Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Illingworth and Councillor Fisher, (Councillor Baigent attended as her Alternate).

 

Councillor Bennet would act as Councillor Clough’s Alternate when he spoke as Ward Councillor on the first item (university athletics track). Councillor Clough would rejoin committee from item 6 (26/01309/FUL 49 New Square).

Name	Item	Interest
Baigent	All	Personal: Member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign
Councillor Clough	26/94/Plan	Personal and Prejudicial: Involved in the application as a Ward Councillor.   Would speak as a Ward Councillor at committee.   Did not take part in the discussion and did not vote.
Councillor Porrer	26/95/Plan	Personal: Application was located within her ward division, she knew Supporters and Objectors, but she had not discussed it or fettered her discretion.
Councillor Baigent	26/95/Plan and 26/96/Plan	Personal: Would recuse himself for personal reasons
Councillor Smart	26/95/Plan and 26/96/Plan	Personal and Prejudicial: There was a complaint from a resident about his chairing of that item when it previously came to committee which was not upheld but Councillor Smart was advised by officers that not to sit on those items in future.
Councillor Porrer	26/98/Plan	Personal: Ward Councillor for area the application was located in.   Discretion unfettered.   Was not involved in the siting of the electricity cable and cabinets. It was not something she had discussed with officers, other than in general terms as part of her ward work.
Councillor Smart	26/98/Plan	Personal: Is the Cabinet Member for Nature, Open Space and City Services. Discretion unfettered as he had nothing to do with the item.

 

The minutes of the meetings held on 1 July 2026 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Committee minutes list public speakers at Committee. Please view the recording of the meeting on Cambridge City Council - YouTube to see/hear more detail about statements from public speakers and Ward Councillors.

Councillor Clough withdrew from the meeting for this item and did not participate in the discussion or decision making.

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for replacement of 12no. existing floodlights and columns serving the athletics track with 12no. new 18m columns with new LED luminaires, with associated works.

 

Terance Hart and Humphry Gleave addressed the Committee speaking objection to the application.

 

Mike           Osbourn     (Applicant’s representative) and Ellen Leggate (Supporter - President of Cambridge & Coleridge Athletics Club) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Peter Rees (Ward County Councillor) addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application. 

 

Hugh Clough (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application. 

 

Councillor Porrer proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation for an informative limiting unnecessary light when parts of the field were not in use.

 

This amendment was carried unanimously.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolved to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted) and an informative limiting unnecessary light when parts of the field were not in use.

Councillor Bennett left the Committee before this item was considered and did not return.

 

Councillor Clough joined the Committee as a decision maker before this item was considered.

 

Councillor Smart withdrew from the decision making committee for both New Square items and did not participate in the discussion or decision making.

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for single storey dwelling with basement, garden and off-street car parking on the land adjacent to No. 49 New Square.

 

The Senior Planner updated her report by referring to details in her presentation to correct details in her report. Since the publication of the Greater Cambridge housing trajectory and housing land supply report in April 2026, there had been material changes including the publication of the NPPF which the council responded to. To adopt a consistent approach on the monitoring of housing delivery in Greater Cambridge, the councils have adopted a different approach to calculate their five-year housing supply individually. So, South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City, on the basis of the updated calculations, Cambridge City now only has a supply of 2.72 years for the years 2026 to 2031 which means they do not have a 5-year housing land supply. The report at paragraph 13.23 outlined that in terms of public benefits of the proposal, the provision of a single dwelling should be given limited weight as this would make a limited contribution to the housing stock which at the time of writing was up to date with a housing supply. Following the above update, the position had changed and therefore needed to be acknowledged in the planning balance. The City Council could no longer demonstrate a housing supply and therefore moderate weight should be given instead of limited to the provision of a single dwelling. It was officers’ view that this did not alter the overall recommendation and that the harm would continue to substantially outweigh the benefits of the proposal.

 

Pietro Marino addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.

 

Caroline Herbert (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Baigent recused himself for personal reasons for the remainder of this item and the following one.

 

Councillor Porrer proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation that if the application were approved (as in the committee rejected the officer recommendation), a gate/boundary condition should be included.

 

This amendment was carried by 5 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 0) to refuse the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer report.

The Committee received a listed building consent application for partial removal of the boundary wall to Willow Walk to form parking area, and to New Square to form pedestrian gate.

 

Régine Page addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.

 

Caroline Herbert (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Porrer proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation that if the application were approved (as in the committee rejected the officer recommendation), a gate/boundary condition should be included.

 

This amendment was carried by 5 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 0) to refuse the application for listed building consent in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer report.

Councillor Todd-Jones withdrew from the meeting for this item and did not participate in the discussion or decision making.

 

Councillors Baigent and Smart rejoined the Committee before this item was considered.

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for conversion of existing dwelling (C3) to an 11 bedroom, 11 person House of Multiple Occupation (HMO) (sui generis) with a single storey rear extension.

 

The Senior Planner updated her report by referring to updated condition wording in her presentation that a management plan was attached as an additional condition.

 

Rosalind Higham and Janet Johnson addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.

 

Shannon Walford (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Richard Swift (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee speaking about the application. 

 

Councillor Porrer proposed amendments to the Officer’s recommendation:

      i.          requiring detail of the two car parking spaces and how they would be managed;

     ii.          ensure there was sufficient space for waste bins.

 

The amendments were carried by 6 votes to 0.

 

Councillor Clough proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation requesting a compliance condition that the property would only be occupied by eleven persons at any one time

 

This amendment was carried by 6 votes to 0.

 

Councillor Baigent proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation by way of an informative to ensure there was sufficient space for cycle parking.

 

This amendment was carried by 6 votes to 0.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 5 votes to 0 with 1 abstention) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted), subject to:

      i.          the planning conditions set out in the Officer’s report;

     ii.          delegated authority to Officers, in consultation with the Chair, Vice Chair and Spokes, to draft and include the following additional conditions:

a.    as set out in the officer presentation an additional HMO management plan condition, which was amended in committee discussion to require detail of the two car parking spaces to be retained/provided, plus how the spaces would be managed, which would be added into a future management plan;

b.    a compliance condition relating to the property being occupied by only eleven persons at any one time;

   iii.          informatives included on the planning permission in respect of:

a.    ensure there was sufficient space for cycle parking and check if provision could be increased;

b.    ensure there was sufficient space for waste to meet recap design guidance.

Councillor Dryden left the Committee before this item was considered and did not return.

 

Councillor Todd-Jones rejoined the Committee before this item was considered.

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for installation of ground-mounted electrical cabinets within Parkers Piece to support site infrastructure to include minor excavation, installation of the cabinets, and connection to existing services, with surrounding surfaces reinstated on completion.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted).

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for a single storey rear extension, following demolition of existing outbuilding. Alterations to fenestration.

 

The Planner updated his report by referring to updated condition wording in his presentation where Condition 4 was removed.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted) including the amendment to remove Condition 4.

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for addition of external wall insulation to the solid wall constructed parts of the building, along with the replacement of the UPVC double glazed windows with replacement UPVC triple glazed windows.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted).

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for addition of external wall insulation to the solid wall constructed parts of the building, along with the replacement of the UPVC double glazed.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted).

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought approval for addition of external wall insulation to the solid wall constructed parts of the building, along with the replacement of UPVC double glazed windows with UPVC triple glazed windows.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 0) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer (with delegated authority to Officers to make minor amendments to the conditions as drafted).

The Committee noted the appeals list.