 I'm going to take us live so that we can start the meeting. I know that Councillor Heather Williams is in the building, but we can do this introductory comment to everyone, as we're after 10 o'clock, so she can come in. Gosh, we feel really together here. Oh sorry, we're live. Oh sorry, I was waiting to hear where we're live. So good morning, members, officers and any members of the public who are viewing the streaming of this meeting and welcome to the Planning Committee of Southingham's My name is Councillor Pippa Halings, and I'm chair of this committee. Please can those present in the council chamber note that everything on your desk, including your laptop screen, is likely to be broadcast at some point. The camera follows the microphone being switched on, so councillers and officers are requested to wait a couple of seconds before speaking to allow the camera to catch up so that those viewing can see us all. And please can those participating in the meeting via the live stream, good morning, indicate that you wish to speak via the chat column, and please do not use the chat column for any other purpose apart from asking to speak. My chair will be managing the order for speakers, my vice-chair. Make sure your device is fully charged and that you switch your microphone off unless you're invited to do otherwise. And please ensure you've switched off or sized silence to any other devices you have so that they don't interrupt proceedings. As requested yesterday by email, please use a headset if available when speaking and hold the microphone close to your mouth. When you're invited to address the meeting, please make sure your microphone is switched on and your video, and when you finish addressing the meeting, please turn off your microphone immediately. Speak slowly and clearly and please do not talk over or interrupt anyone. And at this moment if I could ask that all those who are taking part in the meeting virtually to turn off their video, please, as well as their microphone. Thanks so much. Please note if we need to vote on any item we should do so via the microphones here in the room, only those present in the chamber can vote or propose or second recommendations. So committee members, hello, good morning. And I'll now invite each of you to introduce yourselves. After I call your name, turn your microphone, wait two seconds and say your name so that your presence may be noted. So as I said earlier, my name is Councillor Pippa Haleyings, member for Histon, Invington and Orchard Park, and I'm the chair, my vice-chair. Morning, Councillor Henry Baxillor, one of the members for Linson and vice-chair of the committee. Thank you. Councillor Martin Cahn. Councillor Martin Cahn, one of the members for Histon, Invington and Orchard Park. Thank you very much, Councillor Dr Clare Daunton. Thank you. I'm Clare Daunton, and I'm one of the members for the Fendit and Fullborn Ward. Thank you very much, Councillor Peter Fane. Good morning, Peter Fane, Shelford Ward. Thank you. Councillor Jeff Harvey. Yeah, Councillor Jeff Harvey and the member for Horsham Ward. Thank you. Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. Good morning, everyone. Timmy Hawkins, Gordicott Ward. Thank you. Councillor Heather Williams. Heather Williams and I represent the Mordans Ward. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Dr Richard Williams. Good morning, Chair. I'm Richard Williams. I represent the Wittlesford Ward. Thank you. And Councillor Eileen Wilson. Good morning. Councillor Eileen Wilson and I represent Cottenham and Mamty Ward. Thank you. Are there any other members present? I don't see anybody. Good. And I can confirm that the meeting is quarat. And we also have two officers in the Chamber. Chris Carter. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Members. Chris is the delivery manager for strategic sites. And Stephen Reed. I won't say happily, he's not able. Oh well, so we do have with us Stephen Reed, who is our senior planning lawyer. If any time a member leaves the meeting, will they please make the fact known to me so that it can be recorded in the minutes. Thank you. And I intend breaking for 15 minutes approximately every hour as we're in a room that's poorly ventilated. We have both doors open as you know. And so I'll now go to the agenda item number two, apologies. Ian, do we have any apologies for today? Yes, Chair. We have her too. We have apologies from Councillor Judith Rippith and Councillor Debro Roberts. And Councillor Dr Claire Daunton, as you know, is here. She's substitute for Councillor Rippith. Thank you very much. Any other apologies? No. And agenda item three, declarations of interest. Do any members have any interest to declare in relation to any items of business on this agenda? If an item or an interest suddenly becomes apparent later in the meeting, please would you raise it at that point? I see Councillor Dr Toomey Hawkins. Thank you, Chair. Agenda item seven, which is the item in Codicot, district councillor. I'm also a parish councillor and have been in on meetings where it was discussed. But I come to the matter fresh. Thank you very much. And Councillor Henry Batchelor. Thank you, Chair. Item number five, I have a pecuniary interest in this item, as my employer has an ongoing business relationship with the applicant. So under legal advice, I won't be taking any part in the debate and vote and I'll be leaving the room when it's discussed. Thank you. And Councillor Peter Fein, could I ask you at that point to act as my vice-chair for that item when we come to it? Is that okay? Would the committee members take that by affirmation? Thank you very much. Good. Members, we come to agenda item number four, the minutes. Chair, but it just says that we don't have anything to vote on. We'll be presented to the committee meeting on the 11th of August. Thank you very much. Agenda item five, before we move on to the substantive report, I would just like to invite Chris Carter to address one of the issues that's come to our attention. Thank you, Chair. Yes. Good morning, Members. I'm sure you're all aware of an email received by Members last night from Mr Fulton of the Fuselane Consortium, raising concerns about access to documents and information prior to the committee meeting today. Whilst ultimately this will be a matter for the committee to determine whether or not it's happy to proceed, we'll just set out the following information for your consideration. With regard to the application at Water Beach, the application was received on the 21st of May 2021 and consultation expired on the 17th of June 2021. With regard to the application at Toft, this application was valid from the 20th of August 2020. Consultation expired, the final round of consultation expired on the 26th of February 2021. With regard to the item at Cumberton, no public consultation took place, as this is an application for a certificate of law from the list. The parish council were notified and did comment. All of those applications, therefore, have been available publicly for some time. Mr Fulton did contact officers of the council on Thursday last week, raising concerns with regard to access to information due to the recapture software which the council uses to keep its network secure. Special arrangements were put in place on Friday last week where recapture was turned off for a period of two hours so that Mr Fulton could download any documents he wished to view. It was then turned on again after that two hours had expired. There was no suggestion from Mr Fulton or the consortium after that period that he'd been unable to access the documents he wished to view or that more time was required or a request for any specific documents to be sent directly. No other party has suggested that they've been unable to access documents related to these applications and no comments have been received on these items during the consultation period from either Mr Fulton directly or from the Fuse Lane consortium. There is, of course, given the history of challenges from Fuse Lane consortium, a risk that they may seek to challenge any subsequent decision on these applications, but it's the view of officers that there's been sufficient time and access to these applications for any representations to be made, particularly having regard to the special arrangements which were put in place at the end of last week. Notwithstanding all of this, if further representations were made following the committee today, there would be an opportunity to consider whether or not an application should be referred back to the committee should any new issues that weren't considered today be raised. So the advice of officers is that the committee is able to determine these applications today, but I think, Chair, that's a matter for you and your fellow committee members to determine. Thank you. Thank you. So committee, it's up to us, members to determine this and to go to a vote. I'd just like to ask for legal clarification in terms of representation. So as I understand it, we have a community statement that tells us how comments and representations can be made. Can you clarify that comments can be made following committee determinations as well? Yes, Chair. The council has a statement of community involvement which says specifically that late representations will be considered. If those come forward, officers will have the opportunity to consider whether they give rise to new material considerations and to advise whether they feel that they are sufficient to justify the matter coming back to committee. Thank you, members. So I'll go to any comments or questions of that before moving to a vote to determine whether we continue with the determination of the issues on the agenda. Thank you. Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you, Chair. I see you've got your nameplate changed. So I do have a question to say, has this issue been resolved and is it still an issue? So if we could have, I think, be beneficial to have an update on the problems and whether we've got resolution on them, because I know on other applications I've had residents get in touch that they've not been able to access. So, yeah, has that been resolved now? I think we are being put in a very difficult position again through a technical, I don't know, I'm not an IT expert, I hold my hands up, but some sort of IT issue. This isn't the first time. I appreciate what's been said about the fact that it could come back if it's de-material. But ultimately, as councillors, we don't make that decision. So if we're to determine the application today on that provision, we would need absolutely 100% concrete. If there's anything else that comes in, it comes back to us. And the reality is, because of the way our scheme of delegation is, we cannot have that assurance because it's not in our decision. So it's not in our power anymore. So while, you know, I've probably travelled one of the furthest to get here today, I don't think I'm entirely comfortable determining things as it currently stands. And I really would like to know, has this been sorted? Because it can't carry on. Good, thank you. So we can ask that question of the opposite, it's been resolved. Nevertheless, no matter what the responses, we still have to make a decision about what's going on. But it would be good to know where the situation is in the update. Thank you, Chair. Yes, so the recapture software, just for your awareness, is something that's used nationwide in order to stop essentially the mining, sweeping mining of data. So it's a piece of software that I understand Google has produced that's commonly used by councils and businesses. In terms of an update to it, there is a plan I understand, either later today or tomorrow, to launch a new piece of software, which is approved by IDOCs, who are the company who maintain the planning database for us. They're one of the biggest providers in the country, with a view to trying to reduce the number of issues such as this that have been raised. But so there is a further update coming, is my understanding. Thank you. And have Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. That's very good. Can I have an idea of time scales, please? My understanding is within the next 24-48 hours that update will be in place. Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. Thank you, Chair. I mean, this council will be failing in its responsibility if it didn't look after its... ..its assets, especially its data. We did have a bot attack, which is why the capture software was installed. And it seems to me that... ..the access to the data that's been requested seems to be a problem for just one person. I have looked at the data. I've been able to access the files this morning. No one else has complained of being unable to access the files. The files have been in the public domain for youngs, as we've heard. It seems to me that living this till late is another ploy to put us in a difficult situation. I believe that we have done everything that we possibly can, given the circumstances, to enable Mr Fulton to get access to the data that he is after. But we must make sure that we do our duty, which is to determine applications that we're here to do today. So I will be voting for us to actually carry on with this. Thank you. Okay, committee. I'm going to put this to the vote, I think. Oh, sorry. Not? Almost. That's Dr Martin. I think you wanted to comment that having access to applications over the computer is a relatively modern invention. When I was working in a planning department 30 years ago, you had access by coming to the planning department and looking at the applications, and that was considered legal then. Mr Fulton was given, when he complained, was given access to applications and was able to access them, which is equivalent to the situation that was before. So it doesn't seem to me that actually he was prevented from access or any other applicant, if they had problems, was prevented from access. It's equivalent to the situation before the introduction of computing access over the internet, and therefore I don't see any reason why we should not determine the applications. Thank you. I understand all the issues of access and equality of access in terms of opportunity. We want to make it as possible and easy for everybody to access things. I think we want to honour the statement of commitment to community involvement, representation and participation. I think on this, as for myself, as Dr Tumi Hawkins has said, we have a responsibility and a duty to protect the assets, which is why the software is going in. We've understood that this has caused problems to one person, which is Mr Fulton, and I'm sure if there are late representations that has been done before by Mr Fulton, it will be allowed. This is my view. I think we would need to go to the vote now to determine whether or not as committee can proceed to determine the applications on the agenda. I think Dr Richard Williams will speak. That's a small comment, chair. I don't want to delay things, but I just want to say I'm pleased to hear that the software is being looked at because I know that has been a problem for residents. I know this case is a particularly extreme case, but I have had cases. In fact, I've had problems myself accessing sometimes. Thank you very much. Members will take it to the vote, please, which is that we as a committee, what would be the vote? Continue to determine the applications that we have before us today. If you are in favour or against, please make that clear. One more we need. Thank you. Members, with nine votes in favour and one against and abstentions, that is passed and we will continue with the agenda as before us and determine the applications before us. That means that we move to substantive item number five on page one of your agenda pack. Thank you. Councillor Henry Batchelor, as vice-chair, will withdraw from this agenda item and leave the room. I'd ask councillor Peter Fane to... Yes, Peter, you can put there. If there's anybody... Sorry, everybody, I was just double-checking that Councillor Peter Fane also could access the chats of any of the members virtually who are taking part. So Aaron's going to help you with that. Thank you. So we are on page one of the agenda pack. This is for Water Beach and U-turn, application number 21 slash 02400 slash reserved matters. This is a reserved matters application for 89 dwellings for appearance, means of access, landscaping, layout and scale, pursuant to condition three of the Outline Planning Commission, S slash 0559 slash 17 slash Outline Commission. The applicant is stone bond. The recommendation from officers is approval subject to the conditions. And the key material considerations for us today are the principle of development and design code compliance. It's not a departure. And I'll just confirm. It's not a departure. This has been brought to the committee to allow consideration of parish council objection and because this is the first reserved matters application for housing at the new town and we really want to ensure that we understand the standards that are being held as we move through the build out of this strategic new town. And the presenting officer is Mike. Hello chair, I'm remote. You're remote. I'm actually in the office but I'm remote. Do you have a video, Mike? Hello chair. Hello, good morning. Nice to see you. And do you want us to take through any updates into a summary of the application as well? Thank you very much. Thank you chair. I think Mr Carter was going to update members from a late rep from the parish council. So we'll do that when we get to the parish council points. Or do you want to speak to it? I thought that was going to be the first thing that was going to be read out. But you can respond in the update. Then I'll update members. Okay, thank you chair. So this is representation from Water Beach parish council received on the 26th of July which states the following. On this occasion, Water Beach parish council is unable to arrange representation in person so please can you arrange for the statement below to read out to the committee. Water Beach parish council have highlighted concerns in their objection. The new town is a finished development and yet this application is very urban and has some serious drawbacks. A, the reduction in footpath widths is not appropriate, especially given the emphasis being put on active travel. B, the use of wood in the pavements should not be permitted as it will need long term maintenance which will increase the cost for residents. C, trying to reduce cars in the development is not appropriate for these first developments where there is no public transport infrastructure bus provision only starts at the 150th occupied house and as yet there is no indication of the level of service. D, the proposed layout is likely to lead to car parking issues such as pavement parking as it is not clear adequate off road parking provision can be supported in this design. E, the amenity space to the south must be provided before occupation as there is minimal private amenity space. The space will be safer for children's play as they will look it. Moreover, the parish council feels that Anglian waters concerns regarding increased risk of flooding downstream have not been clearly addressed. Many thanks. Thank you. Thank you chair. I would like just to start by responding to the parish council's comments and then I will do some wider updates and then I will do my presentation if that's okay. In response to the parish council's most recent comments they are broadly similar to the comments they made in their initial response to the plan application so mostly plugged in my report however I will just go into respond to them part by part. So A, footpath width this was responding from the parish council to an initial comment from the county highways officer and that's plugged in the report. The footpath widths are two metres wide acceptable to the county highways department and are in accordance with the design code and are suitable for adoption subject to a section 38 adoption process. Point B would in the path again this is responding to an initial comment made by the county highways officer again is plugged in the report for those areas in proposed adopted areas will be covered by the county council and the statement for specification for those areas not within proposed adopted areas a detailed proposed materials schedule will be subject to planning with materials proposed to be in accordance with the design code. Point C parking standards they are also plugged in the report the standards are in accordance with local plan and design code. The aim of the new town is to get people to change their habits about driving there are opportunities provided so that you do not have to use the car to access facilities. There are footpath links to local employment areas not currently safely accessible by bike as well as to Cambridge and to the railway station these will be in place before the first occupation. The buslin will be by 150 dwellings and there will be a travel hub adjacent to the site which is subject to a separate discharge of planning application and that will be required to be placed by first occupation this will include a location for electric bikes scooters and carcups this will be linked to improvements to the existing railway station by first occupation such as improved cycle parking also get to separate planning of discharge of commission applications. We travel plan for key phase one of the site and transport review strategic review group which will monitor usage point D about street layout again the parking is in accordance with the local plan and design code the new design within the site which I will come on to later through my PowerPoint presentation tracking plans show how the street works for motor vehicles the tertiary street within the street scheme is 5 metres wide and the cars are about 4.8 metres wide and the van is 2.2 metres wide and the refuserators are 2.5 metres wide so vehicles can pass on these tertiary streets and if you park on the northern side of the street on the foot parking you will be parking in front of someone else's garage so it's been carefully designed so cars parking will be the location point E, amenity space again see the report but the upper space to the south of the site will be required by first occupation place space in the year followed by first occupation location of the amenity space is in accordance with the code and the building is over the open space finally point F under the water no objections the lead local flood authority comment on surface water drainage and they have no objection the key phase 1 surface water drainage strategy is already approved and the key phase 1 drainage infrastructure is already approved and this application connects to one of those already approved infrastructure and the scheme I just like to do to give you two more updates so in my report I had said that the lead local flood authority didn't formally accept the scheme they wrote in with the formal removing their objections to the panic which was a couple of hours too late for the formal report last week so that came in early last week and one final update the national planning policy framework was updated last week and I think well I would view that this application is ahead of the curve in terms of its response to the government's agenda on improving quality design there is one particular and more specific point that the national planning policy framework updated last week and that was about street trees in every street and you will see when I come to the public presentation that this scheme has trees around the site and also trees within the site so it addresses that specific point that the MPPF commented on I just want to make a point about members of the public representations I said a response in my report a response from one local household was actually two people two people responding but in the same household in my report I said one local household was actually two responses one objection and one neutral so if I go to my power point is that okay yes thank you very much thank you chair right so if I go back to share right members yep we can see that thank you very much so the application is parcel one in the midtown stone bond is there so it's a reserve matters application for 89 dwellings for appearance means of access landscape and layout and scale pursuant to condition 3 this is an error photograph and if you look at google currently there are some changes to the error photograph because there's a lot of work going on round here where my pointer is but this is the weather redline that's the site of the current application as you can see quite some distance away from the village that the applicant's key phase one the first 1600 houses is in this general area here so in that general direction but this is the site adjacent to existing area of woodland and that is it currently so you can see a lot of earth moving going on and that's the woodland that you can see there so that's the site I'm just reminding members of the this is the SPD plan that shows them the wider motivation e-town again just for highlighting purposes that's the location of the site apologies to turn things on its head but this plan only kind of fits in in the other direction so if I go this plan is north to south this plan is north is on the north is on your left so this plan is a regulatory plan this is the plan that's attached to the design code and the regulatory plan drives the design of the development spatial design of the development and if you can see my pointer that's the site to the left of the woodland and this is a whole of key phase one so members will remember that they approve the design code for key phase one back in June of last year and you don't have to crock your head for the next plan because that's the extract from the regulatory plan describing parcel p1 so parcel p1 has some spatial elements to it a particular importance is the community link through the middle which is a north south link with a lap local area for play in the middle local area for play is not an equipped area for play it's just a place to sit there is one way into the site by vehicles which is the blue arrow here so that would enter what's called the tertiary street which is the red and white dotted line that red and white dotted line doesn't the blue point has to be fixed but the red line means it could be anywhere within the parcel and then there's a point at the western edge where cyclists and non-marcherised users can get out from to the wider cycle or the non-marcherised using network the blue dotted line to the east of the parcel is what's called the secondary street and then the red or the red burgundy dotted line to the north is the primary street vehicles access P1 by coming along the primary street and the secondary street and then into the site through tertiary street there's no car parking access to any of the dwellings on the north or the east or the south or the west all car parking is through the centre of the parcel there are the numbers one, two and three show different types of buildings how they relate to each other one is a terrorist is a terrorist a full-water beach woods to the south you see down here just at the bottom neat that's a neighbourhood-equipped area play and over to the left there's a sick a space for emergency plays there's play areas in the general area and also just to the south west of the primary school and then a public space here as well so if I move on to the next slide this is how parcel Merthaw'i gweld y ff Jessie arlaeth meddelad producing jion dweud i four Ryu ond ond bydwch yn oed harmonio, sj variedwyr wedi'i wneud r Ethan Ac mae gymryd i'r un sig ym bizad ac mae Additha John Wenys Cymru yn y cael y Thanks mae'r bifnwys yma o'r iawn gyda'r cyffredin, ac mae'n gweithio byddol cychwynnol, sydd â'r cyffredin yn gallu gweld cyfrannu. Mae'r bifnwys yma eich gweld cyffredin i'r ffordd ymlaen i'r llwyth ar gyfer y Nôl. Felly rydym yn gweld â'r bifnwys yma, yn y ffordd hyn, mae'n bwysig i'r ffordd hynny. Mae'r bwysig iawn yn y parwyr, ac mae'r pious iawn i ddechrau'r pion o'r ystyried. Mae'r pion o'r pion o'r pion o'r pion o'r ystyried i ddechrau'r pion o'r ystyried, ac mae'r sefyllfa cyllid, sy'n lle fawr, yn ymddangos y gallai pryd yn ddechrau. Mae'r pion o'r pion o'r pernod o'r ddechrau'i gael'i bwysig. A dwi'n gwybod ychydig o'r pleidol ysgol iawn, ond mae'r pion o'r pleidol ysgol iawn. this is a view from the north looking down the community link so it's a 13m wide community space with a cycle of none much which I use is and a lap in the middle of it. This is the muse within the parcel and you can see where, I'll show you a plan later on the platform where the cars are in the park.Mynd ymrwcle ac mae'r ysgrifennwch ond ein bod yn hawdd fel bod ysgrifennwch yma yng Nghyrch, ac mae'r ddag unrhyw gweithio, yn ôl ar y rhan o'r pimentau, ydy'r ddag unrhyw arweithio, ond y gallwn gwirionedd y ddechrau yn ei bod yn dweud o'r gweithio. O'r ddag unrhyw ar yr unrhyw, o'n rhan o'r ddag unrhyw o'r ddag unrhyw o'r drathwch, mae'n ddweud i chi'r ymdiseg. Felly mae'r ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud. Mae'r ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud. Mae'n gwella'i drwb yma ar y ddweud i ddweud. Mae'n ddweud i ddweud o'r ll bankruptcy o phyrraedd bach o'r Ddech, mae yna yn ameth, dyna ychydigrannu gyda chi yn trio. Mae'r gwella ar y ddweud o'r drwych. ac yn ein perffodus'r gwaith. Rydym nhw'n eisiau, chi'n fawr ar y dyfodol Llywodraeth, ac mae hynny y gwaith am y dyfodol i'w mir. Mae'n wfawr ar fy maes nhw, ac mae'n werydd i'n gweithio, y gwneud diwn yn y diwethaf. Mae'r gweld y gallwn y ddechrau arall a rywbeth yn ôl yn meddwl i gyflorol. Mae'n d редdlo'r gwleddd y ddiddor wedi'u gwneud. Mae'n ddiddor ar yw'r gwledd. Mae'n gondol arall o'r gwybodiaeth. Mae'r gyflorol ar y ddiddor. Mae'n gwybodiaeth yn y ddiddor, ac ysgolwyd trwy'r Lais ac trwy'r ffasiliau. Rhyw gweithioích gyda'r cyforaeth diagonal wedi gwybod â'r South East a North West, ac rwy'n gwybod â'r ysgolwyd trwy'r rhannu ac rwy'n gwybod â'r parkau research. Maen nhw'n ddoch chi'n gwybod â'r cyforaeth, dwi'n gwybod â'r eitem, rydw i'n gwybod â'r parkau research i gyd yn Llandwys i'r Rhain. Rwy'n gwybod â'r cyforaeth. sy'n siŵr eich byddwch yn ymgyrchio yma yn gwahanol am y byddwch. The development is vital to all that. There are also other cycle paths that will be provided by the Occupation of the First and Welling, which again will all connect to this development. This green link goes north as well, but there's nothing yet up here. Yn y ddigon cyfaint, yn y pethau, yn cyfaint y Fennodd Forth, ond mae'r ddweud yn llwyth gweithio'r llwyth, mae'r llwyth gweithio yn y ddechrau, mae'r llwyddoedd yn gweithio yr llwyth gweithio yn llwyth gweithio'r llwyth. A'r llwyth gweithio'r llwyth gweithio'r llwyth gweithio yn llwyth gweithio'r llwyth gweithio y cyfaint a'r rhaed i rhai bwysig, yn ynglyn â'r jeiach o'u gwybod. Felly gan y'r cair oed yn dweud i'r honno i gyflym o'r llwysgrifet yn dwy enwedig yn dwy oes, a mae'n dwy oed. Felly am ydych chi'n gŵr i gynnig yn y pethau yw'r cerdd gyrsod, at gyflym o'r llwysgrifet a'r llwysgrifet yn y cyfrifoedd gyda'r ysgrifetau yn y brogiasig. Rydw i'n ddweud, os ydych chi'n ddweud, oherwydd'n hanes chi'n ddweud yn y ddweud, nid yw'n ddweud? Rydw i'n ddweud yma? Dwi'n ddweud. Rydw i'n ddweud y mae'r ffordd ar y bwysig i gweithiol gwybodol ar y twddoedd yma. I'n ddweud yma. See that one there. That's outside of the red lines, that's already been approved as this particular development connects to the secondary streets, cyclists and pedestrians have priority. Now that's a seed change in how people work, how cyclist, pedestrians and card drivers interact so that's developed partially as the first one. We'll see how But this is James' personality where this is the aim for most of the. The primary school has been there also in a way that the cycle. Cal-drivers will not find it easy to get to the school. People will be able to walk and cycle all around here and that's their main place where the school top of his for people who are not driving. So this building, this developer has a relationship with that area more Mae'r chofddiad y gallu peth ar gyfer roedd o'r hyfforddiant neu arweinyddol. Mae wedi cyfrifio bashfyrtaeth gyda'r HAAH, wedi y gwir cyfrifio cyfrifio hefyd ynghylch gan gynnig. Mae'r chofddiad yn hyfforddiant cyfforddiant yn y Plynedd. Mae'r gysylltydd hon yn ymdechrau cyfrifio cyfrifio hefyd ynghyd, yn y cyfrifio cyfoedd yn rhan o gynhyrch yn unaill ei dynnu, yr oedd yn cyfrifio cyfrifio cyfrifio cyfrifio cyfrifio hefyd Fel Gion Unedig newid i ddechreuoddol i gweithreithio yw'r pryddwyr yng Nghymru i ddweud i'r ffordd o'r gwaith dechreu o'r mecanhau ar gyfer y stagau sydd ei wneud o'r llynu i rhaid o'r 30% i 40%. Y pâsul i'r parwysu yn 30% i 1,5% ac yn 4 rhai o gweithreithi ddechreuoddol i 10 oed yn gweithreithio gw holds with the government's definition, so the orange they're affordable rent dwellings the brown are rent to buy the dark green, which is that one right, is discount market sale and then the light blue dotted around they are shared ownership as you can see a variety ar sut unwaith o dант wneud kim o'i gyfkelio i amser blwyddyn, ifrwg, rydyn ni'n nid dubeithio yr cl excav burdenau, galwwch gyrdeithasol accommodate mewn gwir dim yn g 다시 lydwi'n dar edrys, drwy'r wneud o'r mynd, dych chi dy'n gweithio'r espwyl, ach auth y tro i whiskey neu mwych sydd o wneud dod eu mwycio ond at y gwirdd fynd kel vlogs subscribers, ac mae'r rhan o'r mod blaen aprèsnol. Mae oedd, yn gwneud o'r ffordd o gwyllwch, mae'r rhan o'r mod leain. Mae'r blaen, mae wedi cyfnod, mae'n gwych yn ysgrifennol i'r g consistent wydonhwn o'r newtownau mae'r gwasion. Mae'r gwasion, mae'n ceisio, mae'n gwasi'r gwasio leesi. Mae'n ceisio yng ngosled o'r newtownau fel cyflетсяu rhai y cwlm yn gwnod. a mae gennym gyd, a dwi'n meddwl yn ddod. Mae'n meddwl am ychydig, Mike, a phobl yn dweud arno'r ddweud, a'ch bod eich ddweud yn ei ddweud, ond dwi'n edrych ar y dyfodol sydd dr Richard Williams yn oedd y cwmflu sydd yn y ddechrau. Roedd ymlaen i gael i'r ddechrau. Roedd ydych chi. Roedd yn oed yn gweithio'r ddweud oherwydd a chyfodd ar y ddweud oherwydd oherwydd rydw i ddweud, oherwydd rydw i'r cychwyn i'r ddweud o'r gweithio. at yna cofuddio ar gyfer hynny'n sefydlu'r ddismigol, ond hefyd yn ardal ar y ddelch yn ddefnyddio. Rydyn ni'n rhaid i'r ddiddordeb gyda'r cyfael ac ble dyna'r roedd Robert Wilkinson yw Llywodraeth? Caf i'r ardal! Rydyn ni'n rhaid i'n ddiddordeb hwn, Maryam Paul Cuddler a Julia Foster? As I understand Mr Wilkinson you'll be the main speaker for the three minutes, but everybody will be available in order to answer any questions that members may have, is that right? Good and Mr Wilkinson so you know the procedure, you have three minutes to speak, Mr Carter will let you know when there's one minute remaining through the chat. Thank you very much. So if you would like to start now. Thank you chair. Good morning members, I'm Robert Wilkinson, Managing Director of Stonebond. I also have online with me colleagues who can respond to some more specific questions that you may have regarding our proposals. Stonebond is extremely proud to have been selected by Urban and Civic and we have worked closely with your officers and wider team to deliver this extremely exciting project and we recognize the opportunity and responsibility of meeting the very high aspirations for this new community. Stonebond was founded in 1975, we're a medium sized house builder based in Chelmsford in Essex. We have a solid track record of delivering new homes with over 45 years experience in the industry. As you're all aware, the outline application has already been approved and it is the first residential parcel of this which you're being asked to consider today. This parcel along with the first primary school and the comprehensive landscape recreation and play space at Northern Woods and around the new gateway to the new town will form the first new neighbourhood at Water Beach Barracks and Airfield. We realize we're setting the standard for what will come. We have employed internationally renowned architects and designers to shape the proposal responding to the approved design code. The code demands a high quality and sustainable development and we've sought to rise to this challenge. The intention is not just to permit residents to adopt healthy and sustainable lifestyles but to actively facilitate and encourage it. The scheme embodies many features that support this. Firstly, the scheme is all electric. The future government targets have no gas boilers by 2025. Every home owner will have access to an electric vehicle charging point. Estle's heat pumps are designed in from the outset. We have also designed the fabric of the buildings with thermal and solar efficiency in mind. The car is not excluded, but the scheme is designed to put cars out of sight and mind. Parking and garages are concentrated within the buildings and undercroft to enhance the street scene and the quality of the landscape. We encourage cycling and walking to become the obvious choice as residents step out of their front doors. Every home will have a convenient cycle store. We have thought carefully about rainwater and stormwater management, including rain gardens, permeant paving to hold back and discharge the primary system. There's high ambition for biodiversity on the site, considerable effort is being focused on the wider landscape and habitat creation carefully selecting the planting species. There's a variety of different homes to meet different needs, age groups and incomes and we're delivering homes that are affordable to live in as well as affordable to buy. All of our homes will be of the highest quality and entirely tenure blind. I hope very much that you can give support to our proposals enabling us to begin construction on a very special first residential phase at Water Beach, setting the benchmark for future phases and delivering the scheme that we can all be proud of. Thank you. Thank you very much and thank you for speaking to the time so ably. Naturally we are about to determine this and we'll have some very important questions come but it is good to hear that we're talking about the high aspirations, high standards and setting benchmarks so we will need to look at that now as we determine this application. Members, do we have any questions? Yes, just a point of information Chairman. On page 7, point 41 under the representations, 89 dwellings, is that the maximum number of dwellings? A minimum number is given of 70, is 89 the maximum? Thank you. Yes, it's a question to the case officer I think more but yes. Mike, are you there, do you want to answer that question? Thank you Chair. There isn't a maximum for each parcel. The design code is quite clear and it's in the report that there is a minimum for each parcel and there's actually flexibility within each the size of each parcel because there's a maximum number for the whole of the key phase of 1,600 dwellings. For each of the parcels, there's a minimum number of each of the parcels but there isn't a maximum number. Thank you. That's covered in my report, somewhere else in the... If I point to the paragraph 66 of my report. Thank you, yes. Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. Thank you Chair. Just two things for me. The parish council was concerned about the use of wood in pavements. Are you actually proposing to use wood in pavements? Second thing, if I may, the design of that parcel. You seem to have what you, I guess you architects call a feature building or a statement building on the corner. It's not something that I guess is a preference based on some of the discussions I've had with some of our people from our villages. Why are you using a feature building rather than, I know, something else? The design overall is great. I'm not saying it's not. I'm just concerned that we seem to be going through this statement buildings in corners and it's not necessarily what a rural area like ours wants. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Who would like to answer that question? There's two questions there. I'll have to pick up on that. Regarding the wood in pavements, I picked up on this briefly earlier in that the materials will be conditioned, but the reference here is in relation to separating a pavement from a soft landscape area, so a fairly normal traditional boundary between two different types of materials. So it will be a condition, but that's just to explain the context of the, try and explain the context of the comment from the parish council. In terms of the statement buildings, I think when we get to this sort of discussion, this can be quite subjective. However, in our view and in the view of our architects and in discussions with the design review panel, the feature buildings on the corners of the site do mark what we think is appropriate and exciting entrance to the new town, and we believe this is particularly important for our section of the scheme as being the first thing that is seen as it comes off the A10 there. Hopefully that answers the question. Can I just ask, Mike, whether or not the design code that was adopted included reference to a statement building, just to understand that? Thank you, Chair. Yes, the design code is very clear that that area, that particular location on the entrance to the site, required a statement building. So I think Dr Tumi Ogins, we need to take that conversation inside, sort of planning in general about how we go going forwards, but we've already adopted that as part of the design code. Councillor Eileen Wilson. Thank you, Chair. First of all, I've got a point of clarification if I can direct you to paragraph 115 on page 16 and then to paragraph 15 on page 27. I don't know if these are two completely separate measurements, but one says no more than 110 litres per person per year, and the other one says 110 litres per person per day. I'm sure that's a typo. Mike, if you want to look at that. That'll be a very deep buff, I'm sure. I'm so sorry, Councillor Wilson. Yes, it's the... I cannot remember what... It can't be 110 litres per person per year. I thought we were told to drink 2 litres of water a day, so that's how it struck me. That is definitely a typo. I don't know if one of the developer team can remind me. Which of the paragraph was it in, Councillor Wilson? 115 on... 115 on page 16. Yes, I've got that one. And paragraph 15 on page 27. Yes. Sorry, should I... It is 110 litres per day. Yes, that's right. Thank you. That was just my point of clarification. I've also got a question. Looking at the muse area, it suggests that this would be a place where people would also be walking and socialising, and it seems that is where all the cars will be concentrated. I wondered how, if any, evaluation has been done of the numbers of car movements that are likely to be happening when people are walking around cycling and just generally socialising in that area. It seems like it's quite a difficult mixture of pedestrians and cars being concentrated in one area. If I'll just jump in. Yes, you want to introduce yourself to someone. In terms of... Sorry, you just want to introduce yourself before each date. I'm just more than planning manager here at Stonewall Copties. Thank you. In terms of the relationship between the vehicle and pedestrians, it's been designed in a way that they can interact safely with each other. There's the landscape that we use, and that's been designed to be acceptable for equestrian, side-pleasts and pedestrians, also given that the primary route for pedestrians. It's been designed in a way that they can work in conjunction with each other, rather than being an issue in terms of the conflict. Would you like to come back? I would just like to have some idea of the volume of vehicles that are expected to be accessing the garages and the parking spaces. I'm afraid I don't have that dated hand, but I wonder, Julia, is that something that you can pick up on? Good morning, Julia Foster from David Locke, the planning consultants supporting the applicants. Obviously, we've concentrated all of the parking in the core of the block, so in principle, you would anticipate one car per dwelling or thereabouts. We've got parking provision at about 1.6 per dwelling, I think. So it will be a mixture of parking arrangements using street and garage and carport arrangements within that central block, but I think the more important point is that in doing that, in providing that central street, which is where most of the car parking is accommodated, we're making the environment around the parcel and on the edge of the parcel, the outward-facing boundaries of the parcel, car-free, essentially. So people are able to walk, cycle, and move around the edge of the parcel without any conflict with vehicles. The north-south community link through the middle of the parcel is car-free, other than the crossing point right in the centre where the Muse Street crosses over the link. Again, that's been very carefully designed to give priority to the north-south pedestrian cycle, a question movement rather than the east-west car movement, and obviously only half of the parcel lies off to the west of that crossing point. So you would anticipate half of the parking as accommodated before you get to that crossing point. So it's a pretty low-key internal street exclusively designed for the use of the residents within that parcel. There's no through movement for vehicles. You can't come out of the other end once you're in that space. So it should be low-speed, and it should be the residents themselves of that parcel that are using that space, which will minimise the conflict with other modes and other movements around the parcel. Thank you. Thank you. I think that was very, very useful help to clarify. I've got Councillor Jeff Harvey. Yes, thank you, Chair. Well, I really want to applaud the level of energy efficiency and ambition for that here, which I think is excellent. Also the decision to make this a fully electric development, I think that's also excellent. And if Chair would allow opportunistically, I just wondered, that did sort of trigger in my mind what about the construction phase emissions and what your plans perhaps not for this development are going forward on electric construction vehicles in the future? Not material to the heating, but if you'd like to respond to that quickly, then we can have a quick response to that challenge. Yes, so this is clearly something that's on our agenda at the moment, and perhaps Councillor Harvey, I can have a separate discussion about this particular point with you offline, but it is something that we are considering. It's something that is going to become very quickly a part of all construction sites in the very near future. I'm afraid we're probably a fast follower in terms of ranking of where we are on that particular aspect, but I'd be happy to talk to you more about that outside of the committee. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. My question sort of follows on from Jeff Harvey's, the first Jeff Harvey's. The reference to sustainability paragraph 1.3 onwards in our packs. I'm very interested to see the reliance on electricity that Councillor Harvey referred to. However, there's a reference also to commit to looking to exceed 10% renewable energy. Obviously, this site will have much higher electricity demand than might otherwise be the case, given this level of energy efficiency. I just wonder what proportion of the total electricity used is likely to be generated on site, whether by server or other means, or whether this will be entirely reliant on the grid. Thank you. I'm afraid we don't know the exact figures how the proportion is going to be generated on site and it's going to be a very difficult figure to predict the price of actually the occupation of the properties. So I'm unable to clearly answer your question. I don't know whether any colleagues can add any further flavour around that particular point. Please nod or not, if the case may be. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Paul Cuddle from Urban and Civic. We're the master developers for the site. So we basically study and work out the grid load for the 1600 houses that we've got for the key phase one drawing from the grid. We're always exploring where that source is, especially going forward when we build out beyond the 1600 in order to get sustainable sourcing for the overall development. Housing developers have to demonstrate that Stonebond have in delivering the power loads feeding off our grid, our supply for their parcel, for those who don't know Urban and Civic deliver service parcels. So it's almost like a plug-and-play for house builders. If they exceed that, then they need to provide a sort of compensatory measure of power generation, but Stonebond have not exceeded that for our calculations to their parcel. But it is something that we are obviously continuously looking at for sustainable sources for the supply to the site as a whole, as well as will be ongoing surveillance and ongoing management criteria going forward for looking for sustainable measures as our future key phases beyond the 1600 homes evolves. Thank you very much. Councilor Dr Twins. Thank you chair. I've got two points. The first is a broader point. I'd be interested in how the applicants would respond to the concern the parish council has raised about the lack of public transport and the fact that, given having seen the map, that this development is going to be actually quite isolated when it's first built in the middle of the fields. The first residents of this area are going to have no choice, frankly, other than to have a car if they want to access a school or frankly go anywhere because they are in a very isolated north western part of the site. And as we've heard, there will be no public transport. So I would be interested in what the applicant's responses to the parish council's concern that there is going to be significant on the street part can given, as I said, I think practically the first residents will have no choice other than to be car based. I applaud the general aim of the scheme and I understand the problem that you've got in terms of building out a new scheme from nothing. But we are starting with quite a dense sort of area here which has to say is very isolated. So I think there is a gap between the vision, which I think we all applaud, and the practical reality that the first residents are likely to find themselves in. My second point is a smaller one but it could be a very important practical point to the first residents, indeed all residents. Paragraph 122 of our report said that boundary fences will be designed to allow small mammals such as hedgehogs and one would imagine other small mammals as well, that sounds less cuddly than hedgehogs, to move between gardens. Now again, I applaud the intention there but how will that actually work in practice to have a boundary fence which presumably can have a significant gap in it if hedgehog is going to move between gardens, which incidentally the gardens are again much smaller than they would be if we had a less dense application. Thank you. Thank you councillor. So on the first question, actually do you mind if I answer question two first around the mammals? And then with the first question I'll make a little comment around the car parking and then pass the call for a little bit of the wider context on that one please. So the passage of small mammals, mainly hedgehogs I think we're discussing here between the gardens, is not as tricky as it may particularly sound. At the bottom of the fence there is usually a gravel board or it's either timber. It is simply just making sure that there is a small hole for the mammals to be able to pass through on there. So that's in a nutshell how that word would work. That answers that question. And then turning to the back. And we've just lost you, but so if we turn to whoever is going to answer the next part, Mr Cutler, thank you. Yes, that would be me chair. So it's a very good point about first residents on a first parcel on any site and we completely understand that. And our typical model is that we do a lot of infrastructure work in advance of any house builder that comes forward. And Mike has sort of touched on this. So this includes a considerable amount of footpaths and cycleways that will be delivered for the first occupant that will allow either connection to the research park or the science park further south near the A14 or to Water Beach Village itself. We're also looking at, I think Mike again mentioned it with a sustainable travel hub we're calling it, which will include a small little car park, almost like a park and ride type of system in a way. That will also pick up a bike hire system as well as cyclists are using it for their own leisure as well. So there's a number of connection points and modes of sustainable travel that will be going forward. As you can imagine with a park and ride there will be a bus service. And in the meantime we're also looking at a shuttle bus service that will also connect all the way through to the Water Beach train station as an intermediary measure that will be using some of the existing infrastructure that we've inherited from the Barrick base. As you can imagine there's lots of roadways, runways and taxiways to those runways that we can actually take advantage of and connect outside of the permanent stuff that we're building. I hope that answers your question. Yes, Dr Isham. Thank you for the answer. Can I just clarify then that those things will be in place for the first applicants for the people who are in these 89 houses? The occupants. That is correct Council, that is correct. And just one more thing about the hedgehog fences as Robert picked up, they're bespoke pieces of fencing that are sort of off the shelf but they are literally small passageways and fencing and it's all part of our biodiversity migration that we want to encourage along the site. As you know all sites are aiming for 10%, sorry we're aiming for 12% biodiversity net gain and so we're pushing house builders to deliver what we envisage as very simple adaptations to typical fencing but also back boxes, bow boxes, et cetera, et cetera in order to sustain and actually stimulate the biodiversity on our sites. Thank you very much and in fact they are included in our existing biodiversity supplementary planning document encouraging everybody to use this so thank you for doing that in our new one that's just gone out for consultation will be going even further. So as I know it's fantastic in our villages it's actually the scouts and guides that are going around helping and encouraging all households to have these little holes in everybody's fences to enable that to go through and especially as we're intruding on an area which has been left natural for quite a long time that's important. Dr Martin Khan. Councillor William, so touched on something which I wanted to know. I found it difficult to devise from a plan and I didn't notice anything in the actual description what the provision is for private space and the gardens, what proportion which houses are going to have them. I'm interested to know how many of the dwellings are going to have private space. Clearly flat swung but the other ones and what sort of sizes are proposed. I'm sorry, I hope you can hear me now. Apologies for dropping off the call. Yes, hello Ms Wilkins. We can't hear you very well but try again. Apologies for dropping off the call. Hopefully you can just about hear me. Yes. I'm afraid, I couldn't answer all of that question. I heard about private amenity space and perhaps Julia I'll pass it to you in a moment but every dwelling including the apartments through the balconies will have private amenity space and that will be in accordance with the required policies and guidance but Julia I wonder whether you could perhaps elaborate on that. I can't, I wonder whether it might be helpful to actually share the landscape plan. Am I able to do that or Mike is that something that you... Yes of course Mike can share that I think. Or you can share it if you've got it straight there you've got permission to share. I have it in front of me but I don't seem to be able to share my screen so Mike I don't know whether you're able to pull up the landscape plan. Well there's one on page 23 of the design statement which is particularly good because it's got all the garden areas highlighted if that's possible. And I'll just take this opportunity to ask the members to make sure that we speak clearly into the microphone. It's been a bit hard not only for their issues but also for them to hear as clearly as I've heard. I mean well I can answer you Eileen once. I'd like to move to the debate unless your question is burning for the... I've got that you've asked another question. Don't ask it just yet, it's just whether or not we could move to the debate. I've just got two very quick questions. Can I just say chair while Mike's looking for that landscape drawing that in the design code we have specific requirements for private immunity space and it obviously varies for the size of dwelling and the number of predicted occupants for that house or Stonewall scheme complies with the design code on that front. Thank you. Dr Mark, you can see that now. Is that okay? That's answer your question. Thank you. That's a very helpful diagram. Thank you very much. And we just have two more questions from Councillor Eileen Wilson. Thank you chair. My first question is the road coming off from the A10 into this development. Will that also be the road that will be used by the construction vehicles for other parcels being built because it seems to me that that would cause a lot of heavy traffic going past this development. My second question is whether it's good to see that cycle provision is being made for all these dwellings. Will that provision include enough space for cargo bicycles because I know that people are using these more and more when they're ferrying their children around to avoid having to use their cars. Thank you. Yes. That's a big design issue, isn't it? Yeah. Good. Yeah. So if I can answer both those points and feel free anyone to jump into to add. But with regards to the haul road it's a very important point that the council raises. So what we do is we actually separate the haul road from that main primary street. There may be a short amount of sharing because what we do is we branch off as soon as we get into the site off the A10 and then we loop around. It's something that we're very keen to make sure that construction traffic is away from people who actually live there and making it their home because as you know the noise, dust, et cetera, et cetera is not something that residents would want to be sort of sharing. So we work very hard with the house builders and Stoneborn have clearly been part of the party for that. In short, to answer your question the haul road is separate from the primary road. And with regards to the sizes of the cycle carriageways and predominantly where we've got we basically created a strategic network of cycleways which are primary and secondary and some that are shared with people who are sort of footpath pedestrian users. And so predominantly on the more cycle forces in particular the primary they're three metres wide so you can indeed use a cargo bike on there and even the secondary ones will allow that. Thank you. Could I just carry on my question was about the cycle storage in those. Storage and the ability for these largest cargo bikes to get around. My apologies, yeah my apologies. So we are aligning with and maybe Robert or Sean can add about specifically about the stone bond sort of bike storage. My apologies for misreading misinterpreting the question. But the within a design code we very much designed the cycle allocation and spaces for such things very much aligned with the Cambridge and South Cams guidance. Thank you. I'd like to move to the debate if that's okay members. Thank you very much. Good so I think. I mean I think we were waiting for the landscape plan to be this way. Sorry. Did you miss that one? And Martin was very happy to see it. Would you like to see it again? No. Yes. Thank you. Could we just see it again please? Got to find it again sorry. Okay thank you very much for showing that again Mike. Good. So members we'll move to the debate. I think we've got time for a... Yes. Thank you very much for answering our questions and for the information that you provided that was helpful. Thank you very much to all of you. Again if you can turn your videos and microphones off. Thank you very much for going to the debate. Thank you. We don't have anybody from the Prash Counts because we had that read out at the beginning and we don't have a local ward member registered to speak. Thank you very much. So yes. Move to the debate members. Well I don't think we've had... That was quite a meaty clarification and session. Thank you very much. Dr Tumi Hawkins. Thank you. I must admit that the design that's been put before us today is one that has been very well thought out. And I note also that in the answering of the questions the concerns that the parish council raised have been addressed. Sorry that they're not here to hear it or for us to have asked them about it. But that certainly for me makes it something that I think I can stand behind. It's good to see such a design at the beginning of a big project like this and I would hope that other builders will follow suit. And just to say thank you for all those who have worked on this. I think the issue of the distance from the distance of this parcel from the rest of Water Beach the fact that it's going to be the first means that we have to make sure that the transport plan that's being proposed actually is put in place because that will be key to making this model shift work. So that is something we need to make sure that we focus on and get right right from the get go. Thank you chair. Thank you very much. Councillor Dr Richard Williams. Thank you chair. I'll just follow on from Councillor Hawking's point actually. I completely agree with that. I think we are going to have a modal shift. It needs to be there from day one. A modal shift for building an isolated parcel where people have got no option other than to use cars. It just won't work. So I completely agree. It is really important that that is there from day one and that people get into the habits that we're trying to encourage. On the application generally I will be honest that the design is not entirely to my taste but I won't push that point because that's a taste point. There are two points that still do concern me. I am concerned about the density. I obviously completely support our own existing and future biodiversity SPD and as I raised the thing about the board where the hedgehogs can move through. But I think we can't get away from the fact that there are 89 houses here. It's quite dense and by building 89 houses you are cutting down the green space. So we're only talking about mitigating biodiversity and environmental issues and we can only mitigate them because if there were fewer houses we wouldn't be taking away so much space where animals are free to roam as it were. So the density does bother me. It is very dense. It is very urban. I agree with the parish council on that. The gardens are very small. Having just looked at that map very small. So we are significantly cutting down the green space by building so many houses. So that concerns me. I'll be interested to hear what other members think. I'm still on the fence in some ways as to how I would vote. A very small point and I'm not sure this is really a reason to turn down the application but I do find the wood on the edge of the pavement a very odd thing. It will rot. It will eventually rot and it won't look very nice. So I do think that's an old design feature. Thank you. Thank you chair. I find I tune on the fence a bit with this and I think one of the other things to add is asking me to do something areas is working okay. It's kind of flashing up at me. Sorry, technology. I'll ask me to log off and log back on again. So I agree with the density and the gardens are going to be so tiny and small and there's so many of them but also the affordable housing worries me in the sense that it's great that we've got more than 30% obviously we should really be getting 40% but when it was shown about where the housing units are yes they are in different parts of the site but part of our policy is also dispersement through the site now some shared ownership properties I don't know if we are able to bring the slide back up some shared ownership properties are in the top of the places but really of that square housing is being shoved to two corners there's no other way to describe it now that might be something that we think is okay and comfortable with but I think we have to recognise that that's not what the policy says the policy says it can be in small clusters but it should be disperse through the site and it's not and then when you look at it again then with the gardens in those areas it's tiny so I agree with what members have said about the modal shift and being there from the start it just won't work if it's not so I think there are merits to this completely agree with Wooden I've probably got one of the most rural wards in the district we have no Wooden barriers on footpaths anywhere that I know of I think when we look at the materials and conditions I think that's a bit of a no go to be quite frank but I'll listen to other members but the affordable housing worries me and it worries me as a trend potentially for the rest of it if we want inclusion and we want this for everybody then it needs to work for everyone regardless of their financial abilities and thank you very much and Mike I don't know if you have the slide again of the affordable housing and while you're pulling that up I think Chris Carter wanted to come back on the issue of materials it was actually on the issue of density and garden sizes by major just to try and assist the committee so I think it's important to look at this partly in the context of what will be a new town and a key part of the master plan for that new town is the strategic infrastructure including strategic open space strategic green space the blue spaces, the lakes etc so whilst the gardens for some of these dwellings may themselves be quite small ultimately the whole town will be served by what is quite a comprehensive network of open spaces around the development just on the affordable housing it's probably just worth as well in the context thinking of the mix so of the 28 units 18 of those will be apartments and given the design and layout of the parcel those apartments tend to be on future corners so that may be why some of that affordable housing is located in those particular parts of the site noting there are ten houses as well just to set that in a bit of context this is the first of many parcels that will come forward on the new town and lead to be seen in the context of the wider master plan as a whole in my opinion thank you Mike did you have that slide is it chair you can see it also to confirm that the applicant worked carefully with our housing our housing officers and our housing officers are very happy with with this proposal so your housing officers don't think that these have been shoved to the outward edges and basically not sorry you did have it I didn't see that that's my interpretation to be clear and I am I think allowed to have that view of it chair so you can see there that the shared ownership has been dispersed and you've got the flats I do understand you can't separate the flats but more could be done to bring that in and I understand what Mr Carter is saying about the open space and I think from the master plan there will be but this will be the first residence there and it will take time to bring that other open space and for the whole town to develop so it seems peculiar to be going so dense so quickly and if you know the recent years have shown us anything it's the need for actually being able to be out and about and having that space even from the what public space open space really is there in that design thank you very much Mike for showing that and Councillor Peter Fane thank you chair three brief comments on this which may affect our decision the first one is sustainability now of course this is an interpretation of the existing design code referred earlier to paragraph 113 we're still working to the old what I used to call the merton rules 10% renewable energy generation on site and I think it's important to bear in mind that the increased reliance on electricity in a site increases rather than reduces the need for renewable energy generation within the overall site this is obviously just a small part of the site as we explained to us however I think that is compliant the second one is the the explanation that was given to us by the case officer earlier in relation to the NPPF change last week now are these actually street trees I don't know to what extent do the statement or corner buildings actually meet the criteria of the NPPF bearing in mind this is not any longer to be seen as just a matter of subjectivity that is part of the purpose this is an objective test to be met in the future as I understand it however it's only just been introduced and I think we take it from our case officer that this does meet the requirements so I accept that I'm obviously disappointed that it's only 30% affordable housing but again that is a part of the wider negotiations for the site as a whole I think it's important to bear in mind that our own district council definition of affordable rent for RSLs changed again last week and I assume that the new definition will be taken into account for those particular houses and I should say that having made those points I accept that we are setting a very high standard but we know it is right that we set a very high standard because this is the first of the detailed considerations that will come forward for a very important site and I think that by and large I would say that I accept that the development is to a very high standard and I would certainly be inclined to accept the officer's overall recommendation on it Thank you very much, does anybody want to clarify that issue around the affordable rent not the position to do that? Catsa Martyn Cym I wanted to come back to a couple of issues that I am concerned about I am concerned about the size of the gardens but I am more concerned about the insulation basically lying between east-west dwellings which will shade them so they may be less attractive I see this as a problem I mean you've got high density you're trying to bring lots of things together and you don't always can't so after too many things you can't manage to get everything absolutely perfect but I think this is something we do need to keep an eye on likewise this possibility of conflict between cars and users of the central muse area I think this is a potential zone of conflict for instance the award-winning marmalade lane development has a muse area but it is completely car-free and therefore you can see this how this makes use by pedestrians much higher my concern generally it's a very high standard development it's very imaginative good development and a good idea but I am concerned that we keep monitoring how this actually works out in practice and I would want some provision for these issues to be monitored as people develop because it's the precisely because this is the first development we took the decision in going for high density development with plenty of green space lots of public space that's a legitimate way of going forward and that obviously is why we've got small private spaces but I think it will be very useful to see how that works out in practice how people react to that when they're living in it particularly this will be obviously for families with children and that's why where the conflict differences in the news area and pedestrian access and with cars could potentially be an issue and then learn from that so that as the further developments come forward we can take account of those so I would like, I don't know if it's possible to require a survey after a period of time to see how it develops or not but I would like some information on that but I would like to see that whether it's voluntarily or by condition Perhaps we could just enter again a little bit more whether the travel plan does include monitoring that would then inform what's happening there only further developments Chair, through you, thank you. Yes, the travel plan certainly does require monitoring review but beyond that I think there's wider points you're obviously raising there council can the council has a positive relationship with Urban and Civic who are the master developers of this site and I've no doubt having heard the comments of the committee today that we can take that away and have a discussion with them about a mechanism or means for them to agree to update us on the success of these parcels as they come forward so that we can constantly review and improve as further parcels come forward in the future. In my opinion it wouldn't be reasonable to make that a condition of this reserve matters application today but it's certainly something that we can take away and discuss with Urban and Civic and what I would like to suggest on the back of that is that it's just it's also an update towards this committee rather than just to officers so that would help us to understand as applications go forward as this develops out we tend to think things obviously we look at things that you think might be problems and we can only find out really whether there really are problems if we do some survey work afterwards it may be that it's a worry that we shouldn't be worried Yes Mike. Sorry chair. The section 106 agreement attached to the Outline Plan Commission has two groups. There's a project delivery group and also a transport group which will be part of the role of those groups is to see how things are progressing and make changes to to inform future development as it goes forward. Thank you very much. They're part of the section 106 agreement obviously as development progresses they'll get progressively busier groups as more things will be there to be discussed. Thank you very much. So as I understand from this so the travel plan has the monitoring that you've got this transport group as part of section 106 so that will be looking at it but what we've also specifically requested is in the relationship between the planning officers and Urban and Civic as part of the master plan that you'll review this in the light of the comments that have been made here and that they will feed back to committee. Absolutely. Thank you very much. I have councillor Dr Tim Hawkins. No? I don't have councillor. I have councillor Jeff Harvey, councillor Island Williams and councillor Heather Williams and I would yes and then if not hearing anything which is going so much I'm not really hearing what we're going towards and councillor Claire Daunton then I would have to call a break I think so I'm going to call a break now we take a 15 minute break come back we have those people who are registered to speak and then I hope we could move towards a vote members and meanwhile to the officers would also be preparing their summary of what many of the reasons may be so it is now 11.32 we take a 15 minute break and we're back here just after 11.45 so 11. The system has been correct. He was the day when I don't have my watch on that problem. So it's 11.40 so if we're back here 5 to 12 please everybody thank you. Hello everybody welcome back to the South Cambridge District Council planning committee and we're taking up again with the Water Beach new town application and the debate and we have four speakers registered to speak at the moment and we indicated that hopefully after that we would move to a vote we'll see what the panel on how the debate goes so cancer Jeff Harvey first Thank you Jeff I was just a bit surprised that the focus on the wood in the pavements I suppose from my point of view I think natural materials are known to improve the sense of well-being especially mental health benefits there and I'd rather prefer to leave that to the architecture I know for example it depends on type of wood I think oak when buried in the ground so lifetime in 25 years I'm sure it could be a lot higher than that if it were thought about carefully so that's one point and also on Councillor Heather Williams concerns about the placement of the board with housing I think you've got to remember that this is like just one patch in a sort of patchwork cooked so I think if we were talking about putting all affordable housing in one corner of the airfield then that would be a different matter I wouldn't have any concerns about this given it's going to be embedded eventually in lots of other similar patches Thank you Thank you chair I just want to say that I too was quite concerned about the concentration of homes but then I thought this is a new town it's not a new village and towns do tend to be more densely packed together I grew up in the middle of London in a small flat and my outdoor space were the local parks which I really enjoyed and I missed so I still have concerns about the the muse and the potential mix of pedestrians and cars but as we discussed if we can keep some sort of supervision of that to see how that works and how that would work for future developments but all in all I can't see anything that would cause me to not accept the recommendation of the officers and having had the opportunity to go around the whole site of Water Beach and seeing all the greenery the open space that the people living there will have I think even if the gardens are small and the houses are concentrated that there is going to be so much open space that there will be a good quantity of life for people living in the whole development Thank you and councillor Dr Kaig Lonton I'm really following councillor Wilson's remarks and I'm concerned really about the urban nature of the design and particularly what's referred to as the key corner buildings I think that councillor Dr Tumi Hawking has picked that up right at the very beginning of the meeting and I'm really not sure about those and the size and the mass of them but then I'm reminded as councillor Wilson said that this is a town it's a new town so there is going to be the reflection of the urban nature of the development so I think that my concerns I think have been I have to take those into account in the general development of the whole town of the whole site councillor Williams Thank you I I'm still sort of not entirely sold by the it's a town so we must and that feels like it's becoming oh but it's a town it's almost like the fact that it's a town has become an excuse now I spent the first years of my life living in a town in Lechworth Lechworth has a base it has big gardens it's a garden city it is a town so saying we're going to do this because it's a town doesn't that's not an automatic foregone conclusion there are different ways of designing and building towns so I think we could afford to have and given it's the first area as well a lot of the things in this master plan are going to take decades to come online and meanwhile we're going to have residents in this isolated area and I think that needs to be taken in into consideration as well so I'm not saying 100% but I think we've got to stop using it as an excuse for things that we don't quite like we either like it for the town that we're looking to build or we don't but it's not just council it's okay the other thing I was going to say about I think council calm was saying about the survey and it was mentioned about with urban and civic I think it's important that that survey does happen however I don't think it should be something that is developer led I think it's something that for us to get a proper reflection it's something that we need to have as independent as possible therefore I would be hoping that the council will be engaging with residents there to see their thoughts rather than going through the developers and so that way we can have an element of independence and control over the questions that are asked rather than giving that away and for that reason also I don't think it's really reasonable as Mr Carter has said to put it in as a it wouldn't meet the reasonable tests so that would require the developer to do it anyway so that would be my two pennies worth on the survey Thank you and just to pick up on that council volumes Mike if you're there just in terms of section 106 the transport group and project delivery group do any of those have both council and resident involvement at all I'm just wondering Thank you chair I'll just open it up and close it down against something I was doing I'll just I'll just I'll just reading the definition of what's called the progress and delivery group and one of the search for PDG PDG Sight one of those what are the narrations that you get if you're visually I'm nearly there The PDG, the progress delivery group will be committed to facilitating the comprehensive delivery design of the wider site the role of the group is as follows and this is the district council on the council on the developer it's to have a role in assessing and anticipating cumulative impact effects of other developments being brought forward providing such information providing such information under assistance as the district council may reason with request to enable it to prepare update reports to its members as the progress of the delivery of the development of the wider site monitoring for any general update and there's another one the ongoing the approach to the ongoing design for the development across the wider site and the observance of the provisions of SPD there's several things here about delivery monitoring observing maintaining the integrity of the spatial design obviously there's another one in there is to provide a form for members to share information and collaborate so it's learning And so Mike, at the moment it's not explicitly mentioned residence of that but what I think is being raised is the concern that it's not just the council and the developer but also residents involved Chris Carter would like to comment Thank you chair, I don't know whether it's explicitly mentioned but as with other new settlements that we take north as an example as residents start to move into the site you'll be aware that the south council community's teams take a much more active role take part in community forum meetings residence meetings and that's a really good way of enabling that feedback loop to be completed so residents have a chance to speak directly both to community's officers but obviously their local ward councillors as well I've also had it confirmed in the break that they're more than happy to share any monitoring work that they do with this committee at any time so hopefully that provides some comfort for the members as well It also says as a facilitating consultation in community forum feedback role as well There we go, so maybe what we're saying very strongly is we would like to see specifically around these issues that have been raised in committee around that active travel part and the number of cars within the residential area just that mix how that's being managed and whether or not they really do have that active travel options from day one Thank you very much Mike for that I have no more speakers and I think there's what's been excellent members in this debate is really around the concerns of any of the residents in the parish council those have been significantly debated today as well too and had them addressed by the case officer but also in debate The recommendation that I'd like to move to is on page one which is approval subject to the conditions which are laid out from page from page 18 onwards thank you very much subject to the conditions later from page 18 onwards Chris do you have anything to say to sum up beforehand So members I haven't heard anything that says somebody's definitely considering refusal but on the fence so we'll take it to the vote so we need to consider the reasons then yes the reasons that we've I've heard so far Chris if you would Chris Carter if you would help me so one would be around in terms of the principle of development understanding in terms of the density issues and in design code I think you're talking about the urban nature and city issues in terms of the small garden area that's what I understood Chair I think like councillor Rachel Williams to advise if there's a specific policy hook you'd be using here whether he's looking at policy HQ one design principles and if so any specific aspect of that It's the density is the key point for me I'm afraid it's 30% over the minimum I accept there's no maximum but given that there's no maximum we have to somewhere it's nearly 30% over the density of the minimum density and I think it is the urban nature of the development of the density I'll add to that from the small gardens as a parent of small children I mean communal green spaces are great but they no substitute having a decent size garden that your children can play in so under HQ one design principles that would be those issues thank you members take it to the vote please if you would press the blue person on the screen thank you that's everybody thank you very much we have that displayed and so I'm pleased to say that application has been approved with seven votes in favour of two against no abstentions thank you very much members yes and if we'll bring back councillor Henry Bacheliff for the next agenda item thank you very much for acting as I say that's the thing it's all about pushing the bar today's meeting it's all about setting the standard for things good members we are now on page 33 of the agenda item pack it's agenda item six this is for land west of 80 west street toft application number 20 slash 03339 slash full application for the erection of a convenience food retail store with associated car parking the applicant is the abbey group limited and the cooperative group the application is being brought to committee because the parish council requested this and the officer recommendation is approval subject to the recommended conditions the presenting officer is Aaron Coe are you with us Aaron good afternoon members hello everyone hear me okay yes we can thank you very much Aaron can you give us any updates in the summary of the application yes can I just check everyone can see my screen okay yes we can thank you brilliant so just before getting into the detail of the application there's a few additional updates since the committee report was published a further six letters of support have been received from local residents and their comments are summarised as follows residents would definitely make good use of this store as well as the 2,000 plus students at Compton finished college school existing retail provision within Compton is inadequate the proposed store reduce the need for Compton residents to travel outside of the village to fulfil their shopping needs due to the growing size of the community within Compton they would benefit from another store secondly since the committee report was released an updated version of the MPPF has been published however the alterations within this document are not considered to impact the overall assessment of this application and thirdly the applicant has submitted a statement to members which will be presented by them today this document was circulated yesterday so I hope that all members received a copy of this by email right moving on to the proposal so the site is located on the land to the west of 80 Westerie Compton the land is situated within the village development framework Compton and lies between number 80 and an allocated housing site at Benwell Farm to the east the Cambridge Greenbelt lies to the north of the area of the site and the site is not located in the conservation area nor within close proximity to listed buildings the site is located in flood zone 1 and is therefore at a low risk site just to show a wider area of view of the site as you can see the site to the west of the site is Benwell Farm as you say it's under construction and that's for 90 dwellings they're under construction at the moment and there's a further 41 units and considered under an application at the moment so that's pending consideration as you can also see from this area of view the site is immediately adjacent to Compton Village College in sixth form which over recent years has expanded and now accommodates approximately 1900 students it's just a couple of site photos as you can see here you've got the Benwell Farm development to the west and then on the east you've got 80 Westerie so you can see the site is currently a vacant part of land within the development framework it's well enclosed to the north and east and west by planting in trees a hard and soft landscaping and a boundary treatment condition is recommended as part of the approval to ensure the proposal preserves the local landscape characteristics and do not have an adverse impact on the adjacent green belt the scheme has been reviewed by the council's landscape officer and is supported subject to these conditions so this slide shows the proposed block plan the store is proposed to be situated to the north of the site with car parking located in front of the store to the south the servicing and deliveries area is proposed to the west of the store and a vehicle tracking plan has been submitted to accompany the application which demonstrates the site layout is suitable for this arrangement proposed this slide shows the proposed elevations in terms of visual impact the proposed retail store will be set back from the public highway by 33.5 metres the building is proposed to be of a modest height at 3.2 metres to the eaves with the shallower pitch roof design reaching a maximum height of 7.2 metres to the ridge in terms of materials a buff brick with glazing and a sheeting roof is proposed and an external materials condition is recommended to be reviewed by officers to ensure the materials are appropriate this slide shows the proposed floor plan as you can see you've got the sales area the back of house area and the plant area as well and you've got just a CGI to show a visual so as set out in the committee report the consideration shown on this slide are the key material considerations that members should be considering in determining this application today terms of principle the scheme is considered to be compliant with the local plan policies E21 and E22 the scale that is appropriate to the function and size of the village terms of retail impact the development is not considered to result in a detrimental impact on retail uses with in proximity to the site that would warrant reviews of the application in relation to highway safety the scheme has been reviewed by the county highways engineers and considered acceptable subject conditions securing a servicing plan traffic management plan detailed levels and materials for the access arrangements so to conclude the presentation given the growing population of Compton Village with further approved residential developments taking place and the growth of Compton Village College in sixth form is considered the village of Compton is capable of sustaining an additional village convenience store subject to conditions and proposals are considered to be compliant with South Cambridgeshire local plan 2018 policies S3 E21 and E22 Thank you chair Thank you very much and as always what we'll do is bring any questions up if you stay with us before we come to the debate please Aaron thank you very much and we'll now go to speakers and we have Dr Richard Horne with us who is wishing to object to the application Hello Hello Hello can you hear me? We can hear you very well Are you able to put your video on? I'll try I'll actually leave the car right now Fa enw'i'n deall gw'r cyfelyniedd y cwrdd er gael... Dyswn i ddweud? Rwy'n chwyn dechrau, iddyn nhw. Rwy'n gallu chi. Rwy'n gallu'n defnyddiad. Felly mae'n gweithio'r boll. Rwy'n gallu chi. Cymru. Felly cyfosiant. Felly gweithio'r proses. Rydyn ni'n trwy y dynnwy, trio rydyn ni'n byw, y cysylltu Chris Carter, ond yn yw'r hyn sydd yntaf chi'n i amlwg. Cyd~)'r bwysig. efallai efallai y gallwch chi'n gyrraedd ein bod yn ymddangos ar gyfer gwybod yn yslo'n dd14. Fe wneud wedi cael ei fod yn gael fforfa eich weith鼎oad yn yslo'n gwybod yw eu dd14. Shell, fel ydych chi'n gwybod i'r dd14. Rwyof i'r enw, fel yr ysgol, centres ond yn dd14, roedd y pethau yn ffannog yn ysgol, a fod yn dd14 i'r dd14 i'r cyflynyddol. Efallai, ei cyfraithio hir yw i'n ddim yn wadol yma yng ngyfrituriadau. yn dogshwyl yn y cwmysgafeth, ac mae enw yn y cwmysgafeth gwmpas. A'n fwel i sgwyl. Reitam ni allan yn y cwmysgafeth wedi cael ei ddysgu. Roeddwn ni wrthog fel yma. Ac mae'n gwael i ddweud â'r roi thwyd. Wrth gwrs, mae'n gweithio hynny yna ni'n ymwneud i fel yma yw hynny, fel yw yw Schyming. Mae'r gyfnod dyn nhw. Mae'r ddechrau yma yw yma ar y prynnwys ymlaen. Y dweud eich hoffi ddechrau am dweud y bobl coleg i, y cynluniau yno i 19-cwm a ddodol feddwl y bwysig yn ddodol. Ychydig maes yn ddıodol i chi ddweud, a яwch yn i gael i'r gofyn. Mae dewch yn rhan o berthynas o'r hwnnw i'r bobl gyda'r holl, sy'n cyfrifio'r ffildwr yn iddynt ei wneud. Mae gweithio'r bobl yna, flynyddo'n lwyddo'n rhaid. am rhaid oherwydd mae'r gorfod lleolaeth. Wel, mae'r hollwn ni, lle anghig i am rhaid i thawr, rwy'i cael eu bod yma yn cael ei ddechrau. Mae'n amdannu bod yn cael dechrau sydd wedi'i brinellfa i'r croyfu iawn, i'r cyfl Hanffydd. Cyn annu'r rhaid i'r ceisio? Mae'n rhaid i'r ceisio i'r hollwn ni'n seimlo i wneud i chi'n bobl yn cael eu cael eu rhaid i'r hollwn ni. Reprefiwch ar seedsul yma, a'n safod yma er mwyn i'r hollwch That includes Compton Village at Parrish Council. They object and they elected representatives on behalf of the whole village. They object to this. You also have the schoolers. They object. That's on behalf of the school and the teachers and the parents of the 1900 pupils they represented. Rydyn ni ddweud'r copio? Rydyn ni'n gwaelio gweithio cymdeithasol i'r gweithio? Gweithio'n gweithio. Rydyn ni'n ddweud'?r gallu dweud fel hynny'n gweithio'r copio? Mae'n gweithio'n gweithio. Ru'n cael ei wneud. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'r cei. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'r cei. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'r cei a'r ceisio'r ceisio'r ceisio'. Beth yn llei i ysbêffyd? We can hear you, and if you could move your camera slightly, we can see you, I think. There we go. Is that better? That's fine. Is that better? Yes, that's fine. Thank you. You did another procedure. You've got three minutes to address the Committeon and we'll let you know after two minutes. Thank you. Good afternoon chair, members and officers. My name is Andy Brand and I am the planning director of the Abbey Group cynhyrch ar y gweithio sydd yw'r newydd cyfnodol, oedd y Llandd-Ajans-80 Westreit yn teithio. Rydyn ni'n rwyf yn rhaid i'r lle, ond mae'r cymwyntau yn ffynigol yn ymdweithio ar gyfer y lle o'r cyfnodol. Mae'r gweithio ar y gweithio ar gyfer y gweithio sydd yw'r newid cyfnodol, sydd wedi'u gweithio ar gyfer y gweithio cyfnodol, ac mae'r gweithio ar 15 newid ysgol ar gyfer y gweithio. The scheme is recommended for approved by the Planning officer who noted that the proposal is inappropriate location for the new-billy shop. The scheme is also supported by the Highest Department and other Statustry consultees. Last week we heard following the lifting of restrictions we undertook our research on community sentiment in Cumberland. When found out that 145 local people that we spoke with and 110 were supported by the proposal. It is represented 75% of respondents. Many experts in wheel and significant need for and improve food offering in the village, though half saying it is currently poor and more than 90% saying they would use a new co-op store. Less than 10% of respondents surrounding the site were opposed to the proposal. We do not therefore consider that the objections from Comet and parish council reflect the view of commercial residents who support the proposed new store. Respondants are also appreciating the fact that the co-op is a byddwch o'r lleoliadau a'r ddiogelio'r ffordd o'r llwyddiadau erbyn. Yn y pethau, oedd y Cymru yn cyfaint gan y Gruffydd yn 2018, a'r cyflym yw'r cyffredin ei ddweud a'r cyffredin yn ei ddweud i'r ddiogelio i'r model o'r ddiogelio'r ysgol i'r cyffredin yn ei ddweud. Mae'r ddych chi'n dweud y ffordd o'r cyffredin am ddiogelio i'r ddiogelio i ddweud o'r cyffredin yn ei ddweud i'r ddweud y cyffredin, Dwi'n drawlus, maen nhw'n mwynhau â'r pergatffau sydd yn ieddu ar y gyfnod, a'r ysgol iawn yn hyfrifolion gyda'r diolethaf yn y bryd, i ddim yn cyfrifiadol ychydig cynnigol. Felly, mae'r holl gwledeithio cwm하신ad benderfynol yn ymarfin wedi'i gweithio i'r hyn, neu mae'n cyfrifiadol i'r cyfrifiadol i'r cyfrifiadol i amser, i dweud cofnodol i'r cyfrifiadol and thereby residents to force submitting our planning applications to the District Council. As part of the pre-application discussions to address concerns raised with amended locations for store-van's side, the position of the access included additional landscaping as well as accepting restrictions on deliveries during school opening and closing times. Concerns were also raised about the impact on local shops, but both the budget and the top shop have unique selling points such as their post offices and the sale of specialist ond da, mae'n cilio'u ddyn nhw'n cyntaf o'i ddau ar y byddai'r cyffleiriaeth neu'r ddodolol ar y ddeunydd bwysig. Rhywodol yn fuodol sy'n cynnig gyd yn cael dei'r ei gyrraedd ac yn arrivaladau hwn o'r ddodolol yn gilydd ei ddefnyddio'r ddodol o'r middlach. mudfynu maes y ddylog, os yw gydag y cyfnod cyfnodeth gyda'r rhaglid angylchol sydd ond y propi ddim i yn perthyn nhw ychydig yn y maethol. Mae yna'ch rhoi bod gwaith i'w gwithio gyda'i cyfnod yw'r sylwgrun nhw i gwybod i'w cynrychiadu newydd yma. Maech gofynnid. fel ddellun tynedol gweithio a chyfodd angen amherwydd. Rydyn ni'n gweld i chi. Rydyn ni'n gweld i chi? Rydyn ni'n gweld i chi. Eww, eich chweithio at yn ymlaen, dylech dweud ymlaen yn ymlaen. Er mwyn o'r cwestiynauterio, mae'r rhai sy'n yn ei gweithwyr a'u tyrddarrion, cyfnodd o'r cwestiynau funds fel Rhaidwyr Cysylltiad i'r perthynadau, ac yn rhaid i'r cwestiynau am yr au'r gwaith sgwr, rhaid o'r cwestiynau funds fel ymlaen, ac mae'r hyn o'r cwestiynau a'r hystiaun, maen nhw hyn yn braiddio'r hunain. gwrs ac gallwch chi'n gweld ei wneud hyfforddiol, a wedi gynneud o fewn hwn ar hyn deilio mewn cyfŷ ymgyrchu a chydwp hwnnw dwy'n gwneud o'r bwysig i fynd i agnod, a penderfyniadodol am gweithio ar yr ystafell neu chi'n rwyng ymddinte ar hyn a chynnynnau yn bwysig i fynd i fynd i'r bydwyd. Mae'r bywch fy fydd yn ymgyrchu ymgyrchu, ac mae'n dweud yn digwydd bod hwnnw'n gofyn nhw ar amddangos bod hwnnw i weld bethau ymgyrchu. y gallwch ar hyn o gyllid gyda gyda'r cynyddiadau yma'r cyfnodd. Rwy'n meddwl, am y gallwn gyda'r cyfnodd, yn cael ei ffordd. A'r hynodd, rwy'n cymhwyll â'r fawr, y cyrgyntafol a'r cychwyn ffordd. Rydyn ni'n ddim yn daeth i ddau ar Yngyrchwr Llywodraeth. Yn y ddau, yn cymryd, y clywed o'r cyfnodd cyfeirydd ac ar y clywed y Llywodraeth ar gyfer clywed o'r ymddangos. yw ystyried yn ymweld y mynd i gael ei wneud y thymiannol a'u cyhoedd ffyrdd yma. Ieithio yma yn ymweld y lle hwnnw i gael yma i ffyrdd yma'r ysgrif iawn, yna oedd y ddigwydd ar y cerddau i'r ysgrif iawn. Ieithio yma'r ysgrif iawn yn ei ddweud. Mae'r maes fydd oed yn ymweld i'r ysgrif iawn, ac mae'r gweithio i'r unrhyw o'r dweud o'r dweud o'i hwnnw i'r ysgrif iawn. Wel, ydych chi'n myn maen nhw'n iawn o'r cwestiynych mwyhaeth. OK, disiaj, dyna gud o gafod, gallwn eich gwael o'r gweithio a'r tref. Mae'r cymdeithaseth gyda paesodr y gwaesodr, felly sprwydd fyddwch yn ei pariad yma i'r cymdeithwyr ar y gwrthod Caerdydd i fynd ymddangos yn mynd i'r cyfwyr yn y cwmaeiş winningnwy. Mae'r cymdeithwyr yn ymddangos yn y cyfwyr cwm fyddach, rwy'n eich le甚麼, yn bellwch ar y bwrdd yma wedi'i gweld, a'r ddafodol. Oes ymddir iaeth mynd i'r cyfnod o'r planiadau i'r bwysig, i'r ffordd i'r bwysig a'r ddysgu, na fyw, dylai'r rhai componentau i'r bwysig, ac mae'r gwrthodd yma i'n gwybod i chi'n ddodol iawn. Mae'n dweud o'r ffordd o'r planiadau i'r bwysig, i'r bwysig i'r gweithgareddau i'r bwysig i'r bwysig i'r bwysig. As I said in my presentation we did amend the scheme to try and address the concerns that were raised. So, hopefully that deals with point 1. In terms of the viability work I mean a lot of this is based upon the fact that combaton is growing obviously because of principally the Benel farm development to the west I think that y cyfnod yn y cyfnod yw'r ysgolwyddiad ar y Cymru o'r 2011 oes y cysylltu i'r gweithio ar y dyfodol yn ddiweddol i'r benol ffaith yw'r cyfnod sy'n gyda'r hynny, ac yn ymddangos yn y cyd-flygu'r bydd ymddangos. Ond dyma'r cyfnod o'r cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfnod yn y cyfrifysgol o'r cyfrifysgol yn y cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfrifysgol yw'r cyfrifysgol, ..og gweithio ar gyfer y rhan o'r rhaglenywodau COVID-19 sy'n byw'r rhaglenywodau fyddir yn ein debydol...! ..o ymddiad a'r drafodaeth trefwyr yn ystod o gyflym plwyn… …ryddoedd i chi oes yn gyffredigio i ysgolwyddiant. Felly y dyma'n mynd ymweld iddyn ni'n mynd i'r rhaglenywodau sydd ar y cwylfaith ymm mwyaf a'r meddwl ...di'r ni'n mynd i'r produfiwn yr ysgolwyddyd gyda'r Seinfriedd ym Ysgolwyd i'r Gruffwyr. Ond, mae'n cael eu ffoc brethren sy'n gweld hydfeyddol â'r hubynau ystafell arall, mae'n hynny'n rôl sy'n du'n gwirio'n cael eu rôl ar y teimlo. Dyna, mae gennychd doedd y byddwn yn ni'n amlŷ arlo hynny. Felly, ydw i'n rôl sy'n gweithio'r ystafell, gan gwil. a we've got them on their attendant of ours on other stores. I'm sure we would be happy to accept a planning condition if that were needed and it's been used on on other stores I'm aware of which required some form of litter picking strategy to be agreed with the council. Obviously, as I said, Colbert, I'd like to think of quite a responsible company and you know that they'll be very keen to make sure that the impacts outside of their site as well as within it are minimised as far as it can be. Thank you and I have Castle Eileen Wilson. Thank you chair. I've got two points that I'd like to raise. One, it was mentioned by the previous speaker about the noise from the ventilation fans at the back of the store. I know it from the plan that the back of the store backs onto I think it looks like a house on the on the plan and from personal experience I know that it's very difficult to mitigate the noise from those fans especially in the summer and what would this store do to make sure that no residence is disturbed by those fans because it seems to me that it's very difficult to mitigate that noise entirely so that people can't keep their windows open at night in summer so I'd like to hear some positive comments about that. My other point is that I've noticed in the papers that there will be an external cash machine. I don't know if you're aware that quite often external cash machines become the target for raids and this causes enormous consternation to local people and it and quite often is quite damaging to the store so I wonder how much that has been thought through. Thank you. Thank you. Just thank you councillor. I'll perhaps say it as a reversal if that's okay so in terms of the ATM I'm certainly aware of other examples in premature of ram raiding and I know that word for it but in terms of this proposal obviously the ATM is set well with it well back within the store and there would be anti-ram bollards in front of the ATM machine itself to prevent anyone from being able to ram raid. We've used that on another store in in Cambridge if you'll think of and that's worked very well. Again I think perhaps the ones that have been more of a target have been more perhaps close to road cyber is you know the unfortunate sort of getaways quicker than the one here well so you would be fully within the site so that deals with that point. In terms of noise considerations there is a full noise impact assessment submit as part of the planning application which sets out the mitigation measures. Predominally that's the use of acoustic fencing which is noted in the planning officers report as well. We're confident that that will protect existing proposed residents to be inside the development as has been set out in the officers report on paragraph 25 so we feel that's been adequately assessed through that piece of work in those mitigation measures. Thank you. Thank you and Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. I'm still struggling to see what it is that this proposed shop can offer converting on top that is not already there. I used to be the district councillor for top so I know it very well and I'm very well aware where that site is and the potential impact that it would have on the highway safety especially when the school entrance is right opposite it and I know how busy it can get and not just in drop off and pick up kinds as well. So can you tell me exactly what it is that your store can offer that is not already being offered by the store in Toft and converting stores itself because I use both so I know I know what they offer. Thank you. Okay so in terms of again I'll perhaps take those in reverse order in terms of the highway point first so obviously we have accepted conditions in terms of restricting deliveries which I think is quoted in condition number 10 of the recommendation which has been discussed with the highway authority. So that that's there's a range of restrictions there which we're happy to accept. So hopefully that picks that point up. In terms of what it can provide obviously it's a slightly larger food store than the existing one in converting. I appreciate the sites on top it obviously relates to converting so that the budget store and obviously it will provide additional range of goods and facilities and certain convenience that that existing store can't provide. I think the certainly the again referring to the most recent consultation there was a lot of suggestions that people are not using that because it hasn't got the range of goods that you need. So we find that these cop stores operate well because they provide a greater depth and greater range of convenience for local people to to utilise. In terms of the the the top store I mean obviously that's some distance away from the site and I think it's accepted in the planning office report recommendation that the the impact on that store would be would be very limited. Again that's you know has specialist of African foods and provides a very sort of localised need. I think the floor space of that is considerably smaller than the budgets or indeed the proposed co-op. So I hope that answers your question. Thank you. Sorry chair no it doesn't answer my question it doesn't answer my question at all. Can I can I just ask if that's it but also is it a material planning consideration what the offer is can we is that part of what we can look at? Chair I think it's material to consider the benefit that the store could bring to a local community in in that sense. So as Mr Brand I think has said you know this co-op store being larger will provide a broader range of goods and if members consider that to be a benefit to the community then I think that's something they can consider in their in their weighing off of the application. Thank you sorry lots of people because you have to come back on it then. I do um I mean it's strange here we're trying to I mean this is a proposal for a second shop in a minor rural centre it's not even a rural centre it's a minor rural centre which is already served by a store. So we're not we're not in debate now we're because of the clarification of the question. You're right you're right sorry I yeah Dr Jeff. That's fine he hasn't answered my question boy he's on my question anyway. Thank you. Councillor Harvey. Yes thank you chair. I just can't find anything in the agenda pack relating to our policy CC3. Can you speak a bit into the microphones when people are virtual? Okay yeah sorry I didn't see anything in the agenda pack relating to CC3 and our policy on-site generation but I'm just genuinely puzzled actually because um you know solar panels would be the perfect marriage for food retail outlet because of the power consumption by the chillers which would be maximum during the summer months. So Councillor Harvey your question is around the- Yes I just wonder why why not more ambition on you know exceeding the minimum is it probably to save the um the client money overall. I've just had a clarification from Mr Carter that the our policy is for um developments that are a thousand square metres or more. Is that right? Yes through you chair it's for new dwellings and new non-residential buildings of thousand square meters or more being required to reduce carbon emissions by a minimum of 10%. It doesn't mean that we can't ask for more that's the the minimum obligation so your question still stands I think Councillor Harvey. Mr Brown so it's in terms of you know have you considered going above you know in terms of your renewable energy generation for this? Yes thank you Councillor um so we have some sustainability standards part of the application which sets out the um the levels of energy efficiency that that co-op look to operate within their stores um which is is is a very high level um I would have thought perhaps this could be dealt with through a planning condition if that were deemed necessary in terms of just you know deviling in the detail in terms of what what what energy efficiency is obviously energy efficiency is the first principle rather than generation um perhaps we could include a condition that dealt with that if it were deemed appropriate but you know as I said which sets out in the submission um the sort of measures that um the co-op achieve within their existing stores so that might provide a level of comfort. Thank you um Councillor Dr Martin-Carn and then I have Councillor Wyllman. No no no no no no no no no sorry Councillor Dr Richard Wyllman. Thank you chair um it's a short question um could I just ask um to what extent the business case um for this depends upon the presence of the school um because there are rest references to the school um and the number of children who go there in our report so I would be interested to know um that. Yes thank you Councillor the the the the presence of the school um is not critical to the business case um obviously the the presence of new and existing dwellings is is the the key components that are set out in the submission so um we feel that Compton can accommodate a second store given the growing population as has been referred to in the the committee report itself. Obviously the school will generate spin-off additional expenditure into the store by the nature of um its use and people coming and going but the the the critical component is the the presence of the you know the two reports in terms of housing housing expenditure. Thank you thank you. Thank you Dr Martin-Carn and then Councillor Heather Williams. I mean two areas which I'm a bit concerned of uh one is the appearance of the building and secondly is the effect of on road traffic. A lot of question about the appearance really. The building can hardly be described as a great beauty. It's a very simple design. I realised that a a store is a very basic had very basic needs in terms of a space and a store but I wondered if you what what consideration has been given to the external experience of the appearance of the building and its integration with adjoining not just in terms of the size but in terms of of it looking nice outside. Thank you. Thank you councillor. So in terms of the appearance of the building the CGI image earlier that was in the planning officers presentation sort of demonstrated that that the what's proposed that's obviously we've got a the building itself is principally brick with um sort of timber fronting on the uh the gaver lend and then obviously the the roofing sitting bit behind that. I think we felt it was appropriate particularly when we looked at the the previous planning commission on the site for the house in terms of the design of that that building and we we did look at the um obviously the fairly mixed character of buildings in the vicinity including obviously the new development which at that time was under wet bedel farms now some of that's been built and obviously the the school building's nearby so I felt we we looked principally I guess at the consented scheme for the house and tried to sort of replicate elements components of that but as you said correctly obviously it's a you know it's a shop so it doesn't want to read as a residential dwelling principally because there's this shape that it needs to be to be operating sufficiently. I wrote down traffic here but I think that perhaps wasn't going to be the second part that related to the traffic was going to be but clearly the children from the school will use the shop and it's on the other side of the road from the school so it involves children crossing the road particularly a school opening a school lunchtime and afternoon. What provisioned you have you thought of any provisions for ensuring safety of that of children crossing the road or or minimising risk what provisions you thought of? Thank you so we did have some discussions with the school and I believe with at least one of both the parish councils in terms of this point there was discussions about potentially having some form of informal crossing in that location but I think that the view was that that that wouldn't be appropriate given the flow of traffic so we were sort of led to a certain extent by that and then following discussions with the highway authority we were content to sort of you know effectively leave it as per the existing situation. Thank you and Councillor Williams. Thank you Chairman. I might need some clarification from officers ahead of the question to the to the applicant. Mine's around the something that was referenced earlier in response to Councillor Toomey Hawkins' question around being able to look at what's offered to the the area but the proposal is for a food retail store so the proposal is for this to be class A class A1 I guess for the for the land there and so we're hearing a lot about the co-op the fact yeah we've been told about its shareholders and those sorts of things but I mean realistically from officers it could become Tesco's or it could become a funeral parlour or anything else within class one or class A1 or are we just are we restricting this completely to a food retail store in which case is the fact that it's a co-op and not a Tesco's or Budgins or whatever else um actually material here because and if it is then I want to know how long co-op are going to be there so it might need the uh the answer first question answer first chair. Thank you chair through you the end user is not material you're correct so we can't control this being a co-op albeit Mr Brand has said that co-op are signed up should permission be granted and as to the first point I suppose um you can consider the size of the retail unit um here and the prospective range I suppose that could be provided within a retail unit that size versus what's already existing in the village which I understand to be smaller um that you are correct that the end user is not material to this consideration we wouldn't be able to control that. Chair if I get so what we're looking at here is giving permission for something a building that could actually be anything within that class A1 category is that correct or can we condition? The application is for a convenience food retail store uh so the description is clear in my mind albeit that's within class A1 um I think it's very unlikely given the format layout of the building etc that uh an alternative use to a retail store could end up here um but I yeah I mean potentially there are other uses within A1 that could potentially take the place but I think given the um description of the development it's clear that the proposal is for a food retail store in my mind. I suppose what I'm understanding from Councillor Williams is the clarification is whether that could change without having to apply for a change of use. The food retail store would be in use class A1 so as far as permitted change of use within use class A1 goes potentially that could happen. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you Mr Branc because I'm sorry you wouldn't ask a question of the. Thank you. Councillor Eileen Wilson. Thank you um yes thank you chair um I'd like to come back to the noise question again um I'm not convinced about so is it a question or is it for debate about not no it's a question okay um I'm not convinced about the mitigation for the fans but also I would like to know more about the noise mitigation of deliveries um from experience I know that um at these stores uh a large um HDV turns up produce is removed from the HDV it is driven across uneven land or or asphalt in matly metal cages and it is wheeled into the shop and this could go on for quite some considerable time and I can't understand how there will be no noise impact on the neighbours. I am very worried about those houses that are behind that will be behind this development both because of the fans and and the difficulty to mitigate the noise from those fans and also the noise from the deliveries where there's lots of shaky metal. So I'd like to know what they're going to do to mitigate that because I would like to understand how it could be possible. Can I draw of members' attention to page 48 and paragraph 10 there just to see if that the servicing plan answers your your question there perhaps Chris Carter would like to speak. Yes through you chair just also to highlight that um the noise assessment report has been considered by the council's environmental health officers and subject to the recommended conditions they're satisfied with an acceptable noise environment can be created so um my advice advice to members would be to consider that advice from your own statutory consultee with respect to this application subject to those conditions. So what I'm seeing on page 48 there Councillor Wilson is that there would be no deliveries between those hours and there wouldn't be any servicing between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. on all days except for the delivery of newspaper and magazines. I'm very sorry that that's not my point it's delivered during the day as well which are disturbance to neighbours. Thank you okay thanks very much would you like to come back Mr Brand on any other beyond what's in the you know in the in the pack to to address the concerns okay thank you very much thank you very much for your time Mr Brand. Thank you um we now move to um comments by councillor Martin Yeddon. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Did I have your name correct sorry. Yes it's Martin Yeddon yes. Hello thank you and you are the chair of the parish council. I am. Good and do you have permission do you have your video by the way? Don't you have your video? We can hear you perfectly. It says that I'm on video actually. Yeah it does. It says you're not on video anymore don't try it again just. Now it says I'm not and now it says I am. Did I come on at all during that process? It looks like you might be coming on. No but we can hear you very very clearly are you okay to just for us to hear you? Okay that's fine and can you can you confirm that we you have the permission of the parish council to speak on that behalf? I can confirm that yes. Good and you know the procedure that you have three minutes and we'll let you know verbally after two minutes have gone that you've got one minute left. I know that yes. Thank you very much. Okay so good afternoon. I'm Martin Yeddon. I'm chair of TOFT parish council. As you're aware competition and loss and trade aren't usually considered when deciding on application. However there are policies at national and local levels that you do have to consider. The national planning policy framework requires you to consider the impact of a new development on the vitality and viability of village centres and policy E 22. If your local plan requires new shops to be of a scale and appropriate to the function and size of the village. This planning application makes a case case for an additional food store in the area. It says that for a food store to be sustainable it needs a local customer base of around 1500 people. The combined population of TOFT and Comberton is about 3000 people which can sustain the two stores we have. TOFT itself only has a population of around 500 people and so TOFT shop is already extremely vulnerable. The application says that TOFT residents will continue to use its local shop as the proposed shop is too far out of the village. This is undoubtedly true but the new store will take much of the passing trade which TOFT shop relies upon and any loss of business is a serious loss for the village. It's disingenuous to suggest that it wouldn't have a significant impact on the trade of TOFT shop. Both TOFT and Comberton are designated as royal settlements and so both existing stores receive a very significant business rate reduction. The loss of that at least one of these stores would severely affect its viability. It is better to have two thriving stores than three struggling. In my three minutes I cannot tell you the many benefits that TOFT shop and post office brings to the village. It is the hub of the community and my fear is that the current owners retire in a couple of years and they will not be able to sell the business if there was a co-op shop down the road and we will lose our shop. The PC is also concerned about safety issues associated with the post-occasion of the new store. It is entrance is off the narrow road opposite the Comberton village college where there is already a lot of congestion at either end of the school day from parents vehicles and the very many school buses. The council the doctor local plan has a section called promoting successful communities where it says and I quote many smaller villages have very few facilities but those facilities can be important and ensuring that a basic level of service is available locally. The council aims to play its part in protecting and improving rural services in order to support existing communities and policy s3 says that planning commission permissions will be refused for proposals which will result in the loss of village services including village shops and post offices. This is an opportunity for the council to play its part by rejecting this application. Thank you. Thank you very much. No misty having questions. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you misty here then. Thank you and I don't see that we have any local ward member wants to speak and so therefore members we move directly to the debate and I think you know guide us a little bit so we have to consider this is about our balance we have to consider the benefits that this additional store would bring. We're not allowed as a material planning consideration to consider the impact of competition on other I'd like clarification from that from Mr Carter but that's not a material consideration as I understand so when it's talking about the loss of a service I presume that means complete but we're all alert to what it means to a minor rural centre as well you know to have the vibrancy of the services on you know on its streets and on its high streets and I can understand what we're hearing is difference of opinion from different groups of residents about whether we should or shouldn't you know whether this would be beneficial or not and it's now up to us to sort of try and find that balance but I want to make sure that we're within the framing of what's material planning considerations we've heard a lot about its impact on the other so if you could help us on that Mr Carter. Thank you chair so I refer members to policy E 22 local of the local plan which is a key consideration here. In that context competition can be material to your decision if you look at the requirements of policy E 22 it sets out a requirement for retail impact assessment above certain thresholds and point four of that policy comments that where those impact assessments indicate significant adverse impacts on existing town or village centre development will be refused. The case officer may be better placed to comment on the retail impact assessment that's been submitted and what that tells us but in the context of that policy it would be my advice that the competition in that sense can be material to your decision. Thank you very much that helps very much helps me and I don't know if the case officer wants to help us with a little bit more detail about that retail assessment. Yes thank you chair if I could just refer you to the power of 21 we're going to the retail impact so as set out in policy 22 outside rural centres anything over 250 meter squares squared requires the retail impact assessment. As I've set out I've conducted this I've been to the all three or been to the two stores top shop and the the budgets and I feel this is an appropriate location for an additional store. Obviously I've quoted the 2011 census data at 2346 but as I've stated the village is growing with the approved residential developments and it's likely to exceed this quite significantly already as well as the the location adjacent to the to the village college so I do think it will be serving that that purpose. So the South Cambridgeshire District design guide advises a population of circa 1500 people it's required to sustain this a local shop and obviously I think that population will have increased significantly from the 2346 in 2011 and along with the village college I think it's competent canal sustain an additional store in this location and I've obviously gone on to assess the impact on the top shop as well which provides a very different offering to that the co-op provides and if people are traveling from Comberton to Toft which is 1.7 kilometres away for top up shop whether it's fruits and vegetables or general convenience stores then I'll be that's very unsustainable they are traveling because the cycling and walking provision from from theirs isn't isn't the best and if they're driving from Comberton to the top shop then that's additional travels traveling taking place of this the addition of the store would reduce so that's something I think members should be taking into account as and as I've said now in the in the report. Yes I think that's a couple of points. Thank you thank you and what your highlighting is what's kind of what's in the report so what we've we've all had before isn't that retail assessment has you know been done and you've looked at each of the individual stores and in your opinion therefore it's you know it's not significant enough even though you recognise that there could be some impact to warrant a refusal in terms of non-compliance but that's why it's in front of us here and members to look at the balance I see Dr Tuna Hawkins has asked to speak. Thank you chair, ordinarily I will be jumping up and down I'm going yeah this is a you know a store for for a village setting but I think we need to look at this on the whole this is an existing community yes it will be having another 90 houses added to it on the Bennell farm estate or whatever you want to call it but I don't think that that is a large enough addition to warrant a second store especially when the store that is there now you know is serving the community and serving it well and the butchers and you know you've got top you've heard from both parish councils and I hear them and I support their views because I know those communities this proposed shop is going to be 258 square metres so it's it's large and what will happen is it will take trade away from the existing community store which is actually in the centre of the village is more centrally located but my view is this this proposal is relying on trade from the school and of course the new estate which means the existing shop will have its own trade from the school taking away from it without the shadow of the doubt e-22-4 definitely says we know we need to protect existing facilities but I will also draw your attention to policy sc is sc4 paragraph 5 which says the same thing a new retail provision should not undermine the vitality and viability right of a nearby centre it's difficult for me to say this but I think I'm not sure this is the right place for this particular shop I would not want coldy cot you know there are other villages that are growing that don't have anything and yet this is my proposal for a second store in a minor rural centre which already has a store thank you thank you Dr Martin Khan I find it difficult to find a sufficient argument to say that one could that the impact on local stores is sufficient to reject it the we've already been told that the local store is likely to change ownership in two years time so the viability then will be in any case uncertain even um there's been a trend now it's in one of the interesting things but from the during the curvy pandemic has been that there's been a movement of trade from the larger stores down to what my call regional convenience local convenience stores so this sort of store is likely to have increasing use um assuming of course that this uh this change continues one one works on the habits have begun to change and people are going more to at centers near to them but for that to happen you do need to have a reasonable range of project produce in the local stores for them to to be sufficiently attractive that people don't go for longer distance so I see a good argument in sustainability terms in the sense that this store will be larger will have a wide range of uh of material uh than the other local existing stores and so it should divert some traffic that now goes to the larger large supermarkets to the local level and that seemed to me something which is desirable in sustainability terms um and that is one of our major major policies um so uh the um to me that seems to a thing in favour the thing that I am concerned about is that it looks pretty dull um and but we don't seem to have much guidance on what small stores or shops should look like um there doesn't seem to be any guidance so we tend to get rather industrial building looking buildings uh rather dull um I think this we're the time for preparing for a new local plan and these are sort of considerations which I am bearing in mind in future as we revise a local plan because I would have hoped for a more inspiring development I don't think it's sufficiently um it intrusive in the sense that the area around it is not so any particular uh special value that we could perhaps uh use that material consideration to refuse unless we had a more direct policy on this issue thank you but I think we could do better and I would like to highlight that issue but I don't think I've got um enough grounds for that I feel that I could uh object to this and I will be waiting in favour thank you Dr Witsherman. Thank you I'll try and be brief I agree with everything um councillor Dr Hawkeings has said so I will I will not um repeat this point but I I I agree with with her assessment of this application one thing I would add that does deeply concern me is the highway safety aspect if you put a uh shop right opposite of school we all know what's going to happen children are going to be crossing that road there is um as far as I can tell from the papers no safe um crossing point I know what the response will be which is that highways haven't lagged this up but I'm sorry I just disagree with highways on this it's common sense everybody knows it um that highways haven't lagged that I find staggering um and um I think we are more than entitled to take that into account as a material consideration. Thank you um I completely agree um I'm not always known in my household for having common sense my husband will tell you but on this one even I can see that's going to be a big problem um children are going to once cross that road and it's so the location of this shop is is of great concern I don't think it's appropriate and also on the basis that we we don't know we have to assume that we're given permission for the the class not for this co-op um and I think that's a really important thing that we need need to stress so it could change to many other things in its in its lifetime if it's granted permission. I'd also just to sort of bolster and and support the comments that been made by Counts Dr Terry Hawkins and Counts Dr Richard Williams um without duplicating it is that once these shops are gone they are gone um so in my entire ward I do not have a single convenience store standalone convenience store we have a very small post office and we have a farm shop that's a ward of 11 villages eight parishes so the demand for three in one place I do find kind of um surprising so and there were shops but they couldn't survive they couldn't thrive there wasn't the demand and the support so you know especially in these times we have to be very careful what we're doing or we're going to be removing facilities forever once tough shock is shocked that will be it thank you members um I've heard you know issues around um the benefits or not that this could bring the issue of impact on other um office office of services that are within the village and having a vibrant minor rural centre issues around design issues around highway safety um for that being opposite the school um and again the principle of development in that site of that class I have two others who are asking to speak and I hope they would be on different issues so so that they would bring more to the debate before we then move to the vote Councillor Eileen Wilson um thank you um yes just very quickly um I am concerned about the noise impact on neighbours and also um with the competition for the shops is the potential loss of post offices which are a lifeline for communities and when they go they're a great loss thank you so I will add the environmental health issues in terms of noise impact to that so these are things where we are the statutory consultees and consultees within our own office officers have come to an opinion but this is what we are seeing as issues thank you chair um at the beginning of the debate I was leaning more towards uh in being in favour of this application but I must have been swayed quite a lot by the arguments against and the loss of other local amenity so I'm actually a bit torn actually which way I should vote on this at the moment um you know I do sort of agree in principle to the idea of development on this area but obviously the loss of other local businesses is a concern of me as someone else who represents a relatively rural area and has seen businesses depleting over the years um so I will have to make a choice one way or the other when we come to the vote but one thing I did want to explore I think you mentioned it chair was conditioned around litter picking um I think the applicant actually mentioned they would be open to that so should we vote in favour um I would like to explore adding that condition in with um and the wording put together by officers if that would be okay chair thank you yes I was going to raise the same so that's that's very good officers yes thank you chair um there's no reason why we couldn't include an additional condition requiring a litter picking strategy to be submitted and agreed and then implemented um if committee felt they wanted to support that good thank you very much um and I think you have sorry three three please chair sorry just on um council Williams point on the use class um as of september 2020 the use class order changes um this would fall within use class E so we can restrict um we can add the condition to restrict the use of the proposed building to um to retail so that'll be use class E part A as as stated in the september 2020 changes good so I think what we'll do is we um I would like to well perhaps council Williams like to propose that as a condition if it were to be approved yes chair so let's see if we can take by affirmation both of those proposals if this were to be approved the first one would be in terms of litter picking can I take that by affirmation committee agreed as it ever was agreed and the second one would be around restricting this to class E as I understand we take that by affirmation agreed agreed councillor yes verification of that isn't restricted to class E it's restricted within class E shall we Aaron can you can you can you confirm that thank you chair it's sorry sorry chair through you it's it's class E a which were restricted to retail element in class E class E being far border so thank you very much council fame so it'd be class E a as the condition um can I take that by affirmation everybody including council doctor Williams thank you very much I can't interpret some stirring avoiding my eye if there's nothing else to say I think we should move to the vote oh and and we now get in terms of if there were reasons for refusal thank you very much Chris thank you chair yeah so um I have one reason for refusal draught of which relates to um impact on vitality and viability of other existing convenience stores in the village um so I'll just read that one out so the application has failed to demonstrate that combatant can sustain an additional food retail store and that the development would not give rise to a significant adverse impact on the vitality and viability of other existing convenience stores in the village which lie in close proximity to the site and between them provide a similar retail offering and consequently the pros of this contrary to policies E 21 and E 22 of the South Cambridge local plan 2018 um we've also talked about highways and noise with regard to noise obviously you've got the comments of the environmental health officer and quite a comprehensive suite of conditions recommended um my advice would be that um we should rely on those conditions to control the the noise environment here uh and it would be um uh a weak reason for refusal to to refuse on on that basis having regard to those comments and similarly notwithstanding um Dr Ridgewood hym's um points around the highway authority in their comments um it would be quite a difficult reason for this council to defend in the light of um a no objection from the county council highway authority but I just wanted to say that it's obviously what I would say members is if you are minded to refuse that one I think that's a very substantive reason that's just been read out in terms of the impact on the viability of the services being offered um are you happy that that's the principal reason upon which if if it were to be refused that was referred and we what we do is we make reference to the debate we've had um while while I do agree that is a valid reason I think because of the reports that have been submitted I think while not on highway's ground but the location of the store directly opposite the school and its location is also a valid reason the principle of of putting a retail outlet in that particular area of the village or we've believed it was more suitable to residential rather than retail is that something that could be explored just on the purposes that obviously there has been documentation given on the other ground that was given through you chair council do you do you mean in respect to highway safety and its location opposite the school or is there something I mean in principle of development so my advice would be in principle um it would be difficult to refuse a development in principle given within the settlement framework boundary uh and that is supported by policy um that's different to the consideration of the impact that the proposal may have on other facilities within the settlement okay um so are we okay that we're taking if members were minded to refuse and that is the result of the vote that that's substantive reason in terms of the impact upon the viability of the other services in the village um that's the key reason for our refusal are we an agreement with that members can't start with you williams yeah sorry can I just push this point about the highways um you know I will kind of defer to other members or I think are um probably going to vote the same way as me on this but but you know given that I don't want to get into a legal argument but given the very broad definition of what material consideration actually is they just only worry me that we are boxed in by what highways have decided um and there doesn't seem to be any you know scope to depart from that I mean a material consideration is anything that relates to the use and development of the land I think we're entitled to say that we do think putting shop opposite to school with no safe crossing is a relevant material consideration to the use and development of the land um personally I would push that point but I'm looking at other members who I think may vote the same way as to whether they would go along with me on that yeah through you uh you're absolutely right councillor that is a material consideration you're perfectly entitled to refuse the application on that basis I'm simply advising that if we end up in an appeal situation without any evidence to substantiate the point um then that presents it you know it's a more difficult case to defend it in that case but you are absolutely entitled to refuse the application on that basis if you wanted to right I don't want to go around running on this because I think we know where we're kind of going with the vote on this I've got councillor Heather Williams and councillor Dr Martin Cahn there's no reason why we can't put both reasons for refusal down is then at Carter no there's not he's just saying that if that went to appeal we the maybe's you know winning on one and not on the other things it's what he's basically saying I think you've only got to win on one chair through you then chair so we now have two reasons for refusal the second the first being one I read out and the second um that the council considers there to be a significant adverse impact on highway safety as a result of the location of the proposed convenience store opposite the Compton Village College Members and councillor Dr Martin Cahn so I wanted to simply comment ask if the proposal is approved could we include a condition to have some form of management to um to look to make proposals for safe crossing um or impose a condition providing the safe crossing what are our powers um where would be would that be a reasonable condition or would I think I'd defer to the answer that was given earlier by the applicant that that has been explored uh both with the parish councils and I believe county council's highway authority um and uh and not taken any further so I think um it's clearly been looked at and to include a condition so fundamental to be consent I think um I wouldn't recommend that to the committee in this case but to move to the vote councillor Harvey insist Am I allowed to clarify a point I just I'd be concerned because this really the argument is on numbers and the impact on other stores that um this will be a few uh would be mitigated by future growth in the village but is is that sort of a valid thing I mean shouldn't we really be deciding this on what we see currently rather than what might happen in the future and I think that's what's been brought up in the discussions as well by councillors Timon Hawkins in her comments okay thank you sorry just to come back once more um so just to expand that highways reason for refusal um it's the lack of a safe crossing as well as its location of in combination thank you that okay that can yeah good members going to move to the vote now and the vote is on the recommendation that this is approval subject to the recommended conditions um which are on page 46 um onwards ready to vote now members please thank you very much members this application's been refused with eight um votes against and two votes in favour and abstentions thank you very much members it's um 20 just 25 past one and I would suggest we have a break for lunch um and we have a 30 minute break oh Dr Richard Williams I've worked out like it back and forth and Morrison's in 15 minutes see what evidence does I wonder what the difference between evidence thank you very much members so we'll have a break now and move back again at I would say at two in our seats ready to start again at 2 p.m thank you afternoon members um welcome back to south cambridge a district council planning committee and we are starting with agenda item seven this is application 20 slash 040702 slash outline planning for land at the back of four and six east drive high fields cul-de-cotte and the proposals for the outline planning for the erection of two dwellings with all matters reserved the applicant um johnson and the key material considerations are principle of development visual amenity and local character and impact on amenities of neighboring properties with the recommendation for approval the application has been brought to committee because of the local parish council objection um and the presenting officer is Mary Collins are you with us Mary yes I am chair I'll just um show my presentation thank you very much and Mary is this your first time at the committee it is yes chair welcome thank you we're not we're not too terrible oops bear with me while I just get some of these settings right okay so we can see that clearly and we can hear you clearly right that's brilliant um okay I'll just start in that case um oh we've just lost the main screen there we are ah sorry right okay right okay well the application is situated on the eastern side of east drive which is on the eastern part of high fields in cul-de-cotte um the application seeks outline permission for the erection of two dwellings with all matters reserved um as regards the principle of development the site lies partly within the cul-de-cotte village development framework with the site lying beyond the boundary to open the countryside to the east so this plan here shows the position of the development framework on there okay so the existing situation is that there is um dwellings facing onto east drive um with garden land to the rear here um everyone commission was previously with keys for the demolition of number eight east drive and the erection for dwellings to on land to the rear but this current application is um differs from that previous refusal in that only two dwellings are now proposed and um the land doesn't include this stretch here to the red number eight um so the indicative the indicative site layout um shows where two dwellings could be situated to the rear of um the dwellings front in east drive um as you can see the indicative position which we won't actually be approving but this is just to demonstrate potentially this could happen um so the indicative um position is that the actual dwellings would be within the development framework with their gardens being outside um so as the dwellings are within the development framework um officers feel the principle of two dwellings in this location is in accordance with policy s 10 so the pattern of dwellings to the east of east drive um consists of blow density largely attached dwellings within generous plots um but there's sporadic in nature it sits largely within the framework um but this wrote us for a transition between the village and the open land to the rear um so the two proposed dwellings are cited behind main frontage and directly behind number four and six and then um it's likely that their rich line would then be orientated to be parallel with the road as the the port is here to the front of the site um so there would be quite a good deal of um spaciousness between and back to back distances there um but with this particular application um the land within the application site but beyond the development framework has actually had a change of use um sorry a lawful development to the granted or um uh residential garden area so although this is um outside the settlement development framework it is now lawfully can be used as gardens so um we consider that the relationship of the dwelling with the gardens beyond the framework is as acceptable as this land can already be lawfully used as residential garden um so as regards position positioning of the dwelling proposed dwellings um as mentioned it's um the layout is a reserved matter as is the height of the proposed dwellings so we don't know that at this stage um but a similar height dwelling would be considered appropriate to one matching four and six and the conditions been added um to sort of control that height at the reserved matter stage um so in terms of its um impact on the character of the area um the indicative site now does show that there could be two dwellings um with relatively spacious gardens and having a good relationship with the existing dwellings um we'd just like to just mention that there is some history of other and forgive my sort of rudimentary red lines on this plan but this is just showing location of other developments in the area so this is pretty much the application site um it doesn't include that that area of building that I mentioned earlier but that's approximately where the dwellings would be located this is an application at number 20 which has um been subject to um a refusal land appeal and is no subject to a new application that is undecided uh this is land to the river number 38 which gained permission sorry number 30 which gained permission and this is to the river number 30 yen so as you can see there's the actual sighting of the dwellings here would be approximately no further into open country side than we've previously approved um so just quickly going through so this is the details of the the one dwelling that's been to the river number 30 this is number 38 and this is the resubmitted application there so um yeah sorry just briefly talking about residential immunity um we consider that the indicative um sighting of the dwelling shouldn't result in any detrimental impact through overlooking loss of light or overshadowing and so um and again these will all be looked at at the reserve matters stage when we've got more details but with we have comfort that there wouldn't be any detrimental impact on neighbours as a result of the application so I think that's the end of my presentation so hopefully that was clear thank you very much and thank you Mary and we will go to the main sort of the probably main questions coming um into the debate but I just wanted a clarification while you have the diagrams up there um and it would be when you show with with your red where you've done the very helpful um red lines on to show the current situation yes do you want me to share that again yes please that one that one thank you so can I just clarify that when you talked about the the ones at the top which are the two that you said had been um given permission were those permission on appeal but the planning history of the for those permissions sorry let's just get that one more so the one to the rear of 30s drive that was um the one dwelling and that was allowed on appeal so that's this one here this 30 and the one at 38s drive um was just an approval and the one at 20s drive was a refusal with an appeal dismissed and as I said we've got a resubmitted application at the moment which is still under consideration um thank you very much that's that's good I think it's important in terms of the planning history there thank you and I saw a doctor which williams had a same question same question thanks good um thank you very much Mary and we'll probably come back to you again when we get to the debate um we should have with us Alan Melton mr Melton are you with us I mean hello hello how are you and your clock to the parish council I mean you see me okay we can see you perfectly yes very good very cheery yes I'm glad that I had other things to do while I was listening to your debate earlier ah thank you thank you for hanging in there um but that you're you are still able to be with us after all after waiting for us so that's thank thank you very much can you give us um confirmation that you've got the permission of the parish council to speak on that yes indeed chair um I have got the permission of the parish council to speak here this will be the first time I've spoken to this committee uh as the former councillor who did it in the past has recently retired um so that's why I'm now taking up the bathroom oh good great to see that you're providing services as a club with all your experience thank you very much and you know that therefore you've got the three minutes yes I do indeed and first of all chair chair can I say thank you very much for extending the invitation to speak today um I'm here representing the parish council uh as you've set out the parish council do object to this um proposal and there are a number of main reasons first of all the parish council looks upon it as a blatant um backland development and I know that the officer has alluded to other applications in East Drive uh some one's been approved one on appeal one dismissed and I put it to members that there's obviously no consistency and no precedent in set on those previous developments if you take the whole site six and four together um it does it does really significantly over develop the site but the thing that concerns members is that the garden area does sit outside the development line obviously that's got an uh an existing use it's had a certificate granted it seems to me that somewhere in the past somebody thought very carefully about it and it's been used possibly as a lever to apply for planning permission for the proposals as set out I would say as well on another comment although East Road is it's not a bad road but it also has significant development around there and it does concern members that even more traffic will be entering and egressing from a site down there our main concern is is that the bulk of the proposal is outside the development envelope and it does in the in the views of members set a very dangerous precedent and represents creeping development outside the defined village boundary and what worries members is that if this one is allowed um this is the thin edge of thin end of the wedge uh which will encourage um further development there you know coldicott has two very significant developments going ahead at the moment and it is also uh about to receive a planning application for further significant development and it does concern members that although these these are only ones and twos it does add significantly if you add them all up over a period of time significantly to the local infrastructure regarding highways um junctions round about state of the roads and of course educational and leisure facilities so with that chair I on behalf of parish council our recommendation is that this is refused thank you very much for your time thank you very much thank you for sticking with the time members do you have any questions councillor Fane thank you chair um yes just a question in relation to the village design guide that would appear to recognise as I think it says here subdivision of large high field spots to provide new dwellings is acceptable subject to certain conditions which it might be argued this meets how does your objection square with the village design guide as far as we are concerned it is a blatant black backland development and quite frankly the use of the extended area as garden room if that hadn't been there which is unfortunate there would have been no there would have been no application in this form as I said earlier as well it also sets a very dangerous development a precedent for development and it is creeping development over and above the major developments that were already taking place within the curcludges of the village thank you very much councillor dr marketing card um you uh you comment about the adequacy of east road for the the highways authority did not wish to object because it was a private road um do you see um what how do you can you explain the width of the road is it uh can cars pass on it um what would the what would the problems that you would see due to the access to east road well again it yes you're right it is it is a road that people can uh you can motor vehicles can pass on i drive down there quite regularly however um again if this kind of development proceeds and most of those properties then in in east road have large gardens and back onto open countryside again setting a precedent this could be many many more planning applications similar to this and and that would increase the level of traffic movements to an acceptable level on east road what you've got to remember is those who don't know the geography of it and I didn't know until I worked there that it is actually a cul-de-sac and anything that goes down there has to come out exactly the same direction so the traffic movements is not all one way it is basically basically any traffic that goes down there actually in fact doubles up the journey because it has to come out the same way thank you and thank you very much for your time no further questions thank you very much if you can take your video off thank you very much Mr Malcolm thank you and local member council member would you like to speak now thank you chair I will say my piece during the debate okay thank you very much and we move to the debate then members anybody like to yes council member bachelor thank you chair just a bit of clarity from the officers please on the um on the village framework obviously we've heard a bit about it um and the development as a whole does exceed the village framework albeit the buildings themselves would be within it so I just wanted a bit of clarity and whether we can use that as a material reason yeah through you chair the the framework boundary is a material planning consideration the dwellings are indicatively shown within the framework boundaries the cases are explained but that's not fixed at this stage so my advice would be that the framework boundary is material um I think we also have Lorraine Casey who's the area team leader for this um parts of the district on the call and she may be able to provide some comments on um consideration of planning inspector in relation to a nearby appeal on this issue that would be very helpful because I think this issue around the backland development and I think this is one of the reasons it also that is in front of us about this sort of whether or not this is about creeping development and backland development beyond the village development framework so I think that clarity would help us hugely Lorraine um thank you chair yeah I just really wanted to draw attention to the appeal decision relating to the dwelling that was approved at the back of number 30 which Mary showed on her presentation now that appeal decision was made in 2016 the dwelling sits um although the access to the site is in the framework the dwelling sits outside the development framework and the inspector said that the site is located close to a number of facilities in called cot and is within walking distance to these as such whilst part of the site is class as being within the open countryside it is not isolated either physically or functionally from the main settlement so on that basis the inspector felt that the development was appropriate now at that state and the main consideration was then is it in keeping with the character of the area which um being a large dwelling in a spacious plot and also not extending beyond existing built form at the back of the frontage development which includes number 34 these drives the inspector came to the view that it wouldn't harm the character of the area the decision was also made in the context of us not being able to demonstrate by beer housing land supply but that wasn't um a critical factor in the inspector's decision so I think taking that into account we'd caution against um you know any sort of resistance on the on the basis of the village train work and suggest that the consideration should relate to the impact on the character of the area okay thank you that's all I wanted to say on on that decision thank you very much and could I um ask that Mary could you bring up the the plan again that shows where the extent of this boundary this the the red line reaches for this particular application in relation to the others right yeah just getting that so this one here shows um they obviously in the context of the summit showing the gardens and position of the dwellings so not not the position of the dwellings we know that's indicative but it's the far the furthest the line of it as far as it's going okay so if it can be so this is yeah that far line there so this is the extent of the site here and can I issue it in relation to the other buildings because we're looking at that issue around character and appearance of the area that the other one was approved because it didn't reach further than other ones had in the area so where does the garden area on that picture so this is the garden area that's subject to the lawful development certificate but this proposal is going to come to approximately there I know but but but it would be able to build right up until where so at the moment the indicative plan so where the dwellings would be but it's only indicative would be within the settlement boundary yeah and where would the end of the red line boundary go the end of the garden so the question I'm asking Mary is whether or not that red line at the end of it goes beyond the the other this this yeah that's a bit of this so it goes approximately there the additional garden land so it doesn't go beyond the other buildings but the further up no so when you look at in comparison you've got these workshops here so I'm just going by that that's you know these are the workshops okay so it's going to approximately there so in terms of it of its position it's not actually going further yeah okay thank you that was my question basically this question as well the fear of course is if the permission was granted there would be permitted development rights which could be extended could be applied outside the development framework and the such as outbuildings or an extension is it possible to withdraw these permitted permit permitted development rights you don't seem to propose to do that in condition and would it be reasonable chair through you um it's possible I'd argue it's probably not reasonable given the existing lawful use of that land as a residential garden land already so um that would be my my advice thank you just ask clarification question to go go back to the appeal um a minute ago that was 2016 I remember correctly obviously our local plan didn't fly there and then policy s7 specifically about development outside the framework wouldn't have applied at that point is that right so that we are actually looking at this in a different context to the context the inspector was looking at it then I'd have to check with Lorraine whether whether or not the framework boundary changed between plans or not um I would anticipate there was a development framework boundary in place at that time but I wasn't here so the policies you are asking but the policy and I know there was a period where there was no land supply so um I don't know if rumour is correct that we couldn't have applied the local plan so I'm also asking whether it had been at that point or was it at a point where there was a plan in place and there was a relevant you know policy I suppose yeah Lorraine did you do you understand that question um I did through you chair yes there obviously it was a different local plan that was in place at the time that appeal decision was made um but it was at a time where we had a framework boundary and the the boundary was in the the same position as it is in the current local plan um obviously the called court village that design statement spd has been adopted since that 2016 appeal decision so it does represent um you know a material consideration I think in one of the paragraphs of that appeal decision what the inspector identifies as being the defining characteristics of the area and east drive um are replicated um within the village design statement in terms of how it identifies the character of the high fields area and generally in general on east drive in in particular so it's one of the paragraphs in that appeal decision talks about the existing arrangement dwellings along east drive is relatively linear there are examples of in-depth buildings along east drive with the large building sighted on the adjacent site therefore once the dwelling would introduce in-depth development it would not result in any additional or unacceptable encroachment into the open countryside beyond the existing built form um but there are at other points in that appeal decision where the inspector does talk about um the character being of um dwellings within relatively spacious plots I hope that answers your your question there was the point about whether the land supply issue was current at that point but I would welcome clarification on that through you chair I think Lorraine did mention that in her first answer there there was no five years by that point but the inspector didn't afford weight thank you very much Lorraine um no more thank you local member thank you chair um obviously I know the site very well um this one is a it's a difficult one which is why it's it's come before the community today and in some ways it seems to me I see perhaps you know looking at it strictly speaking which is what we need to do from the planning viewpoint the fact that the garden space being proposed for this is about what two-thirds of the whole plot is outside the village framework um and I know for a fact that we've had a committee in the past that's turned down you know something that's been just over the line and I guess we need to weigh up whether or not the use of the um the bed outside the village framework uh is acceptable which with a lawful certificate will suggest that it is for me the question then is put in two two potentially two buildings um within that plot when you look at it in comparison with the two that exists in front of it you can see there's quite a big difference and it's like they're trying to squeeze in too much into the space that there is so the question then is is there nobody will open there and is it suitable it's the character that is being created there is it suitable my answer is no but I take the point that has been made about the one that's been granted at appeal but the inspector might not have given a lot of weight to find the land supply but it was still within the time when we didn't have a five year land supply I mean I have seen this village grow and in some ways it's kind of been you know a bit of this a bit of that but we're now seeing a lot of uh this sort of plot division I guess for me I wouldn't mind so much if all of it was within the framework but it isn't um but I know there's also other side where you know there's things being approved that have not been within the framework I'm sorry this is a tough one for me I guess I'll be looking to the other members to help with us making a decision on this one it's it's just it's a tough one I think there's too much too in that space compared to what's there already but it doesn't mean that you can't build anything in it and if I may must uh think with relation to East Drive itself it is a private road part of it is tired and the rest of it is not it's a single carriageway effectively so it's like you have to wait and for someone else to go by before you can um I know it very well so again you know it's adding traffic to that but it is a private road oh if I can please go to my vice chair and thank you for that councillor dr Timon Holikins because it's together also with the parish councils you know comments I think I find this very very hard but what I worry about is since the time when that was refused and then you know it was won on appeal we do have policies there has been a village design guide that does allow subdivision but it doesn't say go beyond the village development framework so it says yes subdivide but it doesn't say go beyond the village development framework and the two-thirds beyond in terms of that immunity space um you know obviously a reserve matters has to come and then they would have to show where where the building is so that's at the time where you know we would know so this is where I'm finding it very difficult because you know can can we can come to that determination but what what I do find is that it seems to be presenting something that on the one hand in terms of subdivision I also think that's quite high density in that subdivision but to be that red line just seems to be continuing that backline development I have to say that my sort of gut feeling is that's where it's where it's sort of leading to um but I'm finding it hard as an outline application to find the grounds for refusal at the moment I'm just I don't know where we're going on some Councillor Fane. Thank you chair I'm sorry to say I don't find this a difficult one good um it is quite clear that this is residential development up to an indicative maximum scheme size of eight dwellings will be permitted within group villages um there are precedents for similar developments on this land the only area of uncertainty to my mind is whether we can be sure that the dwellings themselves are located within the village framework that is the effect of the indicative layout but that is not binding as I understand it and I don't think and officers may like to correct me on this that we're able to place any conditions on the outline consent that would make that binding so of course this would be that would be a matter for later consideration should an application come back for more detailed consideration we have as was mentioned the village design guide and that seems fairly specific that the principal subdivision of high fields plots is acceptable and whatever we may think of the merits of this I cannot see any grounds for refusing it given the clear guidance of the officers the principal of two dwellings within this location is in accordance with the policy s10 um so for me I'm afraid it is fairly clear cut thank you chair it's just a question for officers um should this be granted approval today for the interest of interest of continuity might it be possible and I don't know if it is to condition that the reserve matters application on this site would have to come back to this committee or yeah it's just a question around that just for uh yeah interests of of continuing the same line of thinking do you chair I don't think that's something we could condition but I think it's something I can say officers have heard um and no doubt the parish council may take a further interest in any subsequent reserve matters application as well so um I think it's something we would consider at that time rather than making a condition of this application but I can note that for the record I mean there are means so the parish council objects the local ward member objects to a reserve matter application it would come to chair's delegation I assume we would then make sure it became to planning committee so um yeah um council doctor Richard Williams thank you chair um I I'm in the camp of struggling with this one um but I would welcome a bit of guidance really on one part I'm struggling with which is this point about the development framework I mean this is now an application as everyone has said therefore we don't know whether the dwellings will be so we are being asked essentially are we happy with the principle of development here where the dwelling may or may not be um within within the development framework that that's really all we can um that's all we can do and on that basis I I think we could quite legitimately say we're not happy that this is compatible with s7 because we are effectively in principle approving you know development somewhere on that plot two thirds of it being outside the development framework see Mr Carter's nodding so so it's my it's my analysis of that defensible yes I don't disagree I think you're also considering whether or not you think the plot is capable of accommodating two dwellings um as well as a sort of separate consideration cast it up to me hulkin maybe I can help in some ways the principle of development within that plot itself within the framework um I guess it's acceptable wasn't acceptable to me is that we are saying up to two I don't think two is a good number for that given the character of the other plots we are talking of single dwellings in large plots and that I think is part of the difficulty I have with what's proposed outline for up to two for one maybe but for two um could you perhaps bring up the slide again Mary which showed the indicative plan of the two buildings thank you I think members we're going to council of the Williams I know that you came in but later you won't be able to vote but you are able to take part in the chairman I was just going to apologise I had some urgent case work which had to tend to but I won't take part in the vote um if I can add to the debate I think essentially if I was being allowed to vote I probably wouldn't support this because those houses are gonna have to put two houses and fit the character they're gonna have to be tiny really if you're going to not lose the um to the point that I don't think it'd be viable yeah I disagree that they'd be tiny but I think I'd say council of the Williams point that on that plot and given the character and appearance of the area they wouldn't be of the same size as the as the other ones uh members are going to take this to the vote um Chris in terms of yeah thank you chair through you so um notwithstanding it's an outline application I've got one reason reason for refusal around um the layout uh character yeah character um and that um failing to adhere to the sort of linear pattern of development um and subsequent narrow pot widths being out of keeping with the sort of low density nature of the uh the area uh that's contrary to policies HQ 1 and H16 just to clarify whether or not members are looking for a second reason associated with the framework boundary or not having regard to councillor Dr Hawking's comment in terms of principle of development or yeah just stay with one or you want to include the principle of development one so include the I think Dr Williams also raised that issue which is the again so that's the second reason around framework boundary which we can formulate the wording and agree with chair and vice chair yeah okay members thank you so we'll go to the vote and the the vote is around the recommendation for approval subject conditions which are laid out from page 61 onwards thank you um from 61 onwards thank you very much so we wish we should only have nine council Harvey he's often in another stratosphere anyway we're usually cooking up very good ideas and on that so this is approved with five votes in favour and four against an abstention so thank you very much everybody very interesting one but obviously this reserved matters will come before us I hope and so we are now on to agenda item eight members on page 69 this is application 21 slash 01633 slash cl2pd in combatan 24 west street combatan and the proposal is the certificate of lawfulness under section 192 for the construction of a concrete base for the siting of a caravan with an existing residential planning unit in the erection of two meter high gates and boundary fence and construction of a permeable gravel parking area and the applicant is Mr Alistair Fung and the key considerations is um it appears for local planning authority the proposed works comply with schedule two part one class f and schedule two part two class a of the town and country planning general committee development order 2015 as amended as we know many of the committee development rights um have been amended regularly just recently um and the applicant's been brought to the committee because the applicant is a staff member of south camps district council and into to ensure transparency about sport before as the presenting officer charlotte spencer charlotte hello hi good afternoon good afternoon just a very brief presentation for you just confirm you can see this yes we can thank you okay so it's a certificate of law for development application for a concrete base for the siting of a caravan and the erection of two meter high gates and construction of permeable gravel parking area um just briefly outlining this site so this is south site here number 24 west street it's a detached dwelling house located to the north um it's set back considerably from the highway it's adjacent to uh the grade two list of buildings here so i'll just change my point sorry at numbers 14 and 18 west street these two are grade two this building uh the site lies within the combatant converse conservation area but it's not listed itself and permitted development rights for the property have not been removed uh so just brief photos um from google here so the site is properties here this is just showing the listed buildings and how they relate to the site and then this is just showing it from the other side there's the property there and again an aerial so this just showing what they are proposing so here they're proposing a concrete base for the siting of a caravan and the two meter high gates are located here which is approximately three meters away from the highway um with hedges along the front and they're just extending the permeable gravel parking area so this is just elevations that have been submitted of the caravan um however please note they're just information only as a caravan slash mobile home is considered an article of movable personal property and so there are no planning laws preventing one being kept within the curtain edge of the dwelling if it is necessarily to their dwelling so and then so just to sum up um as it's a lawful development certificate application there's no material planning considerations and it appears to the local planning authority that the post works comply with schedule two part one class f and schedule two part two class a of the general committed development order thank you chair thank you very much charlotte um and because this didn't well because it's as typical of lawfulness there's not public consultation around that but um parish council were asked for their comments and so we have those in the report um so we'll move directly to the debate and any questions to the planning office counts to Peter Payne. The chairman just to be clear there is I think no quick the the the planning merits of this are not an issue um that's not relevant nor are we in any sense being asked about the caravan it is just a technical matter does it meet the terms does it um therefore are we effectively obliged to um grant the certificate of lawful development I am I find it hard to resist the comment on paragraph 13 that the caravan would not be used as incidentally for the dwelling house and indeed the applicant has been advised that that might be a matter of enforcement I'm sure that will well understood um so as far as I'm concerned it's um it's an open and shut case um just just for myself so what I've understood from the comments from the parish council are concerns that often come to us which is about what this may lead to what we've got to look at is what is in front of us and I then assume that if um people were to see this in the locality the residents in the parish council were to see that this were being used not as a caravan but as an additional dwelling so that it would be a change of use um then that would be a matter for enforcement um and what we would have to ensure that obviously wouldn't be an enforcement officer enforcing upon himself that there would be another enforcement officer that would have to be doing this but I think that's where the main concerns are its perception and that's why it's before us today and we have to make sure that we're very very clear about this that it's about future use of this and it's about concerns that what's being put in place does this seem to say that this would be therefore used not as a you know a mobile home property but actually as something residential so um but as councillor Fane said looking at what's in front of us I don't see any grounds for for refusal councillor Dr Muffin Carn. I would simply comment that if it were this to be a planning application I think we would have great reservations about it we're needing planning commission it's a bit of a curious situation for instance if I wanted to put a very small bike um bike store of one meter by one meter by two meters in my front garden I would need planning permission but if I could put a great big car around when I couldn't but as has been said this is a matter of fact and the position appears to be that it is legal and lawful so that's the um position we're faced with and the decision seems to be quick up. Thank you chair I was just going to say you know what's in front of us it's it's a matter of whether it's a lawful or not it's lawful and I think we could probably just leave it there. Yep let's move to the vote thank you and so the vote is on the recommendation by the officer um but this is approved the certificate of lawfulness there we go okay and um that's been approved by 10 votes so thank you very much that is approved members and that is our last item on the agenda for today thank you everybody for your time thank you