 Okay, I can confirm we're now live. Thank you. Thank you very much. Good morning everybody and welcome to South County District Council and this extraordinary planning meeting which is convened to consider the application for a new village at the site of Bourne airfield. I'm John Bachelor and I'm Chair of the Committee. The Committee Vice-Chair, Councillor Haylings, cannot be with us today. So members, before we go any further may I ask you please to agree that I appoint Councillor Bradenham as the Vice-Chair for this meeting. Can I take that by affirmation? Anyone against? I don't see anyone against. So thank you very much. So Councillor Bradenham, thank you very much for taking on the Vice-Chairmanship. Would you introduce yourself please? Thank you Chairman. Good morning everyone. I'm Councillor Anna Bradenham and I'm the member for Milton and Water Beach Ward. Thank you. We're supported along the virtual top table by the following officers, Sharon Brown, Assistant Director Delivery. Sharon, would you just confirm that you're with us please? Yes, Chairman, I'm with you. Thank you very much. Hello everyone. Chris Carter, Delivery Manager, Strategic Sites. Good morning Chair, good morning everybody. Thank you. Mike Huntington, Principal Planner, Strategic Sites who will be taking us through the report shortly. Good morning everybody. Thank you. And Stephen Reed, Senior Planning Lawyer. Nice morning Chair, Members of the Committee and Members of the Public. Thank you very much. And Ian, Senior Democratic Service Officer taking the minutes today. Good morning. Thank you very much. We also have present several other people to help members understand this application, but I'll let officers introduce them as and when required. First, just a few housekeeping announcements. Please make sure that your device is fully charged and switch your cameras and microphones off unless you're invited to do otherwise. When you're invited to address the meeting, please make sure your microphone is switched on and your camera. When you finish addressing the meeting, please turn both off immediately. Speak slowly and clearly and please do not talk over or interrupt anyone. Please ensure that you have switched off or silenced any other devices you have so that they do not interrupt proceedings. The normal procedure at planning committee is to take recorded votes and we will continue with this unless there is clear affirmation. When we move to a vote on any item and that it isn't clear affirmation, I will ask for a roll call to be taken. I will now ask committee members to speak into the microphone so that their vote is clear both to the committee and to those watching. The members should respond far against or abstain when their name is called. Committee members present, I will now invite each of you to introduce yourselves. Members, after I call your name, please turn on your camera and microphone. Wait two seconds and say your name and the ward you represent so that your presence may be noted. Please remember to turn off your camera after your introduction. I'm John Bachelor, chair of the committee and one of the members for Linton. Councillor Henry Bachelor. Morning Chairman, Councillor Henry Bachelor, the other member for Linton. Thank you very much. Councillor Brednham. Good morning again. Councillor Anna Brednham, member for Milton and Water Beach. Thank you. Councillor Cahn. Councillor Cahn, member for Histant Incident and Water Park. Thank you Councillor Cahn. We can't hear you too well so perhaps you do something about your sound please. Councillor Chamberlain, please. Good morning. We're into the Chamberlain. I'm the district councillor for Hardwick and I'm substituting for Councillor Nick Wright. Thank you. Councillor Fein, please. Good morning. Peter Fein, shelter ward. Thank you. Councillor Harvey. Yes, thank you Chairman. Councillor Jeff Harvey, I'm the member for Borscht Ward and I'm substituting for Councillor Ripith. Thank you very much. Councillor Roberts, please. Good morning everybody. Deborah Roberts, district councillor for the Foxton Ward. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Heather Williams. Heather Williams and I represent the Mordens Ward. Yeah. Councillor Dr Richard Williams. Thank you Chair. I'm Richard Williams. I'm the member for the Wittlesford Ward. Thank you. And Councillor Eileen Wilson. Good morning. Councillor Eileen Wilson, member for Cottonham and Rampton, substituting for Councillor Halings. Thank you very much. So I can confirm that the meeting is court. If at any time a member leaves the meeting would they please make that fact known to me so that it can be recorded in the minutes. So members of the public are aware if a councillor is absent for any part of the presentation or a debate about an agenda item then they may not vote on that item. We have several public speakers today and I would just like to explain how public speaking will work. This meeting is being broadcast live via the council's website and public speakers are reminded that by participating in this meeting you are consenting to being broadcast and to the use of the images and sound recordings for webcasts and training purposes. You will each have three minutes to address the committee. When you start speaking we will start the timer. Please ensure you switch the microphone on before you speak. When your time has elapsed we will ask you to conclude your speech. Once you have finished speaking we may wish to ask you questions. Please be concise in your responses. If there are no more questions you may leave the meeting and continue to watch. The webcast. Committee members please remember that any questions to speakers should be for clarification purposes only. The process for this shall be as follows. I shall ask if there are any questions. If you do have questions please ask to speak in the chat function. The committee can only consider planning reasons for or against the application. The committee cannot consider general observations about the development site. The committee cannot consider comments from public speakers made outside of their allotted time. Once the committee has heard from all speakers and planning officers we will form views on the application. The planning committee will then vote. The outcome is decided by majority vote and in the event of a tie I as the chair have the casting vote. Committee members when you vote please identify yourselves and speak into the microphone so that your vote is understood by committee and those watching on the webcast. Members are reminded that they should indicate whether they are for against or abstain when their name is called. Now let's leave a bit of the chairman. Did you wish to confirm that the local members were present? Not at this stage thank you. So members I'd just like to say a word about the format for today. The planning officer will make his presentation. He will make a presentation in three tranches. So the first tranche will be the principal of development. The second tranche will be the parameter plans transport and access and then the third part would be other issues. So the principal will be he will give the first element of his presentation. I will then open it up to clarification to members so this is your opportunity then to clarify matters with the planning officer. One more bit of housekeeping members. So as far as taking breaks as concerned I will attempt to take a 15 minute break at 11 30 or thereabouts. We will take lunch at 1 o'clock for 30 minutes and we will take another 15 minute break at 3 o'clock should be still operational. Thank you very much. We will move on to the agenda. Just to confirm that you will have had three pieces of paper for the agenda, the main agenda and there are two additional papers which have been circulated earlier to all members of the committee. We now move on to two apologies. Thank you. Apologies from councillors Wright, Dr Hawkins and substitutes are councillors Changlin, Wilson, Henry Batchelor and Harvey. Thank you very much. Do we have any declarations of interest please? If you would note in the chat function the vice chair will be managing that area. Chairman, councillor Williams, Heather Williams. Thank you very much, councillor Heather Williams please. Thank you chairman. It's just to declare a non-procuniary interest that I'm a member of the Greater Cambridge Partnership Assembly as their reference in the report but that doesn't have an impact on my ability to take part today. Thank you very much. And Chairman, councillor Eileen Wilson. Councillor Eileen Wilson please. Yes Chair, thank you. I too am a member of the Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly. Right, thank you. I have another from councillor Grenville Chamberlain. Councillor Chamberlain please. Thank you Chairman, I ought to declare an interest as a member for Hardwick which is very close to this development. Thank you. Right, thank you very much. And councillor Henry Batchelor Chairman. Councillor Henry Batchelor please. Thank you Chair, probably worth noting I'm also a member of Cambridgeshire County Council as they are referenced in the report so I don't think that precludes me from doing anything. Thank you. Right, thank you very much. And Chairman, I probably ought to make the same declaration that I'm a member of Cambridgeshire County Council. Okay, thank you. I'm sure that they are all noted. Right, we now move on to the substantive business of the day and that is on page one of our agendas. And so the reference for this is S3440, stroke 18, stroke O-L and we're at Bourbon Airfield. The proposal is an outline application with all matters reserved except for access for a new mixed-use village comprised in residential development of approximately 3,500 dwellings, mixed-uses comprising employment, retail and leisure, residential institutions, education, community facilities, open space including parks, ecological areas and woodlands, landscaping, engineering for foul and sustainable drainage systems, footpaths, cycleways, public transport infrastructure, associated access infrastructure. This application is subject to an environmental impact assessment. The site addresses Bourbon Airfield, Bourbon Cambridge. The applicant is countryside properties and the Taylor family. The officer recommendation is approval subject to S106 agreements and conditions. The team material considerations will be detailed by the planning officer. This application is brought to the committee because it is a large-scale development of strategic importance. The representative officer is Mike Huntingdon, principal planner. So Mr. Huntingdon, over to you in just one second. So all members please make sure that you're muted and that your cameras are off unless you're speaking please. Thank you. Mr. Huntingdon. Thank you Chairman. Right, I've just got three verbal updates before I start my presentation if I may. The first point is in relation to condition 13 in the report which is the condition relating to transport. If I share the screen with that condition and I'll just bear with me while I just try and do that, I need to put that full. Now can I just ask you if everyone can see that? So Chairman could you confirm you can see that? I can see it but not clearly it needs to be as large. And for those with the paper this is on page 118. So this is just to insert reference to the local planning authority in the condition. So the first part of the condition transport assessment shall be to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and to meet Cambridge County Council's transport assessment. The second part will add the phrase the local planning authority's approval in consultation with Cambridge County Council. Further red type the content of the TA shall meet the County Council TA requirements. So that's an amendment to that condition. I'll just share that. The second update I'd like to share with you is a discussion I had with the Environment Agency on Wednesday. The Environment Agency emailed me querying where discussions were regarding foul water provision with development. I confirmed with the Environment Agency that the applicant was in discussion with Anglin Water regarding using the PAP with Water Recycling Centre. And I also referred the Environment Agency to condition 43 of the report which is on page 130 to 131 of the report. And I referred to the condition and also the reason for the condition which was to prevent the increased risk of flooding and or pollution of the water environment. The Environment Agency were content with that condition. It gives control to the local planning authority to ensure that any risk of flooding arising from any foul water drainage strategy is dealt with. And then I've also had additional comments from a resident of Bourne whose initial comments were recorded in the amendment sheet. And his additional comments reiterated the C2C issue needed to be being resolved before development is allowed to proceed. His second point was it would be better if all construction traffic entered off the children's gate roundabout. And his third point was that the broadway junction must be completed in full and rising bollards installed before any access to the development site is permitted. So that's, those are the verbal updates. So if I move on to my presentation, part of my presentation includes a drone footage. So I'm going to just see if this will, this will work. So bear with me. Right, can members see that full size? Yes, that's fine. Thank you very much Chairman. Right, so planning application for Bourne airfield. This item relates to the allocated development site known as Bourne airfield. The need to keep the file size of this presentation down to a minimum. It means I've kept this slides and we've slides down to a minimum. The chairman has already described the planning application. So I won't go into that any in any more detail. The series of four parameter plans accompany the application as well as a site plan and after approval. These underpin the outline proposals and will guide the future detailed development of the site. The site has been allocated in their local plan as part of allocation SS7 together with the adjacent employment land. An SPD to guide the development was approved by the district council in 2019. This spatial framework plan forms part of the SPD. The SPD sets out a vision for the development which is as follows. Bourne airfield will be a distinct new South Cambridge village acknowledging its historic past but with its own contemporary identity. A diverse yet integrated community with a range of facilities and services to complement not compete with existing local provision. Well connected to the wider area by high quality public transport and providing employment and homes to support the greater Cambridge economy. The village will have a vibrant and strong heart supporting healthy active and inclusive community lifestyles and providing a high quality of life for its residents in a contemporary landscape setting. So this members is the spatial framework plan from the SPD and I'll just try and get the laser pointer. In purple we've got the existing employment area that was existing that's got plan permission last month and an area of open space to the north-east. This is the C2C route and red line going along the northern boundary connected to upper Camborn. Orange are mixed-juice areas. Orange here and orange here. Location of secondary school, primary school, primary school. Village centre, secondary centre. Plainfields up here, Plainfields up here. Country park to the south and woodland belt along the eastern boundary with Highfields Caldicott. I'm just showing a bit of wider context for the site of particular interest is the east-west rail route and this plan shows the preferred route option published by the east-west rail. Although this has not been approved, another route corridors have been proposed by others. This is the most up-to-date plan. It shows a very wide corridor to the south of Cambridge running in a north-westerly direction towards Bourne airfield and there's Camborn. It narrows as it comes up here with the suggested potential railway station to the southwest of Camborn. Then it moves over towards Sandy and Thamesford. I'm aware that there are other options being discussed as well. This is an aerial shot of the site taken in the summer. I'll just show you first of all the contours. The contours have been helpfully shown in white so it's a 70 meter above ordinance date and contour that comes around here and then goes out towards Highfields Caldicott. You can tell it's generally flat but there is the beginnings of a shallow valley on the eastern valley here and then you can see the contours forming that valley and the land drops down. It's lowest point 55 meters above ordinance date but it's generally flat. You can see the three historic oneways and you can also see the former employment site here. There's an existing employment user use here D-ball to make cement free concrete. You can also see the existing uses on site. There's an extensive storage of cranes along this part of the runway and also storage elsewhere around here. Although landscape features on site there's a existing hedgerow here and there's some tree belts along here, a thicker tree belt and a booky hill plantation and some more trees along here. There's some Highfields Caldicott to the east and then to the southwest we've got the farm. This is the farm that the landowner actually for this area and then we have Upper Camborn to the west of the site. There's also a small warehouse and a couple of other houses there. So bearing all these things in mind I will now attempt to look at some drone footage so let me just see if this works. So I'll close that down and I will just try and see if this works. Can members see the website link? Yes indeed. Great thank you Chairman. We've got a new up-to-date drone footage from just earlier on this month so bearing in mind when we did member briefing the other day with a slightly older drone footage this is more up-to-date so it's just one image which has a few arrows so I'll try and that's it. Right so I'm in the north east corner it was obviously taken when there's a lot of heavy rainfall so that's the field that would be retained as open space in the parameter plans together with this area of open space as well so the development site would start if I can do my pointer. I can't do a pointer on this so just have to be the normal arrow. So can members see that arrow clearly? Yes we can. Yep thank you Chairman. So that would be the extent of the built form to the left of my arrow to the west of the development then all this area here would be open space with obviously the exception of an entrance road. This is that that is Highfields Goldicots with the woodland belt and you can see this used to be the earth bund that protected residents from the noise from this factory site and this factory site has been cleared and this is the area where members granted plan permission for the employment area in January. This is the first part of the development that would be built out and this is a mixed use area I'll describe this in the next stage in the parameter plan. Let's see if these arrows work. Oh it's gone a bit far a bit too far so that's the northern boundary of the site which is the A428 and there will be a 7 meter high landscape bund along that northern boundary. Let's just see if I can zoom in that's as far as I can zoom in that's going viewing back towards the northeast corner that's the employment site that will be retained and you can see some of these large areas of storage that are stored on the on the runways loads of cranes and other bits and pieces between the runways the site is used for agricultural use. I might be able to go that way let's go that way let's see if that works. Yeah that's a bit of a clear review of the storage that's going on and a few of the existing landscape features on the site that will be retained. I'm trying to go this way because I just want to show you Highfields Caldecott. Yes what we've got here is the previous area that I showed you wasn't didn't have the updated residential development that had been recently started in Highfields Caldecott there if you can see the pointer. So this is the tree belt running alongside the edge of the development with Highfields Caldecott this is the tree the plantation bucket hill plantation and this is looking south towards open fields towards borne and further afield. I'll try and find a pointer to get you towards Campbell. Right this is another view looking south towards well further south towards distant hills towards Royston you can see and these are some of the buildings that in use with the farming operation as well as a little control tower actually to use with the runway and that's there in the distance that's the farmhouse for the farmer that runs the farm. So if I just move over to the western side that's the boundary with the borne Broadway and interface with Campbell and of particular importance if I can get the right location this might be the best one to look at this is the borne Broadway access so that would be the way in that's the proposed way in on the western end to the to the development and the guided busway or the CTC would run along see my arrow run along all the way through Campbell and this part of the busway already has outlined planning permission and that's that's being delivered by the Campbell and west developers. What you can also see here is is existing um Brideway primitive Brideway which will be connected is proposed to be connected to the primitive Brideway with the with the development and there are also several connections there's a public right of way there's another public right of way that's currently used as a whole road for Upper Campbell and there's another public right of way where my arrow is that takes you to this extensive area of open space at Campbell and the country park there's one other thing I just wanted to point to you if I can get this zoom to work a bit further um I'll go a bit further um sorry about this right um so the development site boundary is here and beyond that tree line will be the parts of country park another open space and allotments and then on this line you can see that is where existing Brideway runs and that Brideway runs um it runs all the way well goes all the way to Cambridge but it um runs alongside the southern boundary and then stops about there I think that is everything that I would like to show you on the aerial photograph um you might be able to just get an idea of this very shallow valley but that's that's the trees in the shallow valley there okay that concludes um I'll just close that down and then I will open up my presentation again yes that um that concludes section one hi Mike um does it I was expecting you to tell us about the principles of development read local plan and uh speed the yep I can go back and um so so the plan so so the site was allocated in let me just get my local plan hang on a sec so the site was allocated as SS7 um when the site when the when the site was when the local plan was approved the local plan has uh the local plan policy SS7 has a series of sub clauses in that in that um policy um let me just get a relevant page it requires the policy requires um measures to address landscape townscape the setting of the new village and to deliver a high quality new development it requires the delivery of a significant network of green infrastructure the creation of a comprehensive movement network um to incorporate opportunities to exceed sustainable design and construction standards and uh will require the provision and management of infrastructure services and facilities to meet the needs of the village measures to assist the development of the community through community development workers um and will be in accordance with the SBD the policy carries on goes on to say what the SBD should consist of and um I've got colleagues I've got colleagues within I've got um Dave Robinson Claire Spencer with me from the local plans team if there are any questions from members in relation to the local plan and the SBD process but the um the my report concludes that the look that the allocation is or that the application is in accordance with the local plan and the SBD okay okay that's it thank you that's it for the first section okay and just for clarity so the local plan uh does establish the principle of development side yeah yes it does yeah right members uh any questions on this first element then so the principle of development um if you'd like to put your request to speak in the check function the Vice-Chair will manage that for me please Chairman we have one request so far from Councillor Heather Williams all right thank you Councillor Heather Williams please Chairman I'll apologise now for later and it's just because it was in Mr Huntington's um report you showed the map over east west rail and the preferred option area I'm just wondering if you could advise us what bearing that actually has in our decision making today bearing in mind that there's quite obviously a lot of support for it going to the north in which case what impact would it have on on the site please can we reserve that for the moment the second second piece of the presentation does deal with transport and access so that will come into that thank you Chairman thank you very much don't take the tip so Chairman the next request to speak is from myself yeah perhaps the breadman please thank you Chairman um so I wanted to clarify um in the uh spatial framework plan the tree belt between the east side of the site and the properties in high fields called a cot in the plan the diagram is shown as the tree belt being complete but we know in the drone imagery it isn't and I just wanted to clarify that um uh that there is an intention which I shall be seeking to reinforce through reinforcement of a condition that that tree belt should be planted up right at the get go to ensure the gap in the tree belt be planted up so that it's actually well established by the time building is actually done it was on your map um SS6 was it am I still sharing something no no you're not okay it's fine it was just to be it was just that on the drone imagery we could see there's a gap and on your SS6 map it showed that there isn't yeah um I can thank you Council Brandon um yes so when I come to talk about the parameter plans in the next stage okay it will show that that tree belt will be there will be a tree belt created there um there is a phasing condition attached to the report now that phasing condition and there's also a phasing plan which I can show you later on in the in the report as well but the phasing condition is somewhere in here let me just find the phasing condition it is condition 11 yeah so the phasing condition will condition eight condition eight condition h talks about that but then it can be we can certainly um it's I was also going to we can come to it in your parameter plan bit I was going to pick it up under condition 10 landscape and design I'd like to strengthen that a bit but I'll come back to that yeah that's fine and chairman that's me done but we have a comment from councillor Richard Williams that he's lost video but he'll come back as soon as he can do you want to pause for a moment I think he can still hear I think he can still hear but he's yes I can hear I just can't see the presentation or anything so um if it's all right I'd like to try and leave and come back do we want to pause for a moment we're paused for a couple of moments please thank you the the presentation isn't actually up at the moment uh just to inform councillor Williams um yeah it's just the video feeds from everyone that's up at the moment so it's not expected that you would see that thank you thank you Liam okay sorry we're just holding for a moment to um whilst the member of the committee goes out and comes back trying to get his camera working thank you John back now it's working okay thank you very much so vice chair Richard with councillor Williams was wanting to speak as well didn't he uh no he just wanted to let us know he's going to come back we haven't got any other speakers chairman no further speakers okay so we go back to mr Huntington them for your uh second element of your presentation please let's chairman let's see if this works right so um we'd like to close down your camera please uh councillor Paddy it's all right we'll just see what we're doing here so this element is as I understand that my parameter plans transport and access yep yep this is them the a bit of a chunkier section shall we say yep um so section two um right so we've got four parameter plans the site planner company applications and the parameter plans fix the key principles of the development um we've got an access and movement parameter plan a green infrastructure parameter plan a land use parameter plan and a density and building height parameter plan so uh just to go through the movement access and movement parameter plan first of all I will just describe certain elements of the plan I'll just get my point to the laser pointer so the first um key element is the main access points um main access point in the northeast corner and there's also a main access point at the Broadway with a no left turn into the Broadway for vehicles um we've got the indicative primary internal circulation in black in solid black line which is this route here goes out onto the Broadway we have an indicative secondary internal circulation route shown in the dashed black line here we have the segregated high quality public transport route in blue running along the top of the site and running through the settlement center the value center and then back out across to Kanban where I described to you on the aerial photograph there are two stops or halts one is in the in the settlement center indicative location there and the second one close to the employment area and to High Falls Caldecott in this location here there are several indicative strategic pedestrian cycle where bridleway links shown on here um we have a perimeter route which is identified along the northern corner along there and then runs on the the eastern boundary of the site connecting to the bridleway which is shown with the green dotted line along here and that perimeter bridleway carries on around the site on the western boundary and again there are lots of connections as I described in the aerial photograph across the Broadway pedestrian cycle bridleway routes across there to Kanban and wider field there are also access points from into the employment site from the development cycle and pedestrian connections and with a vehicle access point here moving on to the next parameter plan this parameter plan describes the density and building heights most of the site will be predominantly two to three stories in height with the settlement center being up to four stories in height with one exceptional location for up to six stories the um the red is the highest density the orange is is the height uh is medium denser high meet height to medium the orange is medium and the yellow is low density the purple is mixed use and residential um and the there's two other small areas of employment there's a curious little enclave in the with the kink in the red line of the land ownership boundary which this will be proposed to be employment alongside the rest of this employment area and then this small area around here is designed to be another employment area like a hub employment zone um zone of activity around this primary school education are other other education locations are here if there's anything else to share with you on that one this is the green infrastructure parameter plan and there are various types of open space proposed uh council Braden talked about um the tree belt along here that's the tree belt the missing tree belt that will be planted this area of open space has various functions including allotments some surface water community orchards some surface water drainage um this pink area will be the flexible use between education and formal recreation the dark green is uh exist in woodland and um the the pale yellow is semi-natural green space and some of these these great these little green squares are playground area this is the land use parameter plan uh repeating some of the some of the elements in um in some of the other parameter plans um yeah the pink areas education formal education one one of the things to just point here is that this primary school could be could be extended to four-form entry and if it's not four-form entry then it's a three-form entry school so there needs to be flexibility in in in place there one key interesting thing that that that is proposed is ability to square in this location and the design treatment of this will need to be carefully considered where the interface between pedestrians and um and vehicle movements the key point about this the settlement center is located and one of the key land use features actually this development is that the retention of the north south runway there's a key landscape feature looking out into the open space to the south the other element is uh the the eastern valley which would i describe to you on the aerial photograph where there's a shallow valley which would form a landscapes treatment along here i know this is of interest to many many members the come once came is better public transport um route so just to remind members that in the plan the route as it enters the new village would come in from the western corner of the broadway and then run along the northern boundary the aim obviously is to get people to get this this this public transport moving moving as quickly as possible so they're going to have two stops in the new village um the plan to the south is the wider context of the site with the two proposed stops within the development highlighted and then and then further stops hard week um there will be a 20 million pound contribution towards the c2c from the development so that's the c2c going into more detail about the western access so this is a extract from the from one of the parameter plans and we can see that the in schematic form the road would be designed to have right right out only so no left turn but then the busway would go straight across and that plan is shown in a in more detail on the this indicative plan on the right hand side um this is indicative and a lot of the detailers contained within that plan will follow from a section 278 process undertaken with the county council but just to give you some highlights these will be signal controlled the red area is the is the bit set out set aside for the busway the cycle path will come across and then join this maintenance cycle strip along here and then this will be designed to make sure there's no left to turn the link to camborn on the other side of the broadways is the responsibility of the camborn west developers and already has outlined planning consent when completed it will be owned by the county council and the junction will be monitored to ensure that it will work as intended and ampr cameras will be used to do to do some of that monitoring more of which shortly monitoring this plan shows with the addition of napple high street indicative locations where the impact of vehicle traffic on the highway will be monitored some locations will involve ampr cameras others other locations will involve other methods of counting traffic and further locations may be selected this plan shows indicatively where the ampr cameras are proposed to be located so that they are in blue but this is a this is a a matter which will be followed up with the county council in jacos you can see that the um going back aside these are all of the the roads coming to the south broadway high high fields high high fields road high street main street on the long road and just to point out the villages because they're not quickly shown there's bar there's um there's borne there's toft there's combaton there's high fields cul-de-cotte there's hardwick and there's barton there's there's section 106 interim transport mitigation package leading to the first 500 homes which which are I think condition 13 so these this mitigation package includes buster science park bus to adenbrooks cycle way to madingley mulch two can crossing at the coach and madingley junction otherwise known as the cambridge crossroads in the developer's package connections to combaton greenway free annual bus passes to all residents of the development a car club electric cycle vouchers and improvements to the wider footpath network I've got my colleagues john finney and um david allot to answer any particular technical questions relating to transport um that concludes that section thank you it might actually be an opportune moment from mr alec and mr dr finney um to comment on the c2c and specifically the monitorum and manage principle and how that's going to work perhaps yep yep thank you um step in on on that we've been in dialogue with the gcp about the c2c scheme and the gcp i'm sorry they let me just interrupt you so um i just introduce you it's david allot and um you are the transport assessment manager at the county council that's correct sorry about that thank you um so the um the gcp remains committed to their funded scheme the c2c which was identified in the local plan and indeed the spd as a key transport measure related to this site and this corridor um presently the gcp and the combined authority are in discussion about the alignment of the routes but again the funding commitment and the strategic need remains there is an independent audit that's about to kick off and that will conclude in may and that will help to resolve the alignment issue um but um the gcp remains committed to uh bringing the scheme forward with uh uh delivery date around 2026 um in terms of this proposal the route is again the funding commitment and the strategic need remains so i've got an extra audit that's about to uh kick off and that will conclude in may and that will help to resolve the alignment issue um but um the gcp remain apologies that i've got an excellent connection uh bringing the scheme forward with uh perhaps we could ask everybody to mute german that would be helpful well they they should all be muted but i think that's an issue with davids in but yeah that's it's much better now sorry about that i was getting then i was getting a lot of echo then um in terms of this proposal then we recognize the benefit that the uh the mass transit scheme will deliver to the development um now what the developer's putting for proposing is a monitor and manage approach so we've identified an initial phase of 500 dwellings with an interim mitigation package as mike has identified and what that could do is allow the development to get started to kick off and that would come with an ongoing monitoring of the site entrances and exits as well as surrounding villagers what would that would do is allow time for the decisions on the detail of the strategic link to work through such that as that advances there would be a need for any subsequent development to come back to demonstrate how that could be unlocked and what we see there is um that the high quality public transport scheme would effectively effectively unlock the remainder of the development as and when it comes forward right is that you david yes that's that's the update on c2c okay thank you all right members um any comments on second two of their presentation then please chairman i have a question please it's the breadman then please thank you chairman um i'd like some clarification on the monitor and manage process what happens if the monitoring demonstrates that the desired shift to modal shift doesn't happen and that in fact the traffic coming out into the relevant areas where you're monitoring with cameras is higher than you anticipated or wished for because the traffic's then already doing it isn't it so what what what would you do then what's the next step if that proves yes so yes what monitor and managers allows us to let the development happen and observe an early phase in a worst case scenario the committee would have the ability or the planning authority would have the ability to hold back future phases if the outcomes don't don't match up to what we desire to happen in addition to that the monitoring also comes with financial contributions that allow us to step in mid phase and mitigate any unwanted events the prime example there is rat running so from the very start of the phase we'll be able to observe whether there is a spiking in rat running associated with development trips and a resultant pot to go in and provide traffic calm in there but yes in a worst case scenario we would observe and and and those results would inform whether or not the development could proceed into a future phase so chairman just further clarification if I may through you um but by that time there would already be traffic running through villages would there not well I did we would we would expect that would be mitigated through the mitigation for the interim phase um that's that's how we would deal with that so the interim package comes with a mitigation to deal with any emerging problems that may emerge through the phase thank you chairman all right thank you um I think we have a list of speakers yes we have uh Councillor Richard Williams first chairman right Councillor Williams please thank you um I've got got two points one um for Mr Huntington just going back to the uh map you showed on densities and height I just just want to have a clarification on that first um yes in the local plan 6a I think you mentioned in your report talks about responding to local character um no I noticed on the sort of scale there are up to six story buildings um where these little dark red dots are on the plans we were given and the SPD doesn't mention six story buildings the SPD says that in some instances buildings with elements up to five stories high may be appropriate in key locations but we seem to have six story buildings here um so um I just want your sort of views on on whether and why why that might be acceptable given it it doesn't seem to be in the SPD and I'm not I'm not sure it responds to local character either um on the transport I can just ask those questions as well and it's probably more for Mr Allitt um my question is really has anybody modelled the journey times at rush hour um for these buses that would run to the science park um and to adenbrooks and then following on from that and slightly picking up on what Councillor Bradnan was saying about running um I just like a little bit more information on what you can actually do about rap running because if as I suspect I'm not having having lived in Campbell and and you know and worked in Cambridge many years ago and tried to get the bus it can take an awful long time um in in rush hour if we get sneered up in the traffic you're trying to get down to the adenbrooks site um so I don't really know what you can do about rap running I mean you can put traffic on again but that will just snare up the traffic in the villages I think if if actually the bus isn't really a viable option for people so anyway if you could just um provide some clarity on those that would be helpful thank you I I think Mr Huntington had a question first and that was the uh sixth story building yeah the the parameter plan just allows for one building of six stories and in my report I referred to whether there are any variations from the spd they are they will be justified um I mean the the by father I mean by far the majority of the site is is two to three stories in height is it so can I just I mean they look like there are two dots two dots there are two dots but they're they're two locations where either of those either of those locations one building of six stories could be located okay all right thank you uh Mr Alex yeah and if if I could ask John Finney to talk about um about the rap running and traffic calming I'll cover the public transport aspect um there are existing uh bus services that are timetabled in terms of the journey time of getting to the um to the science park to the cbc and the science park um we do recognize that the best way of improving public transport journey times is through priority and indeed that's the strategic solution for the site um but another barrier to public transport is the cost of public transport so recognizing that the services and the journey times are not the most attractive as they will ultimately be in the fullness of time we still believe that public transport will be a viable and attractive option particularly that this developer is offering um each household well each householder um free public transport for the first year to help to establish that behavior so I think we have to accept the points that public transport journey times won't be as fast as they possibly will be in the fullness of time uh but it remains a attractive option and now to to John good morning good morning engineering committee my name is John Finney I'm principal development management engineer for the county council and I primarily deal with if you like the nuts and bolts the physicality of the works David deals with the obviously traffic generation in answer council Wilson's question you are quite right sir um traffic calming in and of itself will not prevent people rap running what it does do is reduce um increase time it takes to get from a to b therefore is that route actually attractive it is also as you rightly point out it can be quite onerous to residents which is why at the present moment we are not bringing forward any features within any of the villages until such time as we know they may or may not be required they do we impact on residents probably more than the impact on people who are running there is of course a suite of things we can do it's not all just humps and bumps nowadays I think those that suite of options will also react to when the rap running is occurring if it happens hopefully it will not and what type of rap running is occurring unfortunately it is not a panacea it will not cure the problem it will make it less attractive for people to use those routes and therefore encourage them to use hopefully one public transport which is David rightly points out when the C2C is actually in operation that will be a fast and efficient route as the Cambridge College of Busways proved to be and very popular and and or to use the main arterial route because in fact it takes you as long to get to work using arterial routes as it does using a traffic calm route and it's a lot more convenient I hope that answers your question councillor also thank you yep that's useful right thank you Sherman our next question is from councillor Granville Chamberlain councillor Chamberlain please thank you chair I have a number of questions if I'm married and the first one relates to the distance between the houses at the southern end of the site to the bus stops at the north how far is that and how long is that likely to take to walk and in terms of transport the C2C has faced considerable challenges so far and is not expected to be complete until somewhere I think between 2026 and 2028 it seems to me that it's highly unlikely that it will have a continued smooth journey going on so in the event of a delay beyond 2028 will there be a restriction on the number of homes that can be built my third point relates to the ANPR and the monitoring it seems to me that the requirement for ANPR and monitoring is merely an acceptance of the fact that there will be a reduction in road safety in our villages and between them the roads are not commuter routes they are in the main country lanes they are used by pedestrians and cyclists and they are totally unsuitable for additional high-speed traffic so one may I ask are we just accepting a reduction in the level of road safety and my final point relates to the bus pass is it not the case that this bus pass can only be used by one resident of the household so if there are two or more people using public transport to go to their place of work those the others will have to pay thank you chair thank you who would like to take those please um if I start with the bus queries um yeah just to clarify on the bus pass the bus pass will be available for all householders um so so yes a family would all have their own bus ticket um should they register for one and that would be valid on services for a year in terms of the walking distance to the bus stops we have some the guidance suggests the the optimum is within 400 meters for services to be but it's recognised that depending on service frequency and depending on the way that the roads are designed to um the way that the road is designed people may walk further and the majority of the phase one dwellings would be within that 400 meters and some would be beyond but as part of the detail of the site and how it's designed and the the the routes to the bus stop will be designed as to be as attractive as possible in terms of the transferring question and and john may want to follow on from this um but I think against the planning tests we need to be sure that any mitigation secured is actually based on real development impact um we don't know for certain exactly how rat running would would manifest and therefore we have to we have to employ the the the cameras to observe how how um how these impacts may materialise and then respond accordingly john um you may want to um expand on that before we go to hang on hang on the moment john there was the question about the if um the delay on co is beyond 2026 oh quite quite right um yes um essentially this we are looking at a phase of 500 dwellings at the moment um with an interim mitigation package and a hold point of 500 dwellings um in order to proceed beyond that point um they they would essentially need to be a new transport assessment we envisage that that transport assessment will come in parallel with the c2c scheme um so there is effectively a hold at that 500 dwellings um at which we'd have to we'd have to take stock and see what the strategic transport context looks looks like at that point all right thank you sorry to interrupt you dr finnan no problem at all sir and i would just um support david the the the cameras will demonstrate if there is a problem i mean obviously the local parish councils are concerned about the problem and i think that is quite correct to be concerned about it but we need to demonstrate what that problem is if the problem and after the problem materializes without that empirical data we are working with basically um apocryphal tails only and we we need to be working with something which actually shows what is occurring and just one final point if i may um thinking about the c2c as a bus route is perhaps not quite right it is a rapid transport corridor and perhaps it's better thought of as a railway if you think about it in those terms cambridge at the moment has two railway stations and an exceedingly popular place to travel from it's hoping to get three this will act this development will actually have two stops on the rapid transport corridor it will become a bus when it gets into cambridge but during that time it is a very fast route so it's not quite as simple as being a bus stop it's much more a let's say that frequency of travel and the speed of travel which i think the guided busway again is demonstrated it makes it very very popular all right thank you very much chamber may i come back on the road safety issue please briefly please i do have a quite a long list thank you um i'm afraid that dr finney and mr ablett have failed to address the question of whether this is a straightforward recognition that on the travel between the villages and through the villages increased traffic represents a reduction in the level of road safety can you please assure us that that will not be allowed all right i i i'll respond to that if you'd like david the simple fact is count the time you are quite right if you increase the number of motor vehicles on a route you do decrease the level of safety it's a simple equation um the question is when does that become a significant problem the highway is not a safe environment it is a risk filled environment it is therefore inherently unsafe if you like so we have got to see where that when that level gets to a point where we need to do some intervention there covid 19 excluded the number of motor vehicles on our has been increasing over time more slowly since about 2008 fortunately but that is a response primarily to population increase so you are right sir any increase in motor vehicle usage does represent a detriment to highway safety the question is at what point is that detriment becomes severe enough for us to actually take action and that is what those cameras will demonstrate where the people coming from and what they are doing thank you chair thank you very much vice chair who's next the next council i mean wilson all right council wilson please thank you chair um i i had a question about the um the um bus pass but that that's been answered now um my other question is if um if it is found that there's a lot of rat running which is unacceptable how long would it reasonably take to introduce other mitigation to reduce that and would this require extensive um missions and um discussions my my other point um last night i i went on google street view and drove along um broadway and um st nears road and they do seem to be sort of fairly quiet rural roads and will they be up to take in the amount of traffic that will be coming on and off this development all right thank you we would like to respond to that please i think again probably in terms of introducing any form of traffic calming um council wilson there would be a requirement for a traffic regulation order which will take about two to three months minimum to to process there is also obviously a requirement for consultation um we've always consulted on in the public on relate in relationship to these things although legally speaking we have to we always haven't we always will continue to do so i would suggest therefore you are probably thinking at least a year possibly 18 months but that that that would be if you like the longest period we're looking for um i've forgotten your second question my apologies are the roads up to it uh it was the status of um the the broadway and st nears roads in in terms of just being one one lane each way and fairly quiet rural roads at the moment right my apologies guys i had to uh in terms of roadway obviously we're trying to prevent any increase in motor vehicle traffic along that road as you've seen from the indicative design in terms of the the old state DH road well it was the a428 until comparatively recently so yes it would be able to accommodate a certain level of additional traffic without any significant problems it is as you know quite wide as you say at the moment it's quite quiet because obviously most traffic even even outside covid is using the new dual carriageway a428 but yes that would be able to cope with a certain level of additional traffic without any significant problems all right thank you next speaker is uh councillor jeff harvey right councillor harvey please yes thank you jeff i just wanted um uh to uh clarify that the the 20 million pounds has been offered uh as a contribution to the cc sorry uh councillor we can only see up your nose at the moment perhaps you like the okay yes thank you um yeah so just um clarify what the phasing about 20 million pounds would be obviously we all want a system that's as high quality as possible which normally means money um 20 million pounds at the beginning is worth an awful lot more than 20 million pounds kind of dribbled in over the course of the build out so how would that be tied down thank you is that you David yes um so the 20 million pound payment relates to beyond 500 it relates to the remainder of the development the actual detail of how that payment is phased is for the 106 i think taking taking a steer from camborn that camborn made a made a payment and that is phased over the life of the development i think camborn is split over three lump sum payments um so going into this section 106 it would be a but likely a similar um three off all lump sum payments thank you thank you next speaker chairman the next speaker is councillor Henry bachelor all right councillor Henry bachelor please thank you chairman a few questions if i may um first one on the um 500 dwelling limit condition that was amended by mr huntington at the start to include um that scdc needs to be satisfied with the transport assessment um quick question who in scdc would be would be judging that would it be a planning committee or would it be officers um second question was on the parameter plans i think the first plan we saw in this section um i wasn't completely clear about the types of footway that we were looking at there would they be just pedestrian or would they be multi-use i.e cycles and uh a question possibly as well um and third question was on c2c but i think that's probably been answered um it was just asking what happens if there are delays um and so yeah i think i could probably cross that one out so just the two questions chair thank you very much i think that's probably um mr huntington thank you chairman the the um condition 13 um i would suggest that that condition went to um planning committee for its determination judging by the um obviously it's a sensitive and strategic issue um related to that condition going back to the parameter plan um let me just get the parameter plan up can i just share that with you i want a second so i've got this chairman it's page 147 in our report pack oh actually you can see it already okay that's fine um so what i will do is i'll just so there were there were there were different type there were different typologies um that the the route around the perimeter of the site will be a bridleway so that's bridleway cycling and footpaths and all the other routes within the site the orange dotted lines will be strategic pedestrian and cycle routes so the intention is not to have bridleways throughout the development but bridleways will be in key routes connecting to the print connecting to the wider bridleway network but within the settlement there will be cycleways cycleways um that's that's subject to further fine detailing through the design coding process and involvement with relevant stakeholders like the british or society who's been involved in this in in in designing this um this network okay that's fine thank you yep okay thank you all right thank you very much do we have any further speakers before we move to the third section yes chairman we have three more um and well four actually councillor peter fein i think mr fey councillor fein withdrew didn't you quite correct german oh sorry i stand corrected okay so then councillor heather williams all right councillor williams please thank you chairman just wondering if i could um get an answer to the question that i asked earlier um about stew of east west rail because um so just the impacts that a northern station would have on the on the proposals please chairman right okay i i wonder if i could answer that one chairman yeah please yes the the reason why i um i did the plan um was uh it just essentially providing a bit of wider context because it is there and it absolutely is not fixed at all and it could be either north or south but it's it's obviously part of the of the wider context of things that have been discussed at the moment but i think it was a i think one of the members wanted me to to get that plan available for today's presentation chairman could i just clarify something to that thank you so so while it was included in the presentation east west rail is not something that we should be taking into consideration in determining the application whereas c2c which is also undefined we do that's correct the east the east west rail is is is is not anything that i've i've suggested was part of the consideration it's just part of the wider context thank you chairman thank you mike thank you very much uh chairman the next is councillor debba roberts all right thank you councillor roberts please yeah thank you very much chairman um it's a question going back to the comments that um councillor richard williams made um regarding the um the uh idea of the six story high buildings um it's quite clear on the map there on that perimeter map that there are two areas shown um and i'm very concerned i heard what mike said about well only one of them is going to be chosen however this is only an outline application but if this is agreed today that map would be the indicative design um if it's only going to be one at this moment in time it only needs one circle there for this exceptionally high um buildings i mean it's 80 foot high nearly in old money 78 foot high actually um and all around it is the very high density now if you end up with uh which i fear is going to happen with two very high buildings in that area they are going to overshadow camp on to the left and all this um high density around them you know i just think that's not going to be a good quality of life for the people living near it so why is it that we have two marked on there it should only be one thank you chairman thank thank you very much thank thank you chairman in my in my report i was trying to find the right page um uh somewhere in here i've said i've said in my report somewhere there should be one one of one of those would be a somewhere in here mike is one going to be six story and another one five yes one one one would be six i've got it written here somewhere one would be six and one would be five so actually it's still a very they would be very dominant in the landscape wouldn't they this is at least the town centre that uh is this conditioned i mean at this age yeah yes i mean i mean it's in the design this this will be tested at the design coding stage this is a detail to be designed to be tested the design coding state all right so it's nothing firmer than that at this stage absolutely not not okay uh do we have further speakers please chairman yes uh that's me next please thank you um so i just go wanted to go back do you remember i mentioned this in your first element and you said this was appropriate to the parameter plan i just wanted to since you've confirmed verbally that the um tree belt will be replanted can i just ask if we if it's possible to strengthen um condition 10 landscape and design reserved matters under soft landscaping so it's 10 e where it talks about planting and establishment of structural landscaping to be provided sorry this is on page 114 where it says the planting and establishment of structural landscaping to be provided in advance of all or specified parts of the site as appropriate i wondered if we could strengthen that by saying something specific either adding another element or adding to this saying and specifically planting of the screen of trees um between it's sort of between 56 and 58 west drive and the development in accordance with the parameter plan green infrastructure and i can give you the reference in advance of all other work on the site that's just simply to ensure that that tree belt has a chance to grow before the development starts to impact the residents of highfield is it possible to do that thank you council brother yes that's perfectly possible to do that um i can give you the the parameter i mean what i would suggest is the planting establishment of all of all structural landscaping i mean that covers everything then but i specifically wanted to clarify that belt and yes absolutely it does but it's as appropriate and i wanted to be sure that that belt they actually get on and plant it right away if this is given approval yeah they get on and plant it right away as the very first thing that they do so that those trees have a chance to establish yeah so i i think the the committee will have to agree that first so so okay so that's a principle that i'm asking about whether that would be possible we will return to that if we need to thank you can i just check whilst we are i'm on that then um mr huntington the alterations that you made to the um conditioning or already does that have to be voted through i could i ask you to ask uh mr carter i will ask mr carter uh mr carter could you give us some advice please chair thank you that forms an update to the office of recommendation so that's an amendment to the recommendation um and members should uh could could obviously debate that change uh but um it is an update to our recommendation so that would be the basis of the vote if nothing else changed okay so it is not the proposal from the committee as such uh it's the recommendation so the general vote will cover that indeed okay thank you very much for your help on that thank you okay um so i have others but i'll raise them in the debate chairman thank you very much um do you have any further speakers um chairman you might want to remind the public not to use chat um but separately um the next request to speak another request to speak from councillor granville chain billion for some clarification right i'm just can i just check with you do we have further speakers because it's coming to the time yes um so council chamberlain and then councillor debba robert's and that's it we could then perhaps take a break then if you wished okay thank you very much councillor chamberlain please thank you chair i will be very brief and i'd just like to seek clarification on a comment that dr finney made in an answer to councillor wilson and dr finney stated that st neards road was formerly the a428 and with that i totally agree however in the event that c2c goes ahead and runs alongside st neards road can i ask dr finney to confirm that the carriageway will in fact be significantly reduced in order to permit the busway on the one side and there's two lanes of cycle lanes on the other side at the end of people's driveways thank you all right thank you dr finney i will be perfectly honest with you councillor i don't know but some of the drawings i have seen doing for that would be the case yes sir all right let's check councillor chamberlain you're happy with that thank you thank you chair yes absolutely okay i think that's the end of our speakers on that section so before we move on to the last section of the officer's presentation it has gone 11 30 now and i think we take a short break 15 minutes if we could come back please at quarter to 12 thank you and liam could we okay i can confirm you know live again thanks thank you liam welcome back to south cams district council planning committee where we are dealing with born airfield um yeah i'm currently going through the case officer's presentation um and we're moving now to the third and final part of that presentation which is other issues which includes housing education phasing existing use a four to eight foul water and governance um so over to you mr huntington thank you chairman i'll just try and share this right chairman is that visible yes we can see that thank you very much right i'll just go back to section three other issues so members um will have received this plan in their pack uh it's indicative only it's an indicative phasing plan it it shows the settlement center and this area as being the first part of the development to um to commence development um in terms of councillor bradham's previous comment about planting it shows this landscape area here under indicative landscape years one zero to six so um yes uh we can talk about that phasing condition later on um indicative only but so the yellow area is the yellow area and some of the green hashed areas will be phase one including this area of open space to the north of pi fields um uh orange phase phase two pink phase three and purple phase four it's um very broad brush at this stage um there is a condition attached to the uh the condition 11 which talks about phasing requirements phasing could be different number than the four phases the developers as proposed they could have five phases or six phases that's it's a later issue this just kind of identifies to everybody where they identify the starting area to be okay moving on to delivery if this um the applicant has identified the cumulative number of dwellings i i've highlighted the for the first five years of development chairman sorry with your permission could i just point out i've had a i think councillor harvey maybe he's not able to get back in could you just could we just check that he's able to listen to the presentation yeah councillor harvey are you with us councillor harvey he he says he's waiting to be let back in um Liam have you can you help on this one please hi yeah there's no one in the lobby that i can see so if anyone's able to advise him to leave and then rejoin again uh that would probably be the best plan of action in this instance thank you chairman with your permission can i request that we pause until i can do that yes well that's precisely what we're doing yeah i'm sorry everyone we if somebody is is missing from part of the presentation and then in the end they're not able to vote so it's quite significant that we allow a little time for the member to be able to get back into the meeting so um we will just hold on for a couple of minutes councillor harvey are you back with us yes apologies i am now back in all right excellent okay so uh the member is now back with us so we can continue the presentation thank you mr huntington shall i start yeah shall i start back with the plan that i originally talked about yes yes that's fine yeah um in the meantime we're going to everyone make sure that they've muted please um councillor harvey you know okay thank you very much if you like to continue then thank you chairman so i'll i'll for the benefit of councillor harvey i'll just um start again by looking at this uh phasing plan so this again just to repeat it's an indicative phasing plan it identifies the the area where the developer the applicant would like to commence development particularly around here that's for built form but at the same time there is um indicative phasing for landscape and other uses so on the northern boundary on the area to the northeast corner indicative phase one a years one to two of the development and bearing in mind councillor bradnam's earlier comments about this landscape and belt on the west eastern boundary years zero to six phase one um uh oranges phase two pinkies phase three and purple lilac is phase four and this this is not to say that there'll be four phases there could be five phases or six phases and there is a phasing condition condition 11 um which which requires what the developer would be required to provide at each phase this this information has been provided by the applicant to identify their their indicative construction program should planning consent be granted um it suggests that by the year 2026 27 so um 530 dwellings would be occupied comparing that with the anticipated construction of the c2c of 2024 to 2026 this is aligned with with what we've been working on as a 500 dwellings and c2c being aligned at the same time this is an indicative section across the a428 and looking at the um landscape along the a428 and just the interface between the busway right away walking and cycling this is uh just to remind members of the existing another use and proposed uses on the site so just to remind members of the um planning applications approved for the employment area that's uh that was a hybrid application so partly detailed partly outlined with further built form to come forward in in the future and one of the things that this this application will make sure is that or has to make sure is that people could be able to access into this site um to get to work well and having to go around the site we've also got the existing use here uh which has restricted hours um it doesn't cover the whole of that area it just covers um a small part of that development side and this is the um that strange little shape that I mentioned to you about within the employment site that's in the ownership of the of the applicant I just wanted to remind members of um the utility side of things because uh at the very beginning of the meeting I I I alluded to um discussions with Anglin water between the applicant and Anglin water about Papwith the condition is proposed requiring a foul water drainage strategy Anglin water obligated to accept any foul water once the planning permission is issued portable water there's quite a a short connection needed to the main to the northwest of the site electricity connection will be a bit further afield to born primary substation gas reinforcement to the gas infrastructure to the northeast of the site and also we've got the northern bank photovoltaic array where feasibility study will be required by planning condition section one six other than the transport side of things in which we've already previously discussed what's very important to say with the section one six is that um it's policy compliant 40 percent of 3500 dwellings that's 1400 dwellings one secondary school two primary schools one of the primary schools could be expanded to be a four four entry from a three four entry there will be community centres health centre library and playing fields playgrounds and apartments there will be a new parish council will be required in due course and the government's review will be instigated at the appropriate time a name will be required for the development and the developer will work with the local community on the district council in this process so turning now to the planning balance planning legislation requires planning decisions to be taken in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise government planning policy and the presumption in favour of sustainable development has also been taken into account in the assessment of this application overall the applicant application will bring significant economic social and environmental public benefits associated with an allocated site which accord with the three dimensions of sustainable development set out in the NPPF the balance of these benefits in the circumstances of the application are considered to weigh in favour of granting planning permission and those benefits are listed listed on the on the screen recommendation on this basis is therefore recommended that planning permission for the for this application is granted are set out in the committee report on amendment sheet subject to the completion of a section one six agreement and planning conditions as in the report that's the end of my presentation I will now stop screen sharing right thank you very much for that okay just before we move on to speakers can you guess comment on the capital points I noticed from your report that there's some concern about the air quality for the site of the secondary school up by the four to eight perhaps you could and just expand on what provisions are being made about that and I note that the gas is being brought onto the site it's my understanding that the government wishes to phase out the use of gas is in the longer term so is this actually needed if you guys comment on that please thank you thank you chairman in terms of air quality condition has been proposed by our environmental health officer which is in the list of conditions and in relation to gas that's yes that's a building regulations issue and is not is not a planning consideration okay thank you very much vice chair to have some speakers so myself please vice chairman it's council council president please thank you I wanted to ask two things Mr Huntington one was the in the green space parameter plan you referred to the location of allotments in the northeast corner of the site which is of course the access of site now lovely as allotments are they're not necessarily beautiful and I just wondered had any other location being considered for the location of the allotments that was actually closer to where people are living and that was the first question and the second one was has any provision been required in the conditions for allocation of burial space yeah thank thank you council badam yes so the burial spaces in the application description and allotments will be the land that's been designated is allotment or community orchards in various different locations and this will be a detail this will follow on detail through the design coding process what the what the parameter plan shows is allotments community orchards and burial grounds all under the same classification okay so it won't necessarily be an allotment just as you enter the new no absolutely not no okay thank you very much all right thank you any further speakers yes we have councillor fein and then councillor Henry bachelor thank you very much councillor fein thank you chair my question relates to sustainability perhaps follows up your own in relation to gas there is talk at 717 and to mention just now the range of opportunities to deploy low carbon renewable energy and of the opportunity for the possible PV array on the north bank and that PV array at 750 megawatts if that proved deliverable is very substantial makes a very significant difference to the sustainability of the whole development to what extent will that be dealt with later as a reserved matter what happens if it proves to be viable but the developers decide not to not to go ahead with that with that aspect all right thank you Mr Handingwell thank you chairman so we've got the delivery of the PV array is is um condition 30 so prior to develop the submission of the first reserve matter scheme they they will have to undertake the feasibility work right at the beginning of the development not right but at the beginning of the development and if that does not come forward for whatever reason then there will be a review of sustainability and energy strategies and targets um after each phase so there's a there's a constant because of this side of development changes so rapidly normally talked earlier about how many phases there may be in the development if there are four phases five phases six phases whatever time whatever stage there is a phase they will have to review any sustainability and energy strategies um but the PV array will be assessed right at the beginning of the development does that help to answer the question thank you chairman a couple of questions around the phasing do we know at this stage you mentioned there's 40 affordable housing in this scheme do we know at which stage of these affordable units will come in and more specifically will there be any in the first 500 units that we've been speaking about today um secondly how does the build out of the employment site marry up with this application we're looking at today so this is the new employment site that um that was granted approval last month I mean how does that fit in with the build out of this application here um and finally the small bit of land uh that you mentioned Mike um how am I right I'm thinking the applicant wants to hold on to that small patch of land I think it's off the employment site um and if so do we know the reason for that thank you thank you Mike thank you chairman so the affordable housing that will be subject to section six discussions um the intent the intention is that the affordable housing will be phased in accordance with the phasing of the development so there'll be no justification for slowing the delivery of the affordable housing um the employment site connect uh the employment site there will be there is a condition attached to this application that requires from the very first house to be occupied to which one which condition is that allows people to be able to walk and cycle the um condition 15 uh no dwellings should be occupied until pedestrian and cycle links have been provided between the development with cambourne hyphenscolder and the former stamp employment site so that people be able to get be able to walk or cycle to that employment site from the beginning um and then the that strange bit of land yes that it just it just happens to be within the red line boundary I mean in due course that will be delivered as development at the appropriate time but they've highlighted in their in their parameter plan that it will be employment land because it's um because it's uh because it's adjacent to existing employment land yes okay thank you thank you uh further speakers vice chair thank you councillor heather williams chairman councillor heather williams readers thank you chairman um I just wondered if I could get some clarification around paragraph 528 and 5 527 which is to do the affordable housing element um and my my main concern on my main query I should say not concern is around and the perpetuity of the affordable housing so I'm just wondering if officers could advise how much of the um housing or what proportion would we see as affordable housing in perpetuity rather than just from the outset thank you chairman all right thank you very much I think we have a housing expert with us uh thank you chairman yes I think Tracy Harrison is with us are you there Tracy you with us Tracy I am good morning hi there could you help us on that one please okay well the um sorry to get my notes at the moment obviously we're working on several different tenures for this scheme uh haven't been agreed on what we're going to deliver over the whole scheme at the moment but we are looking at a percentage for affordable rent percentage for share ownership a percentage for rent to buy and then a percentage for discount market so if we're honest perpetuity would be the um affordable rent that would remain in perpetuity share ownership at this time I'm not sure how we sit on that whether there would be any um clause on that for reselling that's got to be sorted out yet rent to buy that would depend on how many people want to purchase their property after living in it for maybe five to ten years they do it in installments five ten or fifteen years and discount sale that will have um a discount market um clause put on it so if they purchase at 80 percent they will always have to sell at 80 percent so the next person along will also be able to purchase at 80 percent all right thank you very much for that uh council are you happy with that um can I just clarify one thing um so the affordable rent and the discount market sale is in perpetuity obviously so long as the council wasn't the provider yes um so it but so we can guarantee sort of 20 percent of the 40 in perpetuity and the other 20 percent of the affordable housing um most likely wouldn't be 100 percent of that so in perpetuity we're looking at 20 percent yes is that my understanding correct yes thank you thank you chairman thank you josey thank you very much thank you very much um chairman the next request is from council gremville chamberlain can you help us a lot of chamberlain please thank you chairman my question is in relation to sewage disposal um the communities that came born at cul-de-cotte and aldrich have all experienced problems with sewage disposal in the recent past so can I ask what guarantee we will have that the necessary infrastructure will be in place to ensure the safe and secure disposal of foul water prior to the um occupation of these 500 homes thank you all right thank you very much for that mr hampton thank you chairman so condition 43 foul water drainage strategy that requires before the commencement of any development on site to have a strategy requiring details of any necessary improvement to the existing sewage system to ensure that sufficient capacity exists to cater for the needs of the development so that's the condition that will be uh the condition that will that's proposed to deal with foul water all right thank you thanks chairman the chamber and you're happy with that all right can you move on then please chairman the next request is from councillor eileen wilson councillor wilson please thank you chair um i i referred to paragraph 234 on page 32 which responds to concerns regarding the adverse impact from odour generated by operation of the small sewage works to southwest of the application site the response is that there is an area of recreational land located between this facility and the application site i'm wondering whether that seemed to be acceptable that if there is an adverse odour from the sewage works whether it's acceptable that that should actually be experienced on recreational land and whether anything will be done to mitigate that odour and that that that was the concern that i mean the environmental officer said said expressed some concerns about the adverse impact but accepted that there was an area of recreation and that was the wording of the environmental officer health officer um who didn't consider that it was a significant issue he didn't say he or she didn't object could i come back on that please um i just wonder how how willing people would be to use that recreational grounds if it does have that adverse odour and whether that's that's um sufficient to enade those concerns i mean the environmental health officer didn't indicate that anything needed to needed to happen or need any work needed to be undertaken to address this issue right okay thank you sorry i don't think you're going to get any further on that one the next request to speak is from councillor martin carne all right councillor carne please um basically i was wondering about specialist housing uh the provision has been referred to in terms of affordable housing but uh we have a larger a former larger new development in in my ward which is orchard park um whether there's a large co-housing element which was introduced and one of the comments made that is very difficult to provide for fine suitable land for co-housing so i wondered if any provision is being made for specialist housing for instance housing for the elderly again orchard park has a low low percentage because there isn't very specific housing for the elderly on the site um or co-housing or other specialist needs what what provision has been made apart from the affordable housing and self-build in in the application description there are um there is there are up to um we've got got residential institutions are within the employment description and also within the self-build the definition of self-build is quite broad which could include that precise scenario that's happening marmalade lane in them in orchard park right cancer carna you happy with that um i don't think residential institutions is really the same as provision of of say single story housing suitable for the elderly but uh i just want to make sure that that is considered in the detailed design state indeed i'm sure it will be there is certainly part of it okay um the next request is from councillor jeff harvey councillor harvey please oh yes thank you well firstly um i pulled the ambition um to reduce carbon emissions with the um solar array um just to clarify what councillor feyn said i think he quoted as being 750 megawatts actually um 750 megawatt hours per year um which if you divide it by the number of uh homes um that plan here is not actually that much um on page 93 um paragraph 718 says uh talks about targeting a 10 percent reduction in predicted co2 emissions from residential dwellings i just wanted to clarify i mean obviously that that's our sort of minimum that we we do demand a 10 percent reduction uh compared with um building regs i believe so it's the um carbon saving from the uh northern bank array is is that in addition to what we would normally expect in terms of uh for example um roof mounted pbs or is that somehow taking away from what we would normally expect thank you thank you chairman no that that wouldn't be in place of because that that's an additional scheme because it it requires feasibility work um the um each reserve matters scheme so each reserve matters parcel for housing development will will be accompanied by its own sustainability statement because that pv array is a separate is a separate piece of work to say the reserve matters application for 100 houses yes okay so i was just then querying the the the use of the word targeting in yep because because then um condition 33 renewable energy needs to demonstrate that at least 10 percent rather than targeting 10 percent okay so that's condition 33 thank you good thank you very much for that sorry chairman the next request is from councillor richard williams right do we have any further ones that i would like to move on to speak as soon councillor richard williams is the last okay thank you all right councillor williams please sorry thank you chair i'll try and keep quick um i just want to go back to the question of sewage and foul water drainage um can i just ask if any thought has been given or if there have been any discussions about securing contributions to the necessary infrastructure works for foul water drainage through through 106 it sounds from the um officer report that there is going to need to be new investment to deal with the foul water from from this site so have there been any discussions around that um and if so what were they thank you all right thanks very much thank you chairman no actually anglin water in their response uh which is on let me find out exactly where the response page 33 paragraph 250 um the foul this is this is verbatim from their comment the foul drainage from the development is in the catchment of the born water recycling centre and it does not currently have capacity to treat the flows on the ground area anglin water are obligated to accept the foul water from the development and would therefore take the necessary steps to ensure there is enough treatment capacity at an appropriate recycling centre should the application be granted approval so they have not asked for any anything yeah thank you i mean they have an obligation to deliver this because i mean it actually is an investment for them isn't it in that they have to pay for it that's their legal requirement over the years yeah indeed okay you're happy with that council williams yeah okay i think they probably are okay so we've finished that element then so that's the presentation the case officer and um matters of clarification uh for the benefit of those watching in the public of course for a major application like this the committee does have uh briefings and we have had briefings on all the essential elements of this over the last year um and so we are certainly familiar with the detail so we're now going to move on to the public speaking i have six public speakers um the first one is the applicants agent uh andrew taylor mr taylor with us please thank you chairman i'm actually the group planning director at country side properties rather than the agent but thank you very much yes no relative presumably of no relative of the applicant no okay um i'm sure you know the process here do you've got three minutes and then they may well wish to ask questions so when you're ready i'll let you know when the three minutes are chair counselors thank you for the opportunity to address you today i would like to thank your officers for bringing this proposal to committee with a recommendation for approval as you know the site is allocating the local plan with an adopted spd the proposals have been developed to respond to the council's adopted planning policies and in discussions with officers parish councils ward counselors statutory consultee and community groups we want this working relationship to continue as we develop the detailed proposals for the site and ultimately deliver this new community in line with the council's vision for the site countryside are committed to creating a new vibrant and sustainable village at borne airfield with a mix of private housing and the provision of a fully policy compliant affordable housing of 40 percent of the development at countryside we take pride in creating places that people love and we believe where we live matters so people can feel a true sense of belonging new homes will be delivered within the first five years in line with the council's housing land supply trajectory helping to meet the district housing needs in the short term and providing a pipeline of future delivery the mix of homes will ensure that a broad range of types and tenures will be provided meeting a range of local needs in addition care home and retirement living will be delivered to ensure the village meets the needs of all groups the allocated site is strategically placed to benefit from sustainable transport projects such as east west rail and the camborn to cambridge public transport route alongside a package of other transport measures to support the development including bridleways cycle paths and footpaths the development will deliver a range of new facilities providing residents with access to all key services which complement that is already in the local area in addition to jobs created through the construction phase the development will create up to 490 additional jobs once operational residents will also benefit from the job creation the recently consented development at borne quarter the development will achieve a biodiversity net gain of a minimum of 10 percent with our plans incorporating 262 hectares of open space the equivalent of 175 football pitches including sports and play areas for adults and children to enable a healthy life a minimum of a 25 meter habitat buffer runs around the perimeter of the site ensuring ecological connectivity and allowing for walking cycling and bridleway routes a sustainability and energy strategy underpins the scheme including a range of measures to enhance the sustainability of the development ensuring it is resilient to the future impacts of climate change and reduces carbon emissions countryside look forward to continuing working with the council and all other relevant parties as the new village is brought forward and developed accordingly we would ask members to approve the application in accordance with your officer's recommendation thank you thank you very much that is the tailor members any points of clarification you'd like to take up with mr tailor nice chair do we have any one wishing to speak we have no requests chairman thank you very much well thank you mr tailor thank you for that we'll move on then to the parish council representatives we have three councils represented that's borne quarter cuts and bartons so first up is councillor brian from borne councillor brian are you with us yes yes chair i am with us i'm with you ronnie yeah thank you and i well well i just give us a chance to welcome you yeah no by all means yeah go ahead thank you welcome and can i just for the record confirm that you're having permission of the parish council to speak on their behalf do you have permission from the parish council yes thank you chair thank you and born airfield has had an interesting planning history actually planning applications for 3000 houses came forward in 87 and 89 one was withdrawn and one was refused and in 1980 92 it was passed over in favor of montfield farm for the site of camborn and then a subsequent 1994 planning application was also refused so that gives you a bit of an idea of the fact that this has been around for some time in spite of the setbacks however the airfield was included as a site in the current local plan but back in 2015 many of you will remember that the government inspectors wrote to the council with serious concerns about out commuting from borne airfield and this led to the local plan suspension and so it gives you some background to what's been going on i'm not sure how many of the committee will be aware of that and what happened after that was that after a lot of work with the south cambridge district council and in partnership with the city deal they managed to convince the inspectors that the high quality camborn to cambridge busway would be delivered within the planned period now our concern as the parish council is that the application has now come forward and that sort of inextricable connection between the high quality public transport scheme and the sustainability of the 3500 houses on the airfield site is not absolute anymore it seems to be conveniently sort of dismissible because of these changes to the transport assessment so we know that there's been delays in the high quality public transport scheme to serve the A428 and as a direct consequence of that these alterations have come into the transport assessment ones that might refer to earlier on but make no mistake about it the potential here is that the committee are being asked to approve 3500 houses with no absolute guarantee of any significant infrastructure provision and that's incredibly important for us so born carriage parish council believe that the reason for this is that we've got pressure from the five-year housing land supply that's pushing forward what we think is a fairly contentable timetable given the the delays in the A428 high quality public transport scheme and you know we've got lots of material county district around public transport strategy modal shifts and the encouragement of non car non transport car modes however there's an out clause and two out clause in fact one that states that there can be a 500 um occupation limit and that could be exceeded based on another transport assessment right up to the full quantum 3500 now this is absolutely crucial for us because of the wording of the conditions and the uncertainty around this a further interim development and and we're just absolutely shocked really that despite all the fighting we've done up until now and and the examination in public and the inspectors and systems that we have a high quality public transport system we now have caveats or conditions on the development that could allow the whole of the 3500 houses to be built with no guarantee of a public transport scheme and so what we would like the committee to do is basically refuse the planning application until we could be absolutely certain that high public transport scheme can be delivered to serve the settlement and what makes this particular sort of switch more galling than ever is the fact at one stage when we were asking for the potential for direct access from this settlement down to the four to eight we were told that they wouldn't do that because it would make a high quality public transport system less appealing and now there is the possibility of not having any high quality public transport system and the houses could still get planning permission based on the application as it's before you today and thank you very much ladies and gentlemen all right thank you very much uh members do you have any questions uh councillor O'Brien nice chair do we have any takers uh chairman we have no requests up present yes uh ones just come in from councillor Deborah Roberts councillor Roberts please good morning um yes can we just maybe a little quicken out and and think an out and flesh out the comment about the five-year land supply what do you appear to be um saying is that the parish council feels very much that uh the other things that should be been put into place for you which you believe really were pretty pretty much guaranteed have been taken away um to um help the five-year land supply is that correct yeah because thank you for the question yes i i do believe that because in in effect because of the delay in the high quality public transport and we all know this is you know very public the delays that have happened so we now don't know for sure what and when any high quality public transport system is going to be delivered for this site in in spite of that you know we you would you would you would expect a delay then in spite of that because the pressure to deliver houses in the five-year housing land supply i think the planning authority are obliged to try and get 500 houses on the books and that's why they're pushing this through and and that's one issue the second issue is that the second condition allows for an additional transport assessment to be done to allow more houses to be built built even without a high quality public so this is never mind being shifting sands this is basically no sands at all so when it comes to paris councils who are who have engaged with this process since 2013 and who have been you know part of the local crown examination only to find that what they had insisted on what the inspectors had insisted on is now not necessarily going to be delivered possibly at all because nobody knows do they can i just add two to that one please then councillor if you want to make a speech it's it's surely not you wouldn't think of that but we're in point question it is it's a very quick question yes it's a very quick question have you put your concerns about the five-year land supply being an element in this to the district council officers and what respect what reply did you receive i did put this to the council officers and the replies were vague to say the least what a surprise thank you very much okay thank you very much and just a small health warding there these are the opinions of Mr councillor Brian and so let's move on have we any further questions yes a request from councillor heather williams councillor heather williams please thank you chairman um so councillor bion i was just wondering if you could you mentioned i realised you're running out of time about direct access would this be to do with the dumbbell roundabout that i think the first thing i heard about when i got elected as a councillor um could you just elaborate a little bit more on on that for me please about your request and the reasons why it's not been included thank you so um bearing in mind that uh camborn has dumbbell access to the 428 and this uh at 3500 houses uh born airfield is not too far short of the size of camborn and we thought it at least worthy of review to look at a direct access on to the uh the 428 that was fairly summarily dismissed and one of the main focuses of of the of that argument was that it would possibly encourage drivers to get on to the 428 from the airfield development and take them away from having high quality public transport option or take them away from the high quality public transport option but now we're at a situation where we neither have that no any absolute guarantee of high quality public transport this this is a crucial element because all of this talk about it being delivered we still don't know at at the moment nobody knows what and when will be delivered on the 428 and and to have an application come forward without uncertainty and having had the element of an option for the for for traffic to go on to the 428 to be taken away and for all the traffic to potentially go on to local roads i think it's you know unconscionable to be perfectly honest okay thank you very much for that uh do we have any further questions uh no further questions at the moment chairman okay thank you councillor brown thank you very much for your contribution thank you thank you and we move on then to cordycott and councillor caulkron please councillor caulkron are you with us yes i am can you hear me okay yeah absolutely i see me as well afternoon sorry to keep you waiting so you know the form no doubt so when you're ready chairman do you wish to check that mr caulkron has the permission i guess thank you guys thank you okay sir thank you okay i'm ready to go here we go uh thank you chair for enabling me to speak today on behalf of the cordycott parish council the parish council whilst acknowledging that this development will take place made from 11 points on the this outline planning permission we are gratified to see that most of these points have been listened to in one form or the other we would like to take the council for the time and effort they have spent on this application and the number of reserved matters and conditions that they have detailed in their submission we were particularly pleased with the removal of any building which was an area r17 on the field separating the development from high fields called a cot since we feel it is important that villages do not co lf it is important the look and feel of this area is maintained sufficiently not allowed to go wild we acknowledge the retaining and adding to the tree belt between the new village and the west side of high fields we still still feel that the building six stories in height will be imposing unless some architectural significance and i hadn't actually realized it's actually on the highest 70 meter elevation which is kind of this this this meeting which is quite interesting it is good to see that ev charging points envisage on all properties of the garage or driveway but are concerned of the number of charging points for people in apartments the proposed northern bank pv solar generation array is to be applauded but we feel that the developers could aim a lot higher than to just reduce the village carbon emissions by 10 carbon target we are still concerned about the entrance to the side particularly the impact upon the roundabout in the entrance to cold cut main street in cold cut has like born a pinch point that is effectively a single track unlike born there is nothing to stop people using cold cut as a wrap run it'll be interesting to see what the traffic cameras show and we do hope that the monitoring will continue long past the occupation of the initial 500 dwellings COVID-19 and the lack of progress of the canvin to cambridge busway has put pressure on the viability of this development since it questions the usage and supply of a high quality public transport system whilst it appeared that the postponing this development until the busway and the position of the east west railway station at cambourne has been finalized we feel that limiting the development to initial 500 is a sensible way forward but I do take the point of the of the born parish councillors that access to the 428 would be really actually sensible at this stage I certainly think then COVID-19 we're a rural environment I think people do actually use their cars an awful lot when I questioned it it was questioned to me I think it was put forward by the county council that it was actually council that it was actually too close to the the junction of the cambourne site and that since the east west a 428 dual carriageway was going to be like a an expressway they were trying to limit the number of entries and exits actually onto it but that's what I was told thank you for your time all right thank you very much do we have any questions on clarification yes myself please chair yeah councilor bradham please thank you mr corcoran I have witnessed the sewage pumping station at the bottom of cordycott high fields and I just wondered um are the are the are you satisfied that the proposal to direct all foul water from this development to papworth are you satisfied that that will resolve um well won't add to the problems there I don't think it will add to the problem um I to be honest with you I'm I'm not actually that I would say with the the problem I know we have problems down at the sewage pumping station and I was glad to see that it was actually going off to papworth or if it was going to go to born it would go the same way as they went with the um electricity down through the south of the of the of the building so that that was gratifying uh so it's um I was water drainage off that site it would be more of an issue I think for us at coldicott then yeah actually the foul foul stuff if it goes off to papworth obviously so surface water drainage from from the newborn airfield site into cordycott would be of concern to you it is it is yeah it would be I think I mean to me I think uh would uh would uh would know more about about that I think she was going to speak I think I'm not sure if he is she's actually in in for speaking she might go to answer that if she is with us she'll be having a so so if if she could just mention that or or uh coordinate out for me it would be helpful thank you all right thank you do we have any further questions there are no other questions chairman thank you councillor corgram thank you very much for your contribution and if we can move on then to Barton and councillor martin please it's councillor martin with us yes hello welcome thank you very much um just confirm that I'm speaking on behalf of Barton parish council excellent and so when you're ready sorry I'm very grateful that um councillor Brian spoke uh first because um I just want to follow up on the traffic issues um I don't think many people really um understand that uh traffic is all ready an issue passing through Barton sort of pre-pandemic uh we have queuing traffic on the B1046 which is between Cullmerton and Barton from seven o'clock in the morning until nine o'clock in the morning through the centre of the village uh past the village school so traffic quite often queues along Long Road and Long Road is is a relatively small country lane it's it's not like the St Neat Road and it's traffic that needs to get into the west of Cambridge or to the south of Cambridge from the four to eight either along the Maddingley Road into Cambridge or cutting through to the through Barton onto the A603 and joining the M11 at junction 12 on the way into Cambridge or down to Adambrooks so the traffic has got worse over the years with um the developments of Camborn um Papworth Hospital has moved to uh Adambrook so all the workforce going to Papworth and the patients going to Papworth are now traveling south to Cambridge you've got huge developments at St Neats so any further development should really be halted until the traffic infrastructure is put in place and ideally that you have a junction between the A428 and the M11 so the traffic through the village is only going to get worse um I can't understand why there's any development allowed until the infrastructure is put in place to cope with um the the traffic and the transport issues so that's the main concern of Barton it's nice that there's going to be monitoring put in place ideally the monitoring should be installed now so you get an understanding of the flow in traffic during the sort of relatively quiet period at the moment because of people working from home and getting an understanding of the flows through the villages as we hopefully come out of this pandemic and go back to some sort of normality and then you'd have a full understanding of the impact of of any further development around the Camborn area um that's the main concern we have in Barton we have petitions from the school about pollution in Barton problems crossing the roads because most of the payments are on one side you have a lot of cyclists pedestrians horse riders and so on all concerned about safety through Barton and the impact of traffic right thank you right thank you very much we'll see if any members want to raise points of clarification do we have any advice Tramp we have no requests at present chairman thank you very much so thank you uh Mr. Councillor Martin thanks for your contribution and we move on then to the local member uh Councillor Dr Hawkins Councillor Hawkins are you with us yes good afternoon chair I am with you um before I start can I I need to make some declarations which is I'm speaking only as the local member and also that I leave on west drive week and my house is one of the closest to Borne airfield right thank you very much just to clarify because I know countryside is listening um right members so when you're ready okay thank you as you've heard Borne airfield has had a tumultuous journey to this point because many previous promises made to the communities of Borne and Caldicott have been broken time and again when the planning inspectors found the local plan sound they noted the skepticism of local communities but stated that there is nothing to indicate that these concerns cannot be satisfactorily addressed through the development process your challenge today is to determine if those ongoing concerns have been addressed satisfactorily or not um for me the two main issues or three main issues are coalescence and I do acknowledge the efforts made by officers and countryside to reduce the scope for this to happen the filling of the gap in the tree belt on the eastern boundary and removing the residential block that had been proposed on the northeastern corner at the top of high fields however I believe that condition 10e needs to be strengthened so that there is no future risk of any development at the northeast and the southeast ends of Borne airfield uh to avoid harm to the character of high fields transport and traffic the inspectors in their final reports stated that they consider that there is reasonable prospect that the come up to Cambridge busway will be completed during the planned period but I also refer you to the county council's policy tsc sc 21 which underpins uh this development and I ask you to use it to compare the provisions of conditions 13 to 22 and I note that condition 13 has been amended uh to include the local plan authority uh having uh some more control over what happens with 13 to however initially I was going to ask you to strike out 13 to but with the amendment as it is you will have to determine whether or not that is acceptable if it is acceptable to you I will ask you to ensure that the planning committee decides anything further as an additional phase not interim phases but an interim phase um we are just concerned that this is a loophole that the developer could drive a coach and horses through to get more than the 500 dwellings before c2c is delivered we must not allow that to happen surface water and sewage um we know that one water recycling does not have capacity as has been said and that anglia water proposed to use purpose um but condition 43 in my opinion is not strong enough to ensure the delivery of the capacity before any occupation that is important and of course we know that surface water drainage going will be going uh southwards to the bomb brook and bomb brook we know has been flooding more than it did before Kanban was built so anything coming off uh one-year field will uh in my view come um introduce more water so uh to conclude the planning ham to call you called born and hardwick will be significant but the question is is it being mitigated to sufficient level this council has inherited a questionable lemon in born airfield but it does not mean you cannot make reasonable quality lemonade from it so if you ask uh if you are happy that it is mitigated fine if not send it back to the drawing board thank you okay thank you very much uh members do we have any points of clarification advice jam uh chairman we have a request to clarification from councillor henry bachelor right councillor henry bachelor please thank you chairman i i actually think before the question to councillor hawkins it was pretty worth for my sake anyway getting some clarity from mr huntington on the amendment that he made at the start of the meeting to uh condition 13.2 because i didn't have time to jot that one down but it is the answer to that question will dictate the question i asked councillor hawkins okay so huntington can you help councillor thank you chairman so point 13.2 i had added shall i share the screen i'll share the yes please i think it's that one just let me know if you can see that yeah thanks okay that's fine i just wanted to make sure uh because i didn't have time to jot it down at the start but that's fine so my question to councillor hawkins is would this new addition you asked for point two to be struck out would this new addition alleviate some of your concerns as the as any sort of interim phases would have to come to south cams for approval as well um thank you councillor bachelot it's uh it's a tough one i mean the there is a reason why the inspectors uh said that the you know they were satisfied that the c2c could be delivered within the planned period and from information that we have to date that c2c timetable seems to have shifted from 20 24 to 20 26 and of as of earlier this week 26 to 28 so whilst um the proposal is you know it is pragmatic in some ways to allow some development 500 for us actually in codicord we still think is too much because the children around about has no plans whatsoever for reconfiguration as far as we can see and we know what used to happen to us before the um the the dual carriageway was built so points uh 13 2 um in some ways does allay that fear but in talking about securing the local plan authorities approval in consultation with the transport um authority which is the county council um the question is if local authority is going to look at this it should be done i believe by the planning committee not by delegation okay thank you very much that's clear thank you we've got further questions yes chairman councillor heather williams thank you councillor williams please thank you chairman and and through yourself to um councillor Hawkins and as as you know um i don't want to be quoting what you already know but um members of the committee obviously we do take into consideration how important things are in the communities and and we've expressed many times many of us that we want to take communities with us um so we understand that's not the case here but as local member and um oh and thank you for the written submission you made last night give us time to digest it you've asked for conditions do you feel that for yourself that if those conditions were put in that you could then support this and your community uh councillor williams thank you for your question in some ways i think for me it's my residence and my communities that are most important in this which is why i declared earlier on that i you know i probably live one of the closest to the um to the boundary of the airfield um but there are many people who have to you know um go in and out and deal with the consequences of this so um i support my communities and funnily enough you know codicord says yes you know we know it's going to happen but these are the issues we have born have very eloquently told you what their concerns are and i take you know both of them are valid if you can with conditions ensure that the harm any significant harm i mean everyone admits that the significant harm though because if you as a planning committee are sure that the conditions that you are or will or you see in front of you are sufficient then fine because you're the ones making the decision not me i'm supporting both my parishes but i don't have that decision to you know to make you have the decision to make so the question is are those conditions sufficient if they are not in your view then you know you know what to do you can either amend them or you can send the application back to the drawing board but really you know we need to make sure that the harm that will be done will be made to get us in the way that the planning inspectors expected that it will that's the main issue for me thank you very much chairman the next request to speak is from councillor debra roberts right councillor roberts please thank you chairman good afternoon councillor halkins to me um can you you're making the comments about um us um if we decide to send it back to the drawing board but i'd like to understand would you like it to be returned to the drawing board and as we clearly have to give material reasons um in any refusal that we made which would be your main material reasons um for um refusing this application councillor roberts thank you for your question i think you're asking the same question that councillor williams asking around about way and my answer to you will still be the same um the i did acknowledge that some of the concerns that my communities have raised have been addressed um but i do feel that some of those conditions still need to be strengthened um especially in terms of uh sewerage and the uh you know the land use um issues that i raised before the main issue um is the transport and the traffic condition 13 1 is good as it has been amended condition 13 2 i still think school be strengthened um and if you can strengthen it then send it back all right thank you very much thank you to me chairman the next request is from uh cancer grandville chamberlain right councillor chamberlain please thank you chair thank you to me for your points they're well made and can i just come back to the access and the use of that cul-de-cotte roundabout between the hardwood roundabout and cul-de-cotte there are a number of properties which have direct access to that road there is also the garage which is fairly well used um do you hold similar concerns to mine that road safety is being compromised by the failure to address this pinch point thank you uh thank you councillor chamberlain um yes i am concerned about road safety and those houses along there in fact there's another uh i think what so um members might not realize is there is a uh a potential development of six self-built houses that will be um opening up onto that road and potentially another two houses so you've got a number of uh drives that will be coming onto that road and it'll be quite busy and road safety definitely will be compromised um but we've heard from highways this morning i'm not sure you know that there is a uh i don't know i mean i don't know that there is much that they can do about the road safety other than perhaps reducing the um the the speed limit on them but definitely it will be compromised so we'll need to do something and not only that the pinch point in cul-de-cotte as i said earlier is the roundabout which as of now there is nothing at all in any of the proposals to actually make it work because traffic will back up into cul-de-cotte as traffic is backing up into borne airfield trying to get out we've seen this before we've been through it before you know at one point in time we were taken alive into our hands getting out of cul-de-cotte to go on the old centennial street and it's just going to go back to that and that is a significant concern thank you very much indeed all right thank you any further speakers no no further requests chairman so councillor Hawkins thank you very much indeed for your contribution uh we move on we have a representative from the county council councillor Wotherspoon councillor Wotherspoon are you with us please i hope i am with you chairman can you see me yet you are indeed so good afternoon good afternoon uh yes as you say i am mandated by the economy and environment committee meeting held on the 7th of February 2019 to speak on behalf of the county council lovely thank you very much so when you're ready then okay thank you very much the drone images were illuminating but one of the many reasons for being disappointed that we are not meeting in the chamber at camborn is that i haven't had a chance to refresh my memory of what the site looks like in the flesh i must have cited past it hundreds of times to and from council meetings from 2004 to 2018 i wonder how soon i'll be doing that again unlike rlw water beach three weeks ago i come to you today with the county council having no objection to the recommendation my three points are the environment utilities and transport i am on the board of natural cambridge chair and i commend the doubling nature strategy that your council adopted at the start of the month with the 20 biodiversity net gain aspiration for new development i realize this application is planning policy compliant at a minimum of 10 but with so much public open space i'm sure there are opportunities to achieve much more than this and i strongly encourage countryside to live up to its name and do all it can to enhance biodiversity on the site i am chair of the cambridge and peterborough flood and water partnership and many of the more than 700 reports of flooding we have been investigating since christmas eve involves sewage if you go back to the camborn 950 the condition of treating their foul water at uttons drove was a requirement for reinforcement of the flood banks of swathes each rain across maire fen for whatever reason the funding ran out before reach five could be completed the owners passed a north stow in particular phase two and when the cost was found to be 10 times what had been allowed for the local enterprise partnership later the combined authority business board stepped in to provide the funding there has been an expectation that the foul water from both camborn west and born airfield would be treated at patworth however swathes the internal drainage board recently learned that camborn west foul water is also to be treated at uttons drove which has come as a shock to the environment agency flood risk manager and the fear is that born airfield will also be sent in that direction without sufficient safeguards while the outfall from wastewater treatment is a fraction of the flow in the grade two is in normal conditions there is obviously local concern about adding a whole lot more from another 6000 houses especially because lifting water out of swathes drain over websholes loose when that is closed depends on pumps which are sized to cope with the north stow foul water i am not aware of any spare capacity and those pumps i urge the local planning authority to make sure that wherever the foul water is to be sent which is not specified in condition 43 nor should it be there is not only an appropriate upgrade of the treatment works but also reinforcement of the standard of protection of any downstream water courses and finally transport i'm not entirely clear how i came to be regarded as the principal promoter of the great cambridge partnership preferred route from a member perspective but i do admit that c2c has taken many more years out of my life than i care to contemplate paragraphs 548 to 567 about the struggle we have had to meet our obligations on education give another indication of the ridiculous amount of extra work that james palmer has required the council to undertake in attempting to remove the spanners he has repeatedly thrown into the works suffice to say that a segregated high quality public transport scheme is fully funded and it will take some route between camber on and cambridge to form part of the st nears to haverhill line of the cambershire autonomous metro within the planned period 2011 to 2031 the county council accepts that the comprehensive package of interim measures is sufficient to mitigate the impact of the first 500 dwellings before the strategic transport intervention monitoring manages a tried and tested technique which the county council has applied to all can bring wheeled and both parts of water beach new town the county council is confident that the teeth it has sunk into the permission through condition 13 are strong enough to ensure that there would be no severe residual cumulative impacts on the road network as required by national planning policy framework paragraph 109 thank you all right thank you very much councillor uh any points of clarification members yes i have one chairman please councillor bradman please thank you chairman uh thank you councillor other spoon um i would like to uh ask you you've said that monitor and manage is a tried and tested methodology sorry i'll put my camera on so you can see me um you've said that monitoring manages and tries and tested technology but um whilst you say it's been applied at al can bring wheeled i'd be interested to know whether it's worked and uh whilst it's been applied at water beach uh we don't know if that works yet do we because actually the first phase uh is still in the process of um the very early work so we don't know whether monitor and manage works i just wondered uh have you any view of whether that's likely to be successful yes i i think you you should direct your your questions in the particular experience at all can be wheeled to the officers that you have at your disposal um but we wouldn't be doing this without the you know you've seen the drawing with all the automatic number plate recognition camera positions um we wouldn't be doing this if we didn't feel that it was capable of doing the job and um and us has been outlined both by uh mr alet and mr finney um should the should the monitoring demonstrate that there were um impacts that needed managing um there are processes in place to to uh address any any concerns that might arise thank you all right thank you uh any further questions uh chairman one request from grant councillor granville chamberlain thank you very quick question to councillor others being and does he accept that in the event that traffic calming measures are required that there will be an impediment to the existing residents thank you um that depends what you mean by impediment um i mean they're the traffic calming is intended to calm all traffic uh so uh i mean you know in that respect and there as much an impediment to to anyone using the roads exactly thank you very much thank you there are no further requests to speak right thank you councillor wellerspoon thank you very much thanks for your contribution um okay so this may well be an opportune moment since we're at just after one o'clock um to take our lunch break before we start the um debate um so members let's see we're back at one thirty please so liam would you mind closing down please all right yeah i'm just going to stop the um stream okay you're now live thank you thank you very much liam uh good afternoon and welcome back to south cams district council planning committee we're dealing with the born airfield application um and we're now ready to start the section which is the debate amongst members so um members we're ready for the debate uh who would like to come in um we have no requests so far chairman um i understand if you want to speak okay thank you uh i i will thank you um thank you chairman um i've been ruminating on um how to consider this application and my concert might i'm relieved to hear that councillor hawkins the local member for cold cot is um feels that the surety of the matters to do with transport we're talking about condition 13 coming back to south cams district council planning committee um is to a degree reassured by that um amendment to the condition 13 um but there are a number of other things that worry me about this application i'll just scoot through them quickly um so that people understand the things i'm concerned about um i'm concerned about condition eight which relates to the um development limitation i'm sure it should say up to 3500 dwellings um not what it says at the moment which is on page 112 um eight a says just 3500 dwellings and i think that should say up to 3500 dwellings um at condition 10 i'm concerned about the sorry sorry before let let's deal with that one first okay because the development limits if you look at the introductory element shall not be exceeded yes it's that amounts to the same thing then doesn't it okay uh i was just that we had the amendment in the description of the um application and i kind of wanted that strengthened to reflect it so we don't ever get something where they say oh it might be 4 000 or something like that um okay shall not be exceeded third point thank you um condition 10 e this was the element to do with the soft landscaping and i wanted 10 e to be strengthened to require to have specific reference to the early planting of the tree belts between the eastern side of the application site and high fields caldercott this is on page 114 of our report um and i wanted to add that it should be done um if you remember the case officer mike huntington pointed us to the parameter plan which said it could be done in between nought in years nought to six and i would prefer that it said specifically for that particular bit um in years nought to one because i think they should be planted right at the outset so they've got a good chance to establish properly um um then there's a whole tranche i'm sorry they're not necessarily in the right order but um on condition 13 i hang on let me just make make sure that officers are okay hearing this and what i if how long is your list then um it's i've got about five elements i think all's perhaps six all right if we go through those and the officers can um look at those and i'll carry on with the debate and we come back when the officers have uh looked at some wording so would you like me to go through them if you go through them now please thank you very much chairman okay so that just check that officers are happy with that um mr carter is that all right yes chair comfortable with that thank you thank you very much okay thank you chairman i have a pen in hand great thank you okay and that's kind of okay so then um right uh so condition 13 the one the tricky one about transport i'm very concerned about this even with the amendments um i'm also not convinced that the junction treatment on borne Broadway um will do the trick um so i'm minded to um remove the part two after the word or so keep the amendments as described in 13 one that has been described to us by mike huntington um to add that wording but to take it out and remove the or option so to delete option two do you want to consider that one briefly chairman as long as the officers have heard it as i say get the list and we'll come back when they're ready to find their view okay so then um skipping about a bit sorry condition 27 a which is on page 122 um it talks about it's it's under the heading of biodiversity and it's talking about the following list is not exhaustive but illustrative of the measures that may be incorporated into an ecological design strategy and if a refers to retention and protection of existing habitats during construction and i wanted to have some strengthening so that we could have a site management plan to restrict travel over those areas um and to keep it away from those areas for the for the sorry to keep it away from the areas that have to be used for nature reserves and um green spaces to avoid compaction um and also to avoid using them for storage of materials or plant um perhaps that's included in the measures that are described but i just wanted to check that um the other one was at condition 58 which is on page 137 um i didn't know whether we needed to say that to again reinforce the fact that this should be up to a maximum of 3500 and no more you know in other words within the total agreed of up to 3500 um i've been reassured that there is um reference to provision of the burial ground and allotments in suitable locations which i've mentioned before um i also wanted um let's see the other one i wanted to kind of improve and i'm sorry i i think it's paragraph 284 it's not a condition but it's 284 on page 38 where it talks about the connectivity to Camborn and since these two villages um now Camborn's becoming a town but 284 talks about the fact that the current proposal for Bournemouth is neither a separate village nor an extension of Camborn and suffers from not being either and i would like to actually um somehow make pedestrian and cycle connectivity between the two developments um stronger and i'm not quite sure how to do that um and i'd also like uh something specific to describe how the foul water capacity will be provided and indeed this was mentioned in the previous clarifications um and it definitely how the foul water will be handled and indeed surface water will be handled need to be reassured before first occupation thank you chairman all right thank you very much for that uh so what's happening now is that the officers are looking at those and when they've had an opportunity to do so they'll come back with um their advice uh and members of course um no alterations will be made without the full consent of the committee um so can we go forward on the debate to be have speakers please sorry before i that was my list can i just um have an opportunity to say why i'm concerned about those things um thank you my concern is that um as always uh if this were to be refused by this committee um whether an inspector might look at it and think um that our grounds were not strong enough and so there's a possibility that it it might be refute might be overturned at appeal and and and be agreed without those conditions having been strengthened um but my concern is fundamentally that all the way through rather like another application that we've considered recently um at water beach um all the way through these developments have been predicate you know they're significant large housing developments and they're predicated on good public transport links right at the outset that set behaviors for all those that are inclined to use them to use good quality appealing attractive swift frequent public transport as being preferable to use in the car inevitably there will be some for some their journeys won't be amenable for public transport um you know those we all do a bit of multiple journeying when we maybe do all sorts of things on our way to work or on the way home um but what we ought to be doing is setting a a framework so that people have a real clear good quality public transport option and that was the precondition really for both water beach and for born airfield and I too asked why they couldn't have a dedicated link off the A428 and I understood the arguments then that actually no they would instead have a good quality public transport link and I thought well okay that's at the time I can't remember you know but that seemed to be a reasonable um justification but now to remove that or delay it until an unknown time in the future I think would be very problematic so members won't perhaps be surprised to know that I still haven't decided which way I feel about this application but I definitely want all those conditions to be in place uh in case this um application is approved and there's lots of things not to like about this application but there are things that have improved with um amendment through the officer work thank you chairman all right thank you very much um and chairman next request to speak is councillor henry bachelor all right councillor bachelor please thank you chairman um chairman my largest concern um and having listened to the public speakers as well was that of condition 13 regarding the 500 dwelling limit uh so it's some satisfaction to me that the officers have agreed to include uh scdc in any kind of um in any decision making if that needs to be um contravened one thing I wanted to explore with officers and potentially the committee would in in fact if we could actually change the wording to specify it come these to come to the planning committee rather than just the authority so then there's absolute you know clarity that the planning committee would be making any decisions rather than the decision be delegated with officers so I just thought I'd um I've run that past officers to see what their views are on that first right thank you um that's mr carter gonna advise us on that please yes thank you chair um I don't see any reason uh why that couldn't be included uh it's perfectly appropriate for the committee to to make that clear uh in my view so we can add that right thank you very much could could we put that on the list then please Chris yes we'll do chair thank you okay uh do you want to go any further on that council bachelor no that was that was my point at the moment chair thank you all right thanks very much chairman the next request is from councillor granville chamberlain councillor chamberlain I see you're already with us yes thank you thank you chair um my concerns you've probably not be surprised revolve revolve around transport and uh sewage firstly in relation to the transport we heard from both mr ope councillor obe bryan and councillor corcoran um that the uh access to the a428 um was not being permitted and it seems to me that if that is as a result of a policy that is held by highways england then highways england ought to be ashamed of themselves forcing commuter traffic onto country lanes which are not designed for it not suitable for it and they should not be traveling past through our villages past our schools uh and they will be traveling once they get out of the villages at high speed on roads where cyclists and pedestrians use it's completely unacceptable and we heard and confirmation from uh both councillor wotherspoon from the county and dr finney from the county council in both cases that there will be a reduction in road safety that is simply not permissible in today's world and must not be allowed in my view at my other point in relation to the foul water drainage is that what is proposed in in condition 43 is a strategy it's not proposing construction so these houses could be built without the necessary infrastructure being in place which is ridiculous given that the local villages a number of them suffer from capacity problems in the interim in the recent times so i would want to see that condition 43 if this is approved uh strengthen not to relate to a strategy but to a delivered construction project thank you chairman thank you very much chairman the next request is from councillor richard williams all right councillor williams please okay thank thank you very much chair um yeah i've got a few concerns that other members have touched on um one thing i will go back to though is is i as well as concerned about transport and foul water drainage i mean i am concerned about the the density in the the sixth story um building which which which isn't what's in what's in the spd um and and i'm not sure it really complies with as i pointed out before the point about responding to local character i don't know of any other um villages in um in south cambridge that need a six-story building to to mark their village centre um that's not what most villages have got so i i do have concerns about about um density and height of buildings um my main concern however um is about transport um and i think we have to be realistic um most people will want to use their car if there is no high quality public transport um link the reality is that bus links which use the public roads into cambridge at rush hour is not a particularly attractive option for many people it can take an awfully long time if you're trying to get into the south of the city if you're trying to get down that really um through that awful traffic pinch point um of of maddingley road and then and then through the city go downhill's road to the south um so so public transport isn't a particularly um attractive option um so i think those habits that councillor brad never referred to simply won't be there from the start if if if there isn't a um a public transport option that allows you to do that and that will inevitably result in people um driving through um the villages and the mitigation for that i think that we've already touched on um will i think as as the representative of the transport department said quite quite rightly in my view um it will actually end up mostly impacting on the people who live in the villages who will find that um traffic calming is being put in their villages to prevent or to try to discourage people driving from new settlements but actually will be those people who have to live um with the congestion and the pinch points on on a daily basis i'm not really sure that the mitigation the harm from the mitigation measures actually um is is is quite significant so so there's an interesting cost benefit analysis um there so i am very concerned about the transport the fact that there isn't that high quality public transport link um that was promised um from the start um does weigh very heavily against approving this application um actually for me because that was what this um development was was predicated on from the start and i'll just finally flag it one thing um there's some very interesting um data i thought from the submission from born parish council about the uh about commuting from um from from Campbell and you know the fact that actually lost people don't go into Cambridge anyway a number of people do go into Cambridge of course a number of people commute um to other villages as well so even with a high quality public transport i think there's going to be an increase in traffic but certainly without it i think it's it's going to be a significant problem um i would just say a note about um file ward right i agree with the suggestion councillor Braden was made um about toughening up the uh the condition on that um because i i would like to see a bit more certainty um that that problem can be adequately dealt with thank you chair thank you very much we've got further speakers please sorry chairman um councillor Heather Williams councillor Williams please thank you chairman and i'm going to start off with the with the recommendation um because it is subject to section 106 so i i just want to address that because we're all aware and particularly the foul water that these are very costly um costly projects that are needed and would be extensive work so i would just like to impress on those that are negotiating section 106 that we really must make sure that there is sufficient money if this is to go ahead to cover those costs um the second my second point is on the conditions i think it would be prudent to strengthen them as other councillors have said um just in case this is you know given approval so i would i would be supportive of strengthening those conditions um as a fallback position but as to the application as a whole i think you know the principle of development is is not welcomed but it is accepted as it's part of the local plan um and i have to say i am i am pleased that there is 40 affordable housing and it's policy compliant on that front because it's not something we've seen particularly with the water beach application and members will be aware that i was not not happy about that but i am concerned that actually it's only 20 potentially that would be in perpetuity and given how important affordable housing is here i think that's something that perhaps needs further work having said that i don't think the perpetuity issue is policy compliant so i don't think that'd be a material reason for um refusal and i do share this concerns around density unsurprisingly more of my concern is around the transport and the fact that we are very unsettled as to what is going to happen next i think there is harm by even allowing the building of those first 500 homes because there is a possibility that we could build 500 homes something happened and then they have no infrastructure whatsoever okay you can't go on to build the next 3000 but i still wouldn't want to see you know 100 homes without infrastructure let alone 500 um and i think there is harm in that there is harm in the fact that we haven't got that infrastructure in place and that certainty which makes me wonder if this application is is just a little bit ahead of time um and i also agree that you know it's the acknowledgement that this is going to reduce road safety is not not a matter that i want to have on my on my conscience really um i think i think it's really important that we take that into consideration and with that on the balance for me i think that the harm does outweigh the the benefits of the scheme um and until we have some certainty over this transport solutions i would suggest that this needs to go on the back burner chairman and therefore i'd be minded to vote against but would support these strengthening conditions just in case colleagues are minded to approve it all right thank you very much uh further speakers please uh chairman uh councillor deborah uh sorry deborah rovers all right councillor rovers please too many williams thank you chairman um i'm having a sense of deja vu here a lot of the elements that i'm concerned about um that you know go back to a couple of weeks ago um and i think that the um the explanations that were given by the um councillor councillor brian from von actually were the most um clear and sensible reasons um that were given now whether the parish is correct that this is being somewhat driven by the fear of the five-year land supply situation and we all fear that well let's not be silly here we all fear that if we lose that we open up the floodgates again however it doesn't give us license to support things that aren't ready that's my my feeling and i think it's quite clear that this is not ready the fact that we you know we feel that the conditions are not good enough and we're having to try here on the hoof and make them stronger uh where in fact if it was a later application we could have those put in um straight away um so i'm leaning leaning very much against being able to support this um i think to me hawking said you know put it back onto the drawing board um though she didn't actually definitely ask for that but um obviously von parish councillor did they want it refused and the other parish councillors aren't happy so um it's not ready it's as simple as that and when you are putting forward something that's going to be three and a half thousand houses um as the end result it has to be right there's been some really excellent letters in the Cambridge evening news outlet expressing the public's real anger and concerns about the development that's happening in south cames and how it's really going to ruin the quality of life for the people who are already here well we shouldn't be getting into that we may we should be making absolutely sure that anything that we give the approvals for is actually going to improve the quality of life if it hasn't got this transport it just shouldn't be happening so you know i i think i shall be going forward for a refusal chairman thank you thank you very much councillor eileen wilson chairman councillor wilson please oh hold on i see that uh hang on a minute i'm sorry councillor um mr carter would like to give us some advice thank you sorry i i certainly didn't want to interrupt the flow of members but i just wondered if it might be helpful to hear again from from david allerton dr john finney about the safety point because it's clearly an issue concerning members and i just wondered if it might be helpful to have further commentary from them on that all right let's do that then um if i kick things off i think john's point on on safety if i've interpreted it correctly john you were acknowledging the point that with all development of any scale that intensifies the level of trips on any mode there is an increased risk uh increased conflict between people traveling from a to b i don't think what we were saying is that this development would impose a severe safety risk on the network i think john's point was just acknowledging the very aspect that undertaking a journey has got inherent risks of course as part of any design process for traffic calming and so forth there is a process to go through to ensure that features that are provided on the network are safely designed and uh do not result in in in a severe safety risk john i i just wondered if you want to build on that i mean so essentially david you are quite correct as you might point out as i said the highway is a risk filled environment if you put additional traffic on that on that environment be it cyclists pedestrians motor vehicles horse riders they're all traffic they all increase the risks of an accident occurring the question is as council waterspoon rightly pointed out does this development push us over into severe as required by paragraph 109 and mppf and at the moment the answer to that question is probably no so while i don't disagree with council um sorry i forgot your count lost your apologies to council council chamberlain my apologies sir there will be an increase in risk there is no denying that but i cannot at the moment say it is so severe that the highway authority will be in position of recommending a refusal otherwise that is where we would be okay thank you very much for that so chairman the next request to speak was from wilson council wilson was waiting well thank you that's right thank you thank you chair um yes um my concerns around transport as well and it's um it's really about people not getting into the habit of using their cars which then is very difficult to deter them from doing so so i too have concerns about um condition 13 2 and would like to see um no uh well it will go before the planning committee so that that's one um piece of comfort but it would be better if if 500 was the utter limit if there is no other um high quality public transport scheme going back to my other comment about um the sewage works to southwest of the application i would like to see some um evaluation carried out of the odours coming from that site and how far the reaches in different wind conditions thank you all right thank you very much um chairman the next request oh did you want did anybody want to respond to that at all sorry did you want to see any response from that from not for the moment i i think too that others have asked to speak haven't they later on so that's what jeff harvey is the next request that's the harvey please yes um thank you chair i wanted to um speak really in support of some of the points that um council bradnam and others have made and i really would be concerned about um condition 13 point two because it seems to me what that's really saying is that the capacity of the local village road should be the determinant of how many houses um are allowed on the site at any particular point and in other words uh in in a sort of imaginary case where the local roads were of higher capacity we would therefore allow um more houses above the um 500 and and that just seems to be putting the car before the horse because really the point of c2c was to establish a sustainable and low carbon um habit if you like and and future of the town so i i just don't think that um it should be a consideration how much more traffic above the 500 the local roads could cope with because um the central point is that we need the c2c as soon as we possibly can and just a further point um in terms of mitigation um if electric buses will to become available uh during the period of mitigation i would be a very a very strong argument for prioritizing that service to be electric buses because we know that the electric buses are very attractive and and uh better able to cause modal shift and it would go some way to uh uh filling the the the sort of aspiration gap if you like while we wait for c2c to arrive all right thank you very much uh the next request to speak is from councillor martin carne thank you very much councillor carne please it will be no surprise that my main concern is also about transport um and i feel very sympathetic with the idea of removing the second part of uh condition 30 and i think we do need to set 500 at the absolute limit um i am a little bit skeptical about how much even the high speed uh high quality transport will actually cause a modal shift uh shift i many years ago did a study run canoe town which had a specific busway very well designed um which in fact was not terribly effective about making modal shift although it did make a very efficient bus service and reduce the cost of producing of running a bus service so i'm a bit skeptical but the high speed transport will not just remove modal shift in the new settlement it will produce modal shift one would hope in the other settlements along the route and therefore the amount of that is perhaps where the main additional uh capacity will be given for more private transport from uh born i am concerned but the position we have is that it has been put in the local plan uh we committed to having this development we somehow have to manage it uh and at least the advantage of having um if it's very well monitored we have an initial well a small development we can get some idea of what the impact will be particularly if we actually do get the higher the new high speed high ability of public transport before the next phase of the development take place we'll be able to be making decisions then on the basis of of some facts rather than on premises and predictions which are difficult to make on matters of personal choice which is what transport choices are so i'm also worried that if we were to refuse it we it will go to appeal because it's in the local plan and it's been accepted it might get approved with far worse conditions than we've got at present so my general feeling is in favor of granting permission at this stage but with a clear limit to the size of our the amount of development in the first phase uh seen as the sort of a monetary the idea of the monitoring i think it's very important particularly important and we must make sure that the monitoring is strictly adhered to and we don't go further until we really know what the latest stages will look for i'm a bit still i mean this is in this uh the sdp that were the lineman to the fast uh fast speed um high quality um public transport system i'm still a bit apprehensive that the later phases will go to be rather a wrong way away from the point uh but that's already accepted in the sdp so we're lumbered with that the the first phase is in any case when the high quality transport comes will be well accessible to the the new system um so that's my my feeling that uh with a fixed limit we would be better advised to uh to grant planning permission at this time um uh within the conditions that we've got i think this is about the best deal that we're going to get the best system we're going to get at this stage however with all the reservations that i have right thank you very much councillor chairman the next requester speaks from peter councillor peter fein councillor fein please thank you chairman i think this is in fact a very high quality development proposal um like others i have some concerns on matters of detail concerns on sustainability um i'm concerned that we're only talking about trialling certain technologies we should be way past that um i'm not sure what the proportion of renewables will be clearly uh the only requirement is a very uh unambitious 10 percent which i think the developers will meet but those are matters we can come back to at reserve matters similarly like others i'm concerned about transport but i've never expected that um c2c would necessarily be the only option as paragraph 10 says it requires will require a strategic transport intervention the c2c or equivalent strategic scheme since uh the spd was improved particularly since the local plan was approved we've now seen of course the proposals for east west rail and i think without doubt that the station at camborn whether it's north or south will be the major route for those seeking to go to um aden brooks and the cambridge biotechnology campus in particular it would of course be better if the sustainable transport alternatives in addition of course to to bicycles and and so on um were available before development started that's what we've always wanted to see modal shift but there's nothing can be done to secure that at this stage i share uh council chamberlain's concerns about putting a lot of traffic onto small roads shared with bicycles and uh and with pedestrians when there could have been a direct link on to the a428 even though that wouldn't be my ideal solution but we're talking about the initial development of 500 houses and my assessment is that 500 houses in that location is perfectly manageable and the other houses proposed will only come forward when we do have a sustainable transport solution that is not currently accessible to us so as so often to me the question comes back to paragraph 11 of the nppf uh and the question we have to ask ourselves is is this an approved development is this a development proposal that accords with an up-to-date development plan uh the answer clearly has to be yes in which case the requirement upon us is to approve it without delay and that is what i shall be voting to do this afternoon all right thank you very much councillor chairman speakers uh councillor groanfield chamberlain councillor chamberlain chairman thank you i'd like to come back if i may on the most recent comment that was made by dr finney um he spoke about the level of traffic being rigid with being diverted to public highways what we're actually talking about here are lanes through narrow lanes in places three villages past a number of schools whichever way the traffic goes from born airfield to wards through barter they are likely to pass at least two schools one village college come across significant restrictions as a result of car's part on the highway i believe that there is a huge risk associated with this the transport provisions are in my view inadequate and i will be voting against thank you thank you very much uh chairman our next request is from councillor debra roberts all right do we have any further ones i just uh like to bring those um that is our last request sorry councillor roberts yeah thank you again chairman um much appreciated my one of the things i should have also spoken to about um was my concern about the too high rise buildings um given the height that they would be um and given what we know about the rise in the height of the land they will be extremely dominant um i think that they uh they should be unacceptable um i don't think that they should be allowed to even be um five story certainly not six story and i fear that um if we don't put something in as a condition against against that happening we will actually end up with two six story buildings um we know that every story that goes on a building is hundreds of thousands pounds more profit to um the builders so i think we've got to if that is going to happen it needs to be tightened up and the condition has got to be imposed there um about um not being that height i think um the maximum that either there should be is is five at the very most um but just to pick up on the comments about monitoring today i'm sure as well it's all fresh in everybody's mind and monitoring has been talked about and how it will happen i'm afraid in reality over the years i've been at south cams when monitoring has been talked about years some years down the line when it's actually happening a couple of years down the line it's no longer a priority or it's something that nobody's got the the uh resolve or the reserves to actually put into place i just don't think we can accept that monitoring is going to happen and that it's going to sort out anything i think we're going to have if this is approved terrific problems i think uh councilor chamberlain has just eloquently expressed the the reality of the situation at ground um and how that traffic is going to be followed through these villages um with their narrow roads and inability um to have to take this as well as unacceptable that they should have to you know why should um the villages around about there now um suddenly have their quality of life um not just disrupted but you know sometimes destroyed you know and and i'm not saying that we shouldn't that something shouldn't be happening here it's like water beach it's accepted it's part of the local plan it's an allocated site but not yet and it shouldn't take them all that long to go back to the drawing board and get these matters further resolved and better resolved than we have now you know it's it's a disaster for south cams to keep allowing these great big developments with so many question marks over them for us to be ticking boxes to allow it it's beyond me all right thank you very much are you still with us or do you it's councilor roberts yes i'm here john still sorry i'm sorry i thought you might have no no i've said i've said my bit thank you lovely thank you very much indeed then um okay any more uh no further speakers german no all right well i just make a brief comment then um don't forget what we're dealing with here members uh this is an outline application uh an outline application uh as already been said this is an allocation in the local plan uh the exact detail of what will actually happen on site will come to us again with the reserve matters um clearly the transport issue is the center of of this but i think everything that's been done that can be done absolute certainty which some have been asking for about when that will be delivered simply doesn't exist in the new world in the real world so we have to accept that the checks and balances that have actually been put in to the conditioning uh very much means that it cannot proceed beyond 500 unless there is a proper transport system in place so having said that can i go back to offices and see how we're getting on with the proposals for the changes to the conditioning please thank you yes chair if you're happy um i've obviously heard the conditions or suggested changes from councillor bradden but also others so i'll run through what i've got and suggested changes um and i'll come to condition 13 at the end so you wouldn't want anyone to think that i'd missed it but i'll just come to that one at the end but uh first of all we talked about condition eight and i think you dealt with with that point uh around the up to or not exceeding three and a half thousand dwellings um condition 10 this was with regard to the structural planting along the boundary with high fields cul-de-cotte um i have a suggestion which is actually an addition to condition 11 instead which is the phasing plan uh and that is that the site-wide phasing plan shall include but not limited to uh the sequence of providing the following elements and to add a an additional element to that which would be j and that would be the early delivery of structural planting along boundaries with high fields cul-de-cotte um as set out in the parameter plan uh so that's that one um condition uh 27a this was um with regard to concerns around um any impacts on areas that might ultimately be wildlife or nature areas um i actually think the wording of the condition does give that control already and requires those details to be included in the uh in the uh the lamp um so my advice would be that there isn't any additional uh wording that um would give us any greater control or certainty um on that point um condition 58 just bear with me a moment um again i think um we don't need to add anything in my opinion um about the three and a half thousand homes here because the purpose of this condition is for um managing the mix of delivery of housing types throughout the development it's not a condition that relates to the overall figure but rather ensuring that the mix that comes forward on each phase um reflects the overall uh mix that's proposed for the development um if i just go back slightly to condition 43 which is with regard to the foul water drainage strategy um i i do have a suggestion here this is on page 130 um and the second paragraph of the condition um so i'll just read the first line the strategy shall include details of any necessary improvement to the existing sewage system and then i've inserted the words including a timetable for their delivery to ensure that the sufficient capacity exists and so on so that's a suggested addition to that condition um there was discussion about comments in paragraph 284 just to clarify those are the comments of Cambridge past present and future um but in responding to those Councillor Bradlam had concerns about connectivity with camborn um i think that as was shown on the parameter plans all of the existing bridal ways and cycle paths do have connections um from the proposed development so um i'm not sure that there'd be any additional connectivity that would be easily provided given the limitations of what already exists in camborn um but there are clearly connections proposed to all of the existing um networks available there um odour from the born sewage treatment works um i would suggest that if members were concerned about that as an issue um officers could be instructed uh to word a condition requiring the submission of an odour mitigation strategy or a survey and then mitigation strategy if necessary to be implemented prior to the first use of the country park area if that was something of a concern to members um and then finally returning to condition 13 um members have talked about removing sorry bear with me just a moment removing part two of that condition that's in the gift of the committee to do that if it wishes to um the only thing i would say is that wouldn't um take away the right of the developer to make an application under section 73 at some point in the future to vary the limit in the first part of that condition but in any case um that would come back to the committee um regardless of whether you keep part two here or you remove it and then the developer chooses at some point in the future to make a further application uh in any case that would remain within the control of the committee um i don't know if there might be anything that uh david alitz might wish to add to that chair just on that condition um yeah i think the reason that we um suggested it's inclusion with the case officer is just in our mandate as the highways authority we have to look at development proposals and have a mechanism to um to to recommend refusal on unsustainable development but equally a mechanism to allow for sustainable development the future is uncertain we've got the national pandemic we might see a big shift towards home working for example and things like that so um the reason for that secondary cause was just an acknowledgement of at some point in in future we would want if there was a proposition we'd we'd need to look at it and take a take a realistic view against the planning tests would the quantum of development proposed um cause a severe impact or not um and that uh i recognize that the this um that this clause it's it's really it's a suggestion for the committee whether it wants that clause or not chairman could i come back on something hang on the moment please okay so uh just pursuing that for a moment please um let's see how that if you'd like to come back again yeah what is your advice on that well i just think i think is it a help to you to have that in place that's uh it is but if it if it if it wasn't in um i think it could still work we do believe that the C2C is going to be delivered and and we see good progress on that um i the reason it was put in was because if there is an opportunity for sustainable development in future a future interim scenario should that be given serious consideration in in a worst case if the development is performing very sustainably high working from home high internet internalization etc so there is a reason for it um for for its suggestion um and hopefully hopefully can members can appreciate why it was put in there right thank you very much um mr carter was there anything further you wanted to add no nothing further for me at this stage check can i just check then where you have suggested that there might be alterations so that was on the planting um what number was that number 10 wasn't it actually chair i was suggesting in addition to condition 11 rather than number rather than condition number 10 11 that's right and the addition there was an additional point j which is the early delivery of structural planting along boundaries with high fields called the cock um can i point out chairman i'm sorry i'm i'm not satisfied with that i'd like it to special so i will come back to that in a moment let's just establish what the advice is first so that's number 11 43 and you're recommending that we do not change 13 but that is in the gift of the um committee yep that's correct chair um and then there was whether the committee wanted to pursue an additional condition with regard to odour odour yeah so that'd be an extra okay all right councillor bradham then do you want to respond since it was your thank you thank you um given that going back to your the um condition 11 the phasing which was the way um mr carter was proposing to address the planting issue the whole point of this is to get these trees planted early on and i i initially i thought mr carter said before a i heard him i thought that's what he said in fact he'd said as j and i would much prefer to see some reference that it should be within the first one or one year of or one or two years of the approval if it is given approval of that approval you know that the tree should be planted within the first two years or even one year um because because i think the the the wording was the earliest point it said early delivery of structural planting along and that's early could mean anything it could mean in the first five years as as it is shown on the green um parameter plan and i don't think that's early enough i think it should be specified as being within the first one or two years right let's check with mr carter then the effects chair thank you um the the condition the very start of the condition uh says that no development should commence until a site-wide phasing plan has been agreed um so this does need to be agreed with the council um and one of the elements that needs to be agreed with the council is the if we add this is the early delivery of structural planting um i i think we just need to give some thought about um how how reasonable this is to specify a precise time um at this stage we do have to have regard to planting seasons and the like of course as well um and not to put a hold on the commencement of the development to you know in order to wait for for a planting season for example so um i in my opinion that's sufficient but if the committee does want to specify a time frame that i would suggest that needed to be in the first zero to two years to allow some flexibility there i'd be happy with zero to two mr carter all right we're we're do that for the moment zero to two and put that in but it's up to the committee to decide whether they want to accept any or all of these um all durations um if i could deal with that now then um members you've heard so there's three elements that mr carter is recommending i'll come back to other ones after we've dealt with these so it's it's the 11 with the addition of the north to two um planting um it's number 43 what was the issue at 43 odour from the sewage works no that's that's sorry chair would you like me to clarify this yeah please if you would so condition 43 is with regard to the foul water drainage strategy and in the second paragraph it's a drop in of several words so it will read subject to agreement the strategy shall include details of any necessary improvement to the existing sewage system including a timetable for their delivery to ensure that sufficient capacity exists and so on fine okay and the odour one was an additional um yes the odour one would be an additional condition um uh delegating the precise wording to officers in conjunction with the chair and vice chair right okay now members can i can i take those three together we come back to any others that people would like to pursue after that um so uh are we all in favour of those particular changes is anyone agreed anybody against anybody want to stay in on that all right so i think those three elements are agreed them uh so we now come to the transport issue where there was a proposal to drop um item two of that um the officers advice to you is that it is of use to them and should remain so can we decide one if we if we want to remove that or not so can i have a proposal um chairman i will make a proposal but we've had a request to speak from councillor martin karn do you want to wait for that yeah i'm councillor karn is it on this issue you know you're quite okay it's on this issue it's basically i was just going to say that if the second party is um taken out of condition 13 would it be possible to put it informative that uh that um that that if they wish to uh put further housing before the uh high speed um thing came came in that you would have to the high quality transport came in they would have to make a set application and fully justify the the reason to make it clear that um we want it really to go back to to committee to be considered okay so um it's there at the moment let's decide we're not we want to drop it first i'll come back to you on the informative should um they decide they want to drop it so chairman it was me who made that proposal and the proposal was to accept 13 1 as amended by mr carter as according to mr carter suggestion in other words to include to the satisfaction of the local planning authority but to remove uh small two from yep absolutely okay then fine we've got a second up for that um no i haven't us yet does anybody like to second that i'll second that it's councillor williams councillor williams okay thank you very much um yeah i take that by so the proposal is to drop uh little two from the list of um conditions um is everyone in favor of that anyone again in favor agreed agreed well i'm against but uh i think i'm the only one like anybody else against no i am i share your your view on this that officers have told us that would be helpful to retain in order to just hear the outcome we all want uh so i think it would be unwise to drop it so i'm okay that's councillor fein speaking there but uh as far as i can see that there's only the two of us voting against that then uh so that is passed them with two votes against and everybody else in favor okay um have we dealt with the conditioning then uh i think we have there's a request from councillor roberts um asking if we've rehearsed reasons for a refusal yeah we're coming to that next yeah okay um uh councillor roberts we do like to speak to that please um we're just thinking about thank you just thinking about the um the last major one that we uh looked at and since then obviously we've worked out that um it would be something that the officers would be thinking about as we went along and the comments that we were making so um i think we've made it pretty clear what our real main concerns are which i think is the transportation more than anything um so it obviously would just obviously be good now to hear what officers have written down for us okay i'll consult with officers now uh mr carter chair through yes thank you through you um i do have a feel for um where members concerns lie uh given the scale of the application um it would be helpful if we could have a shorter German to allow officers just to get our heads together in this virtual world to come up with some precise wording um just uh given the importance of this decision and then to present that back to the committee before the vote okay yeah excellent so um where are we now we're at 234 how long would you need 15 minutes uh yes if you could give us 15 minutes that'd be helpful thank you chair okay so we're going so members of the public we're about to adjourn for 15 minutes to allow officers to give um proper advice to us so Liam could you uh close down for okay i can confirm we're now live thanks thank you Liam uh welcome back to south cams district council planning committee where we're dealing with the born airfield um planning application um when we left officers were consulting on possible grounds for refusal so mr carter can we have something to tell us yes chair thank you um we have two reasons for refusal drafted i'm happy to share the screen if you're happy for that or i can read them out um i'll share the screen now then can you just let me know when you can see those yep that's so we have two reasons the first related to the camborn to Cambridge or lack of camborn to Cambridge uh high quality public transport infrastructure solution and the timing of its delivery and the second related to the impact on surrounding highway network and impacts on the amenity of residents in those local villages right okay all right can i just ask that those who would like me to um cancer robbers is that thank yes sorry chairman um just because i i was one of us for this and then and then made a comment about transport i wonder if we could have a bottom line on the first paragraph of and it is therefore premature because i think that's what we are saying um it's it's not ready and we haven't got enough information or guarantees or even anywhere near a likelihood at the moment so would that be something that could be added in there and i'm also wondering if we could also you know there was a couple of us who were certainly concerned and made richard council richard williams and i made concerns about the the highness of those the height of those two make those big buildings uh and i wonder whether could we have a line also of that we are very concerned about the impact of those two particular buildings as well if that's a possibility thank you chairman all right but as as you're aware you know we had to be quite careful about the use of words so mr carter would premature be chair my advice would be um prematureity is is not a uh defensible reason i think that the the first line obviously cites the lack of certainty over its delivery um which kind of eludes to the same thing without using the the the word premature and my advice would be to to stick with that um i i hadn't uh we we hadn't drafted a reason around the height of of buildings um sorry that we didn't pick that up it is that an additional reason that we'd like to pursue chair uh well there's two um councillors who possibly like there is it relevant at this stage though wouldn't that become into the design guide and so on thank you chair so so through you that the principle of of having a building of up to six stories in height would be established by the parameter plan but the precise detail would come through uh the design coding and design guide work i should also add that um just because it's up to six stories in height doesn't mean it's necessarily a residential building there's potential for it to be for example a place of worship with with a significant height presence for example just as an alternative that that might be worth considering as well okay but it would be detailed um through the design work that comes later can chair and as as councillor um Richard Williams um also commented it on it and there's much better knowledge of the law and planning than i have i mean wonder if it's just worth asking him whether he wants something added chairman we've got thank you we do have a list of speakers i believe yeah sorry uh vice chair sorry there are two speakers wishing perhaps to give clarification granted councillor chamberlain and then councillor Williams Richard Williams all right councillor chamberlain please thank you chairman um can we put that wording back up on the screen please i would like to see the words in the second paragraph roads by reasons of road safety additional noise and pollution so the road safety features in there because that is my greatest fear thank you right that's on the second element isn't yes chairman in after we've got an impact on it right it's coming that's it thank you right okay you're happy with that sorry yes thank you and that's excellent thank you all right and uh councillor Richard Williams sorry i think sorry chair it's that problem with my computer's frozen um yeah i just wanted to come back um mostly on the point about heights i mean that that that was a concern for me um and the reason why i was concerned about that was precisely because of what um mr carter said about it establishing the principle here of um of there being buildings up to six stories if we if we do um let that through so i am concerned about that my i mean my my reasons would be i don't feel it it it accords with um 6a of ss7 but it's also contrary to the spd which talks about building with elements up to five stories um so i think having any six-story structures um in in this is is incompatible with the spd um and in my judgment would be incompatible with with responding to local character in in 6a but um so they would be migraines anyway for for on that basis all right thank you so um can we add elements of that then please mr carter chair yes i i wonder if rather than doing it on on the screen i mean i think the the wording around a reason for refusal to do with height um would be uh more straightforward um to draft and that's uh should should the vote go against the proposal that um that could be delegated to officers subject to agreement with the chair and vice chair i don't know that might be acceptable yes i think that's probably accepted are you okay with that members yes i'm happy with that yes i'll be with that chairman okay so what we've got now then is for those who wish to vote against that there are the reasons um so i'd like to now bring this to a conclusion so the recommendation can be found on on page 108 and the recommendation is the delegated approval delegated to the joint director of planning regional development of outline permission s 3440 stroke 18 stroke o l as amended as we've already uh said uh for various conditions subject to conditions and subjects of 106 agreement so uh before i take a call and just take advice from mr reed sorry chair um i understand that the job title of the joint director of planning and economic development uh changed changed earlier in the week is he still with us chair i am jerry if i can assist um it uh it's uh it's perfectly sufficient for my job title to remain as as that um uh listed in the recommendation so there is no there is no need to revise that thank you following advice mr kelly thank you okay thank you mr reed thank you mr kelly uh so the delegated it's delegated approval subject to 106 and conditions so i'm going to make a roll call so if you're in favor of approval you are for if you want to refuse you're against and if you wish to abstain you're abstained so i'm going to begin the roll call now with councillor henry back on i'm full chairman oh thank you councillor anna bradden um chairman um i'm against against councillor martin carne four thank you councillor gambrel trembling against thank you councillor peter fein four thank you councillor jeff harvey four thank you councillor debba roberts against chairman thanks thank you councillor heather williams against chairman yeah councillor dr richard williams against german yeah councillor eileen wilson four chairman sorry i trouble with the mute right thank you and my vote is four so the outcome is one two three four five six votes four five votes against the application is approved all right thank you very much members thank you very much uh all the officers who have contributed um particularly um mr hundingdon who has done a huge amount of work on this so let's hope that this can go forward in a constructive manner so i don't think we have any further business uh other than to say that our next meeting it's the second wednesday in march um and uh we'll then bring this meeting of south cams district council planning committee to a close thank you very much everybody then could you close down please