 Mae'n dweud eich bod yn defnyddio. Rwy'n dda i'r hoffi'n meddwl ar ôl i chi, o fe wneud i chi'n meddwl â'r modd, a'r meddwl o'r hyn. Dw i'n meddwl am meddwl ar y cyfnod o'r meddwl ar gyfer y Cymru, yn ddau ar y Cymru, iddo i'n meddwl yn y Cymru ar yr ystod i'r gael yng Nghymru. Fy enw, rwy'n meddwl ar gael i chi. Yn rydych chi'n meddwl am y cyfle cyfrifiadau at y cadw. Rwy'n meddwl ar gyfer y Cymru, mor cymdeithasol, ond mae'n rhai o'n ddweud ymlaen, ond mae'n dweud yma. Rwy'n credu i fynd i'n adrwyl yng Nghaerhwm, Henry Batchelor. Rwy'n credu i'n cymdeithasol yn y Cymru, ond y cynyddu yma'r hwn yng Nghaerhwm yn ymlaen i'r cyfnod yn ei ddweud yn ymlaen i'ch cyfnod yr hynny. Rwy'n credu i'n credu i'n cymdwyr y cyfnod yr hynny, Felly, rydyn ni'n edrych i'r FFB'r fathwn i'r cyfrifio, gallwch yn ymdwg i'r cyfrifio Peter Fane i'r gweithio llyfrur y gynhyrch. Is ymddi'r ddechrau tynnu? Mae'r cyfrifio ffawr ar ychydig. Peter, i ffraeg ar y cyfrifio, ei wneud i'w gwaith ar y gwasgau'r cyfrifio. Rydyn ni'n gweithio Peter Fane, rydyn ni'n gweithio'r cyfrifio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Can everyone present in the Chamber know that we are on camera today? So please be aware that everything on your desk, including your laptop screen, is likely to be broadcast live at some point, so please do be aware of that. The camera follows the microphone being switched on, so Councillors and officers are requested to wait a few seconds before speaking to allow the camera to catch up with them. If the fire alarm sounds, then please do leave the Chamber immediately and exit the building through the nearest emergency exit. The assembly point is at the junction of Great St Mary's and King's Parade. Further information on this exact location is in the PACS that democratic services officers have emailed round to us before the meeting. Please can those members who are participating in the live stream please indicate you wish to speak via the chat column. Please do not use the chat column for anything other than requests to speak. Please ensure you have switched off or silenced any other devices you have so that you are ready to address the meeting. Please make sure your microphone is switched on. When you've finished addressing the meeting, please turn your microphone off immediately. Please note members, if we have to vote on any item we should do so via the microphones. It's the same system that we usually have in Camborn, so there shouldn't be any surprises there. And only those members of the committee present in the Chamber today are able to vote. Members present in the Chamber, because the system here is slightly different, our names don't appear on screen when our microphones are on. So I'm going to have to do very quick introductions if that's okay with everybody. So I'm now going to go round the members who are present in the Chamber. And if you could switch on your microphone, wait a few seconds then briefly introduce yourself please. So as mentioned, I'm Councillor Henry Batchelor. I'm usually the Vice-Chair for this committee. Councillor Fane, please. Peter Fane, Shelford Ward, I appear to be the Vice-Chair. Very observe and counsellor. Councillor Martin Cahn. Councillor Martin Cahn, Member for Heston-Inpington on Orchard Park. Thank you very much, Councillor Clair Daunton. I'm Councillor Clair Daunton, one of the members for the Fane, Dytton and Fullborn Ward, substituting today for Councillor Eileen Wilson. Thank you, Councillor Harvey. Welcome. Councillor Cahn, can you turn off your microphone? Councillor Harvey, can you switch yours on please? Yeah, I'll probably just check. Yeah, Councillor Jeff Harvey, Borsham Ward. Thank you very much, Councillor Dr Timmy Hawkins. Good morning everyone, I'm Timmy Hawkins, counsellor for Codicott Ward. Thank you, counsellor Rippeth. Good morning everyone, I'm counsellor Judith Rippeth, Member for Milton and Waterreach Ward. Thank you, counsellor Heather Williams, please. Good morning, my name is Heather Williams and I represent the Mordons Ward. Thank you and counsellor Dr Richard Williams. Thank you, Chair. I'm Richard Williams, I'm the Member for the Whittlesford Ward. Thank you very much, so I confirm the meeting's court, so we're going to proceed. With us in the Chamber, we also have two officers who will be supporting us. We have Mr Chris Carter on my left. Thank you, Chair, morning members. Chris Carter, deliver manager for strategic sites. Thank you and we also have Mr Aaron Clark, who's helping us Clark the meeting, Aaron. Good morning, thank you, Chair. Yes, technical support officer for the meeting. Thank you very much and I believe online we have Mr Rory McKenna, who's supporting us in a legal fashion. Good morning, Chair. I am on date until Stephen Reid takes over when he arrives. Thank you very much and actually we also have another Member supporting us, Lawrence, who is our new democratic services officer who's supporting the planning committee, Lawrence. Would you like to switch your camera on and introduce yourself? Yes, morning, Chair. Lawrence DeMarie Home and new DEM services, as you say. Best of luck with this lengthy agenda today. Thank you very much. Members, just a reminder, if any Member leaves the meeting at any point, would you please indicate that to me so it can be recorded in the minutes? We'll be taking regular breaks, depending on where we are in the agenda, but given we have quite a lot to get through today, we'll have to do that as and when, but obviously we'll be taking breaks to allow Members time to refresh themselves. Members should have the main agenda pack dated 2 November and also some supplementary items, which were only emailed round, so we should have digital copies of those. Those are both dated 5 November and they both relate to North Stofaise 2 and also there should also be a plans pack for a number of the items that we'll be discussing today. So if anyone doesn't feel they have those agenda item, those documents, sorry, please do indicate when we get to those items. Okay, we're going to move on to item one on the agenda, which is Chair's announcements. Two announcements from me. One, as I mentioned, we have a new democratic services officer supporting us Lawrence, who just introduced himself. Obviously, that does mean that our previous clerk who was supporting the committee in senior is now no longer sadly supporting the planning committee left the council, but he is moving to a different role within the democratic services team. So on behalf of the committee, I'd just like to register our thanks for the many years of support that Ian's provided the planning committee and wish him all the well in his future roles in the council. So, yeah, great. Thank you to Ian for all his dedication. And secondly, for those that don't know, Mr Chris Carter on my left is leaving the council. I think he's only got a week or so, he's left with us, so this is his last ever planning committee as he breeds a sigh of relief next to me. Chris, how long have you been with the council? Thanks, Chair. Two years, just over two years. Probably not my last ever plan. Well, again, thank you very much for myself as chair and obviously from the committee as a whole for your support for us over those two years. It's been greatly well received and always hugely professional. So we as a committee wish you all the best in the future and hopefully see you at committee again, albeit in a different capacity. So members will move on now with item two on the agenda, which is apologies. Lawrence, can we have apologies, please? Yes, Chair. So we have apologies from the usual chair, Councillor Pippa Halings. Councillor Deborah Roberts also sends her apologies and Councillor Eileen Wilson too with apologies with Councillor Claire Daunton kindly substituting for Councillor Wilson. Great. Thank you very much. Item number three members is declarations of interest. So do any members have any pecuniary or non-pecuniary item? Councillor Cahn. With regard to the item on Barrington, items on Barrington, 12 years ago I gave a slideshow at information to councillor, sorry, Mr Elihu Lightapart and the applicant appears to be the son. I'm approaching this afresh. Thank you. Councillor Daunton. Yes, thank you, Chair. The first item on the agenda about the footpath is in a parish of Fenditon. Fenditon is in my ward. This seems to be a little... I'm muted, sorry. Sorry, technical microphone issues, members. Yeah. Can everyone online please make sure their microphones are muted, please? Okay. Well, thank you, councillor. I think we understood the interest anyway. Yes. I have been present when there had been discussions at parish council, but I come to this completely. Thank you very much. Councillor Heather Williams, please. Thank you, Chair. Just on the enforcement report, I'm a local member for one of the cases on there, but it's not a decision making, but obviously have been involved in discussions around that. Great. Thank you very much. I need to declare an interest on item five. As Camershire County Councillor, the applicant, I'm also a member of Camershire County Council, as I believe Councillor Daunton you are as well, so I think that will be noted too. But obviously that doesn't preclude us from making a decision on it today. Councillor Rippeth, please. On the enforcement report as well, there's a couple of items to do with my ward, but I've not been involved. Okay. That's fine. Noted. And Councillor Harvey, please. Yes, I'm also involved in one of the items on the enforcement report. Great. Thank you very much. No more declarations, so we'll move on to item four. Minutes of previous meetings. Members, we have two sets of minutes to look at starting on page one, which is the meeting on Wednesday, the 29th of September. Members, are you content that I sign this as a correct record, or are there any alterations, Councillor Rippeth? Just as spanning the sake of a councillor's name on page two, on declarations of interest, minute three, councillor Corrin Garby should be C-O-R-I-N-E. Are you looking? Sorry. Paragraph four, minutes three, declarations of interest. One too many hours in there. Well, yeah. One too many hours and one too few ends. Okay. I'm sure that'll be noted and Lawrence can update that before publishing. Any other? Councillor Daunton. Yes, on the next set of minutes I have a point. Okay. I think we'll sign these ones off first. Members, with that small name change, is everyone content that we sign these as a correct record? Just a mumble of affirmation to be fine. Yeah, thank you. So, we move on to the second set of minutes, which is from Wednesday the 13th of October. Again, same question, members. Any alterations, Councillor Daunton? Yes, thank you, Chair. I'm on page eight under point six, the first paragraph. Myself and councillor John Williams also spoke on that occasion, and I can't see that we were represented there. So, councillor John Williams and councillor Dr Clare Daunton were both speakers. Okay. Lawrence, I'm sure that can be included in the minutes when they're published, please. Any further amendments to this set of minutes, members? Nope. Okay. So, with that one addition, are members okay to agree these minutes is correct? Agreed? Good. Thank you very much. We will then move on to substantive items of business on the agenda, starting with item number five, which is a footpath diversion in Fenditon. Members, this is on page 13 of our agendas. The applicant is Cambershire County Council, and we have Mr James Stringer, who is the definitive maps officer at the County Council, to present the item to us today. James, good morning. Good morning. And, yeah, if you could present the item, please. Yeah, this agenda item is regarding an application for a public park order under section 257 of the Town of Country Planning Act 1990. That particular section being under the Town of Country Planning Act allows South Cambridgeshire District Council, as the local planning authority, to make... Apologies, James. Sorry, would you mind starting again? I'm not sure how much. Yeah, yeah, yeah. For people watching online, call to them. Yeah. This agenda item is regarding an application for a public park order under section 257 of the Town of Country Planning Act 1990. Section 257. The team's meeting screen, so I believe people watching online will only be able to hear what's being said rather than see anything, but I'm content to carry on like that. So, James, for the third time, apologies if you wouldn't mind starting again with the item, please. Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, this agenda item is regarding an application for a public park order under section 257 of the Town of Country Planning Act 1990. Section 257 allows South Cambridgeshire District Council, as the local planning authority, sorry, to make a public park order to divert or stop up a public right-of-way if they are satisfied that it is necessary to do so to enable a development to be carried out. It also allows for the creation of an alternative path as a replacement for the one proposed to be stopped up. The report for the committee this morning is in relation to the Mali development of New Market Road in the parish of Fen Didden. As part of the development proposals, Hill, via their agents plan serve, have applied for a public path order affecting Fen Didden public footpath number nine. Historically, public footpath number nine ran from a point on New Market Road between the park and ride and the BP garage and ran in a northerly direction across what was arable land to the disused railway line. This is shown between points A to E on the plan appendix E of the report. The applicant's assertion in their application is that the existing public footpath is required to be stopped up to allow the permitted development to be carried out. As part of the application for a public path order, the applicant also proposes to provide an alternative path as a replacement. The applicant has proposed that the replacement path be a more inclusive status of a public bridal line and would follow generally the perimeter of the development site. This is shown between points F, G, H, J, K, L and E on the plan. Just briefly going through the report, section two of the report presents some further background on the matter. Section three provides a description of the existing and proposed paths, while sections four and five sets out the legal framework for today's decision along with the relevant council policies. It should also be noted that there are various other paths which the applicant has agreed to provide as part of the development proposals that are anticipated to become public bridal ways as well. As these dedications of new bridal ways are not linked to any existing public rights away, it is not possible for them to be considered under the Town and Country Planning Act and are therefore not part of today's decision. These paths are being considered separately by the county council under provisions contained within the Highways Act 1980. The remaining sections of the report sets out the responses received during consultation and an assessment of the proposal against the legislative framework and council policies. The Assistant Director of Highway Maintenance at the county council, being the position with delegated powers confirmed on the 20th of September of this year that the proposed alternative inquiry would be acceptable to the county council as local highway authority. Therefore, the decision to be considered today by the committee is whether it is necessary to make a public path order of a nine-fendant to enable the development as approved to be carried out. Following a consideration of the proposal, the officer's recommendation as set out in section 10 is that a public path order is necessary and that an order should be made by South Cambridge District Council under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act subject to the inclusion of some necessary information regarding widths. Thank you. I'm going to go straight into the debate on this as any questions for James now is the opportunity to ask Councillor Cahn. The proposal is to create a bridalway but a section of the route is planned to be only two metres wide. How do you... How does it plan to cope for the different usage on a site which is so narrow will it not be possible to have a separate area for horses and for pedestrians for instance or for cycles for instance because of bridalway? James. There are some sections of the proposed path which are proposed to be two metres wide. There are sections of the path that will run parallel with asphalted routes that are being provided as part of other phases of the development and are subject to section 308 adoptions through the Highway Authority. In reality what you would have on the ground is a three-metre or four-metre-wide asphalt cycleway if that's what you would like to call it plus this two-metre wide bridalway alongside it which would provide the additional rights for equestrians. So in reality you would end up with a five or six-metre-wide non-myterised user corridor split in terms of surface and status. The only being provided with two-metre width for horses claiming that wasn't sufficient. James. So the comments of the British Horse Society they were consulted in this particular application and actually they were fairly heavily involved through the planning process of the permitted development as well and they didn't raise any objections in this particular matter. Members. Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you. I can point with the bridalway. I think part of the problem is if you've got multi-use and two-metres isn't sufficient for all those purposes but as it seems to be that there's the two-metres and the other area because the problem is the horses can't go on the asphalt but two-metres for the horses should be fine. I'm pleased that actually that's been included and looked at as something that's often overlooked so happy to support it. Thank you very much. I don't see any no further speakers members so can I take it we can go to the recommendation which is on page 21 but it's hidden by the blue strip at the bottom of the page. Quite unhelpfully. It's section 10 of the County Council's report if that helps anyone and I'm not going to read the entire recommendation but you can see it in front of you there. Members, I haven't heard any dissent to this so can I take this by affirmation please? Anybody not agree? No, no abstentions. No, okay. So that is approved. Thank you everyone. Thank you James. Thank you. Members, we'll move on to item 6 which is on page 81, thank you and this is an application on the land north and east of Rhamthill Farm, Rhamton Road, Cottenham. The proposal is for the approval of matters reserved in respect of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following an outline permission for residential development of 140 dwellings. We have a list of key material considerations in our agenda's members and the application is here because Cottenham Parish Council requested that the application was heard by the planning committee. The recommendation is approval. The presenting officer is Michael Sexton who I'm hoping is with us online. Michael. I am, good morning chair. Good morning. Councillor Goff if you could turn your camera off for a second please. You will be called upon later, thank you. Michael if you'd like to give us any updates and then present the report please. Thank you chair. There's just the one update, a representation sent to democratic services on the 4th of November. I don't propose to read it in full because it is more or less duplication of representations that are received during the course of the application and raise no new issues but just to highlight it's a representation in respect of filling the number of houses and roadways on the site is too high. Location of attenuation ponds. Location for leap. Concerns around planting cycle routes to Lambs Lane and Les Kingwood all of those issues were raised during the consultation period and have been addressed in the report so I don't propose to read the page in full if that's okay chair. Yep that's fine. So I'll move on to my presentation. Chair if you could confirm that you're able to see a PowerPoint on screen now. Yes we can. Perfect. Yes so this is an application sorry. A reserve mass application for 140 dwellings with matters of appearance, landscaping layout and scale following an outline permission for residential development on Ranton Road Cotland. Members may recall this site is one that's been to members before but just for context it's located on the western edge of Cotland heading out towards Ranton further to the west and there was an outline consent was allowed at appeal on 10 May 2018 for 154 dwellings. That application was later subject to a non-material amendment which revised description to say up to 154 dwellings a key relevance to the reserve mass application there are three conditions on the outline consent condition five requiring a precautionary working methodology to be submitted in terms of biodiversity habitats that has been submitted and found acceptable as part of this reserve mass application. Condition six requires details of housing mix including the affordable housing to be provided that has been done and is in the report and again found to be acceptable. Condition seven related to the potential for the layout of the site to build over any existing pictures they would then have to be re-provided and the layout doesn't do so so there's no need for any pictures to be re-provided because none are lost as part of this proposal. In terms of the application boundary again this red line boundary here is the reserve matters boundary has been reduced slightly from the outline consent which I've tried to highlight as this dashed line so this section here in green is no longer part of the reserve matters proposal that's because Camershire County Council have retained this parcel of land for the future expansion of the school and land that's to be leased to the parish council but the reserve matters site is entirely within and hold it within the agreement of the outline boundary so there's no issues in that respect. Again that's just to show site in relation to the existing village just a few views it is very much as you probably expect to fairly open relatively flat and developed area of land that joins the recreation ground does slope down slightly into Leskin Wood which bounds the western boundary of the site. Relevant planning history if members can recall in October 2020 an application reserve matters application was considered by the committee for approval of appearance landscape layout and scale for 147 dwellings that was refused by the planning committee for two reasons first being the proposed dwellings by virtue of their excessive scale height, mass and design would be harmful to the character of the area contrary to local plan policies and neighbourhood plan policies and then the second reason related to the number of dwellings in their sighting interfering with a vista towards all saints church from around the road contrary to Cotland neighbourhood plan that decision was subject to an appeal which was dismissed in July of this year and both of those reasons were upheld so this application for members today very much seeks to address those reasons for refusal and officers are satisfied that the proposal does indeed address those reasons so this is the proposed layout of 140 dwellings 84 market units 56 are four ball which is 40% of the development in terms of the second reason for refusal there is a vista in the neighbourhood plan part of the neighbourhood plan from this area of Rampton Road which looks across the site over the fields to all saints church which is a couple of kilometres further to the north it might not be too clear on this plan but there is a dashed line which is where the developer is superimposed the vista from the neighbourhood plan onto the layout of the site and you can see that the built form has been stepped away further away from Leskingwood to allow these open views to be retained so we're satisfied in terms of the layout that that vista has been retained and the parish council haven't raised any objections in that regard just to highlight to members the distribution of four-wall housing is distributed well through the site it's in line with the housing strategy and the council's housing team happy so there's no objections from officers in terms of the distribution and the mix of affordable housing that's being provided in terms of scale and appearance again referring back to the previous refusal the first reason for refusal being excessive height and scale of the dwellings introducing a discordance appearance previously the rich heights has set out in paragraphs 149 and 151 of the reports this scheme has refused to have rich heights ranging between 9 and 10 metres whereas the application for members today is between 8.2 and 8.8 so it is reduced and the angle of the pitch is much more traditional in keeping with the footage so these are just to show a mixture of house types there's a range of house types within the layout and that's to add interest and variety and avoid the repetition of house types which you can see convey that you don't really have house types of the same design or material palette next to each other too often which is a positive response to the design common neighbourhood plan these are just some examples of some of the house types it's a very typical two-story development throughout the site these are part of the plans perhaps if you would have seen these already and then this is the apartment buildings they've got a rich height of 7.4 that's a reduction of 1.2 metres to what was proposed on the application that was refused in terms of landscaping there's actually a condition on the outline that will secure the detailed planting for the application but hopefully this gives a sense that there's a central green space to the site which is a positive feature the leap is actually being located on the edge of the site rather than in the middle and we feel that gives a good connection to the adjacent recreation ground hopefully members can see there's a lot of additional planting going in along some of the key roads and a lot of permeability through the site into Leskinwood again that's a positive response to the requirements of the native plan there's a lot of planting going in the details of which are reserved by conditions on the outline consent and will come forward through a discharge conditions application so quite a few things to consider compliance with the outline planning permission again officers are satisfied it ticks the boxes in that respect housing provision, open space the four reserve matters biodiversity flood risk and drainage on flood risk and drainage I would say there is a condition on the outline consent that requires full drainage scheme to come forward including management and maintenance details but for the purposes of the reserve matters application in consultation with the relevant technical consultancies including the internal drainage board officers satisfied that the layout of the site can deliver a suitable drainage scheme highway safety and management of roads the highways authority have said they won't adopt parts of the site in its current form but there is potential for the developer to bring forward more information through the relevant agreement with the highways authority that could result in more of the development being adopted there is a condition recommended as part of the reserve matters application that just deals with the potential for lack of adoption residential community and heritage assets so overall as set out in the report officers are satisfied that the proposal is compliant with those key issues policies of the local plan and the name of the plan and this is recommended for approval and just the stress that we really do feel that has addressed the previous reasons for refusal thank you chair Michael thank you very much if you could hold on the line we've got a few public speakers but we will be I'm sure coming back to you for questions and some members may wish to see some elements of your report again so if you could have that on hand ready to display again that would be useful so members will move it's pretty worth for the minutes noting that Mr Stephen Reid has now arrived at the meeting so Rory if you're online thank you very much for stepping in you weren't needed thankfully but we appreciate you stepping in at short notice I'm going to move on to public speakers now members we have one member of the public first of all Mr Mike Mason if you'd like to come forward Mr Mason just the microphone straight ahead of you thank you so the button on the right hand side activates and turns off the microphone if you're unfamiliar with the process we allow each speaker three minutes to address the committee and then there may be some questions of clarity for you at the end so if you could stay seated when you finish that will be helpful whenever you're ready please thank you chairman I'm here as a resident of Cotnam in fact I live not far from the site in a listed building which is mentioned actually in the officers report in accepting the principle of development at this site has been conceded by the authority with outline permission being granted at appeal against former decisions I would express deep concern that a number of important conditions appear to have been ignored in the latest report this is a very large development to be imposed upon a rural settlement incorporating low lying land much of which lies at or below sea level and as such the applicants must have careful regard to existing infrastructure the development proposal must therefore not only avoid the possibility of flooding on the site but importantly should not increase the risk of flooding downstream it is disappointing to note from the officers report that members have not had the benefit of a site visit turning to the report on paragraph 203 full details of the surface and foul water drainage strategy have not been provided for public consultation and residents of Cotnam reserve the right to question the feasibility of these proposals notwithstanding the apparent acceptance of other consultees foul drainage in the village has been problematical for many years and Anglian water services are currently engaged in a major scheme of upgrading and relining of the 50 year old foul clay drain network in the high street the doubling of the number of dwellings served by the Rampton road foul sewer via a pumped rising main paragraph 306 could well result in unacceptable risk to the free flow in the gravity system and reliability of the units at the broad lane pumping station which has superseded the original local sewage treatment works furthermore it is not stated whether there is an agreement or provision for emergency discharge consent in the event of pump failure either at the new pumping station or the existing broad lane installation in view of the sensitivity of this issue local residents need to be given absolute assurance contained within a discharge of conditions application with regard to management of the foul drainage system of pump failure by the use of tankers to transport untreated effluent to the main treatment works at Milton this happens frequently at Histon restriction of sewage discharge to water courses is an important environmental matter currently being pursued in parliament that being said members should consider whether this is the case whether in this case the hitherto undisputed right of developers to connect to existing under capacity foul we've had three minutes now please could you conclude if possible please could you conclude your comments please we've had the allotted time I'll conclude chairman my representation is about conditions which needs to be taken into account by the planning committee I therefore would urge the committee to defer the application and until all discharge conditions applications are received and have been out for consultation and members have had the opportunity to visit the site this is important for cotton thank you very much Mr Mason members do we have any questions of clarity for Mr Mason no okay thank you very much for coming here today and addressing the committee Mr Mason we'll move on now to our next speaker which is Mr James Griffith Mr Griffith if you'd like to come forward as well please say microphone Mr Griffith I'll be the agent for the applicants is that correct yes Mr Chairman I'm James Griffiths head of planning at Tilia Homes formally care living thank you very much it's the same procedure as before three minutes to address the committee and there may be some questions of clarification for you at the end so whenever you're ready please thank you I hope through our discussions and meetings of the past few months of the parish council local councillors and your officers that we've shown our commitment to securing an attractively designed scheme which responds to the needs of cotton community from the outset our application reduced the number of houses we were proposing from the 154 number in outline to the present proposal of 140 our aim for the application was also the maximising amount of deliverable open space that could be linked to the existing cotton and playing fields whilst at the same time respecting the key vista to the All Saints church fire that the neighbourhood plan highlighted the retention of this vista also enabled the housing development to be set much further back from Les Kingwood ensuring that the setting of the wood is respected and enhanced we've also spent some time satisfying the lead flood authority of the drainage strategy with our calculations I can't hear terribly well and I think one of the members of the public can't hear if you could speak up slightly or speak closer into the microphone did you miss most of that what Mr Griffith was saying I'll start again with that if that's possible you could lead into the microphone so everyone can hear you clearly that would help us better start again please we've also spent some time satisfying the lead flood authority of the drainage strategy with our calculations showing that the system does not flood in 100 year plus climate change event the water being routed into four attenuation basins which have been significantly enlarged from early proposals we understand that the drainage strategy is acceptable to the LLFA although additional details will follow with our condition discharge submission we do however acknowledge that the parish council has raised some outstanding points in relation to the application which I'd like to highlight with regard to the house type design during the course of the application we met with and secured feedback from the design enabling panel and took onboard both comments from them and from your urban design officer altering the proposed materials elevational features and window openings should we secure approval with your planning authority concerning the type of materials employed and feel that this will enable the scheme to meet the parish's expectations in design terms the parish were disappointed about our proposed primary source of heating for the scheme and whilst we're intending at least in the short term to serve the development of gas heating we will be providing solar PV panels for a high proportion of the houses as well as employing construction details which will enable an overall reduction in carbon emissions the parish council also raised concern with regard to the use of shared and adopted roads and whilst it's our intention to secure adoption for as much of the road surface as possible where the design requires shorter informal roads in locations that respond to the low density housing overlooking Leskin Wood we have adopted that council's approach to shared access roads in these instances if the roads are not adopted we'll ensure the maintenance of such roads is appropriately managed through a management company which will retain a legally secure funding perpetuity to maintenance of the roads finally the parish have expressed a desire to improve footpath access to the primary school and Lamb's Lane which is an objective that we're also seeking for our proposed future residents should you approve of the application we'll be able to move forward on a meeting between the county landowners and the parish to discuss such a link to our site if you are able to secure your support for development we'll be able to progress the building between the six affordable dwellings 70% of which will be affordable rent at least 1.6 million of the section 106 agreement contributions including 314,000 for local recreational provision as well as ensuring that our robust management regime is in place for Leskin Wood I therefore hope that you'll be able to support our current proposals, thank you thank you very much, very timely as well if you want my staying seated for the moment Mr Griffith there may be some questions of clarity and I see we have one straight off the back Councillor Hawkins please thank you chair my question is to do with heating for the new house it's very remarked that gas boilers are going to be faced out in 2025 onwards don't know what your plans will be if you did get planning permission when you will be building this out but don't you think you should be looking forward even more than just solar panels and use heat pumps or building for the future here we are looking at that as a company but it's a company wide approach and we haven't concluded what's the best room to go down, I think there are still teething problems with air source heat pumps so we are sort of investigating that and I think initially we just want to make sure that our purchases have a choice potentially but I'm not ruling out definitely alternative heating arrangement certainly in the later part of the development thank you councillor provision being made for electric car charging points in the new dwellers nothing has been shown on these particular plans so we would respond to a condition discharge in that instance if there's a requirement but I don't think it's policy at the moment I'm just being told it's also not a reserved matter at this stage councillor Dawn yes thank you for your presentation can I just follow up on the point that councillor Hawkins has made about the heating you said that there were teething problems with air source heat pumps many of us have installed them I'm not sure what the teething problems would be but I felt it was just quite early on as a company I think we're looking for a sort of company wide response and our head office hasn't sort of concluded what the best route is for heating for our houses so you know I think it's still early days in air source heat pump design and I think they're looking at various alternatives so it's just not being concluded yet as to what the best route is thank you councillor Thane thank you chair yes early days in air source heat pump design I'm not sure whether that is really the case now but that may be so and as pointed out it's not a reserved matter just wondering whether you're able to say that there will be space for for instance if ground source heat pumps were to be considered in the future because otherwise we're looking at design of new developments with new gas boilers being phased out within five years is there going to be space for such things to be considered I think air source heat pump probably is the way forward rather than the ground version and there is the ability to retrofit on earlier elements if they haven't had that form of heating established so we can accommodate that and certainly if our purchases early on would want that approach we'd be able to fit them into the scheme thank you councillor Rippith please I don't want to labour the points that people have already mentioned but to retrofit as I'm sure you know is a lot more expensive than to just go with the right thing in the first place and we're talking this is now 2021 and the date is 2025 and I'm afraid it doesn't quite wash with me I think just to clarify this point I don't know to Chris quickly just to clarify the heating point my understanding is there's a condition on the outline planning commission which deals with this matter so the applicant will be required to provide those details and have them agreed by the council so my advice would be it's not a matter for this reserve matters application it's a matter that will be considered if those details are provided for the discharge or condition thank you councillor Harvey please in that case I'm not sure my point is valid but I just wanted to make the point also as somebody whose house is heated by an air source heat pump very effectively but also to make the point that that's only one side of the coin because to the extent that there are two heating problems which I think probably a lot of people would disagree with if there are it might be because the heat demand is too high is there a question for the agent? yes yes and so the question is are the is the fabric and the heat loss designed to be exceeding the building regulations or is it just the bare minimum that we can insist on which I think is building regs part L we would be exceeding it because there is a condition that requires us to reduce carbon by further 10% I think over and above building regulation requirements so yeah there would be an enhancement but no ambition beyond the minimum within the current planning regime and the current local plan if you like not beyond policy requirements at the moment no sorry thank you councillor Heather Williams thank you chair this maybe I'll say I don't want to lay the point and I take Mr Carter's advice about the different conditions but normally or quite often with new buildings new houses they're sold on plan so I'd just like to seek reassurance that options would be given so that if the purchaser wanted they could almost choose the type of heating that they would like and the retrofit option and I'll take guidance as to whether I've been disobedient to our advice and asked an inappropriate question chair but just wondering if that was something that the agent would consider doing Mr Griffith do you have a response to that I imagine there's probably no you I'm kind of delving into sales issues really which I'm a little bit reluctant to do I think if a resident came to us and asked specifically that they would want that sort of approach then I think we would accommodate it that's fine thank you councillor Hawkins again please thank you chair for letting me come back and through you one of the concerns raised by the parish council is the large number of unadopted roles in this proposed development and I must admit it is a bog bear of mine as well because the upshot of having a management company looking after infrastructure in a new development is additional tax burden on homeowners who already pay council tax and sometimes we know these management companies go bust can you tell us the proportion of unadopted roles that you are proposing in this development and why on earth wouldn't you actually build the development so that the roads can be adopted by the highways authority thank you chair yes I mean we feel the same we want to minimise the amount of roads that aren't adopted and that hasn't been decided yet that would form part of the condition discharge we would push as much as possible for the counties to adopt all the roads and there's no reason why they wouldn't other than private drives because they're designed in accordance with their design guide and design brief so we would be pushing the county to adopt as much of the roads as possible not with standing private drives would still be maintained by a potentially management company but to reassure you we do have a lot of experience of management companies and the structure is whilst the company might go bust there's a legal regime in place which ring fences the money the residents pay which is completely separate to those companies so we use that we've got a site of Willingham with this arrangement where a company could go bust but the residents managed the management company eventually and that maintains the payment securely on a legal basis so there isn't any danger of that but yes it certainly our intention to get as much of the road that surface adopt as possible and the only reason we're not is that some of the shared roadways they won't adopt near Lezkin Wood but that's an informal design approach to what we're doing OK Thank you for that Members, did you want to come back? Sorry, what proportion of the roads will be unadopted? I don't think we know that yet what we'll do condition discharge and the section 38 agreement that the company will apply for that stage will push for all the roads to be adopted 100% but it's up to the county when they come back and they may say well we don't want to adopt the shared drives which would make up probably a quarter potentially of the roads on the scheme so I had a guess but I'm hoping that all of them most authorities, most council councils adopt shared roads in these sorts of situations so I'm not quite clear why this particular county doesn't Thank you If there's no more one more counciller coming I don't know whether again we'll be considered not relevant but when you come to the you talk about not being possible to use ground source heat pumps that seems to me that it might be a possibility when you come to consider the conditions of your heating availability because the site is actually on green sand which is a permeable rock and therefore it might be a feasible possibility but if you do that you would need to have a communal system rather than an individual system Will there be a provision of possibility at a later date when you do the conditions to consider for the installation of communal supply if necessary? I think we don't we've got very little experience of communal heating systems it could be applicable to the flatted element of the scheme but I think there could be problems I haven't really explored that and it could form part of the management company arrangements who would be looking after the open space if the heating arrangement isn't the open space but it's Another counciller, thank you I was going to come in and ask Mr Reid to give us a legal view Thank you chair I just wanted to bring members' attention to paragraph 711 little 2 of the section 106 agreements attached to the outline permission there it provides that each of the residents will be responsible for ongoing maintenance of the leak and other on-site public open space if the management company or other third party were to cease to exist or otherwise fail to properly maintain the leak or other on-site public open space I acknowledge that it doesn't extend to management of the roads but as the residents will have an incentive to ensure that the management company stays alive because otherwise the liability passes to then then I think there is some assurance that the management through the management company is robust but I will also add that in my experience the question of whether the state roads are to be adopted or not is not a material consideration for the purposes of a refusal Perhaps Mr Carter would like to endorse that Thanks chair, yes, I agree with that advice Okay, thank you and on the heating issue I think we've got as much information out of the agent at this stage as we possibly can so I would like to move on to the final speaker on this item please which is Councillor Neil Goff he's one of the local members and I'm hoping he's still online Councillor Goff Yep, thank you chair Before I start can I just declare that I'm the a director of this land which was the company which sold the land to Keir Living and subsequently came Tilia Homes just to be clear that sale took place prior to me being a director of the company and secondly I'm a board member of the old west river internal drainage board the relevance of that will become clear in my comments but I speak as a local member on this matter the parish council I'm not speaking today but they have seen my comments in advance and they concur with them As I'm sure you're aware you have three minutes to address the committee and then there may be some questions of clarification for yourself so if you could just stay on the line for a couple of minutes at the end whenever you're ready Many of you will be aware of the controversial nature of this application which was a five-year housing land supply site initially refused by this committee but then unfortunately lost upon appeal that set in train what has been a very long process of trying to make the best out of a bad job The last time you saw this application was this site was a reserve matters application prior to the sale to Tilia Homes that previous reserve matters application was refused by this committee The application was not compliant to policies in the neighbourhood plan and numerous other concerns were raised which on their own may not have been reasons for refusal but were significant for the community I'm pleased to report that these issues have been largely addressed to the satisfaction of the parish and the local members by Tilia Homes I would also like to express my appreciation that the parish for Tilia Homes who have demonstrated a willingness to listen and adapt their scheme to reflect the concerns of the parish and the local members they have been good partners in this and I hope that continues as this development can proceed The lesson from this application is that there is real value in striving for better and I'm pleased to say that this committee and the officers had a big role to play in that achievement because this scheme is a lot better than what we have seen before Serious concerns however do remain about the drainage scheme raised by Mr Mason and the parish council given the importance of drainage conditions in these outlying applications to Kotlin It is really important that the scheme performs not just on day one but is maintained appropriately into the future That requires financial and legal agreements on the provision of long term maintenance of drainage systems to be repulsed particularly in this case given the impact on the joining and very popular Les King Wood which is also a local greenspace Therefore I would ask that the parish and the old west river internal drainage board in particular are afforded the opportunity to bring their local experience to bear at the time that this condition is considered for discharge Lastly it is to be hoped that some form of direct linkage for cycling and walking could be established from this development to the village, the core of the village via the primary school Absent this you will unfortunately approve today a largely car dependent development It's simply too far from the village core to be anything other than that We have a meeting next week with the county council the parish council and Tilia homes and we very much hope that we can craft the solution to this That would be good news for everyone not least the future residents of this development That concludes my comments, thank you Thank you very much councillor Goff Questions of clarity for the councillor Heather Williams please Thank you I'll stick to the drainage issue by yourself chair I'm just wondering because obviously it's a reserve matters application and Mr Carter will shake his head at me if I'm wrong but my understanding is very much that we need to be satisfied that a solution could be made possible and that the condition will then deal with the practicalities So I'm just wondering if councillor Goff were able to give his opinion that a scheme for the drainage could be found possible it might not be what you're looking at you don't agree with what we're sort of being shown at the moment but is it possible in your opinion for a condition to be discharged and for that to be able to be met and then I'm just wondering given the concerns substantive concerns that have been raised on the issue to give more assurance if we were to say that the condition would come in relation to drainage would come back to committee perhaps would that give assurance about then you know parishioners and what have you would have another opportunity to raise concerns on drainage Thank you chair Thank you councillor Goff appreciate you're not a drainage engineer but if you had a view on that Well I have sort of got the had some wisdom from the the other directors of the internal drainage board on this and you know as Mr Mason said this site is it's worthy of just I know some members have been to the site but not everyone it's just worthy of reflecting a little bit on this site because while Mr Sexton said that the gradient is not great this is a hill by Kotlin standards which runs down to Les King Wood which is a very very pop hill, a recreational space for the village so this is an area which is of real real significance I think it is fair to say that the internal drainage board is very sensitive to this site and to the runoff and they feel that the discharge of these conditions is an important matter I won't I'm not in a position to be able to say whether they view a potential scheme as possible but they certainly would want to be engaged in the discharge of those conditions As with the parish Did you want to come back councillor with it? I just want to clarify so I think that was you would welcome if the discharge condition come back to committee I just want to clarify that given its importance and the other thing was around whether a solution can be found because obviously if a solution can't be found no matter how the debate goes today it can't proceed because they can't discharge the conditions so we're not being asked to refuse because a solution can't be found that's what I'm trying to ascertain what we're being asked to do here I'm not sure perhaps councillor Goff it might be useful to hear from Mr Sexton at this stage regarding drainage Michael if you're there Thank you chair I suspect councillor Williams is drawing on the recent debate committee about the Tevesham Road forebought site this Rampton Road site it's in flood zone 1 and none of the site is identified as being at risk from surface water flooding through the environment agency maps unlike Tevesham Road which was considered previously by the committee that was identified as being essentially completely at risk of surface water flooding as Mr Griffith as Mr Griffith alluded to the agent has engaged extensively with the lead level flood authority in ensuring that there is a suitable drainage team that can be delivered there's sufficient information with reserve maps applications to demonstrate that the scheme can indeed be delivered those details are reserved by a condition on the outline consent the surface water condition is very detailed in terms of what it will require is conditions 17 16 but it has got eight specific points which does include maintenance and adoption of the drainage system as you can see in the officer reports in paragraph 21 31 34 and 38 all of the technical drainage consultees including the old west internal drainage boards are satisfied with the information that has been provided at this stage and there would be more information to come forward at this condition stage which would be subject to consultation with the technical consultees parish council would be notified that the application has been received by the council they wouldn't be formally consulted but they would be notified and could have the opportunity to make comments irrespective of the lack of a formal consultation so very happy not happy, satisfied at this stage the reserve masses that there aren't grounds to refuse or resist this application on sufficient information to demonstrate if suitable scheme can be delivered that gives some that's very helpful Mark thank you very much councillor Dawnson please remember we're still asking questions of clarity of the local members for councillor Gawth the question is for councillor Gawth councillor Gawth can you can you just remind us what you said in relation to the footpath I am familiar with the site and I do recognise what you're saying about it's being car dependent if the snow footpath were you indicating that the meeting that you're having you're about to have is to devise a route for a possible footpath yes that's okay this is outside of the red line area of the development so this falls into what I think is a good common sense improvements to the development which is outside of this application that's understood but we do have a meeting next week with as Mr Griffiths has said with Tilia Holmes with the county and with the parish to try and craft a solution which frankly is in the best interest of everyone because if you look at those the houses on this site which are at the north end very close to Les King Wood a pedestrian route from those houses to the school which as the crow flies is not much more than 300 metres is a very very long walk and frankly our expectation is that parents would jump in their cars to do that whereas if we could provide a cycling and walking infrastructure that would benefit everyone not least the future residents of this development but that is outside of the matters you are considering today but is also but is reflective of what we hope can be done with goodwill from all the parties to improve this application OK thank you councillor Goff and I don't think there's any more questions for yourself so thank you for joining us virtually today and addressing the committee as those that concludes the public speakers we have so we are now going to move into the debate so we do also have an opportunity at this stage to ask questions of clarity from the officer and if Michael needs to pull up any of the images or documents that he presents to us at the beginning of this item we can ask him to do that too councillor Dawnson please yes this is a question for the officer thank you Mr Sexton for a very clear report and my question concerns the residential space standards now I know from your report that this falls outside the reserve matters but I do just want to ask in relation to the paragraphs on page 99 where you say under paragraph 102 that 60 market dwellings fail to provide to comply in terms of the area of built-in storage and I wondered if there was any scope for trying to provide storage outside the dwellings because we know how difficult it is for families in houses where there are family dwellings and there isn't sufficient storage so I just wondered if there was any scope for external storage to improve where some of the dwellings are below national space standards I regret that we can't consider that under reserve matters that's a question for the officer Michael if you caught that thank you chair thank you councillor Dawnson paragraph 102 is the policy sets out requirements for internal full space and it breaks it down for number of bedrooms, number of occupants and then one story, two story, three story columns specifically for built-in storage so where those 16 market dwellings don't have a dedicated storage area shown on the plan they do already exceed the minimum internal floor space so there is ample storage available I suppose it's just not illustrated as dedicated storage space so for example the policy requires two square metres of built-in storage those 16 market dwellings exceed the minimum internal floor spaces by more than that so the space is there it's just not shown as dedicated storage it was just just going to highlight that slight element to remember so I don't think there is a deficiency in terms of there is availability within properties it's just not shown as dedicated space that was the slight issue with that policy that's any help thank you Michael Chancellor Heather Williams please thank you chair just sort of going through things I think it's important and others have recognised that there has been an improvement from what we saw before and that's welcome I think the case with the unadopted roads I think that seems to be more of an issue with the process and the system in my mind rather than the application fact that I'll say even if you built a standard you can't guarantee adoption from the other council so I share other members frustrations in that but I do think that's more of a process than this particular application when it comes to the drainage issues I think obviously that's the main thing for myself and trying to look at the order of things and it's sort of chicken and egg which comes first and I can understand why people would want to see the drainage things at this stage but again that's not the process that we deal with so I'm wondering if it's possible given I think it has been very well and clearly shown that there are particular drainage issues in this particular area it's not sort of the run of the mill as described with the gradients and everything else so given that it's sort of an exceptional exceptional case for drainage here whether we are able whether it's in our gift to say that in this instance because of the exceptional nature that we will consult with the parish council on the discharge of condition in relation to drainage and that it would come to ourselves that way we're not unnecessarily holding things up the developer won't be able to proceed unless they could demonstrate and discharge that condition and I think it is right given the level of concern on that issue that we try to make sure that people get the opportunities that they need to be able to partake in that discussion and to be very clear as a committee that unless those conditions are met then development should not go ahead but there has been quite a lot of evidence to show that this might not be the right solution but that solution is potentially possible so that's where I'm at at the moment and I would say for the first time members would be shocked to hear that I'm actually satisfied with the distribution of affordable housing because that's normally a pet issue for myself I wish and credit where credit is due it is dispersed through the site in small clusters I even know the policy of by heart now chair Thank you very much and I'm just going to bring Mr Carter in on the drainage issue Thanks chair through you so just to give members comfort all the drainage conditions are pre-commencement drainage conditions on the outline consent so nothing can happen until those conditions have been discharged to formally consult parish councils on discharge of condition applications given their technical nature however parish councils are normally notified of those applications being submitted and as I think Mr Sexton said in one of his answers we would of course take on board comments received from the parish council so I don't think there's a requirement in my view at least to formally consult them albeit they're clearly heavily involved with them in ongoing discussions along with councillor Goff so I think I'm satisfied that the opportunity will be there for the parish council without needing to change our normal process to formally consult them but obviously if the committee decides it wants to instruct officers to do that then of course the committee is free to make that decision and I will come back to that at the end before we take a vote if that's okay yeah if you want to come back right so that was about the consultation so able to say that we'll see it as committee again obviously it's not standard practice to bring conditions to committee given you know committee is there to do with the sort of more complex and contentious items generally speaking and we want to minimise the workload of the committee however again the committee can make that requirement if it wishes to do so whether it's necessary in this case I'd suggest it may not be at the moment got to bear in mind we've got no objection from the Lead Local Flood Authority no objection from the Internal Drainage Board and we've got conditions details for which are still to be submitted so it may be that the app can come forward with a scheme that is to everyone's satisfaction and so in those circumstances does the committee need to consider it as part of its business I will come back to that question before we take the vote Councillor Hawkins please yeah I may stay on the drainage issue I know for a fact because it has happened in my ward that we have had drainage condition brought back to committee so it's not unusual but I take your point that committee should deal with big issues however it's an issue of grave concern to the parish and I have been on a side visit to this site when we had it before us before and I can quite appreciate the concern of residents so I will be prepared to support a request that the committee request that the condition comes back to us to be looked at and of course consulted with the parish council no doubt the development talking to the parish council anyway in coming up with the solution the other point I wanted to raise was on the reasons for the refusal that we had before which well upheld at appeal but I'm glad to see that the new site owners have actually made changes that have addressed those issues and if Councillor Gough is happy with the changes that have been made so am I thank you great thank you very much Councillor thank you there are clearly some matters of concern which have been raised today in relation to the adoption of roads primary heating scheme and the need to make ensure there is possibility of upgrading that in the future drainage issues and the cycleway connections however it does seem to me that many of those are not for consideration at this stage most of them are under discussion anyway a number of them are already met by conditions so the question arises should we seek to impose extra conditions to ask that some of these conditions come back to this committee on compliance stage or indeed consider a deferral of the application and looking at those I'm very persuaded by what Councillor Gough said the reasons for the original refusal have clearly been addressed and met the concerns of the parish council in relation to the neighbourhood plan seems to me these developers have gone to great lengths to meet those particularly in relation to the total number of houses and so on and I think that in this case we have developers who are clearly prepared to consider matters that we are not in any case in a position to enforce I am in any case opposed to matters being brought back to this committee unless there is a really no need for that I don't think that is the right way or the best way to get the right answer so taking all of that into account and the assurances that we've heard this morning I'm inclined to say that the time has now come to approve this reserve matters application as it stands Thank you councillor I don't believe we have any further speakers in the debate members obviously we do have a recommendation in front of us to approve this application we have had a request and then a subsequent indication of support for that request to bring the specific drainage conditions back to this committee for a decision as well as officially consulting the parish council rather than just informing them that a submission has been made I think we as a committee need to be clear about what we want to do with that before we take the vote on the recommendation so councillor Heather Williams are you putting a proposal forward in regards to bringing something back here yes but taking on board the comments Mr Carter and looking to councillor Dr Tumri Hawkins as she seemed to support what I was saying whether a compromise on that would be to say that if the parish council and local members are in conflict with the recommendation of that so essentially if all is agreed if the parish council are happy and the local members happy with what's proposed then it needn't come back to committee but if there is any conflict of view on the suitability of the drainage condition then it will come back to us given the exceptional circumstances and I do think there should be a consultation and happy to propose those separately if you want chair or put them all in together to give the officers view thank you chair just to say the parish council does have the option to call anything to the delegation meeting anyway but I don't have any concern with the suggestion that they're formally consulted and provided they're satisfied it's delegated and if they have outstanding concerns then officers would bring it back to committee these are for the drainage conditions only though yes it's just in relation to drainage and I'd say parish council or local member okay so other members of the committee are we generally in agreement with that procedure or does anyone have any issue with that okay we have a proposal for that and a seconder members are we all in agreement that this is the way we should move forward does anyone not think that's what we should be doing okay so we will incorporate that into the recommendation then that the parish are officially consulted and if there are any concerns brought back to the committee is that correct yep okay councillor dawnson could I just be clear then it's the parish and the local members I think the local member gets a right to comment on any application anyway but the parish will be an official consultee rather than just being told that this was what's happening okay members well with that addition that change of procedure we have a recommendation on page 121 and that is that we approve the application subject to the conditions that we've just made members I haven't heard any dissent to this so with those changes can I take by affirmation that this is approved does anybody not think that does anybody wish to abstain nope so that application is approved thank you very much everyone that contributed to that debate members we'll move on now to item number 7 which is an application in north stone someone could help me with a page number that would be great thank you page 127 I've had a request from the legal officer for a 5 minute break yeah I mean I'm sort of seeing nods around the room so it's now 5 to 12 so I'll actually say we'll have a quick 10 minute break actually so if we're back in our seats ready to start at 5 past 12 that would be great thank you very much everybody thank you very much members we're now restarting the meeting and we are up to agenda item number 7 which is an application in north stone south of Long Stanton Road north stone and the proposal is a variation of a condition on an already approved reserve matters application the applicant is urban splash house limited and the application is before us today because Long Stanton parish council has requested that the application be decided by committee and also because it's a major development in receipt of objections and a complex application in the opinion of officers in consultation with the chairman and vice chairman bit of a mouthful then the presenting officer is Ms Kate Poiser Kate are you with us online yes I am thank you chair good afternoon so yeah if you could listen over any updates to the report we have in front of us and then if you'd like to introduce that report right thank you there are no further updates to the report I should just prepare the presentation if you bear with me a moment please right thank you now this plan shows phase 2a of north stone new town within its context could you chair just confirm to me that you can see this slide thank you the buildings are shown in grey this represents the phase 2a site and if I just zoom in a little bit here this area here is the age restricted accommodation to which this application refers specifically to the rest of the site are the existing homes of rampton drift to the south is the proposed town centre and to the east is the education site directly to the north lies the greenway this is a greenswraith within which the principal footpath cycleways, drainage trails and tree planting take place much of this has already been provided on site the north east of this part of phase 2a is an area called the peninsula which is largely built this slide I'm just going to run through a few photographs of the site this slide shows it was taken from the age restricted building site and it looks towards the peninsula as you can see the buildings are three stories high and they are almost complete the white buildings have yet to receive their external cladding this photo shows the age restricted site as viewed from the north and it's just a muddy field at the moment to the left are the peninsula houses the construction taken place here relates to the greenway this is part of the greenway that extends to the north of the peninsula site and we are looking at the footpath and the cycleway this part of this is the greenway which is directly opposite and is to the north of the age restricted site as you can see there is some tree planting that has taken place as well is behind here and the footpath is currently under construction just moving on to the site and ground floor plans the one to the left shows the age restricted scheme that has already got planning permission and to the right is the amended scheme and a consideration today just to point out a few matters the proposed amendments relate to the design of the building and the ancillary space the number and size of the apartments proposed remains at 60 45 with one bedroom and 15 with two bedrooms the main purpose of the amendments is to provide better living conditions for the future occupiers the proposed building has car parking contained within the envelope so this area here is actually within the envelope of the building so the first floor lies directly above the proposed scheme takes the parking out of the building envelope and provides a greater proportion of apartments at ground floor level surface car parking is provided adjacent to the building here in the proposed scheme some of the apartments would have small private gardens this area here is also proposed next to the cycle store down here the southern end of the building would be lower in height to enable more sunlight into the internal courtyards and gardens this would only be two stories high whereas over here we're looking at full stories high with regard to the surface water drainage the car parking spaces are proposed to be permeable as well is proposed similar to the approved scheme only moves slightly towards the west here are the approved and proposed ground floor plans which better illustrate the shape of the building as approved and as proposed you can also see the proportion of the ground floor apartments in each area in each the whole of the approved building is four stories high with the exception of the south most section which is actually five stories high for the proposed building the red lined area would be two stories high the purple three stories the yellow four stories high and the green would be five stories now I'm just moving on to the the elevations for comparison here are the east and north elevations of the approved and proposed buildings the east elevation is the top one and that's the one that would front onto the principal access road for anyone who received a plans pack you may find that the east and west elevations are incorrectly labelled here you can see the reduced bulk of the southern end of the building and for the north elevation you can see that the building would have less impact on the dwellings to the west dwellings to the west are just over here and this is the final slide and it shows the south and west elevations for comparison overall it is considered that the amended scheme would be an improved design and that it can be treated as an amendment under section 73 and the recommendation is that permission should be granted there may be questions of clarity from the committee for yourself so whenever you're ready please for the opportunity today to speak in support of the application my name is Anthony Child I'm a planning associate from Bidwells speaking on behalf of the applicant house by Urban Splash Urban Splash are the development partner of Homes England delivering the first residential parcel within phase 2 known as phase 2a the reserved matters consent for this parcel was approved by this committee in February 2020 overall phase 2a would deliver 406 dwellings including 60% affordable homes in a quality environment that achieves high levels of sustainability they're employing modern methods of construction the first modular homes are now being delivered on site an important element of Urban Splash's master plan is the age of restricted affordable accommodation which is the subject of this section 73 application before you today the amendments relate solely to this building and the immediate landscaping the remainder of the master plan is as per the existing reserved matters consent the world has changed significantly over the last 18 months or so particularly in relation to how people are using their homes and their access and connection to open spaces this alongside refinements during the progression of the detailed design has given Urban Splash the opportunity to reflect and consider how they can design and deliver an improved environment for the age of restricted accommodation to the benefit of its occupants the design changes are the result of extensive and detailed pre-application discussions with planning, urban design landscape and housing offices feedback received has directly informed and shaped the amendment proposal for you today some of the improvements include improving the amenity of the central courtyard by reconfiguring the layout and reducing the heights of the eastern and southern blocks to allow more sunlight throughout the date introduction of three communal terraces introduction of a ward garden community space addition of private amenity spaces some ground floor apartments and the introduction of communal meeting rooms which create an active frontage and use through to the central courtyard improvements have resulted in a proposal recommended for approval in the view of offices delivers an improved scheme both in terms of its function and appearance importantly the accommodation still delivers 60 affordable rented apartments with a mix on change from the approved scheme all of the apartments meet the lifetime home standard as required by the outline consent the building does not exceed the height of that already assessed and approved and changes to the layout and appearance comply with the outline consent and design code overall the amendment proposal presents a policy sustainable landscape led development a resolution to grant today will support house in delivering and improved offering for the age restricted accommodation and much needed affordable market housing as part of the wider master plan for phase 2A thank you thank you for Mr Child councillor Hawkins please thank you chair through you Mr Child just to be clear your reason for bringing forward this revised plan is what exactly again why to improve the environment for the occupants so sorry I know so as the detailed design was progressing and urban splash reflecting on events they wanted to see if we could reconfigure the building to improve the open spaces improve ground floor apartments okay thank you anything further for Mr Child no thank you very much Mr Child we will now move on to our last public speaker which is councillor Paul Littlemore who I believe is from North State Town Council councillor Littlemore are you with us yes hello thank you chair thank you for the opportunity to speak I'll get straight into it so North State Town Council before you do kick off can I just appreciate your enthusiasm but can I just double check that you do have the mission of North State Town Council to represent their views today I do okay thank you and as per all the other speakers you have three minutes to address the committee and if you wouldn't mind holding on at the end in case there are questions for yourself so whenever you're ready please thank you so North State Town Council has reflected in our written comments that were reported for the design change proposed in the age restricted housing block and we note the officers reports consideration of the environmental impact impact assessment concerns that were raised as part of our written comments however concerns continue continue to be raised by North State Town Council about the potential social isolation until retail facilities are delivered closer to the site or appropriate public transportation options exist given the low ratio of parking spaces to dwellings the Town Council seeks to clarify that the officers report details that the site will be well connected by footpaths to nearby bus stops though to our knowledge there are no imminent plans to operate any bus service through north at the present time with the Town Centre construction still years away we would like relevant parties the developer South Cambridgeshire District Council Cambridgeshire County Council to ensure that appropriate access to public transport facilities even if on a temporary basis a given serious consideration thank you Do you have any questions for Councillor Littlemore? No, I think that was very very coherent Councillor so thank you very much for addressing the committee today Thank you Members with that we move into the debate now so as usual we do have this is the opportunity to ask the case officer if there's anything that needs clarifying for us so I will open the debate now starting off with Councillor Griffith I think I saw you in my periphery Thank you This is kind of for debate but also I know it's not directly relevant because this is already one version is already approved and we're looking at the environment and the change slight change in design however if any of the officers present know it is really important to the public transport connection especially for elderly people who may not have a car and we're trying to also you know move away from car ownership Have we any information on when the busway is going to be delivered in north stone so that the timing perhaps links in, connects in better with the building of these homes than it had done otherwise Kate I don't know if you know the answer to that do you when the busway is likely to be delivered Thank you chair No I don't have any accurate information on that I don't know whether my colleague Mr Carter is able to help at all on that one I think actually he almost presented himself to us I think Tam Parry is with us from the county council Tam Hi good afternoon committee can you hear me again Yes we can hear and see you so I don't know if you can clarify the issue around the busway delivery date I do my best it's something that's not known at the moment it needs the urban splash development to be completed and for several other parcels of development along the route of the busway to be completed before it can open for buses to use it all of the time what we don't want to do is open it and then have to close it because of construction works and then have to open it again and close it so it's difficult to ascertain exactly when all of these developments will be completed on the route of the busway I think the more likely the time when we will get buses into this area is when the first part of town centre comes forward in around about 2024 and I'm hoping that with Homes England's help we can get a bus service to come in for the top part of the town centre to service development also so we are several years away from a local bus service coming into this area I'm afraid but it's just part and parcel of the difficulties of getting buses into the area so that they can turn around and then exit that's correct yes very much so yes with Homes England ourselves then with the combined authority at the appropriate time and we're looking at whatever we can do to get the local bus service into the area you're welcome thank you chair I think this is a question for Kate one of the concerns of the Nostal Town Council was on bullet point 5 talking about an area of green having been removed and so what is the impact on surface water drainage I might have missed it but I did have a look but I couldn't see that that was addressed in the report Kate can you clarify that please yes thank you I wonder if I could just share my screen again that might help me to answer hopefully you can now see the site and ground floor plans now this is the approved scheme if you can see the cursor over here I just turn on the laser point right this is the approved scheme over this side this is the green space through which the parish council town council refers that will be reduced as you can see on this side but the the swale running north south is the same it's just moved over slightly so a small amount of green space would be lost and but there would be permeable paving for the parking spaces here and perhaps more importantly for the houses that are proposed along here if I go to the approved scheme now this car park if you recall earlier in my presentation this it's built over and it would be four stories high so it's a very narrow corridor here a very narrow corridor but the proposed scheme there's no building over the parking area so the building is actually a much further away so you would then have much wider space here and the building here is only going to be two stories high so there would be a much wider sense of space thank you yes but I think the issue was on whether or not that reduced greenery was part of the drainage and would affect the surface water draining away okay if I can just share the drawing again now the strategic I'm getting a lot of echo difficult to hear the strategic drainage scheme lies in the greenway which runs along here or along here and there's a swell which runs it's just off the picture here the swell would run along here well it's already existing now the proposal is to pipe if I go over to the proposed scheme the proposal is to pipe any surface water from this swell across to the main swell strategic drainage part of the strategic drainage scheme to the swell over here so there is no actual change proposed to the greenway or the strategic drainage scheme on the drainage point of view there would be very little change I don't know if that answers your question thank you Kate councillor Heather Williams please thank you chair and what I'm about to say makes me wonder if actually we're meant to have declared an interest obviously that we've seen this application before but looking at it fresh today because I'm going to reflect back on what I said at the previous meeting so I didn't support this previously because I had great concerns about the heights of the buildings that were being proposed so I do see that what's come forward with the lower heights as a slight positive to address that concern I think we've got the full back position of what's currently there anyway so if I was looking at this as an entirely new thing I probably still would vote against because I'm still not happy with some of the top heights I think it's too high considering it's proximity to ramp and drift and the assurances that were given to them but as we have that full back position in place it is a slight improvement on that so it would be inclined to support the application on that sort of caveat basis thank you for that councillor Dornton thank you I do want to come back to the issue of transport do I understand that there will be no public transport here until the busway is there in place there's no other public transport is that correct? I think Chris is going to dive in thank you chair so there is public transport available at Northside but there's obviously some distance from this specific parcel of land at the moment you've got the guided busway which obviously runs around the periphery of the new town at the moment with the stock just by the parking ride to the north side of Northside so that's what's there at the moment so there is public transport available and we're not running through the site at this stage for the reasons that Harry explained okay so could I just come back on that chair so there would be no opportunity to provide an interim solution to that because if we're talking about age restricted accommodation as councillor Ripp has said that we might well have people there without a car and perhaps not easily able to cycle I can't really work out the distance myself but I just wonder if there's an opportunity to provide an interim solution for public transport Chris through you chair I think having regard to what Tam had to say that's being explored at the moment but my advice would be it's not something to see it's controlled through this application which is a section 73 of a reserve matters application so those conversations are already taking place between the county council ourselves and Homes England with a view to looking to achieve that but it's a separate conversation to the consideration of this application notwithstanding the point made thank you Richard Williams please thank you very much chair I'll be brief because a lot of the points I wanted to make have already been covered I don't like this application I don't like the fact that there's no public transport and I think if there's no public transport at the start you're not going to achieve really the benefits we want because people will be car dependent when they first move in I don't like the design of it I think it's far too dense and I don't like the building heights but given the existing application I'm struggling to I would struggle to formulate a reason to refuse it although I may still abstain thank you thank you councillor councillor Pete Fane I wonder if I could ask Kate Poiser to bring up the elevations that she showed us earlier on Kate if you'd mind yes yes certainly just share we are looking to find chair that shows the comparison between the approved and the proposed elevations I'm conscious of the fact that one of the changes made to the NPPF this year in July in July was that beauty is now a specific planning consideration even though it isn't designed isn't specified and of course that may be a fact but it is now taken into account in design guides and so on the approved plans include some pitch roofs I think if I recall some balconies and so on whereas the proposed plans are entirely flat roofed it's very difficult to say which is if you like better in terms of beauty it's a subjective matter inevitably but I wonder to what extent is a factor to be taken into account in considering the proposed amendment I'm not sure if an officer wants to come back on that I'm happy to comment on that clearly the design changes are one of the key considerations in this application so it's perfectly open to members to consider whether or not they're satisfied with the alternative design or not and to vote accordingly but it's certainly a material consideration for this matter so thank you for indulging me a second time one thing I am pleased about is that it looks like the developer has looked at how the development is going so far and has come back to it and thought we could put in some improvements one thing which I do particularly like about it is the fact there will be more light which is crucial I think in anybody's home and I feel on that that's a really major factor actually in how I'm thinking about voting on this that it is an improvement from the previous design and I will be voting for it great, thank you very much can I set a TV Hawkins please thank you chair perhaps for Kate did this change in design actually go through our design enabling panel or not yes well it didn't go through the design panel but it was negotiations with our urban designers did take place so they were very much involved at an early phase through pre-application advice in giving advice on how to design this and they felt that their advice had been taken into account strangely enough I think I prefer the previous design though not the heights they do say beauties in the elderly beholder however for me the positive in this revision is the sense of better place making and amenity for the future occupants of this flats and that perhaps for me is what tips the balance rather than the design but I think I will be supporting it thank you thank you very much and Councillor Cahn please to repeat points made by previous comments I cannot say that I like the new design as a design more than the previous one but I do take very much the point about light having a large four story building to the south of the site will make a big impact on the sunshine coming in and that has great impact on how you feel when you are in a dwelling so I do see that as an improvement and I tend to agree with Councillor Hawkins that I think this outweighs any concerns about the beauty otherwise of the designs which are not neither are great wonders of architectural design appear a beauty in any case so I don't think that's a sufficient reason to refuse it so I should be supporting the application thank you Councillor I don't have any further speakers so I think we're probably ready to make a decision on this I'm going to take a vote on it because I haven't heard from everyone Aaron if you could set up the voting system please Members the recommendation is on page 143 of our agendas and that's that we approve the changes as outlines and also we give delegated authority to officers to carry out minor wording changes subject to approval with the chair and vice chair so that is what we are okay so we're going old school it's going to have to be a raise of hands please members so given the recommendation I've just explained can I have a show of hands please for those in favour of that 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 that's 8 in favour of those against 0 and abstentions 1 so that application is approved thank you very much we're moving on to agenda item 8 which is on page 163 of our agendas this is again in the north stowe parish it's land west of station road also long standton the proposal is an outline planning permission for up to 107 dwellings the applicant is endurance of states limited the recommendation is to grant approval subject to the completion of a 106 agreement there are a raft of material considerations in our agendas and the reason it's coming to us today because it is a complex application and the fact that long stowe parish council is a joint land owner what did I say long standton I'm sure long stowe can be beside relief there long standton parish council is a joint land owner and also a third reason it's wider relationship with north stowe development as a whole the presenting officer is already on our screens Guy Wilson welcome Guy good afternoon afternoon so if you'd like to give us any updates to the report and then introduce that report for committee members please thank you chair so I'll just share my screen quickly if you can confirm you can see that okay yes we can see it so in terms of updates the only update is I'll just be expanding on the summary heads of terms including in the report just to clarify how those figures have been derived and I'll come onto that at the end of my presentation so as you said the application is for up to 107 dwellings a flexible employment community sort of cafe use and other association development so this shows the site location plan you can see it's to the west of station road placed to the guided busway at a northern end of north stone there is a single dwelling within the site excuse me and a number of association buildings a dwelling immediately to the south there is an industrial development to the south as well the parking ride is to the east and there is an employment site known as digital park to north site and this isn't an error a view of the site showing it's current condition you can see the existing dwelling on the southern part of the site there's a a hedgerow of the lander trees in the towards southern end of the site which I'll use as a marker in some site photos coming up you can see there's existing hedging along the northern boundaries so the site frontage to station road and also vegetation within the site so this is a site boato looking into the site from station road you can see existing hedgerows on the northern boundary and also vegetation within the site and then the lander trees on the left of the screen this is a photo of the existing junction you can see a signalised junction so this view is looking south towards north stone with the the eastern arm to the parking ride on the left of the photo and then the site frontage on the right hand side here you can see currently there is no pedestrian footpath on the western side of station road and there is currently a shared pedestrian cycle routes along the eastern side of station road this is another view of the site from the south west so this is from the the B105O along the mountain bypass you can see the landline edges sort of shown earlier and the extent of the site on the right hand side of the screen you can see some development within phase 1 of north stone it's worth noting obviously this land in the foreground is included within the site area of north stone phase 3B application which is currently pending this is another site bridge to other site just from the busway from the north west you can see again the landline edges and then vegetation along the boundaries of the site and the digital park to the north of the site and again the fields in the foreground within the site area of north stone phase 3B it's moving on to the context within the wider north stone development so this is the submaster plan for north stone phase 1 with residential areas shown in yellow they've got the primary school in orange the mixed use local centre in red with the town square area in light green and then an employment site in this dark blue colour and just the parking rides just to north here so it shows the site in relation to phase 1 and this this diagram shows the site in relationship with the north stone phase 3B proposals so this diagram is taken from the coordination statement produced in coordination with Hemsingland as the developer of phase 3B and also the developers of the digital park to the north this shows some of how the sites have been looked at in a later fashion with a green corridor through the northern part of the site you can see here which will come into in more detail later shows the key vehicular routes through the phase 3B sites with a potential connection into the current application sites and also shows the proposed primary school with a large star here and and areas of sports and play on the western side of the proposed phase 3B developments and you can also see here how the urban structure is kind of proposed to be developed with some market buildings along the perimeter of buildings up to four stories anticipated as well as buildings up to four stories close to the western side of the current application sites moving on to site constraints so the areas like green shown here and here areas of potentially contaminated land the blue lions either side of station road are shown in existing awarded watercourse and then the blue hatching white blue hatching is probably quite faint in one of your images shows areas at risk of surface water flooding with much most of the site either low or very low risk of surface water flooding and some areas at medium risk see here and here the light green and orange shading is part of the base map and doesn't indicate any site constraints moving on to the existing topography and drainage of the site so this blue line here shows the awarded watercourse which flows north along station road and these dotted blue lines show existing drainage channels within the site which currently flow into that watercourse the green arrows show the direction of falls within the site with the lowest parts of the site being approximately 7.16m AOD in the the north east and the highest parts of the site being in the south west going up to about 8.4m AOD so this is the proposed site access plan apologies that the text probably isn't very clear on this so this this is shown with east at the top of the screen with the arm to the parking ride here so a number of works proposed which I'll just quickly talk you through so along the western side of station road a 3.5m wide shared pedestrian cycle link is proposed which would continue the existing shared link along station road and that's proposed along the full frontage of the site a new vehicle access is proposed into the site opposite the arm towards the parking ride and this will include a pedestrian crossing point some minor changes are also proposed to the existing junction as well as provision of a controlled pedestrian crossing on the northern arm of the junction the existing access to the dwelling is proposed to be closed and the existing field access to the northern end of the site is proposed to be reconstructed into a limited service access providing access to a pumping station and servicing of the northern residential element of the scheme so moving on to the plan this shows the proposed developer areas in beige colour and green space of landscaping in green so this hatched area on the northern area of the site is proposed to be a mixed use wildlife area which will include a habitat for newts and reptiles currently within the site and it will also serve as a an attenuation basis as part of the service water drainage scheme this diagram also shows existing vegetation to be retained including key head rows along the northern boundary and southern boundary here it also indicates that a strong frontage along station road is intended to be provided with this sort of market building which would include the non-residential use here and then this sort of purple star is indicative location of the local equipped area of play moving on to the access and movement parameter plan so this shows the proposed vehicle route through the site and this is anticipated to connect into the proposed development north to south phase 3B and this could be provided potentially as a free route or as a controlled access for the emergency access only depending on the details sort of agreed through the phase 3 development this also shows the pedestrian and cycle link which is proposed through the site connecting to the proposed sort of grink corridor in phase 3B as well as connections to the north and south as well which would be pedestrian and cycle winding this plan shows the proposed building heights so you've got the highest part of the site is up to four stories on the station road frontage so this would be this sort of market building including the the number of residential use development is up to three stories shown in orange again on the station road frontage and then this sort of provides a structure through the development along the western boundary and then the centre of the site and then developed up to two and a half stories shown in yellow on other parts of the site and bringing it all together this is the proposed illustrative site plan so this isn't proposed to be included as an improved document but it illustrates how the site could be developed so you've got the access and a vehicle route to site the pedestrian cycle corridor, green corridor along the northern side of the site the wildlife area and attenuation basin the market building which would include the non-residential use and the pedestrian cycle route along station road as well so as I mentioned provided a bit more detail on the proposed section 106 contributions so I've included in my reports the table which shows what the contributions would be based on the indicative mix proposed at this time and this just provides a bit more detail on those contributions and shows how they'll be calculated so for example for the education contributions these are calculated on the basis of 20 size and 10 year on the basis of the count to count source request other and the rest of the contributions are shown on this table so most of these are on the basis of a figure per joining or a lump sum basis and of course the section 1 of such contributions will be subject to indexation as well which is anticipated to be from a point of resolution if members are minded to grant approval and so the key material considerations are set out in the reports and the application is recommended to approval subject to completion of the section 106 experiment for the heads of terms shown just now and the conditions informative informatives included in appendix 1 Is that everything Guy? Yeah, that's over to the chair. Great, well thank you very much very detailed presentation of the report there if you don't mind holding on the line we're going to take our public speaker next and then I'm sure members may have some questions for you and we may possibly need your presentation again to answer those questions so if you don't mind staying on the line that would be great Okay, so we're going to our public speakers next and we have one which is the applicant Mr Peter McCown Peter, I'm sure you're familiar with the process Thank you chair Good afternoon members I act on behalf of endurance estates in respect to this planning application and I am joined by Mr Jake Nugent from endurance That's great, thank you as I'm sure you've heard other speakers it's the same rules for everyone three minutes to address the committee and if you don't mind staying there in case there's any questions to the committee of clarification for yourselves Yeah, thank you chair Whenever you're ready The site is located within the north stone master plan area and therefore the principle of development has already been founded The illustrative master plan and parameter plans demonstrate or a high quality residential development can be brought forward delivering on the wider master plan objectives through for example the incorporation of pedestrian and cycle links significant areas of publicly accessible open space and a wildlife area The submission of the application followed a detailed pre-application process with officers which included valuable input from the Cambridge share quality panel We've worked positively with officers throughout and the application is supported by consultees Engagement has taken place with the local community north stone town council and long stand and parish council These have influenced the proposals Key to the proposals is the development coordination statement and guiding principles document that has been prepared and concert with the two adjoining landowners Homes England and Middle Reach Limited This document will ensure that a coordinated and consistent development of the land west of station road will come forward The integration and movement framework plan demonstrates how vehicular, pedestrian and cycle connections not only with adjoining land will take place but also with the wider sustainable north stone town centre These connections are included within the access and movement parameter plan to give certainty and delivery The development will also deliver upgrades to the station road junction with the guided busway including high quality and safe pedestrian crossings The proposals will address station road in a positive manner and connect with existing footpath networks ensuring that a permeable development will be introduced A flexible employment and community space will be introduced on the site frontage and is a sustainable location for this type of use given proximity to the guided bus on future employment land The proposals will deliver 40% affordable housing which should be welcomed and will help to address a local and district-wide shortfall The sustainability credentials of the development are outlined within the sustainability and energy statements that accompany the application Importantly, future homes will achieve an excess of the 10% policy requirement for reduction in carbon emissions compared to building regs part L an on-plot infrastructure will be provided for EV charging Water efficiency measures will also be introduced and water butts installed in gardens In summary, a high quality development will be introduced and one that will contribute positively to the creation of a new town and community at Northstone There are not considered to be any constraints that would preclude delivery of the proposed development and we would therefore respectfully request that members concur with the officer recommendation and support this planning application Many thanks for your time Thank you very much for that Members, questions of clarity please Councillor Heather Williams please Thank you chair Through yourself it was mentioned that engagement with Northstone and Longstown and Parish councils had led to some positive changes being made. Could we have an example of these please Please Peter Yes, sure In response to that Councillor Williams from the outset with regards to engagement we were supposed to summarise the process we did engage with the parish we presented at the town council and some of the issues that were raised during that process were drainage and access really so we really had to look at our proposed drainage strategy with regards to where the surface water drainage will discharge so that is being discharged to the drainage ditch on station road and that will then discharge the rivers to the north so as part of the process that was something really as it sort of said those drainage requirements were sort of influenced by feedback we received locally from residents one of the other points was just on access how our new vehicular access will work on the station road and then also the requirements and the view given locally that they wanted sort of safe and direct connections provided with them with the guided bus stop so that is why we are introducing a new controlled sort of junction on station road it also incorporates a 3.5 metre wide pedestrian cycle connection as well so those are really two of the key sort of things which have come out of our local consultation Councillor Doneson please Thank you, yes could you just clarify the four story building at the entrance to the site is that necessary in order to ensure that you have the number of dwellings The delivery of that four story building council that came out of really sort of discussions that we've had with your own urban design officers but then with the Cambridge share quality panel and they really felt that it would be important that the development, the access in particular it does provide presence on the station road and given the proximity off the site station road by the access to the guided bus there will be a lot of activity in that location and they felt that development on that corner can be sort of justified up to four stories there you've also got on the growing floor at that location is where the proposed commercial or community spaces to be located as well so there will be quite a bit happening there in the view taken was that a slight increase in sort of scale and mass can be supported So just to be clear then you're saying that that is a design decision rather than a decision related to numbers of dwellings on the site Yes so that four story block on the corner that it is proposed that there will be flats delivered within that block over those three upper floors above the commercial space Okay Thank you Any further questions of clarity for the agents? Councillor Hawkins please Thank you chair and through you I was just having a look at the comments made by the quality panel and this presumably is based on the indicative master plan that was taken that we have seen and it talks about the development needs to develop a stronger sense of character that was concerned by the prominent position of the utilities compound I'm not sure the utilities compound was pointed out but I don't know where that is and landscape scheme was weak I guess this is an outline so all I'm saying is at this point in time seems to be there's a lot that needs to be done to make whatever comes forward acceptable Can I just come back on that Councillor Hawkins The discussions with the quality panel took very much they happened at the outset so during the pre-application stage as I said and following the meeting we had with the quality panel the parameter plans and the illustrative master plan has changed significantly so the compound that has been relocated and then we've also one of the key things as you talked about sort of context character the key sort of themes that came out of the quality panel was that they wanted to see a lot more of the existing green infrastructure onsite routine so if you look at the google sort of street view there is a present running sort of north to south within the middle of the site there's an existing quite significant area of hedging and trees so that area has actually been incorporated into the proposals and is to be routine now onsite and again just talking back which is sort of similar to my previous sort of point which Councillor Williams asked connectivity was another key factor which was raised by the panel and really emphasising and defining those links with station road and the guided bus so that again there is a key route which runs across the middle of the site as well that incorporates the 3.5m wide pedestrian and cycle route okay so that would then be in response to the panel's statement about the scheme being weak in terms of movement yeah exactly so as it said those comments from the panel have really influenced the scheme and the view which was sort of accepted by the officer that the scheme really has positively responded to those comments that were received thank you thank you members I don't think there's any further questions for the agent applicants so again thank you very much for the time and taking the time to come here today members those are all the public speakers we have so we'll be moving into the debate now and as usual this is another opportunity to ask the case officer any questions of clarity and I don't think it's beyond us to be able to pull the presentation up again if that's needed I'll be if Councillor Fane at your first thank you chair yes it was just a question of clarification for the case officer you showed us some parameter plans at an earlier stage particularly in relation to access and circulation within the site I just wanted to clarify the status of those plans are they indicative or would compliance with those plans be intended to be a condition of any approval that we might give thank you thank you so the proposed indicative plans the approved documents so they have been included on the decision notice together with the detailed site access plan as well thank you Councillor Heather Williams sorry I'm just going to clarify the point that was made there because we've got that it is but also the word indicative plans were used which would suggest that actually we're not adopting as it is so I do have some comments chair if you would allow can we clarify that first please that's fine I think Chris Carter is about to I think that might just be slightly misspoken by a guy there so the parameter plans would be included any detailed scheme would have to comply with those they're not indicative they would be approved plans there is an indicative layout included of which guy put on the screen that would not be included as an approved plan that's just to show how a scheme could come forward so to clarify we're in that area the houses go but where they go in that area is for a later debate that's what I thought it was they got thrown off there a little bit so yes right back to what I was originally going to say I think I think actually that level of housing probably will fit in some way I do think that from the indicative plans things do need to move along more and there does need to be some improvements but it does sound that those are being picked up and addressed I would stress on a wider basis that I think the word is quite often used of landmark building that we don't just think a landmark building is something in a corner and very high it does seem to be a trend that's appearing and could we on a wider basis please look at some perhaps more imaginative ways of making landmark buildings I think I would stress as well obviously the agent is hearing and can hear our concerns around the landscaping and the connectivity and things so I would hope chair that they're listening very carefully and taking that on board but I do think that level of development probably would fit within the parameter plan somehow great and I can see the agent feverishly writing at the back of the room so I'm sure it's been lots of notes we remember what we say councillor Richard Williams please thank you chair sorry I wasn't quite expecting that yes I mean I think that the proposed development were excited about 40 dwellings per hectare I seem to remember in the plan so it doesn't I think seem to be problematic that we could have that number of houses in that area I was actually going to make the points I will slightly repeat it but I will make the same plea my heart sinks right here the word landmark building because it is inevitably a very tall building and I'm a little bit dismay if the pressure for landmark buildings is coming from within the planning service or the design team so I don't really think developments need landmark buildings if we're talking about full story buildings so but I think really that's something to be dealt with at the reserve matters applications to what actually comes forward but as it stands I think that number of houses would fit there and it seems to me a well together a well put together proposal for this stage great thank you councillor Hawkins please thank you chair my comment is to do with before I forget paragraph 21 traffic floor meddling I think they meant modelling not meddling although traffic does meddle yeah I'm kind of concerned about paragraph 22 actually where 22 and 23 talking about the modelling of traffic at the junctions the pedestrian phase is not likely to be called every cycle so lower flows are acceptable this is paragraph 22 the last one I thought we wanted to make pedestrian priority over cars so why is that statement acceptable and paragraph 23 the southbound junction with Stirling Road is modelled at over capacity already right from the bat alone why are we doing this I'll give it a go chair guy may want to chip in so with regard to the first point I read that as based on the number of pedestrian movements we're not anticipating that for each cycle of the vehicular traffic lights there would be pedestrians wanting to cross it's not that they're being discouraged it's just that they wouldn't necessarily be there and therefore it wouldn't be so you'd also have to wait for pedestrian crossings to take place so you would get through more than one rounding of the lights for each arm of the access before there's likely to be pedestrians wishing to cross the road and introducing that extra element of delay with regard to the second point it looks to me like that the scheme actually improves that situation notwithstanding that the junction is already over capacity you'll note that it suggests that changes to signal timings are proposed by 124% so whilst that's still over capacity it does actually have the effect of reducing it so it's not actually making any additional impact on waiting times there in a negative sense thank you for that attempt I think that's the theory the point is it's still at all the capacity as you rightly pointed out I don't see it as helping matters to be honest as long as it's over 100% it's a problem and the other thing I wanted to highlight is paragraph 35 still talking about transport stuff and road stuff the developer of this site will need to submit a scheme in accordance with the coordination station etc etc early consultation with local highways authority is highly recommended please please it is a plea you have to do that cos there's issues with this with this site that was paragraph 37 by the way I just finally quoted it just shows that there are issues that need to be addressed and addressed properly and we will make note and we will come back to you on that one you have been warned thank you Mr Reid I think you wanted to say something can I invite the planning case officer to show the building heights parameter plan in the context of the comments from councillor Richard Williams as to being able to look at at reserve matters stage is that possible yes chair I'll just share my screen quickly so so you can hear the building heights parameter plan shows development of up to four stories for the landmark building what we are referring to as the landmark building on the station for road frontage that's so and the development of up to three stories sitting on the other side of the junction there so definitely intention there is provided with a step of frontage to help to find this sort of entrance into north side always dangerous for a lawyer to become a planner the point I was going to say is that by having the parameter plan showing an error of the site of up to four stories it's going to be very difficult at reserve matters stage to reject a building which is at four stories and I just wanted to clarify that for councillor Williams Richard Williams benefit Councillor Dawnson please thank you I don't want to labour this point it's the point that I raised first with with the developers about the landmark building is it landmark in terms of its size or is it landmark in terms of its design that was my point the importance of high quality design but my main point here is the archaeology which is first mentioned on page 182 paragraphs 123 to 125 and then again on page 204 270 to 274 now it makes clear that there are there is likely to be significant Roman finds here so I just want to be absolutely clear that this is covered comprehensively covered in the conditions and I think as I understand it from the conditions this is for officers to deal with but clearly thinking of the finds that were on the Marley side we want to be very careful about this thank you I don't know if the guide you want to come back on the archaeology conditions yes so so as correctly there is anticipated the archaeological finds within the site and condition 18 is proposed which will secure a written scheme of investigation prior to the site and that will be agreed with the account councils archaeology team and that will set out how the site will be investigated so in terms of the physical evaluation of the site also how finds will be recorded and materials published as well depending on what is found within the site in proposed condition 40 you talk about producing 10% reduction in sustainability strategy to reduce 10% reduction in view of the current COP discussions and so on quite likely that the conditions national policies would increase can the condition be sufficiently flexible that if we are bound by future conditions or we can tighten them up later should the context be changed in the future I think Chris Cass is going to answer that one you won't be surprised to him you say the answer to that question is no the condition that reflects the current local policy situation that's the basis on which we have to make the decision so whilst we can encourage the developer to go beyond that and that sets the minimum baseline for what we'd expect to see as you may have heard from other developers lots of them are looking to go beyond that and it's a case of policy catching up with reality I think sometimes, thank you Thank you for that, Councillor Riffith please One more thing that I just want to get really crystal clear in my mind following on from what Mr Reit has just said is this our only opportunity to look at the design because the landmark building because obviously at the moment we don't really know much about what this will look like apart from it can go as high as full stories for me it's what type of building it looks like and you know how it will be presenting in that landmark location and it's design not just the size of it and the height of it Sure, my understanding is design is a reserved matter that we looked at at the detail stage but I'm sure officers can confirm that That's correct Chair, we're looking at the principle of development here and the parameter plans would set out the principle of a building of that height four stories in height in that location but the precise detail, design etc would come forward as reserved matters later Thank you, I just wanted to be confirm myself that nothing had changed Okay, thank you Thank you very much, Councillor Richard Williams, please Thank you Chair for allowing me to come back On the basis of Mr Reed's very helpful clarification therefore could I ask the case officer about how that a four story building would sit in that location specifically are there any other buildings of that height in the surrounding area I noticed from the map there is a development there's a sort of industrial unit immediately to the south I think and then there is some more housing beyond that are there any other buildings of that sort of scale in that area Guy, I don't know if you can help flesh that question Yes, so I think currently I don't believe there are any four story buildings within the immediate centre of the site if I just share my screen quickly this shows from the coordination statement with the proposed development the Homes England Phase 3B district part development so they indicate that four story buildings are likely to come forward along within the digital park site and also within the Phase 3B so it's about developing a range of heights within the proposed north stow to the western side of north stow and developing it's sort of it's sort of townscape really and so the four story heights along a pose for this site along the station road fund sort of divide within that framework if that makes sense I think we also have Mr Carter would like to comment It's probably worth also bearing in mind the wider context of this part of north stow so the opposite side of station road will have the enterprise zone the local centre for Phase 1 so the character of the area is going to be quite dense quite different to what it is now and so certainly in my opinion I'd agree with the case officers of four story building in the fullness of time will probably not be noticeable because of the context of everything else that's going to be constructed around it OK, thank you for that Members I've no further one more, Councillor Hawkins Sorry, thank you for letting me come back paragraph 69, file drainage we have the usual the file drainage is in the catchment of overwater and it does not currently have capacity to treat the flows from this development however, Anglia Wata is obligated to accept it and take steps if we grant planning permission when this comes back can we have some sort of statement as to exactly what it is that's going to do to get the capacity for this development please we are forever going through this loop and we end up with problems further down the line like we have in Linton for example it's a headache, we end up with a headache we don't need a headache can we please have a statement from Anglia Wata as to what exactly they're going to do thank you Thank you, councillor Mr Reed, you wanted to come in If I may chair thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment two matters, I just wanted to check that having regard to paragraph 285 page 206 and the summary heads of terms immediately above that members are happy that they have sufficient detail as to the tariff base of many of the contributions which currently aren't reflected in the table above are you happy that as per the recommendation that that can be dealt with in consultation with the joint director of planning and two, can I ask for you to specifically endorse that indexation should run from the date of resolution if you were minded to approve today OK, not sure how to handle that one but I'm sure I think the answer is probably yes I think Yeah, I think Chris can you help me with Yes chair, so the second points hopefully the straightforward so that's just confirming that any indexation of any section 1.6 payments would run from today so any increase in those costs would be calculated from the data resolution to grant commission should that be what committee resolved to do rather than it being say from the data which the section 1.6 agreement is signed which may take some considerable time more the second point I think is just to clarify that the table that Guy showed on the screen during his presentation which set out the tariff based approach to establishing what the section 1.6 contributions would be is endorsed by the committee that is slightly different to what's in the table in the report that reflects the indicative mix that was put forward but of course that's indicative so we don't know the exact mix at this stage so once we know the mix of 1, 2, 3, 4 bed properties etc that final section 1.6 contribution would be calculated based on a tariff and those tariffs were shown by Guy earlier so it's just confirming the committee's agreement to that. I suppose members if we do have any concerns around a green that I think is putting the best way out of the now Councillor Richard Williams please. Thank you I was just wondering if the officer could put that back up on the screen because I must admit at the time the text was a bit small I couldn't see it I assumed it was the same as what was in the pack. Guy are you able to help? You should be able to view that on the screen now. Yes we can see that now. Chair if I may so what I'm just highlighting is that you'll see for example in the secondary education that you've got a range of contributions which will go up either from nil for a one bed property details not set out on that schedule but it would go up to 21,612 pounds for a four bedroom dwelling similar arrangements in relation to primary and early years and then just to highlight that in relation to the outdoor sports contribution that will be calculated on a tariff base by reference to dwelling size and I think that the point Mr Carter made is that that's not really reflected by the table on page 206 of the report so I wouldn't be clear that members are comfortable that what they're approving is not the table on page 206 but will be a tariff base to be agreed with the director of planning. Okay Councillor Harvey I believe you've got a comment. Thank you chair I was looking at the biodiversity calculations particularly on page 180 so paragraph 103 and it concludes saying therefore if the applicant cannot provide a minimum of 10% by diversity net gain across both area and hetero units and within the boundary of the site of site provision should be provided and I just I just wondered whether that should underline the desiabilty of providing that within the locality if it can't be provided within the site itself. Is there a question? Whether that should should actually have a sort of advisory attached to it because it seems to be kind of giving permission at this early stage to sort of offsite the biodiversity the required deficit if you like which might not be the best solution. Mr Carson. Thanks chair I think the principle is that in the first instance you see to provide it on-site obviously but what that secures is that if it can't be provided on-site for whatever reason that it is secured off-site and the point is taken that as nearby as possible would be preferred but that detail wouldn't be known at this stage unfortunately but that's the principle of the approach that would be taken anyway. Thank you. I want to go back to Mr Reid's comments concerning the table because I'm not quite sure I understood his question to us because obviously I think what you're saying is that the information that's in this table on the screen is quite different from the figure that's given here and I'm not sure are you directing us? I can see Mr Carter understands my confusion. I hope that Chris can clarify. So the table that's in the report is informed and the same information that's on the screen in front of you the table that's in the report sets out what the contributions would be based on the indicative mix that's been put forward. What Mr Reid is highlighting is that because this is outline and that mix is indicative it could change and if it changes it's the same tariff basis that's on the screen in front of you that would be used to calculate that contribution so that the cost per unit for want of better term doesn't change it's just once you know the mix of dwelling types then you settle on your final figures. Let Heather Williams please. Thank you chair just to confirm that I'm personally happy with the tariff system as on screen just in case Mr Reid was actually asking us to confirm that we're okay with this so that's on its basis and I think the doing the indexation from today is very sensible. Just on Councillor Harvey's point around when things go off site, I just wondered whether maybe an informative, I don't think we can condition it something along what we do with the we do the cascade don't be on exception sites and things like that where initially it goes in the location then it goes I think up to five miles nearby and you have to seek every opportunity before you look further away and just whether a sort of cascade approach would be more appealing to members so that way we try to get things as close as possible I'm not sure if officers have a view on that approach to the biodiversity provision or perhaps Councillor Hawkins maybe Point if I may in the quality panels report on page 242 there is a paragraph that talks about the panel is said that this should provide the basis for the proposed landscape has been pushed to the outside edges and there is little if any biodiversity gain and so the panel for this is a weak landscape scheme and did not support the idea of offsetting biodiversity gain off site so that is not something recommended by the panel and we should informative or whatever it is ensure that this is followed I can put it that way Mr Carter Thanks chair for you just to highlight again the timing of that report obviously was before as Mr McHugh said quite substantial changes were made to the scheme so I think officers would be able to view that it may now be possible but I think it's a full back that it is and obviously we want to make sure it's secured somewhere there is also condition 14 which is the landscape in ecological management plan condition which will again inform those elements of the scheme Thank you Sometimes wordings can be interpreted Thank you for clarity Mr Carter Councillor Hawkins I have you down to speak I think that was what I was going to speak on Thank you very much Members do you have any further comments in the debate at the stage No Okay well I haven't I haven't heard anyone speak against this item so I'm going to ask if we can take the recommendation which is on page 163 which is we grant subjects completion of a 106 agreement conditions and informatives if we can take that by affirmation or if anyone wishes to have a vote on this So Does anyone wish to vote against this all abstain No so can I take it by affirmation that this is agreed A number of agreement so yeah we will take that as a preview unanimously Thank you very much everybody Members do we have one more in us or do we want to take a lunch break Right I'm getting break shouted at me from all angles I think we'll take a lunch break now if we take around yeah if we come back at quarter pass which is around 40 minutes so everyone's back in their chairs and ready to restart at quarter past two then hopefully we'll be able to get through the rest of the agenda then Thank you everybody