostels for academic use, taking account of planning constraints.

16 Subject to the outcome of the study the policy for the site will be reviewed during 2007-08.

Scroope House Site and Fitzwilliam Museum (2.8 ha)

3.24 The Scroope House site at the junction of Trumpington Street and Fen Causeway houses the Department of Engineering, and the Faculty of Architecture and History of Art. Part of Scroope Terrace is let to the Royal Cambridge Hotel whose lease expires in 2013.

3.25 In the plan period the Department of Engineering plan to rationalise the location of divisions and groups and to refurbish facilities substantially, following relocations to the new CAPE building at West Cambridge. In the long term, Engineering plan to retain a major presence on the site, while also developing new research facilities at West Cambridge.

3.26 Scroope Terrace will remain the location of the Department of Architecture with the research branch of the department – the Martin Centre – transferring from Chaucer Road. The Department of History of Art has space in Scroope Terrace and 4A Trumpington Street. It has identified a future need for more space in the vicinity, perhaps in premises owned by the University in Trumpington Street.

3.27 The Fitzwilliam Museum has identified a need for additional office space, which has been met for the short-term in premises belonging to the University in Trumpington Street. Beyond the life of this Strategy, the Museum will need to expand on or adjacent to its current site. Formal proposals have not yet been brought forward.

South City (including Lensfield Road (1 ha), the Botanic Garden (13 ha), and the Homerton College Site (1.2 ha))

3.28 The major JIF-financed laboratory refurbishment of some 50% of the Chemistry building in Lensfield Road was completed in March 2003. A programme of lecture theatre refurbishment has also been completed. Further phases of refurbishment of teaching and research laboratories are completed or in planning.

3.29 At the Botanic Garden a recent benefaction will provide substantial built space for plant science research, and allow the relocation of the Herbarium from the Downing Site. An Education and Interpretation Centre (2,775 m²) is also planned.

Sidgwick Site (4.5 ha)

3.30 In 2001 the Regent House approved a Master Plan for the development of this site, principally to achieve better site disposition and to provide new building for the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences.

17 3.31 Following the completion of the new buildings for Criminology and English, there are two remaining redevelopment plots on the site: 7 West Road (former Criminology building) and a site at the south-western corner (identified on the Master Plan for the East Asia Institute but now for use unspecified). The necessary planning and other consents have been obtained for the demolition of 7 West Road and its replacement with a new building which is now planned to be for the Departments of Politics and International Studies.

3.32 Policies contained in the City Council’s Local Plan provide for continuing improvements to the site. The Plan expects that such development will not only allow for improved facilities, but also a reduction in the number of parking spaces, an improvement to the external environment and amenity space, and a better use of land.

University Library (3.2 ha)

3.33 The Stage III development of the University Library is a six-phased programme that started on site in the mid-1990s. Phase 5 was completed in May 2005. Phase 6 is awaiting approval once SRIF4 funding is announced.

Other City Centre Properties

3.34 The University currently has tenancies of the following city centre properties:

Quayside Development Office 8/9 Jesus Lane UAS 1 St Mary’s Passage Proctors 10 Peas Hill part Personnel Division part Academic Division 32 Trumpington Street Admissions Office International Office Cambridge Society

3.35 It remains policy to withdraw from properties rented by the University from other landlords. This will generally be when leases end, but opportunities will be taken to withdraw earlier where economically viable.

Clarkson Road (2.8 ha)

3.36 The construction of ten new buildings for the two Mathematics Departments was completed in January 2003 as the Centre for Mathematical Sciences (15,670 m²). No further development of the site, which also houses the Isaac Newton Institute and the Betty and Gordon Moore Library, is currently planned.

West Cambridge (66.5 ha)

3.37 Outline Planning Permission was granted on 30 March 1999 for 228,000 m2 of built space in accordance with the provisions of the West Cambridge Site Masterplan. The site will be developed over the next 10 to 15 years. 18

3.38 Planning Permission including provision for updating and the Masterplan for the site was revised and updated during 2003 and the revisions approved by the City Council in May 2004. These revisions consolidated changes already approved under previous planning permissions and also included proposals for the realignment of certain internal roads, reconfiguration of parking space, provision of new cycle and pedestrian access, the relocation of various research and academic uses and the addition of new buildings. No further S106 planning obligations were imposed.

3.39 Plans for the redevelopment of the Cavendish Laboratory, including the relocation of Materials Science to the site, are currently being formulated. The buildings are at the end of their planned design life, dated though still flexible in design, and very expensive to operate.

3.40 Proposals are also being developed to relocate Biotechnology and Chemical Engineering to West Cambridge.

NORTH WEST CAMBRIDGE (140 ha)

3.41 North West Cambridge is identified for development to provide for University housing and future academic needs, support facilities, and University-related knowledge-based research. The proposed mix of uses on the site was published by the University Council in the Reporter (2 March 2005) as set out below.

Housing

3.42 The recruitment and retention problems described in the Second Report and the Council's Notice of 10 March 2003 (Reporter, 2002-03, p. 695) remain acute. A study has been carried out by the Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research in the Department of Land Economy, which confirms the serious mismatch between household incomes of University staff and house prices in the Cambridge area. The study estimates that nearly three-quarters of the extra staff forecast would require some form of affordable housing if they are to live within an acceptable and sustainable distance of their work in the University. This study confirms the earlier proposal that housing should be a major use of the site, with an indicative requirement of 2,000 units of accommodation to be developed over the years. The majority of this housing would be 'key worker housing' for University and College staff; with the remainder for sale on the open market to fund infrastructure on this site and the key worker housing. The proportions of key worker and market housing will be determined in the light of further economic analysis and the requirements of the local planning authorities, through the Public Inquiries into the Cambridge Local Plan and South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework. For the key worker housing the Council envisage providing a range of types of accommodation and of tenures, including letting and sale on a shared equity basis. Depending on the mix of housing types and the density of development, around 40 hectares of land would be required for housing.

19 Collegiate development/student housing

3.43 The Council's Second Report described the need to provide housing for up to 2,000 students by 2025. The Council remain of the view that sufficient land should be allocated for provision of that scale, of around 11 hectares. The Master Plan should allow flexibility in the provision of collegiate development, whether it be by the foundation of one or more new Colleges, the expansion of existing Colleges, or shared facilities operated by existing Colleges or external providers. Provision would be made for conventional and/or innovative ways of creating collegiate communities, for example through the co-location of student and staff housing. Within the open space on the site it would be possible to provide playing fields.

Academic and other research space

3.44 Apart from the West Cambridge site, which is allocated for developments in the physical sciences and technology, the North West Cambridge site represents the only substantial area currently in the University's ownership available for future academic developments in the long term. In their Second Report the Council proposed that the third major use of the site should be for University academic activities and for public/charitable sector or industrial research institutions where there is a strong academic association with cognate University activities. Global corporations are carrying out more and more of their basic research externally; many of these corporations were originally based on a particular technology but now find their business dependent on a changing mix of technologies, not all of which lie within their core competences. A broadly based University such as Cambridge is an attractive partner for their external research; a number of industrial research laboratories have already been set up in Cambridge. These are organizationally independent of the University and provide opportunities for interaction, not just in terms of research funding into the University and paths for exporting knowledge from the University, but more generally in engaging in continuous dialogue. Innovation is a key to future economic development. It is enhanced by the interaction of parties with disparate interests. The availability of space sufficient to allow a mixture of academic and industrial research in separate accommodation, affords the University and region an extremely valuable opportunity to protect and enhance the region's knowledge based economy in the long term.

3.45 In the shorter term the Departments of Earth Sciences and Geography are developing plans through the Capital Projects Process for relocating from the City Centre to the Madingley Rise area of North West Cambridge. The remainder of the academic space would be reserved for new academic developments over the next few decades which cannot yet be predicted. The Council also see opportunities on the site for developing the cluster of environmental science based activities based on the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre. This would provide collaborative opportunities for University activities in conservation biology.

20 3.46 The Council have identified an indicative requirement for a minimum of 100,000 sq.m. of academic and research built space, which, depending on density of development, would require around 40 to 50 hectares.

Community facilities

3.47 The Council anticipate that the development will need a range of community and support facilities which might include a primary school, nursery, neighbourhood retail facilities, a library, health facilities, opportunities for worship, as well as leisure and recreational facilities. These would require at least 1 hectare of land and would serve neighbouring residential areas as well as those on this site.

Open areas

3.48 Substantial open areas for landscape, ecological, and recreational purposes (formal and informal) would be provided.

Indicative land use requirements

3.49 An indicative land use schedule has been developed to set out the land requirements for each element as follows:

Housing for University/College staff and for sale 39.5 ha Collegiate provision 11.0 ha Academic and related research (around 100,000m2) 35.5 ha Community facilities 1.0 ha Playing Fields 6.0 ha Commons/Public Open Space 19.5 ha Existing Uses 27.5 ha Total 140 ha

3.50 A development framework is being prepared for the site, using collaborative design workshops that involve key stakeholders – including community representatives, local Government councillors/officers and local/national interest groups – in a participative and constructive design process. The aim is to achieve an outcome that is built upon consensus and ultimately delivers development in a form that meets the University’s requirements in a manner acceptable to neighbours and interest groups.

3.51 The site straddles the boundary between Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District Councils. The Councils are jointly preparing an Area Action Plan for the development of the site, which is expected to be adopted in 2009.

21 3.52 Early development of the site is likely to include a significant amount of affordable housing for University staff and private sector housing. Key decisions need to be taken about the scale and delivery of that development, and management of affordable staff housing. Discussions are also under way on the early development of a Conservation Campus to bring together Non-Governmental Organisations with cognate University activities.

University Farm (146 ha)

3.53 Proposals are being developed for the withdrawal of the University Farm from the North-West Cambridge area and Laundry Farm. This will require the construction of a new livestock (beef and sheep) facility and farm office in the Madingley area.

3.54 At Laundry Farm, planning permission has been obtained for a bowling club on 1.86 ha of land which could be leased to the Cambridge and County Bowling Club for 50 years. It will be necessary for the Club to relocate so as to allow the University to develop the Brooklands Avenue site for the new Botanic Garden Education and Interpretation Centre if that is funded.

ADDENBROOKE’S HOSPITAL SITE (4 ha of University land)

3.55 The original development plan for the Addenbrooke’s site, ‘Addenbrooke’s The 2020 Vision’, prepared by the NHS Trust in conjunction with the University and Medical Research Council (MRC), was issued in 1999. It was updated in 2001, and a third version was issued in 2004. Implementation of the 2020 Vision for the area between current development to the railway line can now proceed following allocation of the site for development in the Cambridge Local Plan.

3.56 The 2020 Vision envisages transforming the Addenbrooke’s Hospital site into an international centre of excellence supporting the growth of scientific understanding, the discovery of new medical techniques, the education of healthcare staff, economic growth and improved access to modernised NHS services. It is proposed to extend the campus westwards by 30 ha to provide land for clinical developments, a private hospital, a new building for the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) and biomedical research. The Trust have rebranded the site as the 'Cambridge Biomedical Campus'.

3.57 It is anticipated that the University will participate in this development through a range of routes, including:

• Developing new University buildings, generally in partnership with other research organisations e.g. the second phase of the Hutchison/CRUK cancer research facility, and the Cambridge Cardio-Respiratory Research Institute. • Taking space in the new LMB building. • Developing embedded research space in hospital buildings as in the Institute of Metabolic Science.

22

3.58 On the Forvie Site the University has purchased the residue of the lease of the Pfizer building with a refurbishment scheme now under way.

NON-OPERATIONAL ESTATE

3.59 In applying the guiding principles of the overall estate strategy to the non- operational estate the following policies have been developed:

• Properties in the vicinity of University sites (i.e. Old Press, Old Addenbrooke’s, New Museums, and Lensfield Road) should be retained. • The long-term reversionary land holding of the Latham/Chaucer/Trumpington Road Estate should be retained and Section 29 covenants should continue to be imposed when tenants enfranchise. • 1 Brookside to be retained and the renewal of the existing lease should have regard to the operational requirements of the Botanic Garden. • The future of Scroope Terrace to be reviewed in the event that at some time Engineering vacates all/most of the Scroope House Site and/or the remainder of the terrace ceases to be required for operational purposes. • The Madingley Estate farms to be retained as a long-term land bank and as replacement for land lost to the University Farm through the development of North West Cambridge. • Tenanted houses at Madingley to be sold when they become vacant unless they provide access to back land but subject to appropriate lotting with adjoining properties in order to maximise receipts. • The properties in Castle Street to be held on behalf of Kettle’s Yard. • The land at Lord’s Bridge to be sold or else regarded as a land bank.

These policies continue to guide the management of the non-operational estate. The lease of 1 Brookside has now ended, and the property is to be refurbished for operational use by the Botanic Garden.

3.60 A strategic review of the Cambridge and Madingley let properties was carried out during the calendar year 2005. As a result the Finance Committee approved a detailed classification of the properties, including recommendations on whether to hold, sell or review.

23

CHAPTER 4

OPERATION OF THE ESTATE

EXISTING ESTATE – FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

Long Term Maintenance Plan

4.1 Maintenance works are planned on a Five-Year Plan, with an annual report on the year’s work and expenditure, and an overview of the condition of the estate and a funding bid submitted annually to the Buildings Committee. It was decided at the Planning and Resources Committee in March 2000 that the University should generally comply with a recommendation by HEFCE that universities should, as a minimum, follow the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors guidelines that institutions should generally spend 1.5% to 2.25% of the depreciated replacement cost (DRC) of their buildings on routine, steady state maintenance (with additional requirements for estates with listed and/or heavily serviced scientific buildings).

4.2 A number of legislative-driven issues require full or partial funding from maintenance funds over the Plan period. These include:

• Access for people with disabilities • Animal Accommodation • Asbestos • Fire Safety • Incoming Water Supply • Trade Effluent Consent (particularly addressing mercury levels in the effluent)

4.3 The recommended maintenance budget bids are considered by both the Finance Committee and Planning and Resources Committee and the final allocation for maintenance is then made taking into account the University's financial position. Invariably this had led to an allocation below the recommended funding level. The previously reported cumulative shortfall for the five-year period to FY 2004- 05 of £16.7M, which resulted in an increase in short to medium term (3/5 years) backlog maintenance to £15M, has been reduced by the addition of SRIF 3/Capital 4 funds to certain major maintenance projects during 2006. The short to medium term backlog maintenance is now estimated to be in the order of £12M. The confirmed allocation for maintenance for the FY 2006/07 is £15M which represents 0.95% of the insured replacement cost of the estate. The condition of the estate is very good in relation to the HE sector as a whole, being ranked second out of 20 Russell Group members. 83% of the Estate is in the condition A (new/highly satisfactory) or condition B (satisfactory) categories compared to the median value for the benchmark group of 66%.

24

Property running costs

4.4 Overall running costs of the operational estate (including academic and non- academic departments) for the Financial Year 05/06 were £27.4M.

4.5 A significant component of property running costs are utility costs of £9.899M (FY 2005/06). The University has an Energy Manager, who has responsibility for ‘the efficient use of energy and water consumption throughout the Estate and to ensure that utilities are purchased in the most effective manner’. A detailed report is made annually to the Buildings Committee on the use and planning of utilities provision. Over the past two years utility costs have been extremely volatile, driven by major world events and increases in total utility costs are predicted over the next 2/3 years.

HEALTH AND SAFETY

4.6 The arrangements for managing safety for all construction projects are comprehensive and led by EMBS, involve co-operation and liaison with specialists in the Health and Safety Division and other sections of the UAS such as Security, and consultation with user representatives from departments. Furthermore safety and security legislation requires an increased emphasis on consultation and licensing with external agencies such as the Environment Agency and the Counter-Terrorism Officers of the Police.

4.7 The Health and Safety Executive continue to make target inspections of some work activities of the University as part of their national campaigns. In 2006 for instance campaigns included the University’s arrangements for “Work at Height”.

4.8 The updated regulations relating to managing work with asbestos make explicit demands of those with defined duties. This is likely to have a significant impact on the work of EMBS. The following list, whilst not exhaustive, indicates some of the health and safety issues of concern.

• The need for accessible facilities to permit the safe and secure disposal of waste must remain on any agenda which involves the potential redevelopment of the West Cambridge Site.

• There are increasing security-driven requirements for access and physical exclusions to restrict proximity or entry to certain facilities e.g. where powerful magnets are located. These requirements make demands on building designs both to internal configurations and to external features.

• Mercury, asbestos and other types of contamination of building fabric and fittings continue on the agenda as a potential hazard in several buildings. Proposals for remediation of a long-term contamination issue are still being evaluated for Chemistry.

25 • The segregation of traffic and pedestrians, is the subject of several national campaigns. Maintaining adequate segregation is especially difficult when construction traffic is present. ‘Traffic management’ issues are likely to be of concern during the next intensive construction phases of development of the West Cambridge Site.

• Disruptions caused by major building refurbishments are a frequent cause for complaint by departments. This is an especially difficult subject for occupants of adjacent or co-located departments who will not gain from the refurbishment. Building projects need to allow for frequent additional cleaning of all areas during work, and serious consideration should be considered to balancing the costs versus the risks of staying in situ during such work against decanting elsewhere if available.

• The lack of adequate storage facilities continues to be raised during audits and inspections.

• The updated CDM (Construction Design and Management) Regulations emphasise the need for ‘cradle to grave’ responsibility for all phases of building work from architectural concept to demolition. The updated regulations may impose additional burdens on EMBS at all stages of project management.

• Research into emergent areas of technology impose significant demands on building services and access. Nanotechnology, for example, requires specialist extraction equipment, whilst stem-cell work requires both biological containment and possibly security arrangements if public attention develops in an adverse direction.

ACCESS FOR DISABLED PEOPLE

4.9 Further to the Disability Audit of the entire University Accommodation carried out in 2002, the University has been improving its estate to comply with legislative requirements, and a substantial programme of works has been completed.

4.10 Whilst the Senior Architect's recommendations for DDA work to be carried out are vetted by the EMBS Internal Policy Group, the Joint Committee on Disability also has a role in monitoring progress and making recommendations on the relative priority of particular adjustments.

4.11 There are a number of criteria used to determine the priority of disability projects. Whilst centrally managed lecture theatres have been completed, there is still a duty in terms of other buildings attended by members of the public, for example administrative buildings and museums. Areas on the Fire Officer's high priority list are also included, particularly where egress problems have recently become known. Another important criterion is the need to establish the physical requirements of staff and students coming to Cambridge. A process has been established whereby EMBS, working alongside the Disability Resource Centre,

26 can quickly resolve the access problems on an individual need basis. All major projects, be they refurbishment or new build, are automatically inspected for their accessibility.

4.12 Where not financed by HEFCE, departments should seek funding for DDA feasibility studies from the central bodies. The scheme should then proceed within specified timescales, depending on the provision of further funding. However, shortage of funding should not preclude departments assessing the implications of their disability audits and resolving problems via management means.

4.13 The Disability Access Audits for each department undertaken by four local architectural practices in 2002 are still the basis for the access policy and any necessary future work.

SPACE MANAGEMENT

Lecture Theatres and Seminar Rooms

4.14 The University has around 100 lecture theatres totalling 13,200 m² of space with 11,500 seats. This includes 4150 m² of lecture space that is totally or partially available for centrally timetabled use. The majority of this space is concentrated on the Sidgwick, Mill Lane/Old Press and New Museums sites. There are also 270 seminar rooms with 12,000 m² of seminar space. Some Lecture Room buildings are freestanding but most lecture/seminar facilities are within departmental space. On the Addenbrooke's Hospital site the Clinical School manage the University's lecture and seminar rooms jointly with the NHS Trust and the Medical Research Council.

4.15 The first phase of a programme of space utilisation studies was carried out early in the Michaelmas Term (i.e. about the peak-use period) of 2003 when a three- week survey of 90 lecture theatres and 157 seminar rooms took place. There was clear evidence of mismatching of class size with capacity. The results were reported to the Planning and Resources Committee leading to a decision that no new lecture rooms be built without Planning and Resources Committee authorisation and that the University should set up a managed Web based room booking system that would cover all teaching rooms and be accessible to departments. The operation of a clearly transparent booking system will generate data needed to make well-founded decisions on the rationalisation of teaching space. A pilot scheme is currently under way. In addition, the possibility of further reducing the University’s stock of lecture rooms by making use of College facilities has been investigated, but implementation is likely to be dependent on the collection of data on existing patterns of use of University lecture rooms.

4.16 Outside the Teaching Programme, the lecture theatres are available for conferences and other events. These are arranged on ad hoc basis and usage varies. During vacations the opportunity to carry out building and maintenance works is maximised despite the cost premium of that. 27

Teaching Laboratories

4.17 Over a two week period (25/10/04 to 5/11/04) of the Michaelmas Term 2004 a space utilisation survey was carried out of 75 teaching laboratories over seven of the University’s sites. It was found that the frequency of use of teaching laboratories was relatively good with 63% of surveyed areas being used over 50% of the survey period. Utilisation rates were variable but, with over 21% of surveyed space having a utilisation rate greater than 40%, were found to be acceptable. The results were reported to the Planning and Resources Committee, and will continue to be followed up.

Workshops and support space

4.18 A study of the use of workshops in the School of Biological Sciences during 2004 by Southern Universities Management Services identified considerable scope for rationalisation of provision. It is proposed to conduct similar studies across the other Schools.

SPACE FOR CATERING

4.19 Almost 5% of the University’s useable floor space is given over to social usage and associated catering space. Around 70% of the University’s departments have some form of catering space ranging from tea-rooms with vending machines through to canteens serving hot food. Within these areas there is a mixed approach to the provision and control of catering which leads to a variable approach to pricing, service and customer choice. The Combination Room and the University Centre and its satellite operations are controlled centrally by the University Centre while all other non-collegiate catering is based within, and controlled by, the departments. The Colleges are responsible for providing food and drink to their students and charge for these services. The University, on its part, has a responsibility to conform to the guidelines set out in the HEFCE Memorandum that discourages the direct, or indirect, subsidising of catering from HEFCE funds and must therefore ensure that it charges all direct and indirect costs.

4.20 Recognising that the Colleges to a large extent cater for their students there remains the fact that as some departments move away from the City Centre towards the west of Cambridge it will be more difficult for students to return to their Colleges during the day until there is more collegiate provision in North West Cambridge, and pressure will mount on the University to provide catering facilities on a par with Colleges. Also a large number of the University’s 8,500 employees require access to some form of catering provision.

4.21 Current policy is that the planning of new buildings will be on the basis that the provision of anything more substantial than hot drinks needs to be on a site rather than department, basis. Provision of more substantial catering in a departmental building will be on the basis that it is designed and managed as a

28 facility for the whole site. This will release space and resources within the departments.

4.22 Embedding hot food outlets into operational buildings raises issues of food legislation, health and safety, quality and pricing control, need for skilled trained staff and associated building costs appears. A major review of Catering in the University is under way and will report during 2007-08.

PRAYER SPACE FOR FAITH GROUPS

4.23 The University currently makes some provision of prayer and meeting space for religious faith groups. Prayer facilities for Muslim students are provided at Sidgwick Avenue. The need for similar facilities for Hindu students and those of other faiths has been registered.

4.24 At West Cambridge, prayer space in the Merton Hall Farmhouse is used by various faith groups, including Baha’i, Buddhist and Christian. However that building will in due course be demolished and new facilities will be needed. Provision will be planned for North West Cambridge.

HOUSING FOR UNIVERSITY STAFF

4.25 The University has long had an interest in the provision of affordable housing for its staff and visiting scholars and also provides some housing for postgraduate students. The main provision is through the stock of 338 houses and flats, which are let to newly appointed staff, through the Accommodation Service. The stock currently comprises:

Causewayside 44 Southacre 12 West Cambridge 206 George Nuttall Close 60 Other Cambridge and Madingley properties 40 Total 362

4.26 The management is carried out by the Accommodation Service and EMBS. The Accommodation Service deal with lettings and supervision of the tenancies and site custodians, with EMBS handling rent collection, maintenance and working jointly with the Accommodation Service on policy development. Lettings are on assured shorthold tenancies, for no more than three years and are usually to newly appointed staff who are moving to Cambridge.

4.27 Other housing provision is by a shared equity scheme for a small number of newly-appointed Senior staff, and lettings on behalf of private landlords by the Accommodation Service. The Accommodation Service also manages some private properties.

4.28 A substantial increase in the stock of affordable housing for staff is planned at George Nuttall Close and at North West Cambridge. At George Nuttall Close up 29 to 50 units will be provided as a planning obligation arising from the disposal for market housing of the University’s remaining undeveloped land on the site. At North West Cambridge the emerging masterplan will provide a minimum of 1,000 dwellings for University and College staff.

4.29 It is anticipated that the increased provision of affordable housing for staff will be in the context of a review of policy on provision of support for staff housing needs. The Council envisage providing a range of types of accommodation and of tenures, including letting and sale on a shared equity basis. The policy review will also address other methods of providing subsidies for housing, and whether management of the housing stock should remain in-house or be outsourced to a Registered Social Landlord.

CURRENT SUPPLY OF SPACE

Floor Space Provision

4.30 The record of the current floor space provision, including the total amount and the location of the space, is held in the Capacity Record at EMBS. This consists of an AutoCAD record of the operational Estate drawings linked to a Planon database. This data is compiled from computer generated construction drawings with automatic room measurement and from information returned by the departments. The database details the size of all rooms, the room description, room usage, in which building the room is situated and the department, faculty or institution occupying it. Also collected is the use of space as teaching, research or ‘support’, the space weighting categories for the Resource Allocation Model and the space categories for the Transparency Review (TRAC). The Capacity Record is used to compile data for the Resources Allocation Model (RAM), and for returns to HEFCE for the Estate Management Statistics (EMS) project, and for other University purposes. University space data is published on the University of Cambridge Intranet domain at - http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/embs/planning/space/. Reference to this database is encouraged; space use improvement often is achieved between well-informed neighbours, as well as through more formal means.

NEW PROJECTS

4.31 Following the recommendation in the last Estate Plan, the University has implemented a formal mechanism that standardises the decision-making process whereby new building projects are planned and undertaken. The Capital Projects Process identifies specific stages (‘Gateways’) when every project over £2M is reviewed by the Planning and Resources Committee before a decision is made to sanction or reject progress to the next stage. Such a process is helping to assess options, and ensure accountability and responsibility in decision- making, and in the definition of project requirements. Additionally there is greater regard paid to how each project addresses the strategic elements of the Estate Plan, the capital funding requirements, and financial sources to construct and maintain each building over its lifetime, together with a more robust control of risk identification and management of risk. 30

BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

4.32 Provision was made in the Long Term Maintenance Plan for a full survey of the Estate over a five-year period starting in 1999-2000. This survey has been carried out by an external firm of surveyors, QMP, covering the whole Estate.

4.33 The assessments of the physical condition of buildings are based on the survey data collected by QMP and supplemented by specialist survey data collected in respect of the Fire Risk Assessments and periodic statutory testing by the University’s Lift Maintenance Unit. They relate to the physical condition of the fabric of the building and services, not to obsolescence. The building condition categories are:

A = highly satisfactory/new B = some deterioration but satisfactory C = operational but significant expenditure required within 2-3 years D = unsatisfactory, substantial work required, serious risk of failure

Building Physical Condition % of buildings A 17 B 66 C 17 D 0

Estate Management Statistics

4.34 The Estate Management Statistics Project (EMS) commissioned by the UK Funding Councils is now in its fifth year carried out by national consultants. Higher Education Institutes report on almost 200 aspects of estates data. These range from the total numbers of buildings and their condition, maintenance and utilities costs, through to details of space use and occupancy. EMS is the primary source for estates information and provides each institution with reliable data to facilitate performance measurement.

4.35 The EMS data show that the Cambridge Operational Estate is in better condition (measured as proportion in condition A or B) than the Russell Group benchmark. It is ranked 2nd out of the 18 institutions which made a return.

31 CHAPTER 5

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. The implementation recommendations can be summarised as follows:

a. Positioning the Estate for the long term

• Efforts must continue to secure the capacity for future expansion at North West Cambridge so as to afford options for provision of residential and academic expansion, when justified, over the next 30 or more years.

b. Planning the current and near-future estate

• In aggregate, the operational estate has grown beyond a sustainable size for needs identified for the next 5 years. Proposals for further expansion must continue to be subject to full scrutiny through the Capital Projects Process with both option appraisals and business plans set out in both major gateways. • Future additions to the estate should be accompanied by compensating disposals unless they are shown by a business plan to be fully self-financing, or are to meet an approved and directly associated increase in the volume of activity with identified and sufficient funding. • Priority should be given to new-build capital projects which lead to consequential reallocation and better utilisation of space, without net increase in space except as above. • Disposals of surplus property should generally be by ending leases taken by the University, by selling long leases of University owned properties, or by sales of freeholds only where there is no long-term strategic interest in holding the land. • Emphasis should be placed on improving space utilisation through pro-active planning. • Attention should be given to further improving the quality of estate data and the integration and dissemination of estate and financial data through management information systems.

c. Planning and managing capital projects

• In assessing whole-life costs of new building projects, priority should be given to minimising adverse environmental impacts. Standards of design and construction for new buildings should comply with the guidance in the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) with buildings complying with an ‘excellent’ rating except where there is clear justification for ‘very good’ rating.

32

• In building projects, the order of priority should continue to be whole-life quality including minimisation of adverse effects on the environment, whole-life cost, minimising of risk, minimisation of capital cost and completion on time.

d. Maintaining and enhancing the current estate

• Priority should be given in allocating capital and minor works expenditure to refurbishment of existing buildings to address areas of poor condition and/or functional suitability, and to bring about relocations and replacement without a net increase to the estate. • Maintenance expenditure should continue to be linked to the replacement cost of the estate, and set at a level to prevent backlog maintenance from increasing. Additional funding should be provided to deal with backlog maintenance and statutory compliance. The budget setting process should have regard to HEFCE guidelines, noting that expenditure on maintenance can come from several sources. • The housing, income-generating and land-banking benefits of the non-operational estate should be balanced to optimal effect. • A study should be carried out to optimise the overall cohesion of the estate for the benefit of members of, and visitors to, the University.

e. Site Strategy

• New strategies should be developed for the Old Press/Mill Lane, New Museums and Downing Sites. • A strategic implementation plan should be developed.

5.2 More detail of the arrangements for implementing the Strategy is given in Annex A.

33

ANNEX A

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ESTATE STRATEGY

1. This Annex describes in more detail the arrangements for implementing the Estate Strategy. It covers:

• The methodology for assessing the space needs of departments, and the ‘Gap Analysis’ through which the space actually occupied is compared to the assessed space need. • The outcome of prioritisation exercises carried out in connection with the Planning Enquiry, and bids to HEFCE for the next round of SRIF/Capital Project and funding. • Action to improve space utilisation.

SPACE NEEDS METHODOLOGY

Purpose

2. The purpose of the Space Needs Assessment section of the Estate Strategy is to assess the likely space needs of the University of Cambridge over the period of 5 years, for both academic and non-academic uses.

Approach

3. The approach taken to identify space need is to identify a space envelope based on student, staff and floorspace data. Developed and agreed space standards (norms) for our University are multiplied by the relevant drivers (student/unestablished staff figures; numbers of permanent staff are not a driver in the model) to give an assessment of space need. These norms are known as the University of Cambridge Space Guidelines. They are described in para 4 below. The space need is compared to actual floor space supply to ascertain the apparent ‘over’ or ‘under’ provision of space for the current situation and for that expected in five years’ time. This process is known as the ‘Gap Analysis’. The resultant figures give a crucial overview of the requirement and actual size of the estate for use in macro-planning and as a factor in the prioritisation of resources such as grants for upgrading quality of space.

34

Space Occupation Guidelines

4. The University of Cambridge Space Guidelines (norms) were first adopted in 1995. These norms were based on University Grants Committee (UGC) paper ‘Notes on Control and Guidance’ (NOCAG). They have been regularly adapted, the last time in 2002, to reflect the various factors applying to the University of Cambridge. The space norms are regularly compared with other Higher Education Institutions and Research Groups. The full space norms represent an optimum requirement with limited constraint imposed by affordability. Given current levels of HE funding, universities work to a fraction of what can be considered the optimal level (100%) of space standards. Currently the University works to a level of 90% of the optimal level; higher than is common in the sector.

Gap Analysis

5. The first Gap Analysis was included in the Estate Plan 2000-2001. Since then the process has been refined, with increased transparency. In 2002 revised norms were agreed for the Schools of Arts and Humanities and Humanities and Social Sciences. The original library norm of 1.3 m2 per FTE student was split, 0.9 m2 to teaching and 0.4 m2 to create a Department Administration space norm. The Lecture Theatre space norm of 0.96 m2 was discontinued, thereby reducing the overall space demand. The current formula calculates academic space need from the sum of elements for teaching space, research space, social space, and departmental administrative space, as follows:

Teaching space Nts x Teaching norm

Research space (Nrs + Nra) x Research norm

Social space (Nts + Nrs + Nra) x 0.7

Departmental Admin space (Nts + Nrs + Nra) x 0.4

where

Nts = number of taught students (UG and taught PG)

Nrs = number of research students

Nra = number of unestablished research staff.

The teaching and research norms vary by discipline.

6. The Planning and Resources Committee have agreed to use the same norms as used in 2002 for this revision of the Strategy.

35

Gap Analysis data

7. Student and staff data are taken from the University of Cambridge Student Statistics and Databook publications. Any adjustments made to the figures that appeared in the Gap Analysis were made with the agreement of the School concerned. The space data are taken from the Capacity Record database.

Ringfencing

8. During the data collection for the 1999-2000 Gap Analysis adjustments were made for certain science and technology departments which had areas containing large specialised equipment (e.g. machines with magnetic fields, wind tunnels etc.) exceeding the extent envisaged when the norms were established. It was agreed that for the 2002 Gap Analysis specialised equipment requiring a floor space of more than 50 m2 would be ringfenced. For this Strategy, the Planning and Resources Committee agreed that ringfencing should cease for equipment items and that as before the Chairs of Schools should decide on whether other types of space should be ringfenced. In the Gap Analysis the total area of ringfenced space was removed from each School’s space supply total so as not to skew space supply at the departmental level. Areas subject to ringfencing decisions were special animal facilities, museums and national collections, at the discretion of the Chairs of the Schools. On the advice of the Chairman of the Library Syndicate and University Librarian, the Chairs of the Schools agreed not to ringfence any departmental libraries. It should be noted that ringfencing is specific and limited to the Gap Analysis. It will not apply to the resource allocation methodology, which will allocate costs as per actual use of space.

9. Space-planning and RAM are inter-acting, crucial and parallel mechanisms.

Academic Space Gap

10. Tables 1 and 2 below summarise the current and future space gap pattern at Council of School level. The gap is expressed as shortfall/surplus against 90% of the optimal norm-based need. The overall result is that for academic space at March 2007 there is a surplus of 25,489 m2 (+8%); the space need is 210,899 m2 compared to a supply of 236,388 m2. At 2012 it is projected (based on the currently approved capital building programme, planned disposals and growth rate for departments) that the gap will decrease to a surplus of 17,813 m² (+5%).

36 Table 1 - Draft Gap Analysis for Councils of Schools

Space Total Space required Over/under supply Over/under Council of space Ringfenced at supply of excluding supply of Schools supply space in m² 90% (Gap space ringfenced space in m² in m² Analysis) % space Arts & Humanities 17,539 336 17,203 16,608 595 3 Humanities & Social 30,581 344 30,237 25,642 4,595 18 Sciences Physical Sciences 68,164 1,462 66,702 51,202 15,500 23 Biological Sciences 59,663 5,244 54,419 51,354 3,065 6

Technology 45,293 0 45,293 43,518 1,775 4 Clinical Medicine 24,439 1,594 22,845 23,662 -777 -3 TOTAL 245,679 8,980 236,388 210,899 25,489 8

Table 2 - 5 Year projected Gap Analysis including new build and disposals

Space Total Space Over/under supply Over/under Council of space Ringfenced required at supply of excluding supply of Schools supply in space in m² 90% (Gap space ringfenced space in m² m² Analysis) % space Arts & 17,539 336 17,203 17,362 -159 -1 Humanities Humanities & 30,581 344 30,273 27,016 3,257 11 Social Sciences Physical 72,392 1,462 79,930 55,060 15,870 22 Sciences Biological 61,808 5,244 54,419 55,441 -1,022 -2 Sciences Technology 43,453 0 43,453 46,622 -3,169 -7 Clinical 30,333 1,594 28,739 25,703 3,036 10 Medicine TOTAL 256,106 8,980 245,017 227,204 17,813 5

Central Library Space Need

11. There is a well-established development programme for the main University Library site, the main space issues to be addressed are the eventual location of the biological, chemical and earth sciences collections of the Central Science Library, together with the linked question of the balance between departmental and central libraries. Growth in demand to 2010 is assumed to be matched to the planned provision of new library space. The impact of electronic publishing (especially of journals in the sciences, technology and medicine) on future space needs both in the central and departmental libraries is the subject of a study currently under way.

37 Non-academic Space Gap

12. The space needs of the office-based non-academic departments have been derived from three elements:

• an office space allowance calculated at 12 m2 per member of staff • a social and meeting space allowance of 0.7 m2 per FTE member of staff • (in some cases) an allowance for specialist space e.g. archive storage, EMBS maintenance workshops, computer suites.

As for academic space, the policy is to provide 90% of the norm-based need.

13. The Gap Analysis for the non-academic departments analysed shows a current oversupply of space of 2,963m² (16%). The majority of these departments are in old converted buildings not well suited to modern office requirements. A significant cause of the space surplus is ‘bad fit’ and the duplication of facilities where departments are in multiple buildings. The redevelopment of the Old Press Site will provide an opportunity to remedy this problem.

Examination Space

14. Cambridge has little purpose-built examination space, and has to make use of lecture theatres and hired premises in the main examination period. It is clearly uneconomic to construct facilities exclusively for examinations, but the needs of examinations must continue to be taken into account in future construction and refurbishment projects. The detailed design of lecture theatres to allow examination use is a key issue. The construction of the Sports Centre at West Cambridge would provide a large flat-floored venue suitable for examinations. From 2008 onwards the Indoor Cricket School at Fenners will provide 178 additional spaces. The Board of Examinations have prepared a register of rooms available for examinations, which will provide the basis for a review of the adequacy of the current supply of examination space.

PRIORITISATION

15. The outcome of the Gap Analysis is a list of departments, by School, with space need, space supply, and the ‘gap’ between need and supply. The Gap Analysis is used to identify departments with a space gap (positive or negative) of more than 10%. These departments are noted as “potential projects” together with departments whose accommodation scored poorly for condition and/or suitability, or whose location was not sufficiently consistent with the locational strategy.

16. During 2006-07 the Schools and Non-School Institutions have engaged in two linked exercises relevant to estate planning: the Planning Enquiry; and identification of bids for HEFCE SRIF 4 and Project Capital 5 funding.

38

17. Listed by School below are the departments with projects registered under the CPP.

ARTS AND HUMANITIES

CPP No. Project Title Department Status

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

CPP No. Project Title Department Status CPP54 Infectious Disease Animal Clinical Veterinary Registered Facility Medicine only CPP70 Sainsbury Laboratory Plant Sciences Implementation CPP78 Plant Sciences: Plant Sciences Implementation Refurbishment of part second and third floors

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

CPP No. Project Title Department Status

PHYSICAL SCIENCES

CPP No. Project Title Department Status CPP50 Relocation of Earth Sciences Earth Developing and Geography Sciences/Geography Full Case CPP74 Cavendish 111 - Physics of Physics Implementation Medicine Phase 1 CPP75 Kavli Institute for Cosmology Astronomy Implementation CPP77 Astrophysics Building Physics/Astronomy Developing Full Case

39

TECHNOLOGY

CPP No. Project Title Department Status CPP63 Institute for Manufacturing Engineering Implementation (IfM) Building CPP79 Chemical Engineering and Chemical Registered Biotechnology Building Engineering/Biotechnology only CPP80 Development of the Engineering Registered Scroope House Site for the only Department of Engineering

CLINICAL MEDICINE

CPP No. Project Title Department Status CPP64 Pfizer Building Clinical School Implementation Refurbishment CPP69 Cambridge Cardio- Medicine Developing Full Respiratory Research Case Institute CPP81 Magnetic Resonance Wellcome Trust Clinical Registered Spectroscopy and a Nutrition Research Facility only Resource and Appetite Laboratory CPP82 Laboratory of Molecular Clinical School Registered Biology 2 only

NON-SCHOOL INSTITUTIONS

CPP No. Project Title Department Status CPP13 East Forum West Cambridge Implementation CPP26 University Sports Centre West Cambridge Developing Full Case CPP31 Education and Interpretation Botanic Garden Developing Centre Full Case CPP36 Infrastructure Sidgwick Site Implementation CPP41 Old Press Site Old Press Site Registered Redevelopment only CPP67 Relocation of Farm large University Farm Registered animal facility only CPP68 Madingley Hall Development ICE Developing Plan Full Case CPP73 West Bookstacks University Library Developing Southern Half Full Case approved CPP76 Data Centre UCS Registered only

40

STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

18. A key action during 2007-08 will be the production of a strategic implementation plan. This will identify the interrelationships and dependencies of candidate capital schemes, with broad brush cost estimates and associated income streams. For this the optimum sequencing and timetable will be identified, with an accompanying analysis of capital and recurrent costs and cost/benefit estimation.

SPACE UTILISATION

19. The data obtained on bookings of centrally timetabled lecture rooms and formal studies of utilisation in lecture theatres, seminar rooms and teaching laboratories shows clearly that Cambridge performs badly in terms of space utilisation. Observation, advice from building users and anecdotal evidence from visits to departments suggests more generally that there is poor utilisation of most types of space, except perhaps research laboratories. The Finance Working Party also came to the conclusion that there was under-use of space from an analysis of benchmark data from the EMS project.

20. Since the last Estate Plan new arrangements have been put in place for space analysis and management with the establishment of the Space Management Advisory Group (SMAG) reporting to the Resource Management Committee. The arrangements are guided by advice published in 1996 by the National Audit Office in their report ‘The Management of Space in Higher Education Institutions in Wales’. The areas examined were key issues affecting the utilisation of the Welsh higher education academic estate, the way it was managed and the efficiency of space use, and techniques which might be applied to improve space management. The report concluded with a list of 39 recommendations; most of the recommendations can be applied to space management in the University of Cambridge. They cover the following areas: Space management structure, Estate management information systems, space utilisation surveys, central and computerised timetabling packages, space charging, and space planning and remodelling.

21. During 2007 SMAG will review the advice published by the UK Higher Education Space Management Group (SMG) in their Phase 2 reports on 'Space Utilisation: Practice Performance and guidelines', ' Review of space Norms', 'Case Studies' and 'A review of English further education and HE overseas', with a view to identifying good practice to apply in Cambridge.

41