®Planning appeal decision
Anstey Hall Hotel, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 9LG
Planning appeal 3361632 at Anstey Hall Hotel, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 9LG (Cambridge City Council) was dismissed on 17 December 2025 by Inspector Whelan P, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the development would preserve the setting and significance of the grade II* listed building Anstey Hall.
the construction of two blocks of retirement accommodation (Class C2) comprising 87 two-bedroom apartments with associated hard and soft landscaping, bin storage, cycle, and car parking. Provision of new vehicular access onto Maris Lane and reconfiguration of wall with new entrance gates. New pedestrian access onto Old Mills Road
- Authority
- Cambridge City Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Whelan P
- Postcode
- CB2 9LG
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the development would preserve the setting and significance of the grade II* listed building Anstey Hall
- whether the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Trumpington Conservation Area
- the effect of the development on open space
- whether the bicycle stores would be conveniently located
- the effect of the development on potential archaeological interest at the site
What decided it
The very considerable harm to the setting and significance of the grade II* listed building Anstey Hall, which would substantially diminish its spatial and landscape setting and undermine its pre-eminent status in the landscape, was not outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal.
The very considerable harm to the significance of the listed building and the significant harm to the landscape character and significance of the Conservation Area, given considerable weight under the Framework's heritage asset conservation requirements, were not outweighed by the public benefits of specialist retirement housing, economic benefits, landscape improvements, and other considerations, which attracted only less than moderate weight.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy 8Policy 55Policy 56Policy 57Policy 61Policy 67Policy 82
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 104Paragraph 115Paragraph 117Paragraph 207Paragraph 210Paragraph 212Paragraph 213Paragraph 219
- Judgments
- Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin)
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Cambridge
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Allowed27 September 2022329810111 Queen Ediths Way, Cambridge, CB1 7PH
- Allowed14 October 2026601250721 Earl Street, Cambridge, CB1 1JR
- Dismissed14 October 20266008906Land At The Rear Of 31 Neale Close, Cambridge, CB1 3LE
- Dismissed13 October 202660099802 Cranleigh Close, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 9NP
- Dismissed8 October 20266010726127 Histon Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB4 3JD
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.