A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services  Email: democratic.services@cambridge.gov.uk

Note: 18 August 2021 JDCC minutes included by mistake, these were agreed at the 27 October 2021 meeting. Please ignore p3-4. 

No. Item




Apologies were received from Councillor M Smart, Cllr Gawthrope-Wood attended as the alternate.


Apologies were received from Councillor Hawkins, Cllr Fane attended as the alternate.


Apologies were received from Councillor Bygott.


Apologies were received from Councillor Thornburrow, Councillor Scutt attended as the alternate.


* Committee Manager note: Councillor Thornburrow arrived for item 21/59/JDCC


Declarations of Interest









Member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign.





Minutes pdf icon PDF 202 KB

Additional documents:


The minutes of the meeting held on 17 September were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.


S/1355/17/FL – Land Immediately West Of The Electricity Pylon And Foul Pump Station Histon Road Impington, 07/0003/NMA2 – Land Between Huntingdon Road And Histon Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB3 0LE, S/0001/07/NMA1 – Land Immediately West Of The Electricity Pylon And Foul Pump Station Histon Road Impington pdf icon PDF 265 KB


The Committee received the following applications:


  i.  S/1355/17/FL – Land Immediately West Of The Electricity Pylon And Foul Pump Station Histon Road Impington.

  ii.   07/0003/NMA2 – Land Between Huntingdon Road And Histon Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB3 0LE.

  iii.  S/0001/07/NMA1 – Land Immediately West Of The Electricity Pylon And Foul Pump Station Histon Road Impington.


Mr Asa Chittock addressed the Committee in support of the application on behalf of the applicant.


The Principal Planner introduced the application. 


In response to Members’ questions the Assistant Director and Principal Planner said the following:

  i.  A tree survey provided by the applicant did not reflect the change made during the course of the application to discharge the pond on the western side and not the northern side.

  ii.  An updated tree implication assessment had been requested through condition with tree protection measures.

  iii.  Suggested there would likely be a loss of one or two of the trees on the boundary.

  iv.  The application did not provide an alternative proposal for the original pond location site. This land now formed part of the Darwin Green 2 & 3 site allocations for which there is no outline consent.

  v.  Pre-application conversations concerning an outline consent for Darwin Green 2 & 3 are taking place between the relevant parties. The applicant will present their proposals to the Committee early next year when there will be an opportunity to discuss and influence the proposals.

  vi.  The relocation of the balancing pond had first been discussed in 2015, as the allocation of Darwin Green 2 & 3 sites moved forward through the South Cambridgeshire District Council Local Plan process.

 vii.  The relocation of the pond had been administered in parallel with the reserved matters proposals brought forward within Darwin Green 1.

viii.  Noted the Committee’s comments about the potential loss of open space should houses be placed on the original pond location site. These concerns could be dealt with as the Darwin Green 2 & 3 development come forward through the pre-application process. Members could provide a very clear and strong steer to the developer team with their views on open space and what should be provided.

  ix.  Referenced paragraph 8 of the Officer’s report which outlined the history of the application. The original balancing pond had received consent though full planning permission granted by South Cambridgeshire District Council. This included an access road and the consent remained extant.

  x.  The current proposal was for a revised full planning application for the balancing pond’s relocation.

  xi.  The application is an important and essential part of the infrastructure of Darwin Green 1. The drainage infrastructure would also support the development moving forward while the proposals for Darwin Green 2 & 3 were under discussion.

 xii.  The site of the original balancing pond is already within the Darwin Green 2 & 3 site allocation and currently not Green Belt land. This site allocation includes the provision of up to 1000 homes and whether development is located on that site is still to be determined through an planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21/57/JDCC


Eddington Lot 4 (Hill) pdf icon PDF 7 MB


The Committee received a Developer presentation on Eddington Lot 4


Members raised comments/questions as listed below. Answers were supplied, and comments from officers but as this was a pre-application presentation, none of the answers or comments were binding on either the intended applicant or the local planning authority so consequently were not recorded in these minutes.


  i.  Queried the dimension size of the back gardens for the three and four bed properties.

  ii.  Questioned the location and size of the main open space on site.

  iii.  Asked if there was enough bike storage on site for the entire development.

  iv.  Enquired as to what extent had the plans changed to accommodate the new National Planning Policy Framework.

  v.  Suggested that more detail was required on the landscaping of the site.

  vi.  Doubted if the bike storage was sufficient to park cargo bikes in sufficient numbers.

 vii.  Suggested there should be a green open space for each apartment.

viii.  Asked what sustainable planting, particularly trees, would be used on site.

  ix.  Expressed concern at the removal of individual bike storage on the properties.

  x.  Asked if dogs would be permitted on the green open spaces.

  xi.  The application should promote active travel, yet a third of the space on site was allocated to car parking.

 xii.  The provision of a cycle policy should be considered to ensure cycles paths were accessible and would encourage active travel.

xiii.  Suggested there should be a cycle space per individual and not per bedroom.

xiv.  Suggested a net zero construction on site would be welcome.

xv.  Advised provision for electric vehicle charging points. 

xvi.  Welcomed the change of colour on the buildings.

xvii.  Should consider the installation of heating systems which could be reversed to a cooling system when required; the top floor flats could get very hot.

xviii.  Asked what active play provision for children would be on site.

xix.  Queried what fossil fuels would be used.

xx.  Suggested there were some planning elements which were last century and should be updated.