►
Description
If there is buffering on the YouTube stream, the webcast can be viewed through the council's website https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/webcast
A
All
right
good
evening,
everybody
welcome
to
the
this
evening
session.
The
development
control
committee
for
the
benefit
of
members
of
the
public
watching
or
participating
in
the
meeting
I
would
first
like
to
go
through
some
quick
housekeeping
rules
in
the
event
of
a
fire
alarm.
We
have
no
drill
scheduled.
It
is
for
Real.
A
If
the
fire
alarm
does
sound,
please
leave
the
building
as
quick
as
and
as
oddly
as
you
possibly
can
buy
the
nearest
available
exit.
The
fire
exits
are
marked,
there's
one
at
the
back
and
we
can
go
out
the
other
side.
Those
of
us
who
are
this
side
of
the
room,
please
go
down
the
stairs
and
we
meet
in
the
War
Memorial
Park.
A
This
is
public
meeting.
It
is
webcast,
live
on
the
internet.
A
So
if
anyone
has
a
problem
with
that,
when
they're
speaking,
please
let
us
know
and
a
quick
courtesy
request
on
mobile
phones,
I
know
we
live
in
a
connected
world,
but
if
you
could
please
either
switch
them
off
or
turn
them
to
silent
for
the
benefit
of
everybody.
That'd
be
very
much
appreciated,
I'd
like
to
explain
how
who
everyone
is
on
this
committee
tonight.
A
My
name
is
councilor
Andrew
McCormick
I
am
chairman
of
this
committee
to
my
right,
our
councilors,
who
will
be
making
decisions
on
the
applications
in
front
of
us
on
this
agenda
tonight.
To
my
immediate
right
and
left
are
officers
who
will
be
presenting
the
applications
and
providing
advice
to
the
committee.
A
A
The
committee
will
be
considering
the
published
papers
and
examining
the
evidence
brought
before
us
tonight
and
will
make
decisions
based
on
planning
reasons.
We
are
Guided
by
national
and
local
planning
policy
and
guidance
at
the
appropriate
time.
I
will
invite
speakers
to
contribute
to
the
meeting
in
the
older
set
out
in
the
update
paper.
A
May
ask
that
all
speakers,
including
visiting
members,
speak
clearly
please
and
keep
to
points
made
on
the
application
to
material
reasons.
Only
no
further
dialogue
between
the
members
of
the
committee
and
speakers
will
be
permitted.
Once
questioning
has
finished,
all
speakers
will
be
reminded
of
their
permitted
speaking
time
and
will
be
advised
when
they
have
one
minute
remaining,
may
ask
that
all
committee
members
avoid
repetition
and
keep
any
comments
on
each
planning
applications
the
maximum
of
four
minutes.
A
This
evening
we
have
nine
applications
on
the
agenda
and
some
post
items
we
anticipate
finishing
by
nine
o'clock,
I
understand
that
planning
can
be
emotive
and,
as
everyone
remains
polite
and
cordial
and
professional
throughout
this
meeting.
Thank
you.
A
A
Okay
item
three
Declarations
of
interest:
do
I
have
any
declaration,
so
this
is
councilor
Hussey.
C
Yep,
thank
you
yeah,
so
I
declare
an
interest
in
application.
220
3153,
wise
Lane,
as
I
called
it
in
I,
think
I
could
be
called
a
predetermined,
so.
C
A
E
Thank
you
chair.
This
is
a
full
application
for
two
dwellings
with
Associated
parking
at
brimpton
Road
forecast
I'll
draw
members
attention
to
the
update
paper.
Well,
we
have
now
received
a
response
from
the
West
Parks
Council
emergency
planners
and
you'll
know
that
they
are
content
with
the
assessment
made
by
the
County
Council
emergency
planners.
E
You
have
a
detailed
report
before
you,
which
sets
out
the
plan
planning
balance.
Second,
acknowledging
the
contribution
towards
the
housing
land
Supply,
but
clearly
that
these
biodiversity
reasons
are
clear
reasons
to
refuse
the
application,
and
the
recommendation
is
therefore
for
refusal.
A
Em,
thank
you
so
I
think
we
had
count
Mr
Scott
Malden
down
as
an
objector.
Do
we
have
any
objectives
for
this
item.
F
Good
evening
chair,
let
me
start
by
wishing
you
all
the
rest
of
your
new
weeks
ago.
It
was
actually
only
three
reasons
for
refusal,
but
now
we
have
seven.
The
first
is
regards
to
SSC
Varsity
side
of
things.
The
biodiversity
officer
has
claimed
that
the
area
is
not
suitable
as
they
belong
and
was
assessed
and
the
officers
have
discounted
that
site
in
the
report.
Normally
the
officers
state
that
a
section
106
can
be
put
in
place
to
see
the
dwellings
and
the
trees
with
regards
to
potential
loss
of
these
trees.
F
This
also
links
back
to
the
biodiversity
and
to
reason
seven
own
the
site
and
wish
to
build
these
houses
are
fully
aware
of
these
students
be
sold.
Any
prospective
purchaser
would
obviously
turn
into
the
second
or
to
the
next
reason,
where
an
inspector
raised
no
one.
This
was
supported
in
the
report
that
the
taxes,
therefore
his
recommendations,
largely
be
within
residential
Gardens
and
therefore
knowledge.
F
The
net
gains
we
are
providers
is
a
claiming
that,
because
it
cannot
be
secured,
therefore,
that
rainwater
would
be
collected
on
the
site
used
for
watering
of
plants
and
all
other
sites,
and
therefore
there
would
be
no
cause
for
additional
flooding
further
up,
Upstream
form
I'm
going
to
conclude
these
dwellings
in
my
eyes
will
not
cause
any
harm
to
any
of
the
trees.
The
houses
at
this
time
when
we
don't
have
the
five-year
land
Supply
in
my
opinion,
does
album.
E
B
Pouncer
Robinson
biodiversity
net
gain
on
an
application
like
this.
You.
E
G
Chair
as
I
called
it
to
committee
and
I,
thank
you
for
reasons
for
for
refusal.
This
has
been
constrained
on
development,
has
changed
over
that
time
and
I'll
be
be
as
blunt.
Firstly,
this
is
not
in
the
countryside.
As
far
as
I
am
going
to
give
me
an
exact
number,
it
means
that
it
is
in
a
the
viewing
of
of
this
site
are
considerable.
G
Most
of
those
houses
have
four
or
five
already
the
the
former
school,
which
is
now
used
by
Billy
Holmes
area
and
therefore
the,
in
my
view,
the
departing
from
not
allow
lights
and
are
really
important.
We
all
agree
that
great
crested,
Utes
and
slow,
slow
worms
and
grass
snakes
are
are
valuable
to
the
ownership
of
the
the
individuals
who
are
coming
for
forward,
and
we
cannot.
We
cannot
in
in
pituitary
make
sure
that
grass,
snakes
and
everything
else
are
are
looked
after.
My
view
is
that
the
relocation
site
is
acceptable.
G
I
believe
responds
well
to
the
trees.
Buffers
for
trees
can't
always
be
a
sad
number
I
think
we,
as
a
committee,
sometimes
think
to
ourselves.
Actually
that
fits
in
with
that
the
the
landscape.
It
is
in,
and
sometimes
a
five
meter
buffer
is
Right.
Sometimes
it
should
be
25
I
mean
we
have
to.
We
have
to
be
flexible
in
in
our
delivery
of
of
what
we
see
I'm,
just
pointing
these
things
out
to
you,
hopefully
in
the
in
the
way
that
it
can
lead.
G
The
debate
by
reversing
net
gain,
as
we've
heard
is,
is
in
excess
of
what
is
required
as
a
guidance
from
us.
In
fact,
it's
twice
the
limit,
and
until
we
get
the
government
to
to
firmly
tell
us
what
we
should
be
doing,
I
think
we
have
to
judge
things
ourselves
until
we've
got
legislation
that
points
Us
in
the
in
that
proper
direction.
G
I
I
believe
that
the
two
tree
issues
genuinely
people
will
see
these
homes,
and
sometimes
we
have
it
or
don't,
buy
it
or
live
in
it
and
don't
live
in
it,
but
I
do
think
we
should
give
them
the
opportunity
to
do
that.
So
I
will
listen
to
the
debate
and
see
what
my
colleagues
say.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
listened
to
what
the
applicant's
agent
has
said,
and
he
certainly
satisfied
me
in
many
ways
in
terms
of
what
would
could
happen
to
the
to
the
reptiles
on
site,
where
he
stated
that
the
area
that
is
designated
for
actors
on
site
is
where
the
reptiles
at
present
have
been
found
and
I
I.
H
Don't
think
anybody
can
say
that
those
reptiles
are
going
to
stay
in
one
position
all
the
time
I
mean
they
are
creatures
they
move
around
and
they
can
move
around
anywhere
on
the
site,
and
then
we
have
this
mitigation
put
forward,
which
is
also
in
the
ownership
of
the
applicant
elsewhere.
So
if,
from
my
point
of
view
that
the
reptile
side
of
things
is,
is
it's
sorted?
If
you
like,
I,
understand
what
we've
said
what's
being
said
about
the
bio
net
gain,
but
again
as
I
understand,
it
is
an
aspiration.
H
The
one
thing
that
does
slightly
concern
me
is
the
fact
that
there
hasn't
been
anything
brought
forward
from
the
applicant
about
the
Upstream
drainage.
All
right,
but
I've
certainly
lived
in
that
area
for
an
eye
on
50
years,
which
is
quite
considerable
time
and
a
lot
of
experience
of
it
and
I
haven't
really
known
any
any
flooding
problems
whatsoever
in
in
the
area.
H
I
note
that
the
West
Berkshire
emergency
planners
haven't
brought
forward
any
recommendation
to
refuse
the
fact
that
the
site
is
outside
a
settlement.
Policy
boundary
in
my
mind,
doesn't
hold
very
much
weight.
H
The
whole
of
balkhurst
road
has
been
pretty
well
developed
right
down
to
shore
Lane,
and
a
lot
of
that
was
outside
the
settled
policy
boundary
agreed
by
this
committee
and
officers,
so
that
doesn't
really
hold
weight.
H
B
Thank
you,
chair,
I
know
this
road
reasonably
well.
Both
my
children
went
to
school
directly
opposite
this
site,
and
this
has
already
been
said
it's.
It
is
well
developed,
it's
not
in
the
countryside,
it's
a
very
nice
area
to
live
in
a
look
at
it.
It's
close
to
the
school
couldn't
really
be
closer
to
the
school.
B
It's
close
to
shops,
it's
close
to
a
pub,
it's
pretty
well
on
a
bus
route
and
the
reptiles,
I
think
we've
covered
and
what
I
see
is
a
very
deliverable
site
that
does
make
a
small
contribution
to
our
housing
land
Supply,
which
we
need
I've,
seen
a
lot
worse.
Sites
come
forward
and
get
approved.
B
One
of
the
reasons
for
objection
is
the
density,
and
it's
a
bit
more
against
than
some
of
the
surrounding
properties,
but
it's
not
not
a
dense
development,
so,
let's
say
I
see
it
as
a
totally
deliverable
site
and
for
that
reason,
I
move
for
approval.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you,
chair
I'd,
certainly
be
happy
to
Second
animation,
providing
we
can
add
some
conditions
surrounding
the
the
reptiles
on
site
that
that's,
the
only
thing
I
want
to
say
is
to
make
sure
that
we
have
that
that
covered,
but
I'd
be
quite
happy
to
take
an
emotion
for
approval,
providing
we
have
conditions
around
the
reptiles.
Please.
K
Thank
you,
chair,
so
I
think
it's
just
a
I
suppose
to
pick
up
a
few
points
in
terms
of
what's
been
said
so
I
understand
the
point
being
raised
about
the
fact
that
it
doesn't
appear
or
the
location
is
considered
acceptable,
but
clearly
is
in
the
countryside
in
terms
of
planning
policy.
So
it
needs
to
be
considered
in
that
light.
K
In
relation
to
the
point
about
the
relocation
of
reptiles
that
has
not
been
resolved
yet
so
I
appreciate
that
it
sounds
like
there
can
be
a
solution,
but
that
has
not
been
resolved
yet,
and
there
is
not
the
detail
before
you
this
evening
to
resolve
that
so
I
think
that
could
be
a
point,
possibly
for
deferral
or
possibly
delegated
to
officers
to
resolve
through
section
106.
We
I
think
we'd
have
to
take
that
into
account
in
relation
to
the
tree
issue.
K
I
think
there
needs
to
be
really
clear
understanding
of
this
there's
two
separate
issues
relating
to
the
trees
one
is
about
overshadowing
and
the
potential
relationship
between
the
buildings
and
the
trees
themselves.
The
other
in
terms
of
the
buffers
is
not
to
do
with
the
relationship
of
that.
It's
doing
the
biodiversity
buffer
that
it
creates,
so
your
SPD,
the
landscape
and
biodiversity
SPD
sets
out
that
the
minimum
requirement
is
normally
20
meters
and
clearly
this
is
well
within
that.
So
all
of
the
garden
areas
Etc
are
within
the
buffer
areas.
It
completely
fails
that
point.
K
Undoubtedly
the
part
about
biodiversity.
Again,
there
is
not
a
10
requirement.
At
the
moment
there
is
a
requirement
in
the
mppf
for
a
measurable
Net
game,
so
in
officers
review
it
fails
that
so
there's
two
kind
of
hard
fails.
If
you
like
on
biodiversity
grants
in
relation
to
the
flood
risk
assessment,
that
is
effectively
again
a
hard
requirement,
your
local
plan
directs
that
that
is
a
position
that
should
be
required.
K
So
if,
if
I
would
suggest,
if,
if
a
Way
Forward
is
trying
to
be
sought,
then
at
best
it
would
be
deferred
to
seek
that
information
and
seek
the
resolution
of
the
mitigation
for
the
reptiles
as
a
minimum
prior
to
any
formal
decision
being
taken
to
approve
so
I.
Just
don't
think,
there's
a
way
in
which
we
could
safely
approve
the
application
this
evening.
Otherwise,.
L
So
what
we
could
do
is
we
could
have
a
resolution
that
it's
delegated
to
Mike's
post,
to
approve
the
application
subject
to
the
reptile
and
flood
risk
assessment.
And
then,
if,
if
agreement
can't
be
reached
on
those
matters,
it
would
come
back
to
committee
again.
But
if
the
agent
deals
with
those
matters,
then
the
consent
would
be
issued.
A
J
Housewell
I
mean
based
on
those
conditions
that
doesn't
address
the
Buffer's
own
minimum
requirements.
I
I
have
a
question:
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
allowed
to
ask
questions
of
officers
now,
but
if
I
am
allowed,
does
this
fall
under
a
unique
exception
for
this
specific
application,
or
does
it
set
a
standard
for
future
applications
that,
because
we've
granted
one
within
the
20
meters.
K
I
think
it
is
always
each
application
has
merits,
but
I
think
this
is
in
office
views.
This
is
clear-cut.
It
is
simply
entirely
within
or
large,
almost
entirely
within
the
20
minutes.
Buffer
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
how
a
similar
site
could
be.
You
know
how
it
could
be
judged
differently
on
a
on
a
similar
sign.
There's
no
there's
nothing
exceptional
I
suppose
in
terms
of
what's
being
proposed,
to
enable
this
to
be
well
within
that
buffer
zone
within
effectively
straddle
by
two
to
Woodland.
B
Thank
you,
yeah
yeah
reason
for
approval
is
that
the
overriding
need
for
housing
and
lack
of
phobia,
housing
and
Supply
outweighs
the
disadvantages
of
the
of
the
objections.
Okay,.
A
Okay,
we'll
go
through
a
list
of
conditions.
If
there
are,
the
points
are
resolved.
E
So
the
usual,
in
accordance
with
approved
plans,
the
usual
three-year
time
scale,
details
of
boundary
treatments,
details
of
landscaping,
delivery
and
construction
hours
to
ensure
there's
no
adverse
impact
on
Neighbors
parking
cycle
provision
in
accordance
with
the
tree
protection
and
arboric
cultural
impact
assessment
and
the
arboricultural
method
statement,
provision
of
refuse
facilities,
the
water
efficiency
condition
which
refers
to
our
sustainable
development
in
accordance
with
policy,
em-9,
electric
vehicle
charging
points
and
then
our
usual
informatives
around
sale.
This
will
be
the
subject
of
sale
and
contamination
and
Cathedral
contractors.
A
Right
we
have
a
proposal
on
the
table.
That's
been
moved
and
seconded
The
Proposal
is
that
the
application
be
delegated
to
the
planning
manager
to
resolve
the
issues
of
reptile
flooding
and
Grant
planning.
A
Permission
planning
permission
if
that's
so
resolved,
so
we'll
move
to
vote
those
in
favor.
Please
show.
A
E
Thank
you
Jess,
so
delegated
to
the
Planning
Development
manager
to
resolve
the
submission
of
the
flood
risk
assessment
and
resolve
the
reptile
situation
to
Grant
planning
permission
in
subject
to
the
conditions
that
I
refer
to
earlier.
A
N
A
Way
down
to
the
speaking
seats,
Mr,
Parker
right.
O
O
The
sweetener
for
this
application
is
the
nutrient
offset
scheme
and
the
fact
local
residents
and
I
help
plant
a
new
broadleaf
Woodland
on
the
hillside
above
Hurstbourne
Tarrant
a
few
years
ago.
However,
the
major
hit
app
for
local
owls
and
other
birds
of
prey.
In
fact,
60
of
this
crucial
habitat
will
be
lost.
If
this
lower
link
development
owls
require
wide
open,
Meadows
with
long
grass
to
hunt
and
catch
their
prey,
which
is
mostly
field
pink,
is
an
oasis
of
Wildlife
and
neighbors,
share
Wildlife
footage
and
photos.
O
This
week
a
video
was
shared
with
a
barn
owl
catching
prey
in
the
meadow
on
the
exact
exact
site
of
the
proposed
development.
The
second
issue
with
the
proposed
Woodland,
is
that
the
soil
in
the
valley
is
very
thin
and
sits
on
top
of
gravel.
This
is
ideal
for
Meadow
and
forms
an
excellent
flood
plain,
but
is
not
ideal
for
large
blocks
of
broadleaf
Woodland.
O
It
would
result
in
a
far
better
solution
to
the
nitrate
mitigation
strategy.
This
alternative
would
also
prevent
the
violation
of
policy
EM1
of
the
dominated
local
plan.
The
new
Woodland
should
Thrive.
This
Hillside
Woodland
is
very
common
along
the
valley.
Another
serious
issue
is
that
Saint
mary-born
sewage
system
is
not
fit
for
purpose.
Even
now,
in
the
summer,
with
dry
conditions,
the
sewer
is
inundated
with
groundwater
and
around
the
clock.
O
Shuttle
service
of
sewage
pumping
tankers
is
required
to
keep
the
toilets
and
St
maryborn
and
the
valley
usable,
if
approved
this
application,
will
add
to
the
number
of
tankers
required
on
the
surrounding
country
lanes.
We
asked
the
committee
to
refuse
this
application.
However,
if
if
it
is
felt
these
two
houses
are
critical
to
ease
the
housing
housing
shortage,
then
we
ask
the
committee
to
request
the
applicant
could
to
come
back
with
an
alternative
nutrient
mitigation
plan.
The
plan
should
fully
protect
the
whole
of
the
existing
endangered
habitat
and
enhance
the
hillside
above
the
valley.
O
A
O
A
Welcome
to
committee,
you
have
four
minutes
when
you're
ready.
M
M
The
application
in
front
of
members
seeks
full
planning
permission
for
the
erection
of
a
pair
of
semi-detached
dwellings
on
land
immediately
to
the
northwest
of
South
View
Terrace
towards
the
southern
end
of
Saint
Mary
born.
It
forms
part
of
a
wider
field,
which
was
the
subject
of
an
application
for
four
dwellings
in
2019-20.
M
This
current
application
now
proposes
just
two
modest,
semi-detached
dwellings
on
a
much
reduced
Site
Area,
with
a
notable
Gap
left
to
the
Bourne
Valley
Inn
in
the
northwest.
The
houses
will
each
have
three
bedrooms,
which
is
in
line
with
policy.
P3
of
the
neighborhood
plan
and
architecturally
they've
been
designed
to
present
themselves
as
a
natural
and
logical
extension
to
the
roof
houses
seen
immediately
to
the
southeast.
M
The
conservation
officer
is
now
much
happier
with
the
scheme
and,
whilst
the
landscape
still
objects,
we
agree
with
the
case
officer
that
the
scheme
is
of
a
high
quality
which
would
respect
the
existing
development
and
would
be
sympathetic
to
the
site's
context
in
terms
of
the
principle
of
residential
development
in
this
location.
Whilst
the
site
Falls
within
open
Countryside,
the
council
accept
that
they
still
cannot
currently
demonstrate
a
five-year
supply
of
housing
land.
It's
the
presumption
in
favor
of
sustainable
development
that
is
engaged
accordingly.
M
M
M
The
addition
of
two
households
to
the
local
population
also
has
the
benefit
fit
of
helping
in
a
small
but
meaningful
way
to
maintain
the
viability
of
local
services
and
the
Vitality
of
this
rural
community.
In
terms
of
the
social
aspects
of
sustainable
development,
the
development
would
contribute
to
the
local
housing
stock.
M
Whilst
from
an
environmental
point
of
view,
the
proposals
will
be
energy,
efficient,
incorporate
additional
soft
landscaping
and
achieve
a
biodiversity
net
gain,
so
in
summary,
Enlighten
its
accessibility
in
the
council's
current
housing
land
Supply
position
is
considered
that,
in
principle,
the
application
site
is
an
acceptable
location
for
residential
development.
The
Proposal
would
occupy
natural,
logical
plot.
That
is
not
recognized
as
being
of
any
importance
within
the
conservation
area
appraisal
or
the
village
design
statement
would
make
a
small
but
worthwhile
contribution
to
the
supply
of
housing
in
the
borough
on
a
site.
That's
not
isolated.
M
In
short,
the
proposals
do
not
fall
down
against
the
presumption
in
favor
of
sustainable
development
as
the
adverse
impacted
not
significantly
and
demonstrably
outweigh
the
benefits.
We
believe
that
we
have
responded
positively
to
the
council's
previous
concerns
with
the
notable
changes
that
have
been
made
to
the
scheme.
There
are
no
technical
reasons
why
this
application
should
not
be
considered
favorably.
We
therefore
respectfully
request
that
planning
paper
should
be
granted
accordingly
in
library
officer's
recommendation.
Thank
you.
Come.
P
One
of
the
sections
of
some
material
reasons
for
refusal
that
was
submitted
by
one
of
the
ward
members
refers
to
policy,
ss6e
and
I.
Think
members
will
appreciate.
I've
got
a
lot
of
history
behind
that.
What
and
it
is
new
housing
developments
in
the
countryside
outside
the
settlement
policy,
boundary
ought
to
meet
a
locally
agreed
need.
Normally,
this
comes
from
Parish
councils
was
a
housing
needs
assessment
to
presented
with
us.
N
Thank
you
for
your
question.
Yes,
in
terms
of
the
housing
need
assessment,
there
was
nothing
provided
with
the
application,
but
it
is
worth
bearing
in
mind
that
the
ss6
is
considered
to
be
out
of
date
because
of
our
housing
land
Supply
issue.
So
therefore
less
weight
is
attributed
to
that
policy.
G
Thank
you,
chip
and
my
viewing
of
this
is
that
there's
14
houses
in
in
semis
is
that
is
that
confirmed
by
by
you,
as
officers.
N
G
Q
N
N
I'd
have
to
double
check
on
our
system
to
get
you
an
answer
for
that
one
if
they
weren't
listed
in
no,
so
if
they
weren't
listed,
it
doesn't
mean
they
weren't
necessarily
consulted.
It
probably
just
means
they
haven't
responded,
but
I
would
have
to
come
back
and
confirm
whether
they
were
consulted
or
not.
Foreign.
A
Q
Thank
you,
chair
yeah.
Obviously,
I've
got
a
background
knowledge
on
this
because
until
two
years
ago
I
was
the
active
Ward
councilor
and
behind
my
questions
to
officers
was
I
sat
on
the
flood
Committee
of
the
Bourne
Valley,
which
included
Hampshire
the
Water
Authority
the
environment
agency,
because
it's
been
mentioned
at
the
Bourne
Valley,
it
should
never
have
been
built
300
years
ago.
It
was
ridiculous.
Q
You
can
do
the
whole
thing's
flooded,
but
the
service
issues
also,
we
had
Vita
Crest
as
part
of
the
committee,
because
300
meters,
Downstream
of
this
proposed
development,
are
the
Waterbeds
of
Vita
Crest,
which
is
the
country's
best
watercress
water
beds,
which
rely
on
the
chalk
stream
flowing
through
them
and
vitocrest
employed
500
people.
So
when
we
look
at
the
thing
on
economic
benefit,
you
know
the
500
people
employed
at
veterans
is
quite
significant.
Q
Now
we
we
often
have
emergencies
or
we
used
to,
and
if,
if
the
pollution
gets
into
the
water
boats,
then
the
Waterbeds
are
shut
down
for
nine
months
to
be
decontaminated,
and
that
is
an
environmental
catastrophe
for
all
people
involved.
So
I
was
disappointed
that
there
was
nothing
in
these.
This
reports
that
covered
the
water
beds,
the
pollution
problem
and
the
issue
and
and
the
section
on
foul
water
management
was
basically
non-existent.
It
will
just
be
covered
at
some
future
point,
but
in
the
born
Valley,
it's
such
a
critical
issue.
G
Thank
you,
chair
I
was
fortunate
enough
to
go
on
the
viewing
panel
on
Friday
and
I
have
to
say,
I,
take
and
I
accept
Council
Faulkner's
point.
It
is
bizarre
in
in
my
view,
that
we
have
a
flood
assessment
for
the
previous
application
in
quite
a
built
up
area
and
yet
somewhere,
where
water
is
so
important,
we
don't
seem
to
have
a
flood
assessment.
It
seems
a
slightly
odd
that
those
things
are
are
conjoined
anyway.
I
was
on
the
viewing
panel
and
my
point
earlier
about
how
many
dwellings
are
on
there.
G
We
cannot
section
how
many
each
house,
how
many
residents
are
in
each
of
these
houses,
now
a
a
modest
housing
that
looks
in
line
because
that's
where
we
stood
in
the
middle
of
the
road
with
the
possibility
of
death,
but
to
see
that
the
street,
the
the
street
scene
would
be
very
similar,
in
my
view,
to
what
is
there
already
and
it
looked
a
natural
extension
of
semi-detached
homes?
G
You
know
it's
not
it's
not
as
though
this
is
this
is
something
special
that
the
the
pub
the
pub
will
create:
noise
disturbance,
all
those
things
and,
in
reality,
I
think
the
the
report
outlines
the
ability
to
deliver
these
houses
I,
don't
like
the
housing
five-year
land,
Supply
being
the
ultimate
decider
on
on
things,
but
I
think
the
reasons
for
approval
are
substantive
enough
to
to
support
it,
and
we
all
know
that
the
delivery
of
two
smaller
homes
is
probably
better
than
an
executive,
home
or
five
bedrooms
in
this
location
and
therefore
I
I'm
I'm,
going
to
support
the
officer
recommendation.
G
Q
Refusal
well,
there
were
other
issues.
I
would
address
I
I.
We
had
the
appeal
end
of
last
year,
where
the
appeal
inspector
upheld
the
fact
that
there
shouldn't
be
development
in
an
arnb
in
a
Conservation
Area.
Q
Q
The
the
the
applicant
mentioned
we
approved
last
month,
three
houses
up
the
hill,
but
that
that
was
up
the
hill
next
to
a
garage
in
a
garden,
whereas
this
is
agricultural.
Undeveloped.
Land
is
a
completely
different
situation.
Q
So
the
reasons
for
using
the
five
year,
land,
Supply
I,
don't
believe,
are
valid
in
this
particular
case.
So
there
there
are
those
reasons:
I.E
the
policy
reasons,
plus
the
specifics
that
I've
mentioned
in
terms
of
the
flood
assessments
Etc.
So
I,
don't
know
if
you
can
pick
out
the
reasons
on
that.
One.
K
You
chair
so
just
because
I
appreciate
we
didn't
respond
to
the
council
Faulkner's
question
in
the
first
place,
because
we're
just
looking
up
in
the
system,
the
environment
agency
were
not
consulted
and
partly
the
reason
for
that
is
the
size
of
the
development.
K
The
fact
that
it's
in
flood
zone,
one
so
I
respect
what
you
say
about
the
local
knowledge
Etc,
but
in
terms
of
the
requirement
to
consult
there
wasn't
one
and
there
wasn't
a
requirement
to
go
any
further
on
that
in
relation
to
if
our
drainage,
yes,
it
is
covered
by
condition
set
out
in
the
report
that
doesn't
lose
the
council's
control.
K
It
just
means
that
it
pushes
it
to
a
different,
a
different
stage
of
the
permission
in
terms
of
the
points
raised
in
relation
to
support,
emotion
for
refusal,
guess
what
you
mentioned:
exceptional
circumstances
and
I
believe
that
might
be
in
relation
to
the
26
house
scheme
that
was
at
the
appeal
hearing
yeah,
so
that
the
the
difference
between
that
scheme
and
this
scheme
and
planning
policy
terms
is
its
scale.
So
that
is
what
would
be
determined
major
development
in
the
aonb,
where
you
need
to
demonstrate
exceptional
circumstances.
K
The
policy
test
here
is
is
slightly
different
and
effectively
is
the
the
paragraph
11,
whether
they're
of
the
mppf,
whether
there's
any
clear
reasons
to
refuse
a
impact
on
a
OMB
can
be
that,
but
it
needs
to
be
a
level
of
harm
where
you
can
see
that
there
would
be
a
clear
reason
to
refuse
the
reasons
why
that
bar
hasn't
been
reached
in
the
officer's
recommendation
is
because
of
the
size,
the
scale
proximity
to
existing
dwellings,
Etc
as
explained
so
overall,
it's
not
considered
in
terms
of
the
way.
K
K
Q
Yeah
I'm
slightly
flabbergasted
because
the
one
thing
I
missed
was
the
neighborhood
plan
and
I.
Just
wonder
what
was
the
point
that
some
very
broad
the
neighborhood
plan,
I'm
just
totally
bewildered.
It's
like
every
policy,
has
been
turned
upside
down,
so
I'd
like
to
continue
with
it.
But
whether
it
succeeds
is
a
mother
issue.
I
suppose.
B
You
I
could
almost
support
the
officer
recommendation,
except
for
the
reason
that
Council
defaultness
raised
regarding
the
sewage
it's
a
problem.
We've
got
in
my
ward
other
side
of
the
borough
and
it
is
Absolute
Total
misery
for
those
people
who
are
affected
by
it
and
to
have
this
effect,
a
major
food
source
that
we
have
in
this
Borough
I
can't
support
it
with
this,
so
I
will
second
counselor
Fortress
recommendation
for
refusal
totally
based
on
flooding
issues.
L
Sure
I
wonder
whether
the
Council
of
Faulkner
May
consider
asking
the
committee
that
this
application
be
deferred
so
that
we
can
look
at
these
issues
because
there's
very
little
information
before
the
committee
on
this
issue
and
you've
heard
there
is
no
evidence
that
would
enable
us
to
substantiate
that
at
this
moment
in
time.
But
if
officers
went
away
and
looked
at
the
issues
and
then
bring
a
report
back
to
the
next
meeting
next
meeting
with
that.
Q
Yeah
I'd
be
happy
with
that
yeah
I
I,
really
like
because
of
this,
the
environment
agency
in
southern
water,
to
be
contacted
and
ask
for
a
proper
report.
Some
of
the
water
was
spent
two
million
on
on
this
Valley
on
sewage.
You
know
for
a
population
of
not
a
lot,
so
it's
a
very
serious
issue.
A
R
A
Thank
you.
Moving
on
to
the
next
item,
land
adjacent
to
bias,
Lane,
silchester
and
I
understand.
We
have
some
speakers-
oh
and
councilor,
Durant
you're,
wishing
to
remove
yourself
this
item.
L
A
Okay,
so
if
we
could
have
the
officer
presentation,
please.
N
N
We've
got,
updates,
cancel
Durant,
provided
further
comments
in
support
of
his
comments
provided
in
the
officer's
report.
He
provided
these
late,
so
I'll
provide
them
verbally.
He
stated
that
silchester
is
very
limited
in
sites
for
development,
the
green,
the
common
land
and
the
development.
N
The
developed
Center
do
not
provide
opportunities
for
development,
as
we
have
seen
in
other
recent
applications
for
silchester
development
is
very
much
restricted
to
single
properties,
and
this
is
the
only
way
much-needed
development
can
take
place
in
relation
to
the
officer's
report
are
just
a
small
correction
where
it's
been
referred
to
as
the
building
and
the
redundancy
of
the
building
have
not
been
addressed.
Information
was
provided,
and
that
is
a
typo,
so
disregard
the
element
relating
to
what
the
comments
relating
to
the
the
building
no
longer
having
a
purpose.
A
Thank
you,
so
I'm
I
have
three
people
down
to
speak
in
support,
no
objections,
so
Mr
Petty
and
Mr
and
Mrs
came
foreign.
A
Thank
you
welcome
to
committee.
Somehow
you've
got
to
work
out
how
you're
going
to
share
four
minutes
between
you.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
chairman
members
of
the
committee
I'm
here
with
the
applicant
Peter
and
Corrine
came,
who
have
lived
in
the
parish
for
over
nine
years.
The
application
that
is
in
front
of
members
is
seeking
permission
to
convert
a
redundant
Barn
into
a
three-bedroom
dwelling
at
the
time
when
the
council
cannot
currently
demonstrate
a
five-year
supply
of
housing
land,
the
application
site
does
not
fall
within
an
arnb.
A
Conservation
Area
flood
risk.
Zone
nitrate
zone
is
not
close
to
any
listed
buildings.
M
Indeed,
whilst
the
site
Falls
within
the
open,
Countryside
policy,
ss6
of
the
local
plan
permits
the
ReUse
of
redundant
or
disused
buildings
in
locations
such
as
this,
as
does
paragraph
80
of
the
framework.
In
this
respect,
the
officer
accepts
that
the
barn
is
genuinely
redundant
and
that
it
is
structurally
capable
of
conversion.
However,
he
has
raised
concerns
with
regards
to
the
site's
location
and
the
impact
that
the
development
would
have
on
the
landscape,
character
and
visual
amenity
of
the
area.
M
M
It's
also
worth
noting
the
proposed
development
is
likely
to
generate
a
similar
or
even
lower
number
of
traffic
movements
than
the
existing
Barn
could,
if
it
was
in
full-time,
intensive
agricultural
use.
In
this
respect,
it
would
be
a
more
sustainable
form
of
development
than
what
is
seen
at
present,
and
this
is
an
appropriate
location
for
a
single
dwelling
from
a
landscape
point
of
view.
The
officer
is
raised
with
raised
concerns
with
the
introduction
of
domestic
paraphernalia.
However,
surely
this
is
an
inevitable
consequence
of
any
such
residential
conversion
scheme.
M
It
seems
perverse
to
have
a
policy
that
allows
the
ReUse
of
buildings
such
as
this
and
then
to
object
on
the
basis
that
there
will
be
Associated,
Garden
land,
hard,
standing,
washing
lines
and
the
like.
If
we
didn't
provide
these,
then
I'd
expect
an
objection
where
an
objection
would
be
raised
on
amenity
grounds.
M
So,
against
this
backdrop,
we
did
not
consider
that
the
proposals
will
adversely
affect
the
rural
character
of
the
area.
The
building
will
continue
to
appear
as
a
barn-like
structure
in
an
open
agricultural
setting.
Indeed,
the
proposed
dwelling
and
its
Associated
cartilage
represents
a
very
small
proportion
of
The
applicant's
Wider
holding
in
terms
of
urbanizing
the
site.
You
will
see
on
the
proposed
site
plan
that
the
applicants
are
proposing
a
significant
amount
of
new
planting
in
and
around
the
site.
M
This
will
soften
the
impacts
of
the
proposed
development
and
allow
it
to
Nestle
comfortably
into
this
location.
With
regards
to
hard
surfacing,
the
applicants
intend
to
put
something
here
that
is
appropriate
for
a
rural
setting,
for
example,
a
buffalo
gravel.
This
would
enhance
the
immediate
setting
of
the
building
more
so
than
the
existing
hardcore
does,
as
will
the
additional
soft
Landscaping.
M
In
addition,
the
applicants
are
also
proposing
to
enhance
the
ecological
setting
of
The
Barn
for
incorporating
a
number
of
biodiversity
enhancements
as
part
of
this
scheme.
These
will
include
baton,
bird
boxes
and
insect
bricks.
This
is
consistent
with
the
approach
that
the
applicants
have
taken
on
the
rest
of
their
holding
already,
where
they've
Incorporated
ecological
enhancements
to
pass
for
their
organic
Vineyard.
M
Whilst
it's
regrettable,
some
of
the
planting
along
the
front
of
the
site
is
being
removed.
This
will
result
in
a
much
safer
access
point.
None
of
the
trees
or
hedgerows
are
of
any
ecological
or
arboricultural
value,
and
some
of
it
will
need
to
be
removed
in
the
near
future
anyway,
as
it
is
suffering
from
Ash
die
back.
In
summary,
the
society
is
considered
to
be
an
appropriate
location
for
a
sympathetic,
Bond
conversion
of
the
nature
proposed.
M
The
development
would
make
a
small
bit
worthwhile
contribution
to
the
council's
ongoing
housing
land
Supply
issue
on
an
unconstrained
site,
whilst
landscape
helmets
been
identified
by
the
officer.
This
has
not
been
informed
by
internal
landscape
advice
and
every
effort
has
been
made
by
the
applicants
to
soften
the
impact
of
the
development
and
allow
it
to
sit
comfortably
in
this
location.
We
do
not
consider
that
the
proposals
fall
down
against
the
presumption
in
favor
of
sustainable
development,
as
the
adverse
impacts
do
not
significantly
and
demonstrably
outweigh
the
benefits.
M
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Do
we
have
any
questions.
B
M
Foreign,
the
the
site's
about
350
meters,
away
from
silchester
Farm
in
terms
of
tree
and
Hedgerow
removal.
That's
just
that's
just
limited
to
a
couple
of
sections
along
the
road
Frontage,
where
we're
having
to
take
some
out
to
facilitate
the
visibility
displays
in
both
directions:
I
think
in
One,
Direction
It's,
a
small
section
of
Holly
hedge
and
then
in
the
other
direction.
There's
some
Hedgerow
and
some
ash
trees
which
are
suffering
from
die
back
and,
like
I,
said
they're
gonna
have
to
they'll
have
to
be
removed
to
the
Future
anyway.
M
As
part
of
the
proposals,
we've
put
forward
replacement
planting
behind
the
visibility
space
and
also
you
see
additional
hedgera
planting
around
the
cartilage
and
along
the
along
the
driveway,
and
we're
happy
to
accept
a
planning
condition
requiring
a
soft
Landscaping
scheme
to
be
dealt
with
or
agreed
prior
to
any
development
commencing.
If
that
was
considered
necessary.
J
You
chat,
we
received
an
email
from
Mrs.
Karin
came
I,
think
I'm,
saying
that
right,
which
addressed
some
of
the
points
raised
in
the
report,
but
one
of
the
things
it
talked
about
was
that
there's
a
technically
a
shop
nearby
and
it's
on
a
bus
route.
But
within
our
report
there's
a
discussion
of
the
meaning
of
the
term
isolated,
isolated
development
within
the
countryside,
and
it's
specifically
denotes
isolated
physically
rather
than
access
to
services.
J
So
do
you
have
any
comments
around
how
we
should
take
it
in
terms
of
isolation
within
the
countryside,
because
the
services
isn't
really
something
we
can
consider.
M
As
I
said
in
my
speech,
the
matter
of
isolation
is
is,
to
my
mind,
is
it
relevant
to
this
application,
because
you
have
a
policy
in
the
local
plan
which
allow
which
allows
conversion
of
buildings
to
residential
dwellings?
There's
no
requirement
for
it
not
to
be
isolated,
and
that
is
entirely
consistent
with
paragraph
80
of
the
framework,
National
planning
policy
framework
says
you
can
allow.
You
can
have
isolated
homes
in
the
countryside
where
it
involves
the
ReUse
of
redundant
or
disused
buildings.
H
Thank
you
now
could
I
just
ask
a
question
about
the
design.
Essentially,
are
you
just
putting
windows
and
doors
into
what
exists?
Because
that
that's?
Why
that's
the
way
I
take
it
from
from
the
plans
in
front
of
me.
M
Yeah
I
mean
all
we're
proposing
externally
is
some
windows
and
doors
and
a
very
small
porch
on
the
I
think
it's
the
Eastern
or
Eastern
side
or
Southeastern
elevation.
That's
it.
We've
tried
to
respect
the
character
of
the
building
so
that
when
you
look
at
it
as
a
dwelling,
it
would
still
appear
as
a
barn
light
structure,
which
we
think
is
a
sympathetic
approach.
T
J
N
So
so,
firstly,
obviously
we
look
at
policy
ss6
and
that
talks
about
conversion
of
of
bonds.
So
obviously,
under
that
section
c,
there's
several
elements.
I
think
I
have
been
through
them
all
in
my
reports
and
it
comes
to
criteria
bi,
which
talks
about
leads
to
enhancement
to
the
immediate
setting.
So
I've
concluded
that
I
don't
think
it
needs
to
an
enhancement.
There
is
a
landscape
part,
so
the
application
fails
to
comply
with
that
criteria.
N
So
I've
then
moved
on
to
the
mppf,
which
has
a
very
similar
policy
requirement,
which
also
looks
at
development
and
reuse
of
redundant
disused
buildings
to
enhance
its
immediate
setting
I
once
again
consider
there
to
be
landscape
Farmers
without
my
report,
so
I
consider
it
to
fail
paragraph
80.
So:
what's
those
policies
in
themselves
don't
require
this
look
at
isolation,
we're
not
looking
at
it
in
light
of
those
policies
because
it
fails
those
policies.
N
G
Thank
you,
chair
I,
appreciate
that
very
much
we've
had
this
I
need
to
refer
back
to
item
one
again,
but
we
we
in
item
one.
We
saw
close
proximity
of
other
buildings,
other
forms,
in
fact
the
school
within
walking
distance
I,
although
I
obviously
support
ss6
for
the
development
of
Brownfield
sites.
G
I
I
understand
that
the
form
may
be
similar
to
to
what
is
currently
there,
but
there
is
an
urbanization
of
lights
and
everything
has
as
nightfalls
there
wouldn't
be
that
with
a
barn
and
therefore
it
is
an
urbanization
and
therefore
has
has
particular
problems.
The
the
picture
that
you
had
of
the
landscape
earlier
up.
It
demonstrates
that
this
is
within
a
area
that
would
light
and
that
we
should
not
consider
the
sighting
of
these
in
regard
to
our
housing
land
Supply.
G
Frankly,
one
dwelling
is
not
likely
to
to
enhance
our
movement
from
4.2
to
to
5.2
and
I,
genuinely
believe
that
the
officers
have
laid
out
well.
The
reasons
for
refusal
and
I
will
be
be
moving.
That
refusal.
Thank
you.
A
Right,
we
have
a
movable
refusal,
Council
Robinson.
B
Thank
you
share
a
look
at
the
reasons
that
have
been
given
for
refusal
and
I
can't
agree
with
them.
I
swipe
nights
a
week
I've
been
to
events
there
myself
having
two
to
three
hundred
people.
A
few
couple
of
months
ago,
we
approved
a
farm
shop
on
the
same
site.
A
couple
of
months
ago.
We
also
approved
some
overnight
pods
for
visitors
to
stay.
B
The
number
14
bus
passes
the
end
of
the
road.
There
are
other
houses
of
character
that
facility,
that
is
there
of
of
the
file
of
the
wedding
venue.
That's
already
eroded
it.
There
is
no
Urban
Countryside
character
to
erode
it's
gone
because
the
residents
in
that
area
are
putting
up
with
loud
music
playing
night
after
night
after
night,
up
until
midnight,
you
can
hear
all
across
the
village
litigation
involved
that
rural
setting
has
been
totally
eroded
by
the
facility.
That
is
there.
So
I
can't
agree
with
the
reasons
for
refusal.
B
The
other
one
is
the
subdivision
of
the
field
and
looked
at
a
picture
that
we
had
up
a
minute
ago
of
the
barn
and
that's
just
a
balm.
That's
stuck
in
the
middle
of
the
field.
It's
an
incongruous
setting
for
any
building.
It
would
look
a
lot
better
if
it
had
some
definition
sub
cartilage
around
it.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
councilor
bound
thank.
H
You
yeah
I
I,
tend
to
agree
with
councilor
Robinsons
in
terms
of
the
look
of
the
building.
At
the
moment
it
looks
rather
in
Congress,
where
it
is
I,
don't
think
it
will
be
improved
at
all
by
being
turned
into
a
house.
That's
why
I
asked
about
the
design?
Basically,
it's
still
a
barn
in
the
countryside,
as
far
as
I
can
see
can
see,
which
has
been
touched.
Apparently
is
what
350,
who
knows
350
meters
away.
H
A
R
E
Thank
you
chair.
This
is
one
of
two
applications
items
four
and
five
which
relate
to
the
same
property.
One.
This
item
here
is
the
householder,
and
the
next
item
is
a
concurrent
listed
building
consent
application.
Will
we
be
considering
them
as
two
separate
items?
E
So
the
proposal
is
for
a
single
story,
rear
extension,
including
excavation
Works,
to
the
rear
garden
and
the
erection
of
a
new
retaining
wall,
a
playgrove
Cod.
You
will
see
that
the
proposal
shows
a
flat
roofed
rear
extension
onto
the
southern
elevation
extending
beyond
the
existing
two-story
extension,
and
the
proposal
is
of
a
contemporary
modern
design.
E
Members
have
had
the
benefit
of
viewing
the
application
site
on
Friday
I'd,
also
like
to
remind
members
of
the
statutory
legislation
in
respect
of
dealing
with
applications
in
relation
to
Heritage
assets.
Page
197
of
the
report
refers
to
sections
60
to
have
special
regard
to
the
desirability
of
preserving
a
list
of
building
or
its
setting
and
also
land
within
conservation
areas,
again
that
special
Duty
to
preserve
and
enhance
the
character
and
appearance
of
the
area.
U
Mr
chairman
councilors,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
good
evening,
my
husband,
David
and
I
have
lived
at
Blaker
of
cottage
for
over
a
third
of
our
lives
and
we've
grown
very
attached
to
it.
We
spent
a
lot
of
people
in
creating
a
far
more
practical
kitchen
and
the
opportunity
to
view
the
garden,
but,
unfortunately,
the
belt
of
the
oak
frame
facing
the
garden
was
much
less
successful
in
high
winds
and
rain.
U
In
the
winter
months,
the
seating
area
is
cold
and
drafty,
and
not
really
at
all
comfortable
to
sit
in.
It's
been
a
huge
disappointment
and
it
should
have
been
the
highlight
of
the
development
and
in
fact
we
we
have
had
numerous
attempts
to
repair
the
situation,
but
it's
just
not
worked,
and
we've
spent
16
years
living
with
this.
In
this
plan
put
before
you
we're
seeking
to
design
out
the
deficiencies
and
provide
a
panoramic
view
of
the
garden
and
to
improve
the
comfort
in
the
area
which
is
the
heart
of
our
Cottage.
U
U
The
design
is
very
much
influenced
by
the
latest
building
regulations
concerning
overheating
and
solar
gain.
Hence
the
large
glass
panels
and
the
overhanging
roof.
This
captures
energy
from
a
low
altitude
sun
in
the
winter,
but
prevents
the
sun's
strongest
Rays
reaching
the
glass
at
the
height
of
the
summer,
together
with
high
levels
of
insulation.
This
free
energy
is
expected
to
reduce
our
heating
bills
in
an
old
Cottage,
with
generally
poor
levels
of
insulation
in
the
walls
and
few
options
to
improve
it.
This
sort
of
innovation
should
be
welcomed
in
our
drive
towards
net
zero.
U
It's
only
a
generation
away.
I
know
that
the
planning
department
is
particularly
concerned
about
the
impact
of
the
site
of
this
design
on
the
Conservation
Area.
We
believe
it
will
be
virtually
zero
as
most
Hedges
are
Evergreen
and
the
beach,
if
considered,
deciduous,
retains
its
dead
leaves
over
the
winter.
U
Ironically,
on
the
front
cover
of
last
week,
last
weekend,
Sunday
Times
home
section
I
found
a
picture
of
a
smaller
16th
century
grade.
2
listed
thatch
Cottage
with
near
identical
glass
box
extension
on
the
side,
it's
located
in
the
mandips
overlooked
by
the
ruins
of
Farley
Hungerford
castle
and
therefore
most
likely
in
a
Conservation
Area.
U
A
U
U
Thank
you
for
listening
and
by
the
way,
I
know
we're
not
allowed
to
bring
pictures
or
plans,
but
I
have
actually.
B
J
J
Thank
you,
Jen.
Thank
you
for
your
your
information.
It's
been
quite
helpful
for
my
understanding
of
everything.
F
J
J
Okay,
sorry,
sorry
about
all
that.
Thank
you
for
giving
us
some
information.
The
main
issue
within
our
report
seems
to
be
the
historic,
environment's
team's
objection.
They
have
said
that
it
constitutes
an
over
development.
Your
wife
spoke
on
that
issue
somewhat.
J
My
question,
for
you
really
is
simple.
You've
talked
a
little
bit
about
the
impact
not
being
especially
visible
to
the
public,
but
part
of
conservation
is
conserving
the
building
for
future
Generations
who
might
live
in
the
property
or
whether
it
ever
becomes
open
to
the
public.
So
do
you
have
any
comments
around
the
the
protection
of
the
building
for
for
future
generations
for
posterity's
sake,
rather
than
now
the
impact
on
the
Public's
perception
of
the
building?
If
that
makes
sense,.
U
The
perfect
perception
around
where
we
are
is
that
they're
all
perfectly
happy
with
it.
We
have
had
no
objections
about
our
development,
none
at
all
and
I
think
you
know
you
have
to
understand
that
architecturally
Modern
Glass
structures
that
are
carefully
created
to
keep
you
know
to
give
you
solar
gain
in
the
winter
they're
regarded
as
quite
beautiful.
You
see
them
all
over
Victorian
buildings
in
London
and-
and
you
know,
I
found
a
16th
century
cottage,
which
is
what
ours
is.
Ours
was
built
in
1592.
K
A
Thank
you.
Do
we
have
any
more
questions?
R
Thank
you,
chair,
I
was
able
to
go
on
the
viewing
panel
and
I'll
be
very
interested
these
one
or
two
points
for
those
who
were
unable
to
be
on
the
viewing
panel.
Firstly,
I'd
like
to
point
out
that
this
is
a
very
modest
extension
to
an
extension.
It
is
not
attached
to
the
original
listed
building
it
in
any
way
of
the
main
originally
listed
building.
The
other
point,
I'd.
R
R
And,
of
course,
to
adapt
to
modern
living
and
I've
have
been
inside
this
Cottage,
it's
a
typical
16th
century,
Cottage,
very
low
ceilings
for
now,
and
it's
very
important
to
have
an
area
where
there's
a
bit
of
Elbow
Room
and
the
the
original
extension
was
put
on
to
achieve
that,
and
this
modest
increase
in
in
in
in
there
so
I
I
would
I'll
be
interested
to
hear
what
particularly
what
other
people
are
on
the
viewing
panel
have
to
say,
but
I'm
not
inclined
to
support
them.
Thank.
B
You
Chef,
unfortunately,
love
to
live
in
the
17th
century,
Cottage
and
so
I
do
understand
all
the
problems
that
the
applicant
and
I
look
at
this
proposal
and
one
minute
we're
being
told
that
it's
an
extension
to
an
extension
and
then
the
next
minute,
we're
being
told
that
building
I
don't
understand
how
it's
protecting.
It's
only
protecting
the
relatively
modern
extension
and
the
proposal
talks
about
removal
of
Oak
framing
an
existing
glycer
and
things
like
that.
B
As
we've
said,
it's
an
extension
on
top
of
an
extension,
so
I
don't
see
how
it
protects
the
original
building
at
all,
and
it
is,
is
a
building.
That's
already
been
extended,
and
this
is
another
step
and
it's
another
erode
big
problems,
but
I.
Don't
think
this
is
the
right
way
to
go
about
it.
I
think,
there's
a
better
way
to
solve
the
problems.
I've
seen
it
done
in
other
buildings
where
I
live,
and
it
can
be
done
without
putting
a
glazed
extension
onto
another
extension,
so
I
do
support
the
officer
recommendation.
Thank
you.
J
I
agree
with
cancer
godison
actually
on
this
issue.
I
think
it
doesn't
do
that
much
damage
to
the
original
building
in
terms
of
it.
It's
not
particularly
detrimental.
You
can
still
appreciate
the
historic
nature
of
the
building,
because
it
is
an
extension
extension.
I
I
understand
the
concerns
around.
Oh,
it's
not
really
protecting
the
original
building,
but
it
is
protecting
the
extension
which
is
now
part
of
the
overall
structure
of
the
house.
J
A
Okay,
councilor
Durant.
C
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
tend
to
well
I,
do
agree
with
both
councilors
who've
just
spoken.
I
think
some
buildings
need
to
evolve.
There's
a
process
this
building
has
evolved
once
I
have
no
idea
how
many
changes
have
been
made
over
the
years
since
the
1500s,
but
there
were
probably
a
few
and
I
think
in
this
case,
where
it's
actually
making
the
the
dwelling
more
I'll,
say
more
habitable
and
is
offering
some
environmental
and
Energy
savings.
C
A
Thank
you
councilor
bound
thank.
H
You
well
I
had
the
benefit
of
going
on
the
viewing
panel
on
Friday
and
seeing
the
the
the
building
as
it
is
now
in
situ.
Obviously,
I
don't
think
it
has
a
great
that
the
proposal
would
have
a
great
effect
on.
Is
it
blaggrove
Lane,
but
it,
but
from
the
garden
it
will
have
a
huge
effect,
I
believe
on
the
original.
H
The
fabric
of
the
original
building
I
mean
I,
don't
personally
I,
don't
think
I
would
have
agreed
with
the
original
extension
myself,
but
it
is
there
now,
and
it
has
sort
of
weathered
to
put
a
flat
roof
extension
onto
an
extension.
I
think
is
a
stat.
Far
is
a
step
too
far
and
I
totally
agree
with
the
officer
recommendation
and
also
what
Council
Robinson
has
already
said.
Thank.
D
It
certainly
doesn't
enhance
the
existing
building,
but
visually
it
doesn't
conserve
the
character
of
the
building
I'm
not
being
funny
when
I
say
I
could
build
that
with
Lego
bricks.
P
G
You
chair,
I,
I,
accept
that
there
is
sometimes
a
need
to
reset
joules,
and
this
is
obviously
a
jewel
and
the
front
elevation.
That's
which
is
not
affected
is
good.
I
just
cannot,
in
my
good
conscience,
support
a
flat
roof
on
the
extension
as
it
as
it
stands
and
I
think
it.
It
provides
harm
from
the
viewing
site
of
the
garden
and
and
actually
the
flat
roof.
A
Okay,
so
the
recommendation
has
been
moved
and
seconded
will
now
move
to
vote.
Those
in
favor
of
refusal,
please
show.
A
Okay,
we'll
take
item
five
and
then
we'll
go
for
a
break
after
that.
So
that's
listed
building,
consent.
A
Time,
thanks
against
one
okay,
thank
you
so
we'll
have
a
brief
break
now
for
five
minutes
and
then
we'll
be
back
in
the
chamber
for
the
remaining
items.
Thank
you.
Everyone.
A
Okay,
if
we're
all
back
there,
we
shall
resume
the
meeting
item.
Six
41,
foil,
Park,.
N
Of
the
roof
to
form
a
first
floor
with
front
and
rear
Dormers,
there
are
no
updates
with
this
application
and
the
application
is
recommended
for
permission
as
set
out
within
the
officers
report.
P
Yep
I
understand
from
the
reporters.
Windows
is
not
characteristic
but
I'm,
looking
at
Google
Maps
and
on
street
view
here
at
the
moment
and
just
down
the
road
there's,
certainly
another
one.
That's
had
its
roof
raised
and
had
the
Dormers
in
the
report.
It
states
that
the
entrance
to
Four
Road
has
Shelly
Bungalows,
so
I
have
got
no
problem
with
the
officer's
recommendation
on
this
one
chair.
Thank
you
very
much.
N
A
And
I
officer
presenting,
if
you
like
to
say
a
few
words.
E
A
Thank
you
now
I
understand.
We
did
have
councilor
Murray
Campbell
from
the
parish
council
with
his
chair
and
welcome
to
committee
when
you're
ready,
you'll
have
thank.
V
You
old,
basing
and
Niche
pit
Parish
Council
had
three
objections
to
this.
I've
been
enlarged.
This
particular
Frontage
is
very
solid.
Compared
to
there'd
only
be
a
hundred
millimeter
gap
between
of
the
master
bedroom
in
number
91.
yeah.
You
can
see
where
the
first
floor
bedroom
window
coming
from
the
right
hand,
side
and
a
little
bit
of
natural
light
coming
through
obscure
glass
of
the
roof
of
91's
living
room.
Well,
yeah.
It's
where
they're
relaxing
is
also
privacy,
because
looking
I
think
if
I
lived
at
91
of
our
neighbors.
W
To
the
policy
em-10
regular,
that
extension
should
amenity
for
occupants
and
development
and
neighboring
properties,
layout,
appearance,
architectural
degood
architecture,
front
officers,
assessment
that
the
floor
level,
the
separation
distance
between
proper
sense
of
Separation,
giving
the
appearance
of
one
or
two
meters
between
the
houses
all
if
overwhelmed
by
rainfall,
that
this
will
increase
the
potential
for
damage
to
our
property
during
the
cons.
Indeed,
the
lack
of
Separation
alone
provides
under
the
extension
beyond
the
main
building
line
at
the
rear.
W
This
roof
light
is
not
shown
on
the
planning
we
can
agree
with,
as
clearly
shown
within
our
objection.
Host
extension
will
also
clearly
and
significantly
conflict
sustainability.
Supplementary
planning
document
made
more
oppressive
by
the
shading
and
loss
of
daylight.
There
will
be
on
achieving
high
quality
designs
and
precision
until
a
site
visit
can
be
organized.
S
I
have
a
throat
infection
at
the
moment.
That's
why
I
presented
it
that
way
in
the
two
and
it's
to
that
extent.
X
Lee
fryer
agent,
actually
moving
control
basing
to
be
Heart
part
of
the
community
I'm
huge.
A
lot
of
them
are
kind
of
friends
and
family
copy
and
paste
a
lot
of
the
same.
If
they're
actually
complement
the
four
bedroom
house,
which,
ironically
borrowing
the
key
points
as
we've
been
through
the
process,
we
wanted
to
keep
it
match
the
cable,
that's
already
on
the
right
of
the
property
to
the
proposal.
X
The
one
in
favor
is
pretty
much
the
only
house
in
all
heinek
but
we'll
be
keeping
the
garage
door,
because
I
feel
that
from
the
street
scene
from
the
street
four
to
five
cars,
the
overall
footprint
about
being
will
just
be
going
directly
up
from
that,
so
that
won't
be
changing
the
site.
So,
as
you
can
see
from
the
rear
extension
we're
planning
to
go,
projecting
about
7.6
meters
out,
so
we
will
be
running
in
parallel
to
that,
which
is
two
points.
X
X
Minute
left,
rather
than
you
won't
change
their
view
into
their
Garden
or
other
neighboring
Gardens
or
the
distance
Beyond.
Y
Y
It
feels
to
me
like
it
is
a
a
very
worthwhile
development
in
a
way
and
designed
in
a
way
which
is
again
sympathetic,
reason
91,
so
this
that
again,
the
overall
look
and
feel
will
not
be
of
of
one
individual
as
well
in
but
more
as
two
separate
and
therefore
recommendation
for
approval.
Thank.
A
You
do
we
have
any
questions
for
the
applicant
agent.
R
If,
if
the
application
is
approved,
the
building
goes
ahead.
Couldn't
yes,
look
at
looking
at
that
picture,
you've
got
the
extension
going
on
the
the
the
side
of
of
that.
How,
unless
you
intend
to
access
the
Gathering,
you
know
it
shouldn't
get
blocked
out
when
there's
any
cause
water
to
run
down
either
the
side
of
the
old
building
or
the
size
of
91
or
both.
Y
Yeah
so
I'll
answer
that
the
Slimline
facial
and
soffit,
which
will
give
no
less
water
capture
than
a
normal
guttering,
would
do
so.
There
should
be
no
difference
in
a
normal
gutter
performance.
Considering.
Y
A
Okay,
you've
had
you've
had
three
bites:
cancer,
Council
Freeman.
X
Y
A
J
E
Yeah
thanks
for
the
question
yeah,
each
application,
as
you
know,
is
a
site
is
visited
by
the
officer.
These
photos
were
taken
by
the
officer.
You
can
clearly
see
from
that
site
visit
all
of
the
relevant
openings
and
therefore
I
can
confirm
that
that
Skylight
has
been
taken
into
consideration
within
the
officers
assessment.
Q
Faulkner,
can
you
give
us
guidance
on?
There
was
a
comment
regarding,
from
the
planning
point
of
view,
the
proximity
to
a
border,
and
that
raises
the
issue:
if
you've
got
permission
right
on
the
border,
how
do
you
then
build
it
because
you
don't
have
any
land
on
which
to
build.
E
B
Chair
what
we've
got
is
a
situation
where
91
has
been
extended
right
to
the
boundary,
a
93
which
was
a
mirror
image.
Property
of
it
now
wishes
to
do
exactly
the
same,
but
because
of
the
previous
extension
to
91,
it
is
actually
giving
the
terracing
effect.
How
do
we?
How
do
we
deal
with
that
foreign.
E
To
Next
Door
you're,
just
looking
at
two
properties,
yes,
the
Gap
will
be
reduced,
but
the
the
assessment
is
whether
that
be
harmful
on
the
impact
of
the
would
that
have
a
harmful
impact
on
the
character
of
the
street
scene
and
the
what
the
immediate
area
and
our
assessment
is,
that
it
would
not.
On
this
particular
occasion.
G
Thank
you,
chair
in
planning
terms.
Is
there
an
acceptable
separation
between
two
properties?
Is
there
guidelines
on
that.
E
There's
no
set
guideline
I'm.
Clearly
every
every
site
has
to
be
looked
at
in
its
immediate
context
and
there's
not
one
size
fits
all.
So
you
have
to
make
that
assessment
in
each
case
you
know
having
regard
to
the
context
and
the
surrounding
area.
E
Yeah
we
we
obviously
take
into
the
impact
on
residential
immunity
in
terms
of
overbearing
impacts,
overshadowing
loss
of
light
lots
of
privacy
and
that's
detailed
within
the
report.
Our
assessment,
as
it
is
acceptable.
H
Just
look
at
that
picture
that
we
have
there.
Presumably
it's
number
91
on
the
left
and
is
that
the
extension
that's
coming
out
from
93
on
the
right.
Yes,.
R
E
I
think
it
would
be
quite
different.
The
angle
is
quite
Bleak.
I
think
it
will
be
quite
difficult
to
to
see
down
down
in
there,
albeit
that
you
know,
officers
haven't
gone
into
the
property
itself
and
carried
out
that
exercise.
We
we
feel
that
it
will
be
quite
difficult
at
quite
a
difficult
angle
to
actually
look
down
into
it.
A
Okay,
no
more
questions,
question
or
debate.
C
Yeah
I
I
share
the
concern
about
the
proximity,
but
if
I
look
at
the
Block
plan,
there's
there's
houses
in
sort
of
I
would
say
equally
or
near
close
proximity
in
the
area
between
the
two
between
the
two
properties
and
I
I.
Take
the
the
comment
that
you'd
really
have
to
want
to
look
into
the
Skylight
to
see
anything
from
that
bedroom
window.
So
I
I,
don't
see
it
as
the
problem
that
that
has
been
put
forward.
So
personally,
I'm
I'm
happy
with
the
officer's
recommendation.
P
Miller
quite
prepared
to
second
that
chair
and
going.
A
P
Are
moving?
Oh
yeah
I
will
yeah
okay,
sorry,
I
I
understood
that
he
was
okay,
yeah,
okay,
formally
I'll,
second,
that
and
over
the
years
we've
had
these
proximity
discussions.
Time
and
time
again,
I
remember
in
Kemp
shop
we
had
a
particularly
almost
exactly
the
same,
and
it
I
think
the
officers
might
correct
me
I
think
it's
worn
down
to
how
they
construct
it
is
their
problem
quite
happy
to
go
along
with
the
office
recommendation.
B
B
If
you
look
at
that
Skylight,
it's
very
roughly
Central
to
that
rear
extension
longitudely
and
you
refer
to
the
block
plan.
The
back
wall
of
the
new
extension
is
probably
two-thirds
of
the
way
along
that
X
engine.
So
to
actually
look
out
of
a
back
bedroom
window
into
that
Skylight.
You
are
actually
going
to
have
to
hang
out
the
window
and
look
round
over
the
corner.
B
You
are
going
to
have
to
make
a
determined
effort
to
look
into
that
into
that
window
and
if
you
ask
what
your
neighbors
doing,
you've
got
bigger
problems
than
this
so
I,
don't
that
just
doesn't
hold
any
water
for
me
whatsoever
in
terms
of
construction.
I
know
it's
not
a
planning
issue,
but
the
construction
will
be
no
different
from
the
existing
garage
construction
you're
having
a
Gable
up
against
your
against
your
boundary.
The
fact
is:
another
10
feet
higher
doesn't
isn't
going
to
make
the
slightest
bit
of
difference
whatsoever.
B
So
I
really
really
I.
Don't
get
the
objections
on
this
I
think
once
it's
all
built
and
all
settled
down,
everybody
will
be
not
happy
but
will
accept
the
situation
as
being
acceptable.
Thank
you.
J
J
Once
this
extension
there
does
make
it
quite
an
ugly
property
not
not
to
put
too
find
a
point
on
it,
but
yeah
I
I
wouldn't
want
to
live
there
because
it
just
looks
a
little
bit
silly,
but
if
it
gains
you
more
space,
you
do
you
Mr
Green
I
have
purchased
some
film
off
Amazon
for
about
three
quid
that
you
apply
with
water,
to
make
my
window
clouded
to
to
stop
my
neighbors
looking
through
my
windows.
So
that
would
be
my
suggestion
to
you.
Unfortunately,
I'm
gonna
have
to
go
with
the
recommendation
and
approve.
A
A
Thank
you
right.
Nearly
home
now
item
number
eight
Pirates
Cottage
trumps.
Let
tub
slain
High,
clear,
yeah
officer
presenting
if
you'd
like
to
lead.
N
Thank
you.
So
this
application
isn't
is
that
pirates
Cottage
in
high
clear
planning
permission
is
sought
for
the
erection
of
a
shed
in
relation
to
the
updates.
N
All
we'd
seek
to
do
is
amend
condition,
one
which
refers
to
the
block,
location
and
block
plan
and
we'd
seek
to
remove
that
purely
because
of
an
inconsistency
between
the
red
line
Edge
and
that
won't
change
the
recommendation
going
forward
and
the
plan
is
shown
on
the
site.
The
position
of
the
sheddy
shown
on
the
site
plan,
so
that
will
have
no
impact
and
the
application
is
recommended
for
permission
subject
to
the
conditions
set
out
in
the
report.
A
A
Speaking
in
support
of
the
application,
when
you're
ready,
you've
got
four
minutes.
Thank
you.
Z
Z
The
objections
on
this
application
stem
from
the
original
application
and
the
principle
of
development
of
the
site.
The
application
before
use
for
a
shed
the
approved
landscape
design,
already
allows
for
a
shed
to
be
erected
on
site
for
bin
and
cycle
storage,
but
a
slightly
smaller
scale
and
a
slightly
different
location.
The
froze
shed
is
cited
near
the
new
house,
which
is
under
construction,
not
visible
from
every
any
public
areas
and
outside
all
route
protection
areas.
I
trust
that
you
all
agree.
This
proposal
is
acceptable
and
Grant
approval.
Thank
you.
A
Well,
that
was
quick,
any
questions,
any
questions
for
Mr
Ramsey
now,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
contribution
and
and
wish
you
a
good
night.
Any
questions
of
officers,
councilor
falcon.
Q
Thank
you,
yeah.
Is
there
a
garage
missing
on
this
site
plan
because
there
was
an
application
for
a
garage
which
I
thought
had
been
approved.
N
No,
the
garage
is
not
missing.
There's
a
currently
pending
application
for
a
garage,
so
there's
at
the
moment,
and
that's
a.
Q
Another
question
on
the
same
thing:
all
right
as
I
recall
on
the
original
application:
the
approval
in
a
set,
the
condition
that
there
was
parking
for
three
cars
and
the
cars
should
be
able
to
turn,
so
they
didn't
have
to
reverse
down
that
dirt
track.
N
So
that
element
as
your
concern
raised,
has
been
addressed
in
two
fight
page
two:
five,
one
where
the
officer
has
considered
the
ability
to
park
the
cars
and
turn.
And
yes,
they
they're
content
that
there
is
space
and
that
condition
would
remain
and
would
be.
You
know
achieved.
A
L
A
Okay,
then
we'll
we'll
move
to
the
vote.
Then
those
in
favor
please
show.
A
A
Right
so
that
concludes
the
hang
on.
We've
got.
E
Thank
you,
Chad
yeah,
this
application.
It
seeks
to
discharge
the
section
52
agreement,
which
is
basically
the
Forerunner
of
what
you
probably
all
familiar
with
the
section
106
which
didn't
come
into
it.
Basically,
106
is
to
replace
the
section
52,
so
this
is
prior
to
1990..
E
It's
related
to
an
application
for
planning
permission
for
a
granny
Annex
which
restricted
the
occupancy
to
ancillary
residential
accommodation
in
connection
with
Park
gate,
Farmhouse
and
Park
Cottage,
family
corner
and
the
submissions,
accompanied
by
detailed
evidence
from
the
applicant
to
demonstrate
that
the
property
has
been
occupied
as
a
separate
usual
for
accommodation
since
1996,
and
therefore
officers
consider
that
the
legal
agreement
no
longer
serves
a
useful
purpose
and
therefore
the
recommendation
to
a
movement
is
supported
by
officers.
A
K
Thank
you
chair.
This
report
is
simply
to
seek
development
control
committee's
approval
to
implement
review
of
the
one
app
requirements,
that
is,
the
validation
requirements,
planning
applications
effectively.
Each
Authority
estimate
every
two
years
that
two-year
period
is
coming
up
to
Renewal.
The
report
sets
out
there's
been
no
specific
legislative,
legislative
or
policy
changes.
J
K
Yeah
I,
don't
I
think
the
key
thing
is
we
don't
have
a
delegated
power
to
do
so.
I
guess
the
other.
The
other
part
of
it
is
in
some
ways
I
think
there's.
This
generation
is
good
practice
to
bring
it
to
the
DC
committee
for
that
purpose,
but
in
in
future
there
may
be
some
more
significant
changes
because
I
think
past
three
times
this
paper's
been
over
the
last
six
years.
We've
we've
not
proposed
any
changes.
A
A
Okay,
so
that's
do
we
need
to
announce
that
as
a
decision
or
is
that
just
recorded
just
recorded
okay,
so
that
brings
on
to
last
business
quarterly
planning
appeals
report.
K
Thanks,
yes,
this
is,
of
course,
the
planning
appeals
report.
The
main
planning
appeals
received
in
the
period
February
to
April
are
all
recorded
an
index
A
and
B
in
appendix
a
in
particular
draw
members
attention
to
the
appeal
decision
for
the
minions.
Lane
Bramley
solar
farm
decision,
which
was
allowed,
as
members
may
be
aware,
is
now
subject
to
a
legal
challenge
by
the
residence
group.
K
Equally,
there's
a
significant
residential
development
decision
for
stocks
Farm
on
page
281
that
that
appeal
was
lost
and
had
implications
for
the
council's
housing
Supply,
as
we
have
previously
discussed.
The
other
part
of
this
report
that
I'd
bring
to
members
attention
is
the
appeal
performance
on
paragraph
1.5,
where,
in
the
just
over
the
year
period,
we
lost
17
out
of
a
total
of
56
appeals.
So
we
were
still
under
the
corporate
indicator
requirement.
K
That
said,
I
would
equally
draw
members
attentions
to
the
risks
set
out
in
the
paper,
particularly
at
the
point
at
paragraph
seven
on
page
279,
which
picks
up
the
points
that
we've
discussed
previously
regarding
the
implications
of
failing
government
Targets
in
terms
of
appeal
performance.
A
A
Just
for
noting
that
decision
and
I
think
that
concludes
our
business
for
this
evening.
So
thank
you
very
much
everybody
and
have
a
safe
journey
home.