Strategic Planning Committee, 23 September 2024

00:01:58Okay, good morning everyone. To get us started then, first with our health and safety announcement. There's no fire alarm drill anticipated today, so if the alarm sounds, please leave the building through the nearest fire exit by following the signs above the doors. Make your way to the rear of the car park and wait there until you're told it is safe to return. And also, please make sure all phones are either muted or switched off.

00:02:28To start the meeting then good morning everyone and welcome to this Strategic Planning Committee meeting on monday the 23rd of september 2024 I'm your chair Councillor Todd olive to my right is vice chair Councillor Mike howe supporting officers present are Ed Freeman assistant director planning strategy and development management matt dickens planning policy manager Damian Hunter planning solicitor and debbie meakin democratic services officer can I remind everyone present that this meeting is audio recorded for subsequent publication on the council's website so please can members and officers making a contribution to the meeting use a microphone be recorded we have a we have a new uh microphone system uh there are some slight teething issues but hopefully that shouldn't happen very much today we'll now start the meeting then by doing a roll call of committee members and declaration of interests debbie thank you chair can I start with yourself please so yes if you can give me that you're present and then if you have any declarations to make you certainly can uh I am in fact present uh and today I do have a declaration in regard

00:03:43To site uh wimple 11 that's an effects and prejudicial nri so I will leave the room for that item thank you very much yes thank you I am here and I have to I have an ORI because I've sit on the parish council for Chris Mary which is Bishop's Clyst obviously a ward member as well and I have an effects NRI regarding because St Mary being as I own the village shop as well thank you thank you very much I'll move on to Councillor Brian Bailey please if you can let me your present and any declarations yes I am present I've got no declarations thank you thank you very much moving to Councillor Jess Bailey good morning Jess good morning thank you I'm present and I've got to directly relate NRI in site Ottery 09 because I'm a Devon County Councillor And that site is owned by Devon County Council so I will be speaking at the start and then leaving the room when we get to that open Thank you. Thank you very much

00:04:56I'll move on to Councillor Blakey please Present and no declarations, thank you Thank you very much, moving on to Councillor Colin Brown Present and no declarations Thank you Colin, moving on to Councillor Bethany Collins, good morning Bethany Good morning, present and no declarations.

00:05:16Thank you very much. Moving on to Councillor Olly Davey. Present, no declarations.

00:05:23Thank you. And now to Councillor Paula Fernley. Present and no declarations.

00:05:29Thank you very much. Moving on to Councillor Hayward, please. Present and no declarations, thank you.

00:05:36Thank you. On to Councillor Beningham. Present, no declarations. thank you very much and who else do I have in the room last but by no means least Councillor Levine good morning present in our declarations thank you very much oh and I have a late comer I'll just deal with it in a moment if that's okay of course thank you Debbie we'll have a collection at the end for a watch for Councillor Jung agenda item agenda item one then apologies for absence none but I have unless anyone else has any thank you chair thank you Debbie agenda item two declarations of interest we have just done which brings us then to agenda item three public speaking or general public speaking I should say we have four oh sorry non committee members thank you Damien Councillor Faithfull we we can't move these microphones because it's the new system thank you chair just to declare I'm on the planning committee and one of the sites has got active planning application or three no it's a Jeep the one next 27 next next to the Solston I've also had recent correspondence

00:07:14With one of the landowners about a couple of sites about the final question on each one, if there are more alternatives might be possible. OK. Any other non-committee members? Councillor John's? It's good exercise. Hi. I'm an Autry St Mary Town Council and obviously we're going to be discussing Autry Parish, so I think it's just an ORI. I don't think any of them affect me directly where I live. Thank you.

00:07:59So Chair, now that Councillor Geoff Young's got settled Geoff, would you mind announcing that you're here and if you have any declarations?

00:08:07Thank you. I've got no declarations and I'm here. Thank you very much. Back to you, Chair. Okay, thank you very much. Agenda item three then. Public speaking. We have four members of the public registered to speak in general public speaking today uh first up we have Councillor Bob nelson chairman of the blackdown hills national landscape partnership and I believe we have a statement from debbie thank you yes I'm reading this out on behalf of mr nelson who can't be with the committee this morning uh he says the following the comments are related to from they are from sorry broad henbury parish council on the site selection report version one broad henbury Parish Council supports the selection of site BRHE04. This site is currently the subject of Planning Application 23-2538-OUT for which our support and comments are on record. It is our understanding that there are no outstanding substantive issues between EDDC and the applicants and that the site will be approved in outline shortly. This application will deliver four affordable houses which will meet the need identified in our housing needs survey we do

00:09:20Not consider it which is therefore necessary to allocate the two sites brhe05 and 07 the parish council believes that heritage and landscape impacts cannot be overcome accordingly we do not support these sites bhi e09 the parish council is opposed to the site our detailed reasons are contained in a letter to the committee members dated 21st of january the content of this letter was reaffirmed at a public meeting on the 23rd of september oh today for ease of reference um that members already have that and in summary on that element there are massive heritage impacts on this site the redrawing of the built-up area boundary simply to include this site is a cynical attempt to legitimise the site and redefine open countryside.

00:10:10The proposed built-up area boundary follows no natural topographical feature and conveniently departs from the National Landscape Boundary to include the site, which would then be about the NL Hedge Boundary. He's also included comments by the Blackdown Hills Parish Network who state that they have no issue with the proposed service village concept but would submit that the definition of services is outdated. For example, it would include public EV or cycle charge points.

00:10:41The cumulative number of services required is impractical in cases where a defined service practicality provides more than one service. Secondly, the sustainability criterion which requires development sites to be close to services is too rigidly applied. we think that service villages should be allowed to serve the hinterland of hamlets which they support reconsideration of these two components would allow development of affordable housing in more villages within the blackdown hills for those communities which would support it and lastly chair he includes comments by the blackdown hills national landscape which states as follows that the leveling up and regeneration act of 2023 requires authorities to seek the further purposes of protected landscapes. The primary purpose from the 1949 Act is to conserve and enhance natural beauty. Until this Act, the requirement was to have regard to the purposes of protected landscapes, which is a lower hurdle in law. National planning policies and the guidance notes which support them have not yet been updated, but we would urge the LPA to work formally with the two protected landscapes in East Devon to determine

00:11:57How this act might work in practice so that development in protected landscapes complies with the law. So that's from Bob Nelson.

00:12:05Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Debbie. We then have Angie Huron on behalf of Brockley's Parish Council. Oh, no, we don't. Doesn't look like she's present, Chair. Shall we move to the next? Yes, Councillor Frances Pullman from West Hill Parish Council. I will test your new microphone, Sister. and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak at today's meeting on behalf of West Hill Parish Council. I'll save my comments about the specific West Hill sites for later in the agenda but I'd like to make some general comments at the moment. Firstly with regard to green wedges now both the current Local Plan and the emerging plan support the principle of green wedges and the neighbourhood plan for Rottery St Mary and West Hill identifies a green wedge between the two settlements. We're pleased to see this included in the draft plan for public consultation earlier this year. And I mention this because today the committee will consider sites that are situated within this green wedge. These sites, Ottery 1A, 1B and GHED 23, 24 and 26,

00:13:28Occupy the northern half of the green wedge and this would result in the coalescing of the two settlements. Now, officers, well, other than Ottery 1B, officers haven't recommended these sites for allocation and our parish council urges the committee to follow this view. It seems that these sites would actually negate the whole principle of green wedges. We are particularly concerned about Ottery 1A, which has the potential to deliver over 400 homes. If this was developed, we believe it would seriously harm West Hill. Development on this scale would impact on the facilities and the services based in Ottery that are currently shared with West Hill, and this needs to be planned for. But in particular, I want to highlight the impact of maybe up to 800 additional cars on the local roads. If the site is developed, there's going to be a significant increase in the traffic volumes using the B3174 between St. Mary and the Daisy Mount A30 junction. Also using this road will be the heavy lorries transporting tons of raised sand and gravel from the straight great quarry and in addition

00:14:44To this permission is being granted for the dairy herd to cross the B3174 four times a day to and from the milking parlour. The time taken for each crossing is stated to be up to 45 minutes and needs to occur at very specific times of the day. We are also aware that there's been approval for the development of a service station at the Daisy Mount Junction, so this will mean heavy vehicles and lots of other traffic on that roundabout, which will lead to congestion with all these additional traffic coming from Ottery St Mary. Car users and other vehicles will inevitably look for alternative routes and that one of the main alternative routes is going to be to travel by West Hill to avoid these inevitable queues.

00:15:31Our narrow, unlit, unpaid lanes are not suitable for this and all we see is a significant, very significant downside for West Hill and no benefit whatsoever for the residents. We share the concerns raised by previous speakers in previous meetings about the infrastructure across East Devon, but I want to raise serious concerns specific to West Hill. We've raised these in the recent working group sessions. Councillor Pullman, could I ask you to wrap up, please? You have had your three minutes. Over.

00:16:08Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Lastly, I have [member of the public], co-chair of the Oil Mill Lane Residence Association. Just in time, [member of the public]. Could you turn the microphone on, please, so we can hear you? Thank you.

00:16:34Right hand button. Okay. My name is [name removed]. I'm the co-chair of Oil Mill Lane Residence, which includes the land referred to in the agenda from Creedy Farm down to Clisson George. We sit in the area known as Option 3 in the Emerging Local Plan, the land referred to as three possible additional strategic land allocations is what I'm here to refer to and which concerns many of our residents.

00:17:03It's a subset of Option 3 proposed by land owners and developers for up to 2,000 new homes. The Working Group has not recommended these three sites, as you will all know, for inclusion in the Local Plan and we would strongly support that view. We respect that new homes at some level are needed and have to go somewhere, however we do not support the use of sites which are not sustainable on economic, social or natural environment grounds as we believe is the case in these sites. If we look at economics first, 2,000 houses we don't believe is sustainable, as the additional services for schools, surgeries and transport links wouldn't be viable. Looking at transport, the link between the 376 and the Sidmouth Road via Ulmur Lane.

00:17:53Ulmur Lane, not very well known in this part, I don't think, is actually single track from the Sidmouth Road end to Woodbury-Salterton, and would be costly to widen for two-way traffic. Clearly, this road would become part of the infrastructure of a new 2000 house development. in terms of rush hour at least. The new employment area on the opposite side of the A376 would seem to us to require longer journeys up to either Topsham or Clyst St Mary and another crossing over the 376 I believe has already been rejected for a cycle where it's part of the Clyst Valley Trail, so clearly issues there.

00:18:34The suggestion of new primary schools, which obviously, while welcomed in many ways, it's probably unlikely to satisfy the demand and older students are likely to require car and or bus journeys causing further overloading on already full secondary schools. Local village primary schools in nearby Woodbury, Salterton, Clis and Mary, Clis and George existing are already at capacity. And bus services would need to be expanded from the currently extremely sparse services to link with the proposed cycling hubs.

00:19:07However, we doubt that this would be enough to reduce car trips, especially in all weathers. Topsham Station is nearly three miles away. Quite a decent bike ride, especially in the rain and cold. And virtually no parking for cars, let alone bikes. Cycling from new homes is not practical, and trains are already at capacity in peak hours. The nearest surgery and pharmacy are also in Topsham, and the post office in Clis St Mary.

00:19:34And Dart's Farm really isn't the co-op. Overall traffic will increase significantly between 2,000 to 4,000 vehicles. The second and perhaps one of the most key points to us in Romulain is that this proposal would include the destruction of best and most versatile agricultural land, a large majority of which is Grade 2 and 3A and yields high-value crops currently. This was the basis of the planners rejecting a solar farm within the proposed land.

00:20:05[member of the public], you haven't had your three minutes. Could I ask you to wrap up, please? Okay, by summary, overall the proposed developments will be unsustainable, best and most valuable land will be destroyed and taken away from food production forever, reductions in local immunity, and will threaten the current rich biodiversity. We are well over now, [member of the public]. Thank you. Councillor Howe, do you have a declaration you need to make?

00:20:35There's more points of clarity, and if they could turn the mic off at the other end as well, please. it's I am the sub postmaster and owner of chris mary post office that was mentioned in that that speech so I just need to be clear okay thank you Councillor How um worth commenting um those three sites aren't on the agenda for um committee to make a decision on today as you will know members um we're expecting those will come to the wrap-up session in mid-october once officers have had the chance to do a full assessment on those quite substantial proposals with that then I think we move to agenda items four and five matters of urgency and any items to be dealt with after the public have been excluded and I believe there are none for either that's correct chair thank you Debbie which brings us then to the moment you've all been waiting for agenda item six proposed housing site allocations at Ottery St Mary and surrounds. Mr Freeman. Thank you chair so yes

00:21:41Just to start us off just to give you an update on the current picture in terms of housing requirement housing numbers members will recall I think in the meeting on the 3rd of September when we first started considering sites I presented a report set out that the housing requirement figure for the Local Plan was 20,812 dwellings based on the government's standard method calculator however as officers we were recommending that we try and aim for a supply figure 10% in excess of that to have headroom to take account of sites that may not come forward for reasons currently unforeseen during the planned period which helps in terms of maintaining an adequate supply and a five-year housing and supply requirements during the planned period which would have added a total of 1,828 additional dwellings to that to give us the headroom when we started out we were short on the headroom we had a headroom of only 1.2% based on officers recommendations at that time as we've worked through the last three meetings I think it is we currently stand at 571 homes less than

00:22:50That figure as a result of the committee's deliberations albeit obviously some of those sites may well need to be revisited at the wash-up session that the chairs highlighted so just to highlight we're currently running with no headroom and a deficit fundamentally against the housing requirement figure and we need to be looking to bolster that figure in terms of meeting the housing requirements set by government so that's a challenge as you'll note the officers recommendations included sites are obviously within designated areas such as green wedges national landscape and coastal preservation areas so obviously that remains a challenge moving forward in terms of bolstering those figures given that our recommendations already included sites in those sensitive locations which obviously we have not done lightly and only made those recommendations due to the need to meet those government figures so hopefully that's a useful update on where we are in terms of the figures heading into today's discussions I'll hand over to mr dickens to introduce Ottery samarian surrounds thank you chairman uh thank you mr Freeman so today we're looking at Otteris Mary and surrounds as committee

00:24:14Will be aware the the process the offices have followed in terms of site selection has followed a step-by-step logical process involving identifying sites sifting out those that are deemed not credible as potential options we've gone through a site assessment process and this has led on to site selection but it's worth stressing that the site selection process sits within a bigger strategic picture so [member of the public] mentioned the need to identify sufficient land to meet government housing figures so that is part of the top-down element if you like we've worked with spatial strategy so we've tried to define we sought to define a logic for where housing would go and why so these if you like are the two top-down components and the bottom-up component is site assessment work and this has led to the recommendations that are before committee so moving swiftly on we start with Ottery st mary today an overview of Ottery st mary you'll see on the right hand map that a small number of sites are recommended for allocation those in green that

00:25:21We'll go through individually and they're mostly located on the western side of the settlement And we start with Ottery 01, which is partly recommended for allocation, Land of Barrett Farm.

00:25:36Thank you. Thank you, [member of the public]. And first up to speak this morning, a very warm welcome to Councillor Richard Granger for Ottery St. Mary Town Council.

00:26:02Good morning. I am actually put down to speak on all 16 of these. So I might, if I may, give you an overall picture of where we're coming from. We've had an extraordinary meeting of the council last Monday to address this matter, very well attended by the public. And a slightly surprising development came out of the meeting, which is that we are actually in favour of the large Ottery O1A given that it will answer all the needs and it will avoid the constant disruption that constructing new housing at the various sites inside the town itself will bring which will as you know um Ottery is very very uh congested narrow streets narrow pavements and the prospect of three four five years of of house building on various sites in the town is is really not one that we can uh we can contemplate the overall quality of life in in Ottery would plunge. However, the large site 01A is on the west side of town. No construction traffic would need to use the town, and it has potential, because of its size, to provide

00:27:54Future housing needs for the foreseeable future. So the corollary to that is that we really cannot contemplate any further development inside the the built-up area we've we don't have a backyard left to build on and I mean this it's slightly counter-intuitive building on a greenfield strip but looking at it it's the urban area starts at taylor's food factory and it's quite a discreet site it will lend itself to if properly developed improving the connectivity down into the town because we can put footpath cycleways etc within the site and I think that's pretty much all I'd like to say at the moment I look forward to addressing the individual sites as they come up thank you Councillor Granger we come then to the first of many comments from Councillor Vicky Johns Hi I'm Councillor Vicky Johns, Autry St Mary Town Councillor And District Councillor I'm speaking my district capacity unfortunately I don't agree with the Town Council which doesn't happen very often but does happen occasionally and I object to this site and agree with the officer's comments that it should not be put forward. One of the points that I'd

00:29:46Like to make is on every single site for Autry it states lack of secondary or primary education provision. It says that on every single site for Autry. However in other areas it states things like primary has some capacity to support development but not to accommodate all of the potential development transport costs to secondary would apply. We are aware that King school is at capacity they cannot build any further and that is going to cause massive issues with regards to this particular site it is part of the green wedge that is something that is very important to the residents of Autry and West Hill and although I appreciate what the town council is saying with regards to the fact that all building would be in one area that particular site is in part of designated open countryside and it should not be used to build housing on it would also allocate 469 houses. I believe from my brief figures that I did with regards to all the sites put forward for Autry that are in green, we were only going to get possibly

00:30:46And hopefully not 254. So this is a massive jump for a town who has grown 25% in the last 12 to 15 years and whose infrastructure has not grown at all. I would also point out that for the hold of Autry, not particularly this site, but specifically 469 dwellings, the town of Autry has the only doctor surgery that covers Autry, West Hill, Tipton, Fenerton, Wimple, etc. None of that is mentioned here. I know it's not a planning consideration per se. However, for the residents that currently live there that already can wait up to six weeks for a doctor's appointment, adding an additional 469 for Ottery, 150 for Fenerton, 100 for it's the massive impact to Ottery itself would be horrific. The other thing for Ottery is that within the neighbourhood plan that we have currently, this runs until 2031, it does state the countryside of the neighbourhood plan area is a highly valued asset with special character provided by the rolling farmland, wooded hillsides, winding lanes and the open river valley. As you come into Ottery,

00:31:53I've visited here since I was born, basically, because my grandparents lived here. Coming into Autry, coming down that road, is a very important part of coming home. You come down, it's a winding countryside road. We've already had a quarry inflicted on us, which all of us objected to and was completely ignored. That's not mentioned at all in any of this. And it also states for O1, new roundabout required to facilitate access.

00:32:18That will have a massive impact on Autry itself. so I agree with the officer's recommendation that this site should not be approved thank you thank you Councillor Johns Councillor Faithfull thank you chair this site is within a settlement containment or green wedge area of the lottery st mary and west hill neighbourhood plan with the site protruding quite considerable distance into that area with Broad Street defined as the active center of Autry town it is equidistant from the edge of Chineway Gardens Slade Road area to the east and Kings reach to the west development of the whole site of Autry 01 would leave the residents on the far west end of the site quite isolated with limited public transport provision the 44 a bus that runs out along Exeter Road only being less than an hourly service development out developing out area a would also have a detrimental effect on the landscape of the area which is highly visible from many locations around the town along with other locations around the parish area a is also reaching out into the open countryside well beyond

00:34:11The built-up area boundary I strongly support officers recommendation regarding Autry 01A, and with a heavy heart, while I would not be willing enough to say I support officers' recommendation, I do not feel I can stand against the proposal of Area B. I would want to see the proposed tree screening and tree buffer with improvements to pedestrian access for the present residents along the lower section of Exeter Road.

00:34:56Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Faithfull. And we come then for the first time of many today into committee members. Councillor Ingham I wanted to ask a question of mr Freeman after we've dealt with by it can we go back to that thank you Councillor Collins thank you chair um I attended the extraordinary town council meeting um that Councillor Granger referenced earlier on in um in speaking about this site and I note that one of the concerns of residents was that if we allocate everything into site 1a then that would free up the rest of the town but as it's been sort of mentioned in previous um committee meetings there isn't a specific allocated number of dwellings per area and so just by allocating 1a doesn't mean that the other sites aren't going to be allocated and so I think it's a huge huge risk to allocate that site and lose such swathes of open countryside um in such a sort of beautiful area when we we have other sites that we could allocate and I know they're not ideal but we are really stuck between a rock and a hard place

00:36:11In this and I think that we have to try and make the best of this bad situation and so I would be in support of the officer's recommendation to move on from 1a and to recommend 1b thank you is that a proposal Councillor Collins thank you do we have a seconder Councillor Jess Bailey sorry I forgot your name for a second there Jess and it's 10 30 go on sorry thank you yes I very much support Councillor Collins I couldn't see that that is possible oh one a it's absolutely miles away from the facility it would really harm the open countryside and it encroached into the green wedge and I don't unfortunately agree with the town council because allocating that will not prevent other sites coming forward and 469 houses is far too many.

00:37:06Otruee has had more growth in the last Local Plan period than any other town and we're still feeling the consequences of that with our struggling facilities. so no I support the officer's recommendation that we move on on O1A thank you thank you Councillor Jess Bailey for the benefit of members of the public so what you've just heard is our first proposal of the day in this case it's two proposals one for site O1A and one for site O1B which we'll vote on separately the proposal for O1B is to allocate the site which means it would go forward into the draft version of the regulation 19 plan as a policy allocation the proposal to move on from o1a however is possibly not what you were necessarily expecting for a rejected site the proposal to move on is grounded in some legal advice that we've had from mr hunter because this plan has to meet as mr Freeman said earlier government mandated housing figures or it's going to be dead on arrival and we won't be able

00:38:12To move forward any further with it if we were to vote outright to reject today the issue we'd have if we got to the end of all of these meetings and found we didn't meet those numbers is we then wouldn't be able to reconsider anything because we'd already have voted on um and legally tied our hands in that respect so that's why you've heard a proposal to move on rather than to reject in case we need to revisit any of these decisions at the wrap-up meeting that we mentioned earlier so hopefully that makes sense Councillor Ingham uh thank you chair I support the recommendation to allocate um 1b and to move on 1a with a proviso and an understanding that if if we don't approve the other recommended sites that instead of approving the whole of 1a you can take a small part of that into an acceptable possibility rather than kicking it out wholesale or approving it wholesale which I understand would not be in the interests of pottery for sure thank you Councillor Ingham it's always an option on any of these sites for us

00:39:35To allocate part whether it would be appropriate in this instance will be for committee to decide of course Councillor How thank you and I suppose I just want to come comment on what the town council has said and no disrespect to the town council I I fully understand what they're saying in fact this committee on Friday were allocating sites jointly so we could master plan them and everything else and a larger site in that respect works better because it can be master plan better so I have a great deal of sympathy with the town council and what they've said but the reality is we have other sites that we couldn't just say no to because they are deemed sustainable and everything else so I believe currently as we sit here today if you took the whole of one you would still end up with all the others as well because it is hard to differentiate the two at this minute in time but as I say it's just a point just to clarify and have a lot of sympathy with the town council and what they've tried to

00:40:33Achieve thank you Councillor Hayward thank you chair um would yourself or uh the vice chair or mr Freeman just for the benefit of and the members of strategic planning notice but for the benefit of the members of the public here and watching just outline the consequences to East Devon if the numbers that are mandated by central government are not met within this plan just for the purpose of clarity to everyone understands what we're trying to do today thank you I can certainly give it a go Councillor Hayward um so there's there's a couple of different points there one as I've already said if we don't meet the numbers that government has set out the Local Plan that we're producing this time as I say will be dead on arrival that means uh two things one it means that for the foreseeable future we will continue to not have a five-year housing land supply which is those of you who've been involved with planning decisions in this authority will know means that developers have in members view free range do more or less what they

00:41:44Want that may not necessarily be the case in law and I'm sure Mr Freeman would be itching to correct me then that there's simply extra weight given to housing supply but the truth probably would be somewhere between the two of those positions the other consequence potentially if we can't produce a Local Plan that meets those housing requirements is the government could step in and send inspectors to do it for us and they would not have I think I'd be right in saying and fair in saying anything like um the level of uh sympathy empathy local understanding um that your ward members here um will hopefully show have hopefully shown over the course of the last few meetings and will show today um those are the those are the big ones um go on Councillor How I suppose the third point is is very mindful is if we don't achieve this Local Plan our numbers grow by 200 a year and that's the big one under government instructions so to watch out for as well indeed so we work under a large black cloud but thank you Councillor Hayward worth worth

00:42:52Raising that does anybody else wish to speak on site artery zero one I can I can see your hand I'm afraid ring committee so I'm not going to be able to come out again in which case then we have a proposal from Councillor Collins seconded by Councillor Jess Bailey to allocate O1B and move on from O1A. Sorry, Councillor Jess Bailey. I hadn't actually spoken on O1B. Would you like to speak on O1B now?

00:43:27Yeah, I think it's a comment not just about O1B but about all the sites. And I think Ottery is a bit different from the other towns in that there were specific comments about education and about the lack of primary and secondary school facilities. And it concerns me that as a committee, we are recommended to allocate where that issue has not been resolved. So if we're going to be, I understand the pressure that we're under for houses, but if we're going to be allocating houses, it needs to be done in a sustainable way, and yet we haven't actually resolved how that primary and secondary issue is going to be resolved.

00:44:14So I'm concerned that we're allocating houses and education. Where are the children going to go to school? So that hasn't been addressed and that is a bit different from the other towns where I don't think it's so black and white, which it is in Ottery, that there is an issue with the education. would it be helpful perhaps if mr Freeman could clarify how those issues are going to be addressed as part of this and and other processes um thank you chair well I mean there are issues with with a number of locations in the districts as members will be aware and we're working on something called an infrastructure delivery plan with partners at Devon County Council who in this case would be the education authority and other infrastructure providers to understand uh how the infrastructure needs would be delivered and how that would be funded and and resolved um so that's an ongoing piece of work that needs to marry up with this when we come to presenting the final regulation 19 version of the plan to members so that that that is understood so I appreciate that's a slight

00:45:16Uncertainty at this stage in terms of lottery st mary specifically um members will note that the next site austria underscore zero nine presents an opportunity to to set aside land and has previously has been set aside as land for education and community purposes where some of those needs could be met if members were minded to allocate that particular site which is what part of it is already allocated in the current adopted Local Plan for those purposes so there is a potential opportunity there when we come to that site to set aside land for some of those purposes at least Thank you, Mr. Freeman. Okay, any other comments before we move to a vote? No? Okay, in which case we'll go to a vote on the recommendation to move on from O1A first. All those members in favour of moving on from O1A, please.

00:46:12Our first unanimous decision of the day hopefully not the last and the proposal to allocate o1b those members in favor please I see 12 those against and those abstaining one okay that proposal is carried then that brings us to autry o9 Debbie can we turn the volume up please yeah members can I just advise you I appreciate that you're talking to the chair but if you turn your voice away you can't hear it as well so if you can direct your voice to the microphone the risk is if I turn up the volume too much then we'll start to get some feedback on those members with more louder voices if I can say that politely so yeah keep your microphones a little bit closer and direct towards the microphone would be helpful and we'll do our best for you at the back I'll do some tweaks as best I can thank you for bringing it to our attention OK, thank you Debbie just before we move on Councillor Jess Bailey, did you second both of Councillor Collins' motions?

00:47:32No, only O1A OK in which case Councillor Ingham has kindly just volunteered do we need to vote again? Probably best, yes OK, so the proposal is to allocate O1B this time correctly seconded. All those members in favour please and those against and those abstaining. There we go. Sorry Mr Hunter, I promise I'll be more careful in future. So before we move on to the next site, Councillor Ingham, I think you had a question for Mr Freeman. Yes, thank you Chair. At the introduction where Mr Freeman said what our total was, plus 10% and that there was a deficit of 571 At this moment, is that correct?

00:48:19So, therefore, how many have you actually allocated at this time? That's through three meetings. Before we start this meeting, how many have we allocated out of your target? I'd have to get my abacus out to start counting up, because I haven't been keeping it running total so much as a deficit to the officer's recommendation. so I'd have to come back to you with a figure on that Can I just check, so the 571 that's not the three added together plus adding 10% and then you end up with 571 No, the 571 is a deficit compared to what officers have recommended to go forward so far. So we've got today's to go for plus fine 571 Essentially Thank you very much But we started off with a deficit as well.

00:49:20So that's 571 deficit compared to where we were at the start on the 3rd of September, which was with a headroom of only 1.2% versus a headroom of 10%, which is what we're aiming for. So are you saying that this 571 comes from 20,812 plus 10%? is that's your new target the 571 is relative to where officers recommendations were before we started fiddling with them without any power on it was so that that recommendation included 1.2 percent headroom I believe I'm right saying that's right and the 571 is the deficit overall so members have have chosen to allocate some that we were not recommending so those are taken account of yeah but there's an overall deficit of 571 compared to where we thought we were in the first at the start of the first meeting thank you for clarifying that Councillor I'm not going outside I mean I I will I take I take that point Councillor Collins I think it's fairly clear when we come into committee that I'm addressing committee members but point taken point point taken Councillor Roy collins thank you

00:51:01Ottery 09 Councillor Granger did you have uh anything further to say about this one well 09 is um I think one of the better known sites up for developments in in Ottery given that it's owned by Devon County Council and it's already in the neighborhood plan I believe there's some site that could be used for for instance building a new school with reference to what Councillor Bailey has said and Councillor Johnson said the need for a new school in lottery is it's becoming more urgent and bearing in mind that we're trying to allocate more housing to lottery it becomes an absolute necessity and this site is head and shoulders I think the best on offer for a new school in artery however there is a conflict because obviously it is the preferred site but the lead the lead in the race for sites for the relocation of tipton school Tipton St John Church of England Maintained School that of course has yet to be decided but what it doesn't have is approval for housing and I think it's already been rejected

00:52:40On those grounds its proximity to Cate Bog is also a worry happy enough for it to be allocated for a school but not for housing thank you Councillor Granger and before I come to Councillor Johns I just going to quickly come to mr Freeman to clarify the situation with what the proposal or the recommendation from officers is with regard to what we allocate here okay thank you chair um yes I mean I think has already been identified a large part of this site is already allocated in the adopted Local Plan uh for education and community purposes um it is owned by Devon County Council and I think we're trying to understand exactly the position in terms of school provision here and also in relation to the primary school in tipton st john as one of the proposals was to move the tipton st john primary school to this site which was part subject to a previous planning application which was rejected I think fundamentally what we're recommending here is that we set aside a suitable land for school provision whether that be a

00:53:55A primary school for Ossery St Mary, potential relocation at Tipton St John Primary School and also potentially land for the expansion of King's School as well and the remainder for housing. So the yield is a slightly variable feast depending on how those discussions progress and the clarity we can get from Devon County Council. But I think fundamentally we recognise that this land is important in terms of providing for the educational needs of Ossery St Mary in the surrounding area and that has to take priority thank you mr Freeman so to be abundantly clear even though it's not shown on that map the proposal is that the site is allocated for both school and housing with the school use taking priority when the allocation is finalized if it's allocated yes that's correct and the report does highlight those as opportunities and say in terms of yield I think it says 90 dwellings and then depending on requirements for school provision which we're still trying to understand with Devon county okay thank you mr Freeman so hopefully that helps clarify things for members uh we come then to Councillor Johns hello again

00:55:13I was hearing probably at the end of the day um I object to this on the grounds that every single site in Ottery states lack of secondary or primary education provision I appreciate what mr Freeman has just stated with regards to only part of this land being put aside for housing however that's still 90 houses that could have 90 plus children that will have no primary or secondary education within Ottery other sites across the district where there is no primary or secondary provision it does discuss how um has capacity to support limited development etc you know that there would need to be transport to get to and from additional sites I think this site should solely be used for education and for community use king school could expand onto this site if they had the funds and the means to do so which I know they've mentioned previously and it is recorded in one of the forms somewhere that they need assistance financial etc to be able to expand that is the perfect site you could fit an additional secondary

00:56:18School you know an extension as it were of the king school and the primary school there quite safely but I think if we put 90 additional houses there bearing in mind it also states that we would need a new roundabout required to facilitate the access etc and it was turned down previously on the overall impact that those houses etc would have and I know that was for 150 houses etc and I know everybody still keeps talking about the relocated Tipton school but I'm still of a mind that Tipton school should stay exactly where it is well not exactly where it is but in Tipton and that if there was a new school here it should be a new Autry St Mary primary school as they don't have room to expand where they currently are so I would advocate that this site stays for educational and community use only the entire site as stated in the neighbourhood and Local Plan. Thank you. Thank you Councillor John's. Councillor Faithfull. Thank you Chair. I am very concerned about the proposal to develop out this site due to

00:57:29Its close proximity to Cadet Bog and the ancient woodland around the bog. This woodland is an important wildlife haven that needs sound protection being a County Wildlife Site. I'm also concerned about the potential for lots of hedgerows around this site, particularly in view of an earlier planning application for this site. Similar to Autry 01, I'm concerned about the way this site reaches out into the open countryside away from the town Centre with little transport provision the main 44 bus turns off at Barrett Cross to Salston Corner and then up through West Hill and Marsh Green rather than via daisy mount and hand and pen any development on this site needs to address the need for protection of the wildlife in the area and the visual impact that the development will have on the surrounding area the site is similarly visible from around the main part of the town and from views within the national natural national landscape area particularly from East Hill strips area above the town I would therefore request that tree planting be encouraged to protect the local landscape. Along with my

00:59:12Concerns for a potential joining up of Ottery with West Hill, I'm also concerned about the potential for coalescence between Ottery to Cranbrook. With Cranbrook extension reaching out to bodily bridge there is clear need to ensure that communities are able to maintain their independence independent identity I therefore hope that we can progress with our investigation to the green belt rather than our green wedges thank you chair thank you Councillor Faithfull I'd hope we'd be worrying about about coalescence between Cranbrook and Wimple or Cranbrook and West Hill before we get to Cranbrook and Autry, but point taken there.

01:00:04I'm going to come to Councillor Jess Bailey first as she's got a conflict and we'll have to then leave. So, Councillor Jess Bailey.

01:00:10Thank you. Yes, I support Councillor John's and Councillor Faithfull in what they've said. I think it's unfortunate that Devon County Council, as the Local Education Authority have put this forward for housing without actually identifying and resolving the issue of education because not only does it then potentially exacerbate the pressure on education but it will leave a huge gap in how we actually provide for education within Otter East St Mary and the surrounding areas.

01:00:45We need to sort out the pressure on the King School and on the primary school within Ottery and we need to, nobody's discussed with me the infrastructure delivery plan and I would just request politely that the committee don't allocate. I'm really worried about them allocating this whole site for housing and I hear what Mr Freeman says, but we could find ourselves in a situation once the line's been drawn and it's been allocated for housing, we can't guarantee that actually the education side of things will be resolved and I would really urge the committee to prioritise education and once that's been resolved then potentially looking at housing. Thank you. Thank you for your patience committee I've just been confirming some things

01:01:59With Mr Freeman who's now going to share those things that we have confirmed. Thank you chair Yeah, so just a bit more clarity sort of on the education position, because I think it's fair to say discussions are still ongoing with Devon County Council about exactly what is needed here in terms of education provision. But I think one thing that has been clear from the discussions is that in order to fund the sort of education provision that has been talked about here, particularly, I think, if it's not relocating the Tipton St John Primary School to here, for which I believe there's government funding, then there is very much likely to be a need for some housing on this site in order to help fund the education services that would be needed to be delivered here given funding situation in terms of Devon County Council and all public bodies at this point in time so I can't help thinking that just allocating the site for education purposes alone could be counterproductive if you actually want to see school provision made on the site um so I think what we need to do is is by all means

01:03:06Give priority to education provision on this site and leave the yield in terms of the residential units flexible depending on that and we can have further discussions with Devon County Council about how an allocation of this site is is worded in terms of the Local Plan whether there's a particular area of land that we can set aside specifically for school and educational purposes and an area for the residential and how we word the yield of the residential.

01:03:33But I don't think it's necessarily going to be productive to look at this as just land for education purposes. If we actually want to see delivery of those school facilities, I do think it needs to be a mixed use development to achieve that outcome. So just to be absolutely clear, the policy wording should committee decide to make an allocation, will specifically reserve an area of the site exclusively for school use.

01:04:01It couldn't be put forward as housing. If that is members' wish, I see no reason why we can't draft wording of a policy that secures that. In which case then, we come into committee very quickly. Before you do, Councillor, can you please go up to the public microphone or those at home will not be able to hear your words.

01:04:29Thank you Chair, sorry for interrupting Sorry, my question of clarification is my understanding is Devon County Council obviously to provide education need to build houses sell the houses etc etc to build those but those houses can be on any site they don't specifically have to be on the site where that educational facility is being provided, I just want a clarification on that fact please Well through you Chair they need to be on land that Devon County Council owns in order to be able to sell that land to use the money to fund the school this is the land that Devon County Council put forward in Ottery St Mary as part of this Local Plan process sorry if I may just clarify but again it doesn't have to be, it can be any land that Devon County Council own, it doesn't have to be land specifically in Ottery to provide a school for Ottery or educational use for Ottery I just wanted clarification on that before it goes to committee, my understanding is Devon County Council own sites across

01:05:30East Devon, they could build housing anywhere and use that money to fund a school wherever they'd like within the district just clarification please um suja obviously I mean Devon county do own land across the district as has been said much of which is county farms which is not land that would be suitable for development um so this is this is the land that has been put forward by Devon County Council with education as part of the uses I'm not aware uh of other sites where they would be able to derive an income that would help to fund this but I take the point that Devon County they don't own land across the whole of the county that could potentially be developed I'm not at liberty to know what the opportunities there exist but this is the land that's before us and within our Local Plan process of which you as a committee have a decision to make I suspect other communities getting housing allocations to pay for an otter school might have something to say

01:06:28About that as well in terms of their own education provision but there we go I have Councillor Hayward who's been waiting patiently Thank you Chair Well you've hit the nail on the head and with all due respect to Councillor Johns Axminster had 800 dwellings not 200, 800 dwellings allocated on Friday there was debate amongst this committee and certainly Axminster would like some extra secondary and primary education to go with that. And I think the residents of Axminster, and in fact any settlement would feel themselves quite cheated if the money that was taken from Section 106 and Sill elsewhere was spent not in their communities.

01:07:14That's the nature of where we are. But that essentially illustrates the disconnect, and on this I'm with Councillor Johns. The report has indicated that there is currently a lack of provision. That's with the housing we've already built. so there's this disconnect that essentially we must build more houses to provide education for the kids who already live there it's a never-ending cycle but that's that's the game we're playing um we're one application one and a half applications into today's process no one has yet mentioned southwest water which is a miracle and their dereliction to provide I'm sure that will come as we go through. But one of the things that often comes up when we talk about southwest water infrastructure and other infrastructure is grampian conditions. And I'm wondering with this application, mindful of what Mr Freeman says, that actually you allocate the grampian condition and you say, fine, you cannot build or occupy any of your houses until you've delivered a school on this site that is capable of dealing with the allocation of housing and children needs in the new houses plus working towards others but coming

01:08:29Back to Councillor John's point if you don't allocate this then effectively we get to the end of the process and then we have to perhaps revisit o1a because that's the nature of what we're doing in with so if you don't build here on a site that would have probably very good access to that school, you may have to end up building on 018 and other sites, say in Axminster and Sidmouth and Exmouth, that are much further away from that school and more challenging.

01:08:56So, we are stopped in a rock and a hard place, so we have to take a pragmatic view on this. The only other question really to put to Mr Freeman is, if members today decided not to allocate, could DCC overrule us because they are a planning authority in their own right? Or would our decision trump there is because that would have then a direct impact on a site we're going to consider later and conversely there's a flip side to this so we have to be mindful of a bigger picture that if we didn't advocate this it's actually potentially a green light in the Tipton site and that's another added layer to what we have to consider. The order that these applications are done actually have an impact on later discussions thank you chair um so I mean I think in terms of the first point I think the intention here would be that the education provision on the site addresses needs in the town and the needs from the growth of the town through this Local Plan um so hopefully

01:10:04We would end up if this site were allocated with a position where we have primary school and secondary provision that is fit for purpose for the town now and into the future um I think in terms of a gramping condition you run into issues that we're kind of shooting ourselves in the foot because by doing that I suspect it would suppress the value of the residential land because any developer building that out is then held back from actually delivering homes until the school has been delivered. I would hope that we could trust the education authority to deliver the education provision since they are statutory required to deliver education places anyway so they will have to deliver something in terms of education places to meet the need in the town and if they've got land that's that's allocated for that purpose logically that would be the way of doing that so I'd question the need to do that but I understand the concern um in terms of Devon County Council overruling us well as a um local planning authority they can apply to

01:11:05Themselves for the schools um I don't believe they can apply to themselves for the housing so that they could do that whether they would I don't know you note that they previously applied to us for the mixed-use development on the site will be it I think it was more houses at that point so they haven't gone down that route which I think reinforces the link between the housing being needed to fund the school and therefore it's pointless them applying just for the school on its own if they can't fund it thank you mr. Freeman thank you Councillor Hayward Councillor Blakey thank you chair a question first if I may given that the report suggests that this site could yield 90 dwellings but bearing in mind that I think quite rightly education has to be the number one priority what proportion of that site would actually be taken up by the construction of 90 dwellings and I appreciate that that's an approximate figure but how much of a chunk of the land are we actually looking at? I might bring my colleague

01:12:20In at this point who's gesticulating at me but I'm not sure what she's saying Thank you, it's a 10 hectare site in total so 90 dwellings on a 10 hectare site is actually not very much of the site at all, it's perhaps a quarter to a third of the site although bearing in mind that you would also need to keep a sort of landscape buffer to the west of the site because of Cad Hay Bog So it's perhaps less of a developable area than some other sites would be.

01:12:55So by the sounds of things, we could be looking, if it were in IT2, it could be taking into account that buffer, perhaps half the site for housing development, which seems a little on the strong side, or am I misreading the maths? I think we're saying it would be less than half of the site. I think the previous application was about 150 houses and land for the school so the number of homes has reduced since that application to I think partly help to address some of the sensitivities and concerns that were raised at that time so we think 90 is achievable with the land for the school but I think as has been said I think it's clear the priority needs to be the school provision so we need to come up with some wording in the plan that makes that clear and if in meeting the needs of of education provision in the town they can't get to 90 homes then so be it that number needs to to drop and flex uh according to that um I think that's fair with the conversations we can have

01:14:00With Devon county to inform the wording of the allocation that actually goes into the plan okay thank you thank you Councillor Blakey I'm going to exercise chair's prerogative having heard the discussion here I think we're very clear that we want to see land reserved for the school here and that if housing is required to fund that if that's what we're saying then you know fine but that there needs to be a very clear priority given to land for the school first on that basis bearing in mind that the policy wordings will come back here in the draft plan for us to review and have oversight over make sure that we are satisfied and that in the interim Devon county will have some input on that as well I'm happy to propose officers recommendation from the chair on that basis Councillor Ingham well you've just done it chair so let's go and vote okay Councillor Davey thank you chair I have to agree with Councillor Johns about tipton st john Primary and I think the discussion about relocating Tipton St John Primary to

01:15:18Ottery St Mary is somewhat unhelpful and we've been much better thinking of it as an extra primary school for Ottery St Mary and then deal with Tipton St John as a separate issue. I'm grateful to Councillor Faithfull for pointing out the environmental constraints here as well and I would hope those could be dealt with planning committee as possibly could a Grampian condition on sewage provision and obviously the specifics of the layout and how much land is allocated etc could also be dealt with a planning so on the assumption that that we are ensuring that this entire site cannot be used for housing only I'm quite happy to support okay do any other members wish to speak on this allocation no okay in which case the proposal uh from the chair in accordance with officers recommendation is to allocate the site for school first houses second all those members in favor please that's unanimous okay uh yes could we uh bring Councillor Jess bailey back in please OK, that brings us then to site G.H.E.D. 26, land west of Cadhay Lane, Councillor Granger from the Town Council.

01:17:00Yeah, this is a very large outlier. Objections to this site are rather similar to the ones that have been expressed over 01A.

01:17:38And this entirely wipes out the green wedge between Ottery and West Hill. It wasn't put forward for recommendation by your committee. And it's not supported by the Town Council. I don't think I need to say much more.

01:18:00Thank you. Thank you Councillor Granger, short and sweet. Councillor Johns. Thank you.

01:18:16Thank you. I should be short and sweet too. I agree with the officer's recommendation not to put this forward for various reasons. The site should not be allocated as it extends into the open countryside, has high ecological and heritage sensitivities, and development would be visible from some considerable distance.

01:18:31Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Johns. Councillor Faithfull. While I am in support of our officer's recommendation, I would like to make a note of this. What am I saying? I would like to make a note of the need to move on. This site will have a major impact on the valley from Sulston to Fox and Hole area. This valley forms an important value view, which was overlooked in the forming of our Offrey and West Hill neighborhood plan.

01:19:24There are so many potential views along the valley that it is difficult to decide which one is the most important, from the bridge at Fox and Hole to the entrance to Solston. This site is also highly visible from around the town and more distant locations across the parish. I therefore would like to support the officer's recommendation and ask the committee to vote to move on and ask that you do not come back.

01:20:03Thank you, Councillor Faithfull. Councillor Jung, I have you first, and then Councillor Davey.

01:20:09Thank you. I agree with the officers and the speakers, and yes, can we move on and maybe not come back? To be clear, is that a proposal to move on from Councillor Jung? Councillor Davey, did you wish to second it? I will second that. Unfortunately, we can't say we won't come back, but I think we're pretty well-minded that this is not a site we're likely to revisit.

01:20:38Do any other members of committee wish to speak? No? Okay. In which case, I'll take the opportunity to say I completely agree with everything that's been said, and if it hadn't already been proposed, I would be proposing that we moved on as well. With that said, then, we have a proposal to move on from Councillor Jung, seconded by Councillor Davey. All those in favour, please. That's unanimous and resounding, if I may say so.

01:21:06We've been going for an hour and 20 minutes now, so we're going to take a 10-minute break until 11.30. OK, before we pick up again, just a quick word from Mr Hunter.

01:34:40Thank you, Chair. It's just to clarify earlier, when members were giving declarations, both Councillor John's and Councillor Howe, both declaring an ORI, which is an other registrable interest, on the basis that they were saying that they're both members of their local parish council. Now, the only reason they need to declare that is if actually their parish council was going to benefit in some particular way from the applications that were being put forward, because they, say, for instance, were the owner of the land.

01:35:07And I've clarified with them both that that's not the case with any of the sites on today's agenda. though. So I've said to them, actually, I don't believe that they do need to declare an ORI. After all, they've got no interest. So not that that probably means a lot to most of you, but I just wanted to clarify that for the purpose of the recording before we move on today. Thank you.

01:35:28Thank you, Mr. Hunter. And with that, then we come to Ottery 10. And members, you'll notice now we will do GHED 27 immediately after Ottery 10 as well. Stay next door to each other and first up we have I have here on my sheet a question mark by [member of the public] [member of the public] I have you down as a possible public speaker on this site you don't have to now is the time yes if you press the right hand button there you go okay thank you chairman what I wanted to point out was a more of a general concern that I have across the Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal.

01:36:21And that we've got sites around East Devon which are broadly similar to the characteristics but are then treated differently in the appraisal. And this is one such example here. We've got, this will round off a section of the town. Now I did a quick search of the document. Nowhere else does any other settlement have rounding off as a reason to promote an area of development. And in fact, if we go to further north to the village of Plyntree and its satellite hamlet, Normans Green, the actual plan assessment says, retain the separation.

01:37:03And for us at Solstyn, Solstyn is a separate hamlet. Not only that, it's not visible from the road, it's not visible from the AONB, from the protected lands. gate. Solston, both Solston Barton and Solston Ride, are completely hidden in a dip, with the exception of the Otter Hayes residential facility for disabled people, which actually hasn't been mentioned in terms of impacts of any of the development sites. So that's my main concern. And the other one is that the strategic environmental assessment, when it is considering the effects on population, it's only ever considered the effects for the population that will be moving into the new development area. It's actually not considering the effects on the existing population. So I'm just asking that when these sites around Salton are discussed, we consider it as a hamlet, which it is. We consider it as having minimal visual impact on the landscape and it is not in fact an extension of Ottery St Mary. It's a separate place in its own right with Salston in its postal address. I'll stop there Chairman. Hopefully that's within

01:38:19Time. Thank you. Thank you. It was indeed. We then come to Councillor Granger from the Town Council. I'd like to commend Denise's opinions to the committee and say that, well, this is

01:38:48Ottery 10, isn't it? Yes, it's hard to see how this is going to, I think we'd have to take it in concert with the neighbouring site, the land south of Strawberry Lane, which would completely urbanize that corner there are some serious issues over flooding down at the bottom of the site both sides actually and I'm the council doesn't support the site to say there's no access to the to the road with no pavement or street lights and the site is prone to flooding I think I'll leave that one there there'll be more to say at the next. Thank you Councillor Granger. Councillor Johns. Hi can I just clarify that we're just talking about Ottery 10 or are you wanting us to talk about Ottery GHD 27 at the same time? We're doing Ottery 10 now we'll do 27 next. Thank you that's not part of my three minutes that was the question. Okay so I object to this site due to the fact that it states the site is within 1600 metres of all facilities except a train station and mentions keeping the footpath

01:40:16Which runs through the site but there is no suitable foot cycleway for people to access facilities as Strawberry Lane is too narrow to place a footpath or cycleway. There has already been various incidents along the road with people being clipped by vehicles as it is the main road from West Hill, Tips and St John to Autry. The site is surrounded by very narrow roads which lend themselves to single vehicle access in various places. Adding houses here will have a detrimental effect on the residents who already reside there. There is mention of part of the site being within the flood zone but no mention of how the additional housing could affect the houses on lower sites who already have issues with surface water runoff. I know that a lot of houses were flooded in 2008 but I'm also aware that the houses there have had issues since the Bovis site was built due to the fact that they're lower lying. I have grave concerns about this site. As far as I can work out, Salston Barton and Salston Wright by definition are hamlets. A hamlet is a small

01:41:09Settlement that has no central place of worship and no meeting point. For example a village hall. picture a handful of houses dotted along a road or a crossroads perhaps separated from other settlements by countryside or farmland and as such they deserve the same protection as other hamlets I noticed that in Plyntree 04 reason for allocating or not allocating the site was put as a no due to the fact that it would join Norman's Green to Plyntree impacting on the separate character and identities of both settlements and the open countryside character I would argue that 10 and GED27 are both hamlets and should not have this site thrust upon them.

01:41:47One of my main concerns is the fact that they keep mentioning footpaths. Lots of other sites across East Devon, when it mentions that there's no footpath or there's no street lighting, that's a reason for allocating against it. For some reason, Autry, every time they mention there's no footpath, they go, just chuck one in. I don't think some of the members of the strategic planning, and perhaps some of the officers know, disrespect, actually know Otter at all and understand just how narrow some of the roads are. It may look like it's suitable for two vehicles, but as somebody who's lived here most of my life, the majority of people, A, don't know the size of their vehicle, and B, don't realise that you can actually go up against the hedge without completely wiping your car out. Sometimes it's easy, obviously, to hit a cyclist or pedestrian, apparently, and I have grave concerns about this site, how it's going to access. It does mention going through the Bovis site but I don't know if anyone's actually been to the Bovis site the access

01:42:38To it is either from halfway down the road the no man's road as it's called it doesn't have a name halfway down towards the King School site but there's no path to get there and it's very narrow or as I like to refer to it the path to nowhere that comes out at the Bovis site directly opposite the cricket club which then takes you into the main road it now has a built-up thank you to Councillor Jess Bailey but it actually takes you directly out onto the road and there is no path in either direction thank you thank you Councillor Johns Councillor Faithfull thank you chair this site works in connection with gh ed 27 as described in the report for gh 26 pedestrian and cycle access is very poor with strawberry lane being the main route into town into the town centre Having no pedestrian walkway, I would expect any development on this site to make contribution, including land for improvements to the lane.

01:43:57The development of Island Farm Kingsreach area has created waterlogging issues on part of the cricket ground. There is clear need for alternative methods of addressing water runoff. This might include attenuation ponds on higher ground. Setting an attenuation pond on the floodplain has demonstrated that it will cause the water table to drop. By allowing the water normally retained in the ground to have a place to drain out into.

01:44:36Thereby causing more flooding rather than less both autry 10 and ga gh ed 20 which one uh what am I writing here yeah 27 are located in close proximity to an established cluster of dwellings at salston barton I am very concerned that poor layout design and architecture can have a detrimental impact on present residents private privacy and right to light I would therefore question the housing numbers put forward for these two sites the report suggests the undergrounding of the overhead cables the cables crossing otrie 10 and gh ed 27 include the main power supply to Autry and the surrounding area with a pylon on Salston corner. It is not just about lowering lower voltage power lines on wooden posts. Thank you Chair. Thank you Councillor Faithfull. Coming into committee then I have Councillor Bethany Collins. Thank you Chair. I would echo what my fellow ward members have said in relation to this site and also GHE D27 um the the strawberry lane is incredibly narrow there's a particular point where the road bends where which is just sort of

01:46:19Where the footpath to nowhere the Councillor John's reference comes out and cars often come around that corner on the other side of the road and I've almost been hit whilst I've been driving so I dread to think what the impacts could be of people coming out of that footpath onto the road would be and I would just question where this proposed footpath could go it's incredibly narrow obviously there's sort of housing and a caravan site either side and I just don't think I can support this site based on that because I just think it's incredibly unsafe and for that reason I would not be supporting the officer's recommendation to allocate this site. Thank you Councillor Collins. Councillor Jess Bailey. Thank you I'm also opposed to Ottery 10 and ED 27 I think that well first of all it's not safe, it won't be safe for residents from here to walk along Strawberry Lane it's too narrow, you can't put a pavement in and it's just not safe and it's particularly dangerous on the bend section

01:47:24And also at the section where it joins the main road and I really don't think we should be allocating this I also do not agree with the rounding off lottery. I think that's completely inconsistent with other settlements. It's not rounding it off. It's actually extending it into the countryside. And I also think that we need to respect the individuality of our hamlets and not join our hamlets up with a town.

01:47:54So for that reason as well, I shall be opposing this allocation.

01:48:01Thank you. thank you Councillor Jess bailey before I come to uh Councillor Blakey um I'm just going to look to officers for some commentary on the issues with the pedestrian access please um thank you chair so um my understanding is that there's a current outline application in on on this site which proposes as part of it uh creating a crossing across um strawberry lane into uh I think it's pavy close is it pavy run um which is uh to the north of the site um you can think sorry but it could link through into 27 and then create that link through um to the north so um links through could be could be created through that route um to then give walking and cycling links through into the town from there so yes I mean I think the two sites do almost come together in that regard so officers would be suggesting that this is one allocation not to if both are approved by committee is that part of that equation well as adjoining sites I think it would be legitimate to require them to come

01:49:23Forward in a coordinated way through some kind of master plan to make sure we secure appropriate pedestrian access links through through both sides yeah okay thank you mr Freeman Councillor Jess bailey to respond thank you um that there's no safe route from king's reach into Ottery st mary because the only way you can go is back out onto strawberry lane and to think that residents are seriously going to divert all the way up there and then come down and have to exit King's Reach back onto the road without a pavement, that just doesn't solve the issue.

01:50:00I think we'll give officers a moment to look at that and then possibly come back. But I had Councillor Blakey.

01:50:17Thank you, Geoff. Is there a compromise available here? Taking into account comments that have been made about the fact that this is a hamlet and wants to keep itself as such quite understandably there needs to be a buffer between the hamlet and the remainder of the lottery St Mary so would it be sensible to propose a compromise which is not to allocate lottery 1-0 and to say that as regards GHE D27 that perhaps only the southern half might be available for development which would make sufficient space for perhaps give or take 30 dwellings. Obviously not as many as the allocation that is wanted but that would enable some development to take place whilst retaining that separate identity as a hamlet. So perhaps if Mr. Freeman was listening you can comment on that one as well I'm sure mr. Freeman would resent the implication that he wasn't listening I I'm afraid once we're in committee we can't come out again sorry have we got any commentary on the pedestrian access issues and a response to Councillor Blakey's thoughts this huge I mean I

01:51:53Think we had assumed that you could come through the Kings reach development out onto Barrick Road in terms of pedestrians and cyclists who appreciate there's no vehicle link through but in terms of sustainable routes to travel through and into the town that would be the logical route in terms of apologies I was talking to my good Councillor Blakey repeat his question the idea was that we don't allocate Ottery 10 which is to the east of the site but actually only allocate the southern half of ED 27 thereby retaining will be a smaller buffer between the Salston Hamlet and the extant Ottery St Mary is that a sensible It's certainly an option if members are concerned about retaining a separation between Salston Manor and the adjoining development and Ottery St Mary.

01:53:02I have to say, I'm not going to be shot down in flames here, but I've not heard of Salston referred to as a hamlet previously, so I hadn't really thought of it in those terms. I don't know if other officers had. No, just shaking my head. so I think we hadn't considered it to be a hamlet in its own right to be honest we saw it as a manor, a house that's slightly detached from the town with some development around it but not necessarily a hamlet in its own right Okay, thank you Mr Freeman, continuing on through my list then Councillor Ingham Thank you Chair, I think there is a danger that people may wish to spontaneously create a new green wedge that doesn't exist and we've already been considering a whole plethora of sites that are in green wedges that have had history of planning applications over decades that I would suggest have a valid accountability for to justify moving on but this site it's not in a green wedge the coastal preservation area

01:54:21Or the national landscape and the best we've come up with is that it might create a coalescence that no one's mentioned in planning terms within this council before or if they have it hasn't been taken up formally on any occasion so because of that and looking at the the other proposals the other sites which have I believe very valid reasons for not being considered we're in danger of picking up reasons for not allocating this which aren't in planning terms valid so that's why I propose it for allocation so just to be clear Councillor Ingham you're proposing otteri 10 to be allocated okay constitutionally then I need to look for a seconder first Councillor How I will at this point because I still haven't been convinced of anything other um I'm not happy about it but at the same time I think we need to work on it and see where we go okay thank you Councillor How I I have then Councillor Brian Bailey and then Councillor Jung.

01:55:55Thank you, Chair. I think if this is an ordinary planning meeting instead of a strategic meeting, I would say for all the reasons that have been given by my colleagues, I disagree with Councillor Bennion, unfortunately, but everybody else has spoken, and I agree with what they're thinking. This is going to encourage coalescence. There are two ways about it. It's a long walk into town, a really long walk.

01:56:24There's no footpaths. It's very bendy. There's no streetlights. So if this was a planning application, we would turn it down for these reasons. So therefore, I cannot support it as it stands. Thank you, Chair. Okay, thank you, Councillor Brian Bailey. Councillor Jung. Yeah, listening to all the speakers, I can see the negatives of this site. I know that lane very well I've been taken out on that lane as well the southern bit is in the floodplain is that floodplains three level three but I can see that there are issues with that issues with pedestrian accessing it for the cars using that lane and I can see why the meeting at Autry the other the other day did go for Autry 01 rather than this one here so I won't be supporting this one okay thank you Councillor Jung Councillor Hayward then Councillor Davey um not to overall you chair but I'm pretty sure Councillor Davey did have his hand up a long time before me then I'll go Councillor Davey then Councillor Hayward sorry I didn't see you wally

01:57:57That's all right um thank you paul I'll be quick I just have serious concerns about the access here by any means whether it's in a vehicle on a bike or walking um and I support the latter two before the first um but I I don't see that this is a particularly uh good site in terms of access and um I'm not happy about it about allocating it Councillor Hayward thank you um on one sense I agree with Counts Ringham.

01:58:45I don't believe this is coalescence. I don't think, again, I don't live here. Viewing it dispassionately from outside, I would just say this is a very lovely, tranquil conurbation of houses that happen to have been detached from the main dwelling. We have them in Axminster. They exist in All Saints, and they exist in Charlestown. For my view, it's not a separate settlement per se, and I'm sure it's delightful to be there, albeit there's quite a few flooding issues, it seems, there.

01:59:20However, on the point that the connection to the town, the footpath, the cycleway, driving, is so dire, on that basis I'm going to support the proposal that we move on from this because I don't think it's practical and reasonable to develop this when we come to the adjoining site then mindful of Councillor Baker's point I will have a further discussion on that thank you chair thank you Councillor Hayward before I come to Councillor Bethany Collins then I think Mr Freeman wanted to show us some pretty pictures.

02:00:01Thank you, Jay. Yeah, if Matt could switch over. Yeah, so just to clarify what I was saying earlier about the application on the adjoining land. So this is the, it's an outline application, so this is indicative only, but obviously we're talking about this site here on the adjoining land. This line here is an existing public right-of-way that runs through that, so it would have to be retained through any development of that site that leads across to strawberry lane up here you'll see on the indicative layout they're showing a layout which has foot past running north south through the site up to this crossing point which would then go into the king's reach development from which you can then walk or cycle through to barrack lane and into the town through there so there is the potential to deliver that kind of link it would need to be in conjunction with the adjoining site which would obviously come on to but my point is that it is achievable in terms of a pedestrian and cyclist route

02:01:04Into the town from there Thank you Is it a direct response Councillor Jess Bailey I think the distance you'd be talking about is way way way over 1600 metres and it's just not feasible to think that pedestrians will be able to go all that way if you look at um how far the bottom of 027 is to take people all the way up to the top and then all the way around it's just not going to happen it's not it's not achievable Councillor Bethany collins thank you I was just interested in obviously mr Freeman mentioned the access the pedestrian access from pavy run previously I was just wondering where he was referring to that access being so that's through the kings reach development um well I'm just looking at aerial photographs so it looks like you can come through there's some county highways land I believe on this corner so you could break through there across the road and into the development and then you can wind through and I believe there's a gap up here into barrack lane

02:02:18Looking under the aerial photographs appears to be a gap through to barrack lane at that point at which point you'd be able to walk and cycle along Barrick Lane and into the town. I appreciate it's a reasonable distance, I haven't measured it, but picking up on Councillor Bailey's point, I'm being told it's 1,600 metres. Okay, so we have a proposal on the table from Councillor Ingham, seconded by Councillor Howe, to allocate Ottery 10, that is the substantive motion at the moment.

02:03:02Before I take us to a vote on that does anybody else wish to speak on this site no okay it would probably be remiss of me not to remind members of that 571 house deficit that we mentioned um at the outset but that's all I'm gonna do we'll go to a vote then the proposal is to allocate Ottery 10 those members in favor please account one those against account eight and those abstaining that's four so that proposal falls and I will then wait until somebody gives me an alternative proposal Councillor Jess Bailey seconded by Councillor Bethany Collins all those members in favour of the proposal to move on Can we have hands staying in the air, please? Thank you. I count nine. Nine. OK. Those against. One. And those abstaining. Three. Does that add up the same both times?

02:04:34Okay uh so we move on from Ottery 10 then which brings us to uh we're going to go slightly out of order we're going to go next door to gh ed 27 which is a few further down my sheet of paper here and we have mr timothy dutchian um thank you uh thank you chairman and councillors for letting speak against this planning application. I'm speaking not as an individual, but on behalf of a group, mainly comprising households on the borders of the proposed development.

02:05:24Salston Cross, Salston Barton, Salston Rydes, Salston Manor, and we call ourselves Strawberry Fields Forever. My two concerns are flooding and safety. So if I start off with safety, If you come out of Salston Ryde and join the main road from Tipton-Fluxon up to Salston Cross, King's School have already designated this road too unsafe for school children to walk to school, so they have to be picked up by a schoolhouse at the end of Salston Ryde.

02:06:01Just after you enter the road I've just talked about, there's a very sharp bend, which has been spoken to before, where there's a bridge over the stream, which is a site of flooding and a single passage for vehicles. Numerous small accidents have occurred here. Indeed, the bridge was badly damaged by a fracture two years ago and had to be rebuilt. The road then comes up to Scorston Cross, but at times wide enough for two cars but often one Salston Cross you turn left to West Hill straight across on an unnamed road you go past King's Reach towards Barrick Road and King's School and right downhill to Osheris St Mary if you go straight across as I've just said it's a very narrow road with a games field on the left and this is a major major site of danger. Out of school hours on several days of the week, cars collect in large numbers and this will be readily backed up by members of Ottery Town Council. There may be 30 cars parked up, parked on the verges, making it

02:07:18Extremely dangerous. In fact, two weeks tomorrow I was driving as a passenger in actual fact and we came at about 7 o'clock at night. A football came out of the thing. A little boy ran out from behind the park guard, completely didn't look left or right. If we'd been three seconds, we could have knocked him over and killed him. It is dangerous, and by having increased houses, it's going to make it more dangerous.

02:07:51If you turn right, and we have videos and photos to accompany this if you would like to see them if you turn right down the strawberry lane again it's it's wide at the top and then it narrows to one and then going around the corridor where salston barton joins it it spreads out a little bit and then past the bowls club the cricket club and the new pedestrian access from king's reach but it's a very very narrow road badly lit no pedestrian access it floods so if pedestrians are doing it they have to come out into the center of the road to avoid going through the floods so it is a very poorly it's a dangerous area the traffic is increasing along here sources and manor has been developed and is more shortly before and so that will produce extra extra extra extra traffic the farm traffic has increased both in sizing and size I mean size of the vehicle and quantity if skip Tipton school is to be relocated like except I've heard quite a lot about this today

02:09:05Then the footpath we've talked about the footpath I won't go under on it anymore. Flooding. Water goes downhill. So Salston-Barton is at risk. Could I ask you just to draw your conclusion? There's a well in one of the houses in Salston-Barton and the pump is having to be on at the moment because the water table is high. Salston-Ride the houses are in the floodplain and have difficulty getting house insurance. Those risks are going to be increased by this development.

02:09:39So from a safety point of view and a flooding point of view and a lot of the stuff that we've heard about from the previous development I recommended that it's rejected thank you mr dudgeon could you turn the microphone off please sorry oh I'm so sorry thank you and I have then um dr dunsford did you wish to speak again yes please um we've heard a lot about the roads I can do nothing but endorse the fact that all four roads leading from that site are one car width for some all of their length. There's been collisions with the bus, collisions with pedestrians. But the flooding issue, we're looking at a two-dimensional map. Actually, what we're looking at is GHED 26 is a field where the land levels are over the top, above an elevation, the roofs of the houses of Salston-Barton and Salston-Ryde, which are in a little dip. This means not only are they disproportionately visible from East Hill strips, and I've taken some photos to prove it, it actually is like extending King's Reach almost parallel to the main iconic viewpoint

02:10:54At White Cross Car Park from the AONB. It effectively adds a third of the width of Otter St Mary. Flooding is also a very, very serious issue for us. We're already receiving, we're already flooding. We've seen that residents had to be moved out of their properties for up to five months. Now DEFRA, when they're calculating flood risk damages, mental impacts of flooding, mental health impacts of flooding are very important. Research is backed up by research and it's especially relevant when people have to move out of their homes for this sort of prolonged period.

02:11:37I'm also very concerned that there's no, if you're putting natural flood management measures in, we're so close, there's no room for them to have any measurable effect. And that the flooding could affect not just Solstyn, but it could affect the Bowles Club, the Patank Club, the Cricket Club, the electricity substation, and some vulnerable homes in the form of what you call static caravans. it could affect all of those. The other point is that we've already lost a number of footpaths in Ottery, particularly the footpaths accessed the bridge across to King's School, the supporters washed away, a tree fell on it because the roots were eroded so significantly, and the only footpath that makes the river accessible to disabled people has also been washed away.

02:12:31Downstream, we've seen a significant erosion. And what I'm trying to say here is that it's not for no reason that East Devon District Council have put in place natural flood management measures dotted up and around the catchment. If we develop these sites that are right on the very edge of the floodplain, there is no means to attenuate that flood water. It's not just flooding properties, it's causing all that erosion of the riverbank and the important public footpath connection that people enjoy.

02:13:02Thank you. Just in the nick of time. Thank you, [member of the public]. Not to constrain people's right to democratically have their say, but perhaps members could just bear in mind time moves on, and I'll leave it there. With that, Councillor Granger. What I was going to say has already been said by our two fine representatives. What we can't tell from this map is the actual topography, and [member of the public] quite correct, there's a steep slope.

02:13:45So any housing development, they would be able to look down into the gardens of the existing houses at Solstyn-Barton. We had a presentation from a representative of the developer about a month back concerning the outline planning application, which they subsequently have put in. And out of all the planning applications that I've seen over the last seven years as a member of Ottery's planning committee, it's the first one that actually mentioned the provision of low-cost housing, shared ownership, housing association, development, that sort of thing.

02:14:33That is a shining shame on all the developments that we've had and the last thing we want and need is more mansions which no one in Ottery can afford so the mood and feeling at that well attended meeting and I'm here to represent the views of the people that live in the town was they're against it the path access to the bovis development is along past the football field and then in pavy run it's it's entirely impractical people will always take the short shortest route and that's the road that floods is dangerous is narrow and are lit so it's not sustainable to put this development here I shall leave it there thank you Councillor Granger Councillor Johns hi um I was advised at the beginning of the meeting that any upcoming planning applications are not um to be discussed in here they're not related to what we're discussing and yet funnily enough if they're mentioned when they're trying to push sites through, just thought I'd mention that.

02:16:00GHED 27 is been put forward for 60 houses. The planning application currently in stands for 63 houses. I will reiterate what everyone else has already said. I'm really concerned that there is no existing footpath along Shrawby Lane. I know that there has been discussion about linking it to the Bovis site. However, I don't know if you've actually been to the Bovis site. The majority of the houses are built right up to the boundary, hence why there's no path on the inside of the Bovis site.

02:16:26That go down that road and link it to anywhere else. It has a path to nowhere. It has a path halfway along between this site and the King's School. There's a path that opens up halfway along there that takes you into there, but there's no path to actually access that path safely. The water runoff is a great concern. The houses that live below here, and please be aware, they will be living below this site.

02:16:50They're not adjacent to this site. They're below this site. they have issues with water runoff with it being a field that water runoff is going to increase massively when housing is put in there regardless of whether or not they put in beautiful trees and bushes etc they're also putting houses in and the runoff alone is going to cause massive issues I don't know if the all the strategic planning are actually driven down that road when it's been raining for more than half an hour but the road itself now floods because of the king's reach development. And they're constantly digging it up, by the way, the bovis site, because they're having massive issues with the water runoff there. Just thought I'd put that in.

02:17:27The officer's report states that the site is on the periphery of the settlement and has a semi-rural character. It could be considered to round off this part of the town. This is the only site on the Local Plan put forward that feels that our town needs to be rounded off. We're quite happy with it as it is. It doesn't need rounding off. We're quite happy have a little bit jutting out here and there that's how we like it um the most most concern I have is that there is no safe walking or cycle path to the center of the town you cannot access the bovis site from it the houses are built right up to the edge I'm aware of the planning application that's been put in I have specifically not looked at it because I sit on town council planning so I was waiting until after this before I actually look at it um but yeah that's what I have to say thank you thank you Councillor John's council of faithful can I start again

02:18:46No three minutes is three minutes council of faithful we have a lot of sites to get through basically this site is along with what I said about Autry 10 this is potentially overbearing the site is on brow of the hill it has visual impact from both east and west there's also issues of waterlogging on lower ground caused on the cricket ground we also have the bowling green and the Patank Court in that area I also concerned about the issues of public footpath when you leave this meeting you have an alternative route you can take to get home via Columpton would you use it so how can you expect the residents particularly there's plenty of residents up in West Hill would we want to go all the way around the other way to get to the end of strawberry lane and I don't think it's realistic um what else am I saying oh that will do for now thank you Councillor Faithfull um in view of the comments that I've heard and the comments that we've heard

02:20:23On the previous application um Ottery 10 I think it's um abundantly clear committee aren't going to support this site either so in the interests of good order um and getting on to other discussions I'm going to propose from the chair that we move on from this site and it may simply be that we need to come back to it and reconsider it down the line when we don't meet our numbers but for the purposes of today I'm going to propose that we move on and I will look for any other comments from committee if necessary but would suggest that perhaps our time might be better spent discussing other sites. Councillor Hayward. It's just a very brief interlude the first is a question to mr Freeman and it comes back to a point counts the baby raised 1600 meters is that based on following the available roads or is that as the crow flies across the whole of the spectrum of what we're doing so I've drawn the squiggly line on google maps and it does follow where you

02:21:21Would actually walk very much indeed because that makes a difference to us I think the only other thing to add in and I'm grateful for your comment is 87 of Devon's roads are like this that's the nature of East Devon there's a few primary roads A's and B's and C's 87% of what we're having to contend with is roads like Strawberry Lane so I just want to throw that into the mix that's part of the challenge we face Thank you Councillor Hayward any other particularly salient comments?

02:21:54No? In which case then the proposal from the Chair is to move on from GHED 27 seven for today. All those in favour, please. That's everyone except Councillor Ingham, so 12. Those against and those abstaining, that's one. Okay, thank you members. That brings us then to site Autry 15 and I have first up Councillor Granger. This is the one

02:22:45Slade Road in someone's back garden. The council feels that we acknowledge that development would cause minimal impact but do feel that adequate facilities such as a pavement need to be provided because it's just a rural piece of tarmac between the hedges. And it has minimal impact. It doesn't have a vast amount to recommend it, but in the circumstances, I wouldn't oppose it. Thank you. Councillor Granger. Councillor Johns. Thank you. I mean, technically, it's the same issues with everything else, lack of secretary, primary school, et cetera. It is within access of all the facilities, but those facilities are already seriously overloaded what I would say is and I don't want you all gloating about this I would say it's the wrong side of Ottery just because of the issues that there are there is no right side before you start laughing todd but it is there is the wrong side what I would say is the report states there is the opportunity to provide a section of foot path along the front of the site and potentially along the front of the adjoining property

02:24:13As they are owned by the same owner I would ask this is looked into thoroughly and ensure the pavement is of adequate width to allow Pristia's mobility vehicles to gain access to the town itself with no issues. Again, Autry should not be left with substantive pavements just to make life easier for others. So that's what I will say on this site. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Jones. Councillor Faithfull. I am concerned about the relatively high number of houses with such poor pedestrian access to this site while there are pavements in the area of the entrance there China Way Gardens the pavement ends well before this site and the property next door Slade Road at this Slade Road at this point is a narrow road with little room for vehicles to pass there are relatively high number of business further uphill the hill causing quite high volumes of vehicle movements Thank You Councillor Faithfull and we've had a lot about pavements I thought I'd make the slightly flippant observation that if we didn't allocate any sites that didn't have a direct pavement connection

02:25:36To all of their services we probably wouldn't allocate anything in East Devon at all but there we go I have Councillor Jung and then Councillor Bethany Collins thank you Jeff listening to the speakers I would recommend this this proposal as long as there's a footpath I'm sorry as I suggested it in the in documents thank you Thank You Councillor Jung I'll look for a seconder Councillor Ingham do you wish to speak okay thank you I have Councillor Bethany collins then that's all been said so let's vote okay Councillor Brian bailey did you have anything to add or can we move to a vote okay any other comments on this site no okay in which case the proposal from Councillor Jung seconded by Councillor Ingham is to allocate site Ottery 15 all those members in favour please that's 12 those against and those abstaining that's one okay that brings us then to site Autry 18 and I have registered to speak [member of the public]Kinney good afternoon thank you very much my name is [name removed] I'm a member of the Gerway Action Group

02:27:15Speaking against. It has long been understood that development on sites to the south of Autry would put undue pressure on the town's ancient road infrastructure. All traffic heading for the main arterial routes will have to pass through the narrow streets of the town centre, as will all associated construction traffic heading to and from the sites. so Autry 18 is no different the site cannot adequately accommodate pedestrian traffic from the development without significant changes to the immediate road system and it also takes no consideration of additional road traffic will contribute to the wider problems of the town the west of the town with its direct route to the A30 and beyond provides opportunities that have far less negative impact the site is clearly inappropriate in that the only advocates for developments are those financially profiting from it namely the landowners and their agent it has been robustly and consistently challenged by all other parties including the residents in unprecedented numbers the town council and even eddc planning committee members refusing permission in the face of the Tilted Balance Directive.

02:28:43That is definitive enough testament to its unsuitability. Should it have been granted permission under the pressure of the Tilted Balance, that would not be justification of its suitability, merely a poor planning decision based on external pressures. We're wasting an inordinate amount of taxpayers' time and money fighting inappropriate proposals for development based purely on financial gain and not the benefit of the town and the solution of its issues.

02:29:15It's always been understood and acknowledged that more appropriate housing is required and this is an opportunity to take control away from developers and put it in the hands of councillors to make proactive and informed decisions that contribute to solving the town's capacity issues rather than adding it to them. the solution to land allocation for Ottery St Mary lies to the west of the town adjacent to Exeter Road there is compromise to be found there thank you very much thank you [member of the public]Kenney, Councillor Granger this is one we're all very familiar with it's taken up a great deal of time over the years a great deal of volunteers time given freely it's an inappropriate development. We've always opposed it. Half the town seems to oppose it.

02:30:16They're willing to sign petitions to that effect. East Devon has rejected it. It's gone to appeal. I hope that the appeal fails. And I commend your decision not to recommend it for allocation.

02:30:34Thank you. Councillor Granger. Councillor Johns. I'm sure we're all painfully aware of this site and how badly it is placed within Autry on the outskirts basically if the site is approved it would change the approach to Autry considerably from that aspect which is basically a single width track which has lots of farms down the end with large tractors and other vehicles that come through to get any further down that road you go through Wigerton which has lots of very historical listed buildings which I am aware have been clipped on numerous occasions by large vehicles that can't quite judge how large they are the site has already been put forward and turned down by East Devon district council so due to various reasons including landscape highway safety flooding loss of agricultural land etc and that has already been mentioned by the the resident the site is again it's the wrong end of town because any vehicles that come through have to go up tip hill and down the other they have to go up and then come down tip hill a very narrow

02:31:43Crossroads with very limited pavements. To be perfectly honest with you and being very frank in this meeting, the offer put forward as an appropriate pavement is an insult to Osher and its residents and I think the site should be refused. Basically the site that's been currently, the planning application that's currently come forward for there, the site has not been refused on highways ground because highways are happy to put an insufficient pavement from there putting lives at risk and I think it should be refused on all the grounds that it was currently refused on by East Devon District Council. Thank you. Thank you Councillor Johns. Councillor Faithfull. I support the officer's recommendation to refuse. Thank you Councillor Faithfull and as we're coming into committee now can I say that I also support the officer's recommendation to refuse and I'm going to move from the chair that we move on from this site sorry yes Councillor How has a declaration to make yes my sister has actually bought a house just down the road from this I believe it's an effects

02:32:54NRI I don't believe should be seriously affected apart from the obvious that all residents in that area would be but for clarity thank you Councillor How Councillor Hayward or Councillor Collins okay Councillor Hayward thank you I agree it's just making an observation and as we go through this on I'm listening to the speakers on the basis of what's been said you wouldn't have built go away close that's that's the truth of this if you were comparing my flight and I emphasize entirely what the previous speaker said about it's being done for profit and it's being done for money welcome to the world of planning because for every person who says oh why is there too many second homes in this area someone sold that home to that person so greed and avarice and even just capitalism is responsible for this because East Devon hasn't gone out and demanded people put their land forward we have a tech we have a statutory duty to call for sites This is what we have to do to make the Local Plan.

02:34:03And people have said, yeah, I've got a field. I'll throw it into the mix. That's the reality of the situation. So if landowners, none of these, here at Minster-Holliton, if not a single landowner had put their land forward, we wouldn't be in this situation. How we'd build the houses that we're asked to, I don't know. But this is the reality of the situation. So I support what you're saying, Chair.

02:34:26But again, it's that level of pragmatism. For every piece of land we're considering, someone has put it in front of us someone's put it in front of us and we have a statutory duty to consider it indeed, Councillor Ingham thank you Joe, it's been interesting this morning listening to different speakers and a number of outlined that all those sites put forward to the east are no no, not to be considered I got the feeling that those to the south of Ottery are seemingly not to be considered so perhaps we should have listened to Councillor Granger at 5 past 10 and allocated 1A and got on with the job I hope that it's not NIMBYism that's led us to this and I hope that's because people feel Ottery 1A is the best site and not just a convenient place to allocate houses away from themselves but we'll see how things progress this afternoon thank you we will indeed Councillor Any further comments on this site note in which case the proposal from the chair is that we move on from otter 18 all those members in favor please

02:35:47That's unanimous which brings us then to otter 19 just around the corner and we have Councillor Granger. And Ottery Council supports the decision not to recommend this for allocation and just by way of observation, 1A is looking better now, isn't it? We have a wrap-up session for a reason, Councillor Granger. It may be that we need to ask that question again. Councillor Johns. Hi. Ottery 19, I would support the officer's recommendation to not allocate this site, but just a point of clarification, the Gerway site that was put forward is on a brown site the site that you were talking about previously is a green site just for clarification Councillor Faithfull anything to add okay good thank you very much um in this instance so do I and I'll propose from the chair that we move on from this site any further comments from members no in which case all those in favour of the proposal to move on please that's unanimous which brings us then to Ottery 21 and we have miss samantha thomas from carney sweeney on behalf of the landowner or developer

02:37:15Thank you chair members um I say samantha thomas from carney sweeney planning and I'm here representing wayne homes who are the developer who have an interest in the site um we would obviously support the position of Ossery in the settlement hierarchy as being a location that can accommodate additional housing to meet both local and a wider need and to support existing the town centre and existing facilities. We would also support that as providing a better balance of delivery across the district which is something you have heard from me before. In terms of the site We consider it's very well-related to the town and is well-placed, and there is a willing landowner and an interested developer who's very keen to bring an application forward, so it is fully deliverable and could be delivered reasonably quickly.

02:38:16In terms of a technical assessment, that is ongoing, but our initial highways advice has confirmed that we can provide an acceptable access to the site, not involving third-party land or impacting on the floodplain or flood zone and also we have the scope to provide the pedestrian and cycle connections that are referenced in the site assessment. I think in terms of other impacts as I said ongoing technical assessment but we're confident those matters can be addressed through the detailed scheme such as landscape with appropriate landscaping and buffers and in terms of the wider impacts that we've had today through suitable conditions such as construction management and infrastructure such as contributions towards education so we would obviously urge that members go with the officer recommendation to allocate the site thank you thank you [member of the public], Councillor Granger unfortunately as with the land of Sidmouth Road that was previously mentioned it's a long part of town anything coming out of that site has got to go up tip hill down into town across the narrow crossroads it's a rather

02:39:42Optimistic plan I think there's a narrow track that would need to be a great deal of infrastructure adjustments to make this viable and it's in a particularly beautiful meadow that runs down to the into the otter valley and the town council does not support this application thank you Councillor Granger um and apologies uh miss thomas I think I called you miss sweeney reading the wrong bit of my paper um Councillor Johns um thank you um I'm afraid I also object to this as the site is located on the valley floor it would be visible from prominent ridges on each side of the valley the site is bounded and crossed by hedgerows and trees which may be of landscape importance there are various prows crossing the site and in the wider landscape area which may offer views of the site the site is a significant greenfield site parts of which are very constrained it is very sensitive in heritage terms and visible in long-range views part of the site surrounded on two sides by existing development is less sensitive again the concern would be it's

02:41:02It's been discussed in here about the opportunity to introduce tree plant, to screen this, et cetera. That's obviously because of where it's sited. It has exactly the same issues as the previous site we mentioned. It comes out onto Sigmath Road, which is exceptionally narrow. To get into the town itself, you have to go up the narrow road. Although technically it's supposed to be two vehicles wide, it isn't because of the pavement on the left-hand side jutting out if you're going up the road.

02:41:25When you get to Tippell at the top, which is obviously where the primary school children go, there is a lollipop person there. but the crossroads at the top I don't know if all of the selection panels are aware of Autry, I know the majority of you are it's a very steep hill, you drop down the other side, the crossroads at the top is very narrow, it's also exceptionally busy, I would object to this site, thank you Thank you Councillor Johns, Councillor Faithfull Thank you Chair The images in the report for this site are actually for the larger site of GHED29 rather than Autry21. They are mainly for the area GHED29B rather than 29A. There is no direct access to the site from the Sidmouth Road. As there is no clear access to the site in the report, it is difficult to make any clear comment. There are two possible access points one from Claremont fields and one from go away close but they both are dependent on who owns the land owner who is the land

02:42:50Owner for the strip of land between the ends of the adopted highway and the strip the site boundary the image of a metal gate is actually located quite a considerable distance from the site in question I would like to therefore suggest that the committee move on from this site for the for this round of meetings and land more information to be collated in particular relating to accessing the site I'm aware that planning application for the farm access point was applied for set further down along the Sidmouth Road the access point gave poor provision for pedestrians thank you thank you Councillor Faithfull worth just clarifying for members that the issues with land ownership for an access etc would be for any potential planning applicant to address when bringing an application just because we make an allocation doesn't mean that it's guaranteed to come forward if that issue couldn't be resolved and it couldn't obviously we have to be satisfied that the site is deliverable to be allocating it lawfully having said that though could we get some clarity on what the

02:44:24Access arrangements might be for this site, please. Thank you, Chair. Well, as I understand, there are two potential options, as has been said, from Claremont Field and from Gerway Close. Not aware of a specific proposal from those putting it forward, but I think either of those options are potentially achievable, and Devon County Council, as the Highway Authority, are satisfied that the site is deliverable and a satisfactory access can be achieved.

02:44:52Thank you, Mr Freeman. I have Councillor Jess Bailey. Well, quite often I disagree with Devon County Council, but it's certainly not clear to me how this site is deliverable. And I think that if we're going to be considering allocating somewhere, I don't expect every last detail to be finalised, but I think it's just not clear either way, and particularly going through Claremont Field, what the third-party arrangements are.

02:45:23So, I'm also concerned that whichever way potential access is achieved will bring vehicles and pedestrians to the substandard junction at Tip Hill, which is, of course, a great concern. And I just don't feel that this site should be allocated. So, I'll leave it at that, but I won't be supporting its allocation. and I think in terms of Autry, why, you know, there's been so much house building that's why we're left with sites. It might seem like, you know, people are objecting to all sites but the problem is that there's already been 25% more than anywhere else, more than any other town in the district in recent years. Thank you.

02:46:19Yes, that is a typo then, yes, because we are on Autry 21. Good spot. uh other members of committee sorry Councillor You didn't see your hand hold it up high next time um yeah I note in the opportunities in the notes that there's opportunity to link uh go away close and clement field by footpath and psychopaths uh therefore that's eliminating the problems of going down to the Sidmouth Road for cyclists and pedestrians.

02:47:04So it's got some pluses and the officers do make this a recommendation so I would propose to support the officers' recommendation on this one.

02:47:20Thank you Councillor Jung. In this case I'm going to second that one um I think the highways issue needs further investigation if this is to stay in the regulation 19 version of the plan um but I think the other issues can be uh satisfactorily mitigated to some degree or another um the other point I would make if we don't allocate this site Ottery will have 168 homes allocated in this plan period and I appreciate it's taken a lot of growth but given that we have to look at a new baseline being what's there today uh for the emerging Local Plan um mr Freeman how many dwellings are there in Ottery did you have a number up earlier I did yeah let me just find it it was uh well 3 400 households in the ward according to the 2021 census in the ward so that does include some of the rural periphery around yeah I mean even even if we half that if we didn't allocate this site we'd be looking at less than 10% growth for a Tier 3 settlement, I think, [member of the public]?

02:48:31Is Autry Tier 3? It must be. Yes. Yes. Either way, I'm happy to second Councillor Jung's proposal. I'm getting a quizzical look from [member of the public] about his own settlement hierarchy. Oh, it might be Tier 2. It's in accordance with the other terms. Okay. With that ramble over, then, any other members wish to speak? No? Okay. In which case, then, the proposal from Councillor Jung, seconded by myself, is to allocate Ottery 21.

02:49:03All those members in favour, please. I count nine. Those against? Two. And those abstaining? No one. Does that add up? I know we have lost Councillor Ingham. It does add up. Yes, very good. Okay. The good news is the front table can count. Excellent. So that is carried then. Which brings us to GHED 29, as we've already done 27.

02:49:46Thank you, [member of the public]. And we have Councillor Granger. This brief, for reasons previously stated, it's on the Sidmouth Road. It's unsustainable. And we don't support it. We agree that it shouldn't be recommended for allocation.

02:50:14Thank you Councillor Granger Councillor Johns I also agree that the site should not be allocated thank you Councillor Johns Councillor Faithfull I just want to take an opportunity with this site to relate to the images the metal gate that was referred to in the previous one and it's on this one as well is that the if you look on the northern boundary there's a v at the far left and that is where the metal gate is and the road access is actually on the right on the corner of the Sigmath Road but I actually support the officer's recommendation. Thank you.

02:51:17Thank you Councillor Faithfull. Members, Councillor Jung. I would recommend officer's recommendation. Okay the proposal is to move on I did see Councillor Fernand and a minute ago are you seconding okay any members wish to speak on this one no okay in which case the proposal from Councillor Jung seconded by Councillor Fernley is to move on from ghed 29b all those members in favor please that's unanimous which brings us then to GHED 31 Councillor Granger I didn't have a 29A on my list is there a 29A [member of the public] can we go back a slide ok is that ok Mr Freeman has just advised me to ignore him so I'm going to take that advice so GHED 31 then Councillor Granger thank you From now on, actually, my view and the council's view is that we will support the officer's recommendations.

02:52:41And so for every one of these allocations, which are all no, that's going to be our attitude. And I'm late for a lunch appointment.

02:52:52Thank you, Councillor Granger. Councillor Johns, Councillor Faithfull, do you have anything to add to the officer's recommendations on these? no um I support the officer's recommendation all of these they know for various reasons about the fact that they're unsuitable where they're out where the allocations are put forward um council faithful unfortunately has had to leave the room briefly what I would say though that with that I've noticed while I've been looking through these and I've been looking at other sites etc is the lack of consistency it makes it very very difficult as a ward member when we're reading something on hours that's almost identical to another site in another area of the district and some are allocated and some aren't for exactly the same reason it makes it exceptionally difficult perhaps in the future a template could be given out to officers when they go and assess these sites so that at least then we're all reading from the same guidelines it would make life a lot easier thank you thank you Councillor Johns Councillor Faithfull did you have anything to add on

02:54:0031 32 33 or 34 or indeed 35 yes I have on others this one I would say I support the office's recommendation to refuse on this one but I've got I'll just go back and look at my notes but I have got other things to say okay please do have a look because if you don't have anything to add we could take them on block and save some time however in this case while council of faithful checks quickly I will propose that we move on uh from gh ed 31 from the chair do any members wish to speak okay in which case the proposal is to move on from gh ed 31 those members in favor please that's unanimous council of faithful gh ed 32 I support the officer's recommendation to refuse I move as chair that we move on from GHED 32. All those in favour please. Okay that's carried so we move on from GHED 32. I do have 32 on my sheet Ed. Are you? Okay. GHED 33. Councillor Faithfull.

02:55:14This site has potential access from Chimeway Gardens. I would be grateful for information relating to highway capacity for this site. how many more houses could be added for the roadway available due to the angle of view from this site from the east hill East Devon national landscape I would consider this site to be offering less of a visual impact than sites on the west side of the valley and town okay thank you council of faithful do any members wish to speak on this site no okay in which case I will propose from the chair in line with officer's recommendation that we move on from jhed 33 all those members in favor please that's unanimous jhed 34 council of faithful this site has the potential to provide a link road from alfington road to chineway hill to alleviate traffic, particularly when yonder street is closed.

02:56:33This would need to work with GHED 35. It would indeed. Thank you, Councillor Faithfull. Any members wish to speak? No, okay, in which case I will propose from the Chair that we move on from GHED 34. All those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. GHED 35, Councillor Faithfull. My understanding of this site is that it was offered along with other sections of land to provide sports provision and part of a link road through Tsuchang Wei Road.

02:57:18Alongside this was off-road parking for residents along North Street. I would therefore like to know why when land is offered for one thing, it is added to the assessment process for other things, usually for housing. Having sat through the three previous meetings, I am quite surprised how often this has happened. When local landowners are making an effort to support the local community, it is very disappointing to see their offers ignored and brushed to one side.

02:58:04Under the present circumstances I support the officer's recommendation but not necessarily for the reasons they have given I would therefore like to see a future review of the proposals including rejecting rejected sites to check whether what the sites were listed for is actually what they were put forward for thank you Councillor Faithfull I'm going to come to mr. Freeman just to clarify what's gone on there thank you to yes I mean I think this site and the other sites around this kind of north eastern edge of the town were put forward together and there was some suggestion about creating a kind of link road around that quartile of the town and offering potential benefits in terms of open space and sports provision as members will note from previous meetings what we've considered is the housing component of those proposals we can only consider provision of open space sports pitches etc where it's commensurate with what is needed from to support the development coming forward so we can't consider those wider benefits and in any event I think our conclusions remain same in

02:59:22Terms of the landscape impact the highways impact I think there's issues with the northern part some of which was sifted out as well in terms of the impact on heritage assets as well so for various reasons those proposals wouldn't have been acceptable but what's before you is is the elements that we should be considering through this process thank you mr Freeman do any members wish to speak on this site no in which case I will propose from the chair that we move on from gh ed 35 all those members in favor please that's unanimous okay we are going to push on through tipton um and then as there's only three sites in there and then we will break for lunch members so without any further ado then Ottery 04 and I have first up a statement from the landowners debbie thank you chair I'll just check I got the right one so this is uh I'll read the statement as well as jeff on behalf of the landowners of what tree 04 I support the officer's

03:00:31Recommendation the primary issue facing the village I would argue is the need to move the school out of the area of flood risk there is a great deal of support to find a site that retains the school in the village and a great deal of opposition to removing the school from the village the landowners have made this land available in previous representations to regulation 18 Local Plan and also in respect of the current and ongoing site assessment process being undertaken by Devon County Council and the school governors. With regard to car access, previous advice from Devon County Council on a previous refusal offered no objection to the access. The site was previously a second choice allocation for housing. Given the ongoing exercise regarding retaining the school in the village the landowners support the proposed identification for a school with some self-built housing if however the school is retained in the village on another site as part of the current process being undertaken by the school governors I would suggest that a cascade mechanism could be replaced in regulation 19 policy where the site is identified as a residential

03:01:49Allocation in short we support the report before committee in respect of this land subject to this proposed slight amendment so that is from neil jillings and that's on behalf of the landowners thank you chair thank you debbie um worth highlighting as the report states were tipton to lose the school it would lose its tier four status and therefore it would not be appropriate for an independent housing allocation so just for members to bear in mind there with that said um Councillor Granger. Oh, he's run away. Okay, Councillor Johns. I would support the landowner and the officer's report with reference to an allocation for the school and for five self-built dwellings on this site. Tipton needs a school in Tipton. A relocated school to Ottery, for any other name, is a new school for Ottery, regardless of whether it's relocated.

03:02:53I strongly advocate for this school to be built on this site in Tipton with the five self-built dwellings.

03:03:01Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Johns. Councillor Faithfull. This site abuts the main Offrey to Sidmouth Road, which historically was the B3176. This road continues to carry considerable amounts of traffic, with no pedestrian footway along its length. there is very high likelihood that parents will park in the immediate vicinity of the school and likely onto the Sidmouth Road. The development of this site would need to include the closing off of the side lane.

03:03:49I do not consider placing a primary school directly onto such a busy road to be a sound proposal. to the north of the proposed access point is a deep-cutting, severely limiting visibility. While this is the only site put forward by Devon County Council, it is not the only possible site in Tipton. Each of the various sites in Tipton have room for small housing to go alongside. a new school with or without a 30 mile an hour speed limit cars are still likely to travel excessively due to the steep downhill section of the road and the steep uphill section opposite with regard to the proposal for 45 houses the extra houses will only be justified if the school remains in tipton if the school is to be relocated to thorn farm site there is no justification closing off the side lane will mean that disabled access to the site and and also close I feel that this site is excessive for the community like tipton st john thank you Councillor Faithfull um I must say in this instance I'm in complete agreement with the

03:05:30Officer recommendation um that the school should be staying in tipton and it should go on this site with five self-built houses and therefore I'm going to propose from the chair that the site is allocated for the school and five self-built dwellings Councillor Jess bailey thank you um Yes, so obviously I'm the Devon County Councillor, and there are other sites around, but this is the one that's being brought forward, not by Devon County Council, I just want to clarify that as a result of a comment made by Council of Faithful.

03:06:07But I think what is really important is that we scrap any reference to 45 houses, because I'm concerned that potentially that may lead to the owner preferring 45 houses. And I think, given that there's no other sites in this process that are identified at this stage, if the school doesn't go there, then it will, as you say, lose its Tier 4 status. So, can I ask that any reference to those 45,000 is removed? Thank you.

03:06:36Yeah, I would clarify my proposal does not have a fallback position in it. Councillor Jung, I saw your hand first, and then Councillors Bethany Collins and Fernie. um the recommendation says the site should be considered for a school I would like to take out the should be considered and put the site that should now should be for a school not just a consideration making more just just just to be absolutely clear I'm proposing that this site is allocated for a school and for five self-built dwellings not for anything else that is the policy allocation I'm proposing Councillor Firmly no okay nothing to add any further comments from members no okay in which case the proposal is to allocate the site for school and five self-built dwellings from the chair all those members in favor please that is unanimous and perhaps we could uh give Devon County Council a nudge that they've now got a site allocated so they could get on with building that school um with that said uh site autry 06 Councillor Granger has run away so

03:08:00Councillor Johns okay Councillor Johns for the benefit of the tape agrees with officers recommendation on both of these Councillor Faithfull although this site is technically within the East Devon national landscape the boundary is the road side that road boundary of is the road the site is set on I do not feel that the impact that that would have it will be created by having a small development on this scale would have any real harm to the to that landscape as the site can only be used for roadside section I would expect any development to be an extension of the houses that come cross Thank you Councillor Faithfull do any members wish to speak no okay in which case I'll propose from the chair that we move on from Autry 06 all those members in favour please that's unanimous which brings us to the last site for I can't really call it this morning session anymore but Autry 22, Councillor Faithfull.

03:09:27I do not feel that development on the corner will have sufficient impact to make the visual harm unmanageable. Reduced roof height and tree screening can help to reduce the visual impact of this site.

03:09:50Thank you, Councillor Faithfull. Do any members wish to speak? No, in which case I will propose the officer's recommendation from the chair which is to move on from this site all those members in favor please okay that's carried unanimously in which case then we will finish there for the morning session I would say just for members benefit if we don't finish today then by six o'clock then we will adjourn today's meeting and pick it up on the 1st of October which I had told members would wouldn't have a meeting but it looks like we may need it after all so with that then we'll reconvene committee at two o'clock

00:01:57Okay. Good afternoon, members. Or should I just say afternoon, as the case may be. But welcome back. Welcome to those members of the public that have joined us. We are still in the middle of the Ottery paper set under agenda item six. We're just about to start West Hill. So if you've come for the West End site allocations, there may be some time yet.

00:02:23So please do bear with us. But rest assured, we are not going to dawdle through the agenda. With that said, then, we come to West Hill. Do we want to do a little bit of an introduction for the benefit of members of the public? Very brief introduction. Yep. So West Hill, our Woodland village. And you'll see on the screen a quite substantial number of sites that were submitted, rejected in officer recommendations.

00:02:53But you'll see two sites on the northern-ish side of the village that are proposed as allocations for development. Okay, thank you, [member of the public]. And I should have perhaps mentioned this over lunch, but just for the purposes of good order, we're going to take those two proposed site allocations first. So we will start with West 04. and we have registered first from the public, [member of the public].

00:03:26Good afternoon. This is a site with a history of a failed previous application and appeal for two houses. It is obviously impossible to go into any detail in three minutes as to why this site should not be allocated, so I shall just briefly touch upon access and density. A note of photos provided in today's documents depicting an unobstructed view of a gate leading to a green field.

00:04:02This is not the reality of the situation. Perhaps the photos I have supplied on the planning portal can be shown on the overhead projector, as these give a more realistic picture. Windmill Lane is a narrow, restricted road with a blind bend which must be approached with caution due to parked vehicles. highways state windmill lane due to its geometry creates a lower speed environment this leads me to assume that in effect what highways are saying is that windmill lane is an unsafe road which requires navigation with extreme caution but then in turn they're asking you to conclude that this in turn makes it safe for road users this is an absurd assumption and the increased traffic on the lane will be an excellent waiting to happen especially when manufacturing those who have no prior knowledge of it, such as courier drivers, under pressure to meet delivery targets. Who will pick up the pieces after the event? There are always parked vehicles on the lane, including the blind corner, partly due to various properties only having off-street parking for one vehicle. This lane clearly is not appropriate as an access point

00:05:06For a 36-property housing estate, and all local residents are astonished it is even being considered. In the original assessment, it stated this site would have a maximum yield of 25 dwellings. I would stress the word maximum, which is unequivocal. That was a starting point from which residents assumed they could consider the matter in the hope of reducing that number. The residents were perplexed by this and looking at the density in comparison to Windmill Lane.

00:05:33A formal application was submitted by the developer for 36 properties, who I assume thought they could totally disregard that initial assessment. There's a diagram in today's summary showing the empty field and surrounding properties on Windmill Lane. Perhaps again on the overhead projector we could be shown a diagram depicting the density of the estate proposed alongside the existing density. In a previous meeting today this committee asked or was asked how the initial assessment of the number of dwellings was provided for each site. The reply was it was generated by an agreed formula as part of the housing and economic land availability assessment methodology. Can we please have an explanation of that formula as well as the specific calculation for this site at the moment we have an increase from a maximum of 25 dwellings to 36 which is a 46% increase another resident has said to me what is the point it's all made up as they go along so this is obviously giving out a very poor signal to the residents I hope this committee will not endorse

00:06:36The higher figure as that will leave the residents with their hands tied behind their back at any subsequent planning committee herein. Any agreement to 36 properties would lead to a development which is totally out of character to its surroundings, which in this case would be the lane being used to give access. The maximum figure has already been assessed at 25. Formal planning application was submitted well over a year ago. There have been at least three sets of amendments and over 200 documents to date. This suggests this site is not as straightforward as the brief summary prepared for this meeting with some eyes.

00:07:09I would ask this committee not to include this site in the Local Plan and certainly not endorse the figure of 36. Perhaps all decisions should be left to a formal planning committee when hopefully more time can be given to what is a very important decision affecting the existing residents of Windmill Lane and the whole Westhill community. After all surely we're almost at that point where the formal planning application was lodged in June 2023. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry the microphone please somebody thank you we come then to um is katherine knee from collier planning thank you chair I'm katherine near collier planning I'm speaking on behalf of strong strong vault homes who control this land strong vault supports the officer recommendation proposing the site to be allocated for residential development site is available for development it is within a sustainable location adjacent to the settlement boundary of west hill It is of a size that means it could be developed quickly by an SME developer and would be capable of forming part of the Council's five-year housing and land supply.

00:08:22The site is currently subject to an application for 34 dwellings, including affordable housing. The application was submitted following positive pre-application discussions with the Council's Development Control Officers, who concluded that the site would represent sustainable development and would deliver much-needed housing. The site selection report identifies there is an opportunity to improve connectivity for the site by the provision of a pedestrian and cycle link into the site to the east, which is also proposed to be allocated.

00:08:51Strongvots are committed to the provision of this link and are working closely with the applicants of the adjoining site to provide this. This link can be secured by a planning condition and or a requirement of the allocation. Devon County Council have confirmed that there is capacity for the development in the local primary school and financial contributions have been sought and will be made towards secondary provision The site selection report identifies that the north east edge of the site falls within a protective view in the West Hill neighbourhood plan This actually amounts to a very small part of the site which is proposed to be within area of tree planting in the application layout The landscape impact has been assessed as part of the planning application and concludes that the site is visually well contained by existing vegetation and buildings.

00:09:40Nonetheless, the proposals include new planting around the site boundaries to enhance existing vegetation and incorporate the development into the landscape. All other technical considerations have been agreed with the relevant statutory bodies, including highways and access, ecology and flood risks. Southwest Water have confirmed that there is capacity in the existing network for the supply of water and for surface water runoff to be accommodated within the public sewer.

00:10:09Modelling work is on going to determine whether the foul sewer requires upgrading and a condition would prevent development being occupied prior to adequate provision being in place. Development of the site will also help to resolve a localised surface water flooding issue. The technical work undertaken in support of the application has informed the detailed proposals for the site, including the site's density. It has demonstrated that the site is suitable for residential development of a scale in accordance with the proposed allocation.

00:10:40The matters raised in the site selection report, including connectivity, landscape and education, have been addressed. We therefore request your support for the Office's recommendation for the site to be allocated. Thank you.

00:10:53Thank you, [member of the public]. and for members worth bearing in mind that many of the issues you've just heard about are a matter for planning committee and not for today. We're concerned with the principle of the allocation even though the application itself might be illustrative in some respects for that. We come then to Councillor Francis Pullman from West Hill Parish Council.

00:11:24Thank you Chair. This site, West 04 is outside the current built up area boundary. And whilst it's appreciated, there's a need for housing, a need for more housing. I think it's poor planning simply to squeeze more and more houses without the necessary supporting infrastructure into what's already an overcrowded area. In West Hill, the infrastructure is very limited. We have one convenience store, which itself potentially is under threat of development, which includes a very necessary and much-used post office counter.

00:11:59We have an oversubscribed primary school. We've got a garage, which is essentially a repair shop, doesn't sell fuel. And we have the British Legion Club. There's a dentist, which is oversubscribed, is not taking new patients. For any other services, for shopping, for medical infrastructure, etc., the West Hill residents have to share the facilities of Autry St Mary or go further afield to Honiton, Sidmouth or Exeter. Living in West Hill means being reliant on a car, with all of the environmental downside that that brings.

00:12:33On this particular site, the walk to the school, local school, is a long walk, and it's down roads, narrow roads, with no pavements. The bus service into Autry and Exeter runs on an hourly basis, but it's only really accessible to residents in the northern part of the village. It's not accessible to most of the village. Given the fact that cars are really essential to people who live in the area, the access onto this site along Windmill Lane is totally inadequate.

00:13:07It's narrow and of necessity. It has cars parked on the road. Adding another 36 dwellings with one or maybe two cars per dwelling will create congestion, significant inconvenience to residents, and it will also mean a great deal more traffic trying to join the B3180 at peak times which will also contribute to congestions. A key concern that we have is that many of the residents of Windmill Lane are already suffering from local flooding caused by surface water runoff.

00:13:39This is from what's currently a porous green field. When that area is built over with non-porous surfaces there's a considerable risk of worsening that surface flooding problem. and the developers must have robust plans to manage this problem. We mustn't allow it simply to worsen the existing problem for the current residents. West Hill Parish Council objects to this site allocation as it makes the village unsustainable by increasing use of cars, it creates road congestion, it puts further demands on the limited infrastructure of West Hill, it potentially worsens the surface flooding problems that are already being experienced by residents of Windmill Lane and it will also put more pressure on the sewage disposal system which we know is already shockingly inadequate. Thank you. Thank you Councillor Pullman. Could you turn the microphone off please? Thank you. Councillor Jess Bailey. Thank you. I think that West Hill is being allocated too many houses I think it is inconsistent with the spatial strategy so there's looking at this there's 66 houses West Hill has been classified as a tier four settlement so as a tier four

00:15:05Settlement there should be limited development to meet local needs and in other villages reports There's reference to, you know, being too much, too many sites being allocated, which is inconsistent with the spatial strategy. But that hasn't, same principle, hasn't been applied to West Hill. And I really do actually think that West Hill is not a tier four settlement. I know we discussed that. But if you look at it, and I know that the response has been that it's a more nuanced approach, that if it doesn't have 7 out of 10 local facilities, then it can still be a Tier 4 settlement.

00:15:45But when you look back at the report from July 21, it does need to have 7 out of 10 local facilities. And the only exceptions that were made were West Clyst and Exton. So I really don't think that it is a Tier 4 settlement. I really do think that 66 houses is too many. There's no playing field. King's School is full. And also, the nature of West Hill means that, well, we've already had quite a lot of development, and the nature of West Hill means that we have a lot of windfalls.

00:16:17So, on top of whatever's being allocated, undoubtedly, there'll be additional windfalls more than in other places. And I suspect that West Hill has more windfalls than anywhere else, probably, in East Devon. So, I'm opposed to this allocation for 36 houses. The road is completely inappropriate. It's not a sustainable location, and I won't be supporting the allocation. Thank you.

00:16:45Thank you, Councillor Jess Bailey. Members, Councillor Blakey. I'm going to take the opposite view, I'm afraid. I support the proposal from the officers on this. it looks to me like a completely adequate place to to develop the proposed development if we take the planning application particularly which is 34 dwellings that's just under 16 per hectare which is hardly dense it's it's quite well spread and I think provided that when the planning committee come to have a look at the detail that items such as surface water flooding and so on are addressed I'm sure they will be and it seems to me to be eminently suitable so I would like to propose it as written in the report okay thank you Councillor Blake is that seconding Councillor Harrow I yes I will second um but at the same time I also need to ask this three minute question obviously has been raised the allocation of 36 we all know it's the standard method but just to clarify the density in this site if it's approved would have to be a full

00:18:05Planning application and are using the statistical you know of approximately 36 houses is meaningless to that planning application is mr. Freeman could that be a fair assessment or not yes through chair that's correct I mean we can we state a number in the plan um but if an applicant wants to apply for more or less than that we have to consider that application on its on its merits um if matt could switch to hdmi2 I can show you the layout plan of the application that's before us at the moment I'm not sure how clear that is so that is the 34 I mean I agree it's higher density than the surrounding area but west hill is very low density and I think we've said at previous meetings about trying to make efficient use of sites that are allocating through this plan I don't see that a higher density here is going to harm the wider character of the area so it's quite self-contained and well screened in this case this plan is showing 34 but I think you could easily get a further two on there by increasing

00:19:17The number of semi-detached units or reducing some of the car parking I noticed a lot of the units have got a double garage and four parking spaces in front of them so there is space there too from moderate increase in density to 36 I would suggest okay thank you mr Freeman uh so we have a proposal validly made and seconded do any other members wish to speak Councillor Fernley thank you um so we are looking there we've got the other site with that 18 next door to it do Do we want to consider them together, or are they already being considered together?

00:19:59So I think I'd be right in saying the policy allocation would be written to group the two sites together, and I think I'm right in saying when this came to planning committee some time ago, provision was made there for a pedestrian link between the two? Looking at people who I'm assured, yes, but Mr Freeman might have more insight. Not really, but I think there is something there in considering the two together because I think if you link the two by a pedestrian link, it does create a better pedestrian link to the services and facilities at the heart of the village than you would otherwise from this site.

00:20:39OK, thank you, Mr Freeman. Do any other members wish to speak? No, OK, in which case then the proposal from Councillor Blakey, seconded by Councillor Howe, is to allocate site West 04 Four. All those members in favour, please. Account 11. Yep. Yep. Okay. Those against? One. And those abstaining? None. Okay. The proposal is carried then. And we will do the next site, proposed for allocation next door, West 18.

00:21:23Next. And we have [member of the public] from Blue Cedar Homes. Thank you chair. Blue Cedar Homes support the selection report relating to this site which allocates the site for development. Your officers have carefully assessed the ability of West Hill to accommodate some additional development as well as the suitability of each site.

00:21:50This site is a logical one with development on three sides and is available now there is a current outline planning application on the site with a committee resolution to grant consent from october last year and an agreed section 106 agreement which is ready to sign the site is not protected in landscape terms and there are no technical objections including from highways or drainage and indeed southwest water therefore this site is truly available suitable in all respects and deliverable now it can come forward in the early part of the Local Plan I hope you can endorse the suggested site allocation thank you thank you mr tofts uh Councillor Pullman Thank you, Chair. I'm fully aware and appreciate that this site has been recommended for planning approval subject to certain conditions and a Section 106 agreement, despite the fact that this site is outside the current built-up area boundary.

00:23:09In my comments about the previous site, West 04, I expressed concerns shared by a number of residents and by the council that squeezing more and more houses into the village puts further demands on the stretched infrastructure of the village. It will result in an increase in car journeys, which is contrary to everyone's aspiration to reduce car dependency. The nearest bus stop for this site is on Bendurak Road, which is quite a hike from this area, along unlit roads with no pavement.

00:23:41The walk to the school from this site is also along difficult roads with limited lighting. Given the residents will be reliant on cars, the road access to this site is difficult through narrow winding roads, and an increase in road traffic is going to cause congestion at the double roundabout on West Hill Road. And given that there are no employment opportunities in West Hill, it does mean that new residents will probably be commuting to Exeter or Honiton, thus increasing road usage within the village and also at the junction between West Hill Road and the B3180, which residents frequently complain about as this junction is being very difficult and quite dangerous.

00:24:22Increasing the volume of traffic here is a risk. the residents adjacent to this area have expressed concerns about the flooding due to surface water runoff from the site and from underground springs and over several years residents have been contacting Blue Cedar Homes the parish council and the district council trying to resolve this problem of surface water flooding and these existing problems are going to be exacerbated. Perry's Gardens and Eastfield Gardens suffer from it at the moment and further development resulting in replacing greenfield porous land with non-porous hard surfaces is going to aggravate this situation.

00:25:03There has to be a more robust system to deal with drainage if this development is to go ahead. In a similar vein, southwest water has a pretty shocking record of raw sewage discharge into rivers and the sea resulting in people being advised not to swim in Exmouth earlier this year. And if we keep putting more and more houses into little areas without ensuring that the basic infrastructure is actually available to deal with it, then we're going to make the problem worse.

00:25:33Simply claiming this is someone else's problems, not good enough. We all know the problem exists and we need to resolve it. So the parish council does not agree with the allocation of this site for further development.

00:25:48Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Pullman. coming into committee then Councillor Jess bailey um I my comments really are um follow on from Councillor Portman and the comments I made uh in relation to the previous site um west hill's being incorrectly treated as a tier four settlement um and it shouldn't be I don't believe it is sustainable I believe it will generate a significant amount of car use I know that the planning committee has already resolved to grant approval subject to section 106 but I still have concerns about it. I think it will have a detrimental impact and I don't believe that East Devon is complying with its spatial strategy because actually Westhill is getting nearly 10% growth which is more than many other places including some of the settlements higher up. So I think there's going to be a danger that when we get to um examination of our plan may there may be issues with our plan because we've got a spatial strategy but we are not actually complying with it and this is a classic example in west hill where it's disproportionate it's not meeting local needs

00:26:57It's going beyond that thank you thank you Councillor Bailey Councillor How and then Councillor Jung yeah I'm happy to propose this and I can remember the discussion when we approve this at planning committee and it is exactly that we do need to put these two sites together because we could only ask for the footpath to go to the edge of the boundary on this site and to make it work it needs to go completely from northwest on site 04 to southeast corner on west 18 what we're looking at now to make a sensible link makes the bus service sustainable and easily to get to from both sites and also the routes of schools and everything else to work so I do ask that officers take that into into account and make sure we get a footpath through both sites linking them so we get that lovely connection um other than that I'm afraid you know all the other things are no different from any other site um and I see no difference in that respect so happy to recommend officers approval

00:28:02Thank you Councillor How I'll look for a seconder Councillor Jung yes I I will second that and uh just to um to comment on the sewage issue that was brought up by one of the speakers um I would hope that gramping orders would be attached to any site that has uh got a problem with sewage thank you but that would be other time of the planning application okay thank you Councillor Jung do any other members wish to speak on this site no okay in which case then the proposal from Councillor Howe seconded by Councillor Jung is to allocate site west 18 those members in favour please 11 okay those members against one and those members abstaining okay that allocation is carried forward then okay reverting slightly back to the original running order we'll come now to site west o one and I have Councillor Pullman to speak Thank you, Chair. I recognise that this committee's got a huge task in front of it at the moment, and I do not propose to make the problems worse by responding to every one of the site allocations being proposed that have been rejected by the planners.

00:29:45We agree with the views of the planners on these sites, so I won't be speaking on any of the others, apart from West 20, when that comes up. However, as you quite rightly kept me to my three minutes earlier on today, I would just like to raise one issue where, as West Hill Parish Council, we're slightly concerned that sites GHED23 and 24 seem to have vanished. They're actually within the West Hill Parish boundary.

00:30:17They weren't recommended for allocation previously, but suddenly they've disappeared off the radar screen. so we just wonder what's happened to them we're particularly concerned because in one area of the quarry a great deal of activity has been taking place very recently and some very expensive looking work is being done so we just want to find out what's happening on that score but that's it yeah okay um I'm aware of this as an ongoing issue ghed 23 and 24 my understanding is don't appear in any of the papers because they were sifted out um in as much as they were considered so unacceptable in planning terms that they're not even worth committee considering have I got that right mr Freeman uh yes basically there was so I think these were the sites out on the western side of australia st mary which was so far out of the town they didn't meet the criteria in terms of sites or the eastern side of West Hill yes so yes so they're not included in the papers they were included in the working group papers

00:31:21Which I think is what's caused some confusion just to show what had been sifted out but we decided not to include them in the papers for the committee to avoid confusion and in so doing seemed to cause some confusion I think but we We are, of course, aware of the works taking place there and that has all been investigated by enforcement officers taking appropriate action. Councillor Jess Bailey.

00:31:46Can I just ask then that when the next version of the plan is published that they're shown as sifted out because there's an inconsistency with some sites that are sifted out being shown in various reports in blue, but those ones just disappearing. And I think particularly with the works, the very extensive works that have been going on for months which I've been reporting, I think we just need that reassurance that they definitely have been sifted out.

00:32:11So if that could be shown in the next iteration of the Local Plan, that would be appreciated. We can certainly take that away. I think the appearance of some of the blue sites in some of the maps is accidental, not deliberate, Mr Freeman. Yes, the intention wasn't to include the blue sifted out sites, but it snuck into some of the reports by accident. We wouldn't show sifted out sites in the Reg 19 version of the plan.

00:32:37Obviously, we'll only be showing sites that are actually to be allocated in the plan itself. But there's no reason why in covering reports we couldn't potentially show the sifted out sites if that's members' wish. OK, thank you, Mr Freeman. Coming back to West 01 then, did any members have any comments to make on this one? No, in which case I'll propose from the chair that we move on from West 01.

00:33:02All those members in favour please that's unanimous okay we're now going to take West 20 the other site that Councillor Pullman wished to speak regarding so Councillor Pullman your three minutes. Thank you Chair we are concerned about this particular site it lies quite a long way outside the built up area boundary very rural and very remote from the centre of the village Access between the site and the village is very, very poor.

00:33:48It's via a very steep, narrow, unlit road with no pavements. And when I say it's steep, it really is a very, very steep hill. It would take an Olympic cyclist to be able to ride up it, and you need to make sure your brakes on your bicycle are very good to come back down. also the road does go through quite a sort of dark dense wooded area and if there was any prospect if anyone thought that children could ride from this site to go to school I would not allow a child of mine to do that it's just in my view too dangerous the site contains a lot of mature trees covered by TPOs and really it is totally unacceptable in terms of development it has had quite a long history of applications and appeals all previous planning applications have been approved including recently a pip application so I would just like to reinforce the the fact that as a parish council we totally and utterly um reject this this one we think it's totally unreasonable to try and develop this area thank you thank you Councillor Pullman

00:35:02And just to emphatically respond to that I will propose from the chair that we move on from this site without any further ado do any members wish to speak no okay in which case you have the proposal to move on all those members in favor please that's unanimous okay the remainder of the West Hill sites are all not proposed for allocation and there are no public speakers registered so in view of time um members does anybody wish to speak on any of the rest of the west hill sites Councillor Hayward very quickly it's just a question so again I'm very mindful of Councillor Bailey's points about west hill and and the pressure it's under but we've just looked at four and 18 combined and had representations from the resident about the access from windmill line so could the officer just explain to me why two and three have been specifically disregarded when effectively that would if you viewed all of them as a master plan I'm not advocating them at this point but just explain why given that they allow access from a good road

00:36:25Primary road and it can do away with the need to go down Windmill Lane from Ben Barrack sorry Ben Barrack Road why they've been specifically disregarded so I mean I think I'd start by saying I think we feel that Windmill Lane is an appropriate roads further development despite what the public speaker has said it is a reasonable width and has a footway down certainly most of its its length and I think the highway authority agree with that I think the reasons for rejecting those two sites primarily in terms of two I think it is it talks about scale of growth in this location and fundamentally that the two sites you've now agreed to allocate are the better sites more centrally located closer to services and facilities with better opportunities to link through to them I think beyond that it comes down to sort of the scale of growth and development you'd be looking to put up west hill in terms of two I think scrolling through to four it does talk about difficulties in terms of highways access as well I think that's a different access

00:37:46Point isn't it this is three rather so officers have suggested and we move forward with 66 so just covering it because from you know looking from the outside that's you know it's a route in and the land doesn't seem particularly worse than what we've just allocated but thank you for your clarity thank you chair I'm happy to go along with you okay thank you council I would thank mr Freeman um in that case then I will propose from the chair that we move on from and bear with me sites uh west two three seven eight nine fourteen fifteen sixteen and nineteen so all of the rest of the west hill sites that we have not already considered um we do we do have to vote on each of them in turn. So members, get your arms warmed up. Starting then with West 02, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. West 03, the proposal is to move on. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. West 07, the proposal is to move on. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. Where have we got to? West 07 or

00:39:218? 8. West 08, the proposal is to move on. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. West 09, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. West 14, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. I should get a recording of this really, shouldn't I? West 15, the proposal is to move on. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. West 16, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. And West 19, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. Excellent. Thank you very much, members. That brings us then um to the end of the west hill sites and we move to agenda item 6d pay henbury and we have first up site um I'm not going to try and pronounce the h site pay 01 uh Councillor Jefferies we have registered to speak afternoon chair um may I all uh from the scheduling I

00:40:45You only want to speak on sites 3a that's fine I may ask that my parish council representative and others speak before me on that that's fine thank you okay so in that case then we have nobody registered to speak for sites pay 01 or pay 02 do any members of committee wish to speak on either of those sites no in which case I will propose from the chair that we move on from sites pay 01 and pay 02 so now some more voting for you members the proposal is to move on from site pay 01 those members in favor please that's unanimous and the same again for pay 02 the proposal is to move on that is unanimous okay we then move to site pay 03 which is for members Just a note, split in terms of its recommendation, where 3A is recommended for allocation, 3B is not.

00:41:46And we have an objector to 3A, Viv Game. The site context and constraints do not support allocation. Not my words, but from a 2022 East Devon District Council assessment of this site. In two years, nothing has changed except demands on the village infrastructure. The local sewage treatment plant is overwhelmed on more than half the days of the year and the single-track road to Pei-Hembury has become more and more clogged as the size and number of vehicles increase.

00:42:33This proposed allocation lies outside the local neighbourhood plan area. The number of houses proposed on 3A is 15, but everyone knows that once a developer has provided access and services, it will not stop there. We're told that the whole of Site 3 could accommodate up to 70 houses. Pay Henry could not sustain that. Ours is a village in balance and what would upset that balance is a development on a greenfield site, known in the area for its abundance of flora and fauna, where there is already a significant housing development on Payhembury site 01, despite it being rejected as an allocated site previously.

00:43:26In fact they're already building nine houses on that site so returning to 03A itself it's a greenfield site plenty of mature trees some over 100 years old two ponds rich in biodiversity it also contains a runoff network from a septic tank and Japanese knotweed which would somewhat hinder a house sale. Under the Environment Act of 2021, East Devon District Council is seeking a biodiversity net gain of 10% from any development. That's a measure that came into force in February of this year. 22 species of birds, 9 species of bats and deer have all been recorded on this greenfield site. Included amongst the bats are two that are at risk of extinction, the barbastel and serotene, which use the mature trees for roosting. Bat flight runs would be disrupted.

00:44:32The ancient ponds contain a plethora of aquatic life. So East Devon mandates that this development must not only retain the current level of biodiversity but increase it by an additional 10 percent. It's difficult to see how this development could possibly comply with that requirement as it rips into an interconnected ecosystem. The additional strain caused by housing and hard standing with the resulting runoff additional surge and vehicular traffic and the impact on local aquifers and the river catchment One has to agree with the East End District Council.

00:45:12The site context and constraints do not support allocation. Thank you, [member of the public]. We then have Councillor Cox from Henry Parish Council.

00:45:29Thank you. Increase of 15 is a 12% increase in the size of the village. The present 134 were dwelling in this. We recognise a steady increase is healthy. We were having nine built at the moment on Pahembury 1. We also had the highest rate of Q-class conversions of any parish in Devon. The infrastructure is hopeless. Our present sewage works are coping. They discharged for 1,708 hours last year.

00:46:04A recent upgrade was planned, and they got as far as putting the portaloos in before it was cancelled. I'd like to read a statement from Penny Hammett, our headmistress. We're currently full, 104 children. We have a waiting list for particular year groups. We have nine new homes being built next to the school, and we will struggle to accommodate any new families. We're predominantly a Victorian building which has no capacity to grow.

00:46:34Our classroom size is limited, and we don't own a hall. Our facilities and amenities would not cope with any significant growth within the village. We belong to Ottery Learning Community, which is made up of five primary schools feeding into kings in Ottery. All the schools are at capacity and wouldn't be able to take any children from Pehembry that couldn't get in. The GPs and dentists are up to capacity and struggling.

00:47:00Transport. Pehembry is now effectively a commuter village for Pehembry. Access is by single track lanes into the village from all directions and there is increased developments in Fenerton. There is no public transport with three buses a week. It's two miles to Fenerton station, down narrow twisty lanes with no footpath or cycle waves. The access to the site would have to come from the main lane into Pehembury and it's on a bend and a hill.

00:47:32There's no possibility of access to the north from Marcus Park or hillside. All facilities would have to come up that lane. A very large splay would have to be created to allow safe access, which would involve a destructive considerable length of dead and banked mature oaks. As you enter into Pei Hembury from the south, the development would have a high visual impact as it goes up the side of the hill.

00:48:00As stated, this was not recommended in 2002, and nothing has changed. Our major worry that if 15 houses were put in with access, it would be a very small step before there were 70-plus houses.

00:48:17Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Cox. And Councillor Jefferies, next. Just to say, Councillor Cox has just said that very well. So to save repeating all of that, I think a lot of what he's just said is thoroughly reasonable. The access to Payhambury down single-track lanes means that all traffic will be funneled through those, and there are increasing stresses on that from other developments in the area. I just wanted to highlight a couple of things in terms of planning.

00:49:03I think it's worth thinking about the Class Q developments that have happened in the area and how they're permitted development. So there isn't any planning for them to happen. They all happen as windfalls. So this area has taken a lot of windfalls in terms of that. And I believe that doesn't have an element for affordable housing. So we've got a slightly skewed situation out in the rural areas where these class queues are going through, but there isn't the same level of affordable housing being delivered at the same time.

00:49:36And on the infrastructure of sewage, I believe Payhembury may be one of the worst in East Devon if not I'm not sure sure sure if you can confirm that is it what it's it's the top of the tree isn't it I believe it is the worst in East Devon yes which isn't an accolade you want and just to also stress being a smaller rural settlement one gets the feeling that when infrastructure does follow developments even if that does happen that we may well be at the bottom of the pile for that sort of thing and this summer has highlighted that with works starting for something that obviously needs to be done years ago and then being cancelled at the last minute for higher priorities.

00:50:21If there's any explanation of, I think it ties in with Ottery and the Ottery schools, I just wanted to also highlight not only is there not school places available for the children in the village and a very low likelihood of that site being able to accommodate them even if they did get the funding to increase that but note that the other feeder schools for the king's school the primary is there haven't got space either so I'd like to see that looked at before we could possibly think of increasing houses here thank you okay thank you Councillor Jefferies um mr Freeman is there anything you wish to comment on there you can say no okay uh in which case then we come into committee Councillor Hayward thank you chair I'm going to propose that we move on from this site I don't think it's appropriate the points that have been made um by speakers are very valid um I struggle to see and I appreciate there is a methodology and a hierarchy uh but when we've considered villages such as sort of you know charlestock and

00:51:38Hall church and others for me pay henbury is just so small it barely I can't conceivably see how it gets into tier four appreciate there's there's this methodology but I think with the development they're having I think another 15 is just it's just a bridge too far for pay henbury so I'm happy to propose actually I'm not happy I'm reluctantly proposing that we move on for this site and we just don't do any more here thank you it just clarifies that move on from a and b yes move on for both okay thank you Councillor Blake is that just second it is yes I think that Councillor Hayward has nailed it it is not appropriate okay do any other members wish to speak mr Freeman wants to say something after all well I think firstly if matt can put hdmi2 on if I just show you the road um so the site is on the right hand side you can see the existing built development that puts the site uh to the right so the road at this point I accept is is is a reasonable width it does narrow

00:52:59Further as you go out of the village I would acknowledge um but I don't think it's any worse than a lot of the roads we've been looking at through this this process um the other thing I'd say I think there's a lot of reference back to the 2022 assessment that was for the site as a whole um and I think the size as a whole you know we would agree isn't acceptable but um we've deliberately split the site and looked at this um a part of the site which more closely joins the the existing built form and we do feel that that can be acceptably accommodated within the village um hear the comments about the sewage works those are not I mean accepting that the pay and research works is is the worst um but there are issues obviously with the surge capacity across the districts that we know about um those obviously need to be addressed before further development comes forward but this is a plan for until 2042 if consent was coming forward ahead of

00:54:01The infrastructure then we would certainly look at a gramping condition that ensures that those homes can't be delivered and occupied until those works have been undertaken to provide the surge capacity so I don't see that that is a reason for not allocating the site it's something that would need to be dealt with through the planning application process as are many of the other issues that were raised about biodiversity net gain etc we would expect all of those things to be adjusted through the detailed design of the scheme but in terms of the principle of development on this site I haven't heard anything that makes me think the assessment is wrong the the other thing I think I'd say um exercising chairs prerogative is we've heard an awful lot today about pavements and safe pedestrian access actually a very very short way further up this road probably within highways curtilage there's a perfectly good pavement which runs then as far as I can see all the way through to services in the centre of the village accepting that you do

00:55:01Have to cross the road a little bit further down with plenty of visibility given how much weight we've put on that in the rest of the day that to me seems significant the other thing the other concern I would have um and I'd be grateful for some insight from mr Freeman on this is um pay henbury is identified as a tier four settlement um and in the in the same vein as the discussion we had about hawk church last week I'd be concerned that if we didn't allocate anything in pay henbury we'd be undermining our own spatial strategy in terms of saying that service villages tier four settlements need to take some admittedly there's a question about scale which is legitimate but but if if we if we don't allocate this site are we creating broader issues for ourselves in that respect um you could argue there's an inconsistency there if we don't make an allocation in uh in pay himbury I don't think we made an allocation in branscombe but I think there was a question as to whether or not that would continue or should continue as a tier

00:56:12For settlement um so yeah I mean I think there's an issue there there's obviously an issue in terms of the wider housing numbers in well it's only small numbers here um we are struggling for numbers more broadly um this would seem to be an opportunity to deliver a small number of homes that would help to sustain the community I think I have Councillor Bethany collins then Councillor How and forgive me I don't know the area completely well but I do believe there is now a footpath in field that goes from coal stocks into payhambra is that right someone can confirm that I know it's quite recent I don't know but just to add to the you know all the talk about footpaths and sort of safe pedestrian access towards sort of walking routes to the school and things like that I think we'll give mr Freeman a minute to check that Councillor How did you want to come in yeah and obviously um the rest of the residents parish council and ward member both raised education

00:57:19Devon County have been quite clear, Hayhembury Primary School has some capacity to support development, but as it is a popular school with out-of-area children, this is likely to cause pushback to other primary schools. So it has capacity for people in area, and that is something we need to be careful about, of saying no to a site that has walking distance, a school that's a really good school because it's popular, but because it's popular it's full.

00:57:46We need to heed Devon County's words very carefully if we're arguing against something for almost no facts behind it. Councillor Jung. Hearing all the various viewpoints, on balance, I think Peh Embry 03A would be suitable for this village. so I I won't be um supporting my colleague on diffusing this thank you Councillor Jung Councillor Jess bailey then Councillor Brown thank you um I personally feel that 15 is too many um given the size of pay henbury and how rural it is um so whilst I wouldn't entirely agree with Councillor Hayward and I wouldn't entirely agree with the 15 I think possibly some but not as many I think that's too many I'm sorry sorry Councillor Jefferies um I'm not uh not coming outside committee um at this point do we have clarification on that footpath I'm not sure how material it is to decision making no I mean I can't be sure from what I can see on aerial photographs and the survey what I would say is as the chair said I think there is an opportunity to

00:59:15Create a safe link to the existing footpath alongside the road and provide pedestrian next route to the village okay thank you Councillor Brown then Councillor Fernley yeah this committee allocated 30 plus hours in Duncansboro that hasn't got a school some of their children are transported over to pay and breed to go to school. So I can't see if there can be any arguments here.

00:59:43Thank you, Councillor Brown. Councillor Fernley. Yes, we've heard lots of arguments for and against. And we keep being asked that we need to be building houses and villages so that the villagers don't die. So here we have a village and we're proposing to build a relatively small amount of housing. so I would be supportive of a development maybe as jeff bailey suggests maybe not quite so many but I definitely think we should allocate this site Councillor Blakey you have already spoken but I'm feeling magnanimous that's very kind thank you chair um having listened to the debate further and the the other explanations that we've had um I'm persuaded so I'm going to withdraw my seconding okay that doesn't happen very often but there you go the power of debate um I will look for another seconder for Councillor Hayward's proposal, Councillor Levine is going to second. Do you wish to speak Yehudi? I think so, I can just say so. Okay, thank you. In which case, I think we will go to a vote on the proposal

01:01:06To move on and see what happens, as that is the substantial motion in front of us. So, the motion from Councillor Hayward, seconded by Councillor Levine, is to move on from, we'll start with 34 A, all those in favor please that's three all those against that's I count nine nine okay and any abstentions no okay so that proposal fails um we'll do 34b and then I'll look for another proposal on 34a so the proposal is to move on from 34b the south half of the site those in favor please sorry did I say 34b I meant 3b Councillor Brian bailey are you voting no okay so that's 11 those against and those abstaining that's one abstention okay so 34b uh we do not move forwards with do we have another proposal for 34a 3a where am I getting 34 from I don't know Councillor Bethany Collins.

01:02:33I propose that we go with the officer's recommendation to allocate 3A. Okay, thank you. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Colin Brown, I saw first. So the proposal is to allocate site 3A. Those members in favour, please. I count eight. Those against? Three. And those abstaining? One. Okay, that proposal is carried. then. That brings us to the end of Pei Hembree. So we move then to Plimtree with a, may I say, packed agenda of public speaking. So we start then with, you've gone, there we go, Plimtree.

01:03:24There we go. Anything you wish to say in introduction, [member of the public], or shall we dive straight in? dive in okay very good uh we start then with site plim 01 and we have up first the landowner or promoter uh mr dan rogers from bell cornwall welcome back mr rogers good to be here thank you jack um I've actually with this uh site I can wrap up both my comments for plimo one and plimo four in the same three minutes um I've been asked to be here on behalf of the landowner who is essentially the owner of plimo one plimo three and plimo four um with regards to parcels o one and o four um we respect the officer recommendation recognize that plimo three um is the more appropriate location uh for allocation and we fully support that um it's just really to make the point that with um plimo one and plimo four they were put forward as their total land holdings and the ownership of the client um but ultimately if required for housing number purposes um then

01:04:33Much smaller parcels of allocation could be made available uh for example with regards to plimo four sorry I digress slightly but for example that southern parcel of land could be uh allocated rather than the whole site to ensure there's no coalescence uh with normans green to the north and the same could apply for Plymouth 1 now ultimately Plymouth Tree is a location I think suitable for an allocation planning inspectors have previously said it's a sustainable location given the facilities that are in the locality including the village primary school the community shop the village hall the pub and the play area and the recreation field and obviously that work is supported by officers in the evidence base which puts Plymouth Tree as a service village therefore yeah reasonable to provide an allocation in Plymouth Tree and Plymouth 1 and Plymouth 4 or any part of those sites are available if members and officers require its allocation thank you thank you [member of the public] Velocot from Plymouth Tree Parish Council have I pronounced that right yes you did perfectly thank you so Councillor Velocot

01:05:45Speaking on behalf of the Plym Tree Parish Council in respect to Plym 01. The Parish Council supports the officer's recommendation not to allocate, but this is based on the size and the scale as well as the basis that the site extends into open countryside and visually does not relate well to the village. I do have more to say on Plym 03, but that's it for now. OK, thank you.

01:06:10Councillor Jefferies, anything to add? No? OK. in which case we come into committee members resounding silence Councillor Jess bailey uh I'm happy with the officer's recommendation is that a proposal yes okay Councillor Davey you seconding I am I'll leave it at that very good thank you uh the proposal from Councillor Jess bailey seconded by Councillor Davey is to move on from site plimo one members all those in favour please. Okay that's unanimous thank you. We come then to site Plym 03 and we have up first an objector [member of the public]. Thank you. Site 03 currently has an application for outline planning permission for up to 30 houses. This application has generated a significant number of objections in the planning portal which include concerns about one road safety the proposed access to this site is on a bend at the bottom of an incline with very close proximity to the school this approach is in part a single lane and vehicles frequently must reverse down the incline to allow the opposing traffic to pass the proposal is for up to 30 new houses many of which

01:07:35Will be substantial detached properties of which we already have good stock in the village. These are likely to have multiple occupancy and high car ownership. The likelihood therefore is that a minimum of 60 additional vehicles will be negotiating this pinch point which will inevitably have an impact on the safety of children, dog walkers, cyclists, horse riders and other vehicles. In addition to this, construction traffic will initially be high volume and large in size and this will further compromise safety in this area. Secondly, flooding. There have been numerous events of flooding around Penspool cottages which are below the proposed development.

01:08:20The proposed attenuation pond may mitigate some of this but could be a safety risk to children particularly as it is sited next to the proposed village green thirdly sewers in 2022 the sewer storm overflow at the green end lane plant spilled 42 times for a total of 422 hours which is equivalent to about 18 days non-stop there is another sewer storm overflow near Pennsport farm which overflowed 18 times for a total of 14 hours in the same year. The sewerage infrastructure clearly struggles to support the existing population so what effect will the development of a large site such as this have? The source of that data was from a BBC news report on the 31st of January 23 in the science and environment environment section. Fourthly sustainability. An application for development in the village in 2014 was rejected as Plym tree was not considered to be sustainable. What has changed? We have minimal public transport, a community shop that is at risk of closure, poor access including a ford that floods regularly in the winter and

01:09:37Limited infrastructure from utility providers. The proposed scale of development for site 03 would add pressure to an already under-resourced village. It is unfortunate that this is being pushed forward without consideration of the developing neighbourhood plan, the output of which will represent the views of the community and the types of housing needed to support young people wishing to stay in Blymntree and elderly residents wishing to downsize. Could I ask you to wrap up please, [member of the public]? Certainly. We must assume that the final decision on site allocation will be made with due diligence and process rather than exploiting an existing application in order to expedite support to the government's new housing quotas. Thank you.

01:10:19Thank you, [member of the public]. I then have a supporter registered. They are rare, but they do happen apparently. [member of the public]. Hi. Pintory is unusual. We've got a good range of facilities where they're underused our school isn't for our village shop every committee meeting we're going we need more volunteers growth will enhance our sustainability rather than overloading it like we've heard on a lot of other applications we we own a few of the sites that are proposed but this one is clearly the one that offers the rest of the village it's got access points for pedestrians on all sides so it links the shop the school the pub the playing fields the village hall very neatly very easily, and it actually enhances road safety because you can walk around the village in a more safe fashion.

01:11:12As it's been a long meeting, I will leave it at that.

01:11:14Thank you. Thank you, [member of the public]. Just to clarify, are you the landowner for this site? Okay.

01:11:22Thank you. In which case I'm going to take that as having been the landowner or developer slot, because otherwise we're being a little bit unfair then, I think, in giving hearing to the owner. so we're going to come then straight to the parish sorry it wasn't clarified with me so I'm sorry I think that's a fair approach I understand we are going to come then to Council of Velocote. Thank you the parish council does not support the officer's recommendation to allocate at the size and scale of the development proposed. As noted in the report, Plymtree is classified as a service village and the draft plan policy provides for limited development to meet local needs. By way of a background, the Council has over the years consulted with the electorate for Plymtree on development, including a town hall meeting relatively recently to discuss planning applications for Site 3. These consultations have consistently shown support for small and sustainable development, primarily through infill to incrementally increase the housing stock and support affordable housing for local families. There are significant

01:12:59Concerns over the suitability and scale of the proposals, especially around the lack of suitable supporting infrastructure, as highlighted in the Parish Council's response to the recent planning application for Site 3. As with other local parishes, access is along single width rural lanes and sewage treatment is already at capacity. Car routes to Clumpton and the M5 would route through the village and highway capacity and safety is an area of concern.

01:13:30Flooding is also an issue and with ice in winter and when flooding occurs many of the local roads become impassable as noted previously there is support for small development and lower density of development would be supported however when viewed in light of the current population of approximately 625 residents 30 homes could lead to an increase of up to 20 percent of the population in summary the parish council does support the need for small and sustainable development but has significant concerns over the suitability and scale of the proposed allocation to site three thank you thank you uh Councillor Jefferies right thank you I'm just probably in a similar format to the last one a lot of these things have been said so I'm not going to uh not going to say them again apart from uh in the last one we looked at uh I mentioned that the road infrastructure into these villages is not great and the illustration I know it was of the actual site access but showed a very quite a suburban looking view whereas if we looked a bit further down the lane the other way

01:14:50You would have seen the reality of the lanes single track lanes in uh in my ward which is that they are very narrow have few passing spaces and also are degrading an alarming rate and to go back to the infrastructure not being fixed especially up in the rural areas us being the bottom of the pile or there it feels I feel I needed to add that to give a sensible representation of what the lanes out in the rural areas are like I agree with the parish council in terms of scale and actually the numbers that were just mentioned the population of 625 is the population of the parish whereas Plyntree itself and I did this by doing a tops up of the houses I could see on the map is under 150 dwellings so when we're looking at a figure of 30 you have 30 new dwellings it's a much bigger percentage increase and will definitely change the character of the village so I come with a proposal that a more appropriate number of buildings for this site would be 15

01:16:04Which will be more in line with the percentage increases we've seen in other allocations in other parishes and or villages and I would be remiss not to mention the sewage but again I have to set similar reservations about whether we're going to ever reach the top of the pile in terms of having our sewage fixed and although the Plymouth Tree doesn't have the top spot like Payhembury it's quite a long way up there in the league tables of number of hours of discharge in East Devon. Thank you very much. Thank you Councillor Jefferies. I'm not sure it's necessarily been mentioned this afternoon yet but just to note that in the event that there are genuine issues with these sewage systems, liberal use of gramping conditions I expect would find support at planning committee. We come into committee then and the first hand I've seen is Councillor Brian Bailey thank you chair it's just if you'd be kind of to follow up on your remark we've just made now if the site has been allocated with grampian conditions do the properties on that site still count in our overall

01:17:16Title total or are they invalidated so the grampian condition would be a planning application stage not at allocation stage um so we we wouldn't it would um potential infrastructural constraints like sewage would factor into when those numbers go into when the housing numbers from a site goes into our overall calculation so that affect our housing trajectory um but it wouldn't have any bearing on on the total numbers they would still count I then had um Councillor Jess bailey then Councillor Hayward thank you um I'm um I do think 30 is too many I mean just looking at the map with the houses that you can see I mean it's a huge proportion of what's there and I think from a cohesion um point of view it just seems excessive to me and I think we have to um build balanced communities um and I know that it's tier four but I feel that 30 is excessive so I'd be much more minded to support around the um the the number that Councillor Jeffrey suggested of 15 I just I couldn't support any more I mean I I think 15 is a lot but um you know

01:18:39And I I know the pressure that we're under but I do definitely feel 30 is too many thank you thank you Councillor Bain and Councillor Hayward thank you chair um the first part is a very brief reflection a comment was made earlier about why sometimes we agree this and then 10 minutes later we agree something else and there's some inconsistence and I suppose it's a reflection from my point that over six strategic planning meetings with thousands of pages of data and and applications or allocations in front of us it's not possible to be entirely consistent because some sites have pavements, some have trees, some have bridges, some have footpaths, and so we just personally, I have to view each one of these essentially with a sense of self and a sense of place for knowing the place in itself, and some parts of East Devon I know better than others.

01:19:37Another comment earlier was, well, you know, why are you even considering this? Well, you know, we have the site owner here. The site owner has decided to stick three green fields into the mix, And what's the appeal of turning a greenfield into something worth 12, 15 million pounds? I don't know. But on this, I entirely agree with Councillor Bailey. 30 for me just feels too much. Essentially, a village the size of Plymouth Tree that has probably grown to that size over a millennia, suddenly to add 20% to it and hope that infrastructure catches up, that if you build it, they will come.

01:20:18I just think it's too much. And I know we've dealt with the bigger settlements and we're now getting into the smaller ones on the periphery. But there reaches a point that I know we've got to find numbers, but just smacking them into villages because this thing, you've got to take your share. Some of them just can't. Some of them I don't think can sustain that level of development.

01:20:41And that's going to be heartbreaking for people who own the fields. but um that's just my personal view check thank you okay thank you Councillor Hatewood so if I can just take I've seen your senior hand Councillor David I'll come to you in a second but if I can just take a straw poll I'm getting the feeling that committee would be happy in principle to see an allocation of this location but is not keen on the number of houses that are proposed here and in reality we're talking about the 30 rather than the 43 because that's what's in the planning application um so just by show of nods if a proposal would come forward with a lower number all chair perhaps you know like we've done with other sites partitioned the site off and said you don't need to go for example plin 3 you know you've got a building line that goes north of that large building in the centre of the picture, effectively, if you went north from there, you cut that site in half.

01:21:49That site could take perhaps 15, maybe 20, 15, and that's more in keeping with what else is there. But you've gone here, we have this issue, the same as we do with lottery, you're going well beyond the established boundary of the village, and you're going into where the one or two detached pockets are on the outskirts. So, for me, it's still a move on, and at the move on stage, the applicant may well come back and say actually okay I'll cut that in half and we'll go for 10 go for 15 we can make a decision on it then I'm going to make a proposal and we'll see whether it flies um just because I've been whispering to ed about how we move on with this one um so I'm going to propose that we ask officers to go away and look at what area we would be allocating on the basis that we allocate 15 houses for this site so I'm saying let's make an allocation here for 15 houses but let's get officers to go away and draw an appropriate

01:22:50Boundary to come to us in the Reg 19 plan so that's my proposal if that makes sense if we're happy with it on my left yes chair happy to take it away I'll allocate 15 and then officers can confirm the the boundary for that allocation at a later date accepting that it'll be some sub part of this site probably towards the eastern end because that's where the access is I would imagine it but if we're happy with that okay are we all clear what that proposal is okay in which case then I'm going to take the speakers I have left which is councillors davie and you Councillor Davey um just on the subject of affordable housing if you have this come forward as smaller applications it could be quite possible if you have 30 houses allocated in the village with absolutely no affordable housing by splitting it into three four applications all of less than ten houses none of which would have any liability for affordable housing I think I'm correct in saying I think we'd

01:24:07Probably see that coming and do something about it. Well absolutely but I'm just making the point if you want affordable housing you've got to allow some housing so if we reduce the number of houses we get fewer affordables out of it as well but that may still be enough for the village to cope with. I just want to say a couple of words about traffic and transport as well because I'm so used to every time an application of any sort is proposed, we hear about the increase in road traffic. And as a proponent of active travel, that saddens me. It's true, but it makes me sad that we have to think that way. On the other hand, we also have to think if every car in East Devon was somehow mysteriously disabled tomorrow, would you be able to cope?

01:25:02You know, could you actually get some fresh milk? Let's assume the delivery lorries are still running because they're electric. But I mean, the answer, obviously, is shared electric cars. So every village has a pool of electric cars, and it's not as far-fetched as it sounds. It is happening in some places where people have got themselves organized to do it. but it does disappoint me that we always have to immediately consider the impact of yet more road traffic and yes I got here by car today I do hope that wasn't a threat Councillor Davey if my car doesn't work tomorrow I know who I'm calling, Councillor You there'll be no clammy meeting that's for sure just to make clear what your proposal is for 15 houses and to move on with the other 15 that we might have to come back to at the latest date? My proposal is for 15 houses and for officers to come up with an appropriate boundary given densities in the village and the rest of the site would be moved on from, yes. Yeah so we

01:26:22Could come back to it. We may well have to, as is the case with all of these sites are we happy yep okay in which case we're going to go to a vote on that proposal all those in favor please that's unanimous okay uh we move then to plym 04 mr rogers do you have anything to add No, we covered it in Plymouth 1. Thank you. OK, thank you. Councillor Vellicote.

01:26:59Plymouth 4, the Parish Council supports the Office's recommendation not to allocate, but this is based on size and scale, not on the basis that the site would join Normans Green to Plymouth Tree, impacting on the separate character and identities of both settlements and the open countryside character. The view of the Parish Council is that Normans Green and Plymouth Tree are a single settlement. the separation is a single small field and we form a single community thank you thank you Councillor Villicott Councillor Jefferies do you have anything to add no okay I've had a Councillor Jung's hand yeah in view what we discussed on the previous one that 15 was enough um I can't see how we can propose uh can go forward with this one so I proposed that we move on. Is that seconding Councillor Fernley?

01:27:48Yeah, okay. Do any other members wish to speak on this site? No? Okay, in which case the proposal from Councillor Jung, seconded by Councillor Fernley, is to move on. All those members in favour, please? That's not, oh no, Colin's hand was up, I just couldn't see it, so it was unanimous. We come then to Plym 05 and I have Councillor Velikert Plym 05 the Parish Council supports the office's recommendation not to allocate but this is based on the size and scale not solely on the basis that the site is a significant greenfield site which contributes to the setting of the adjacent listed manor house and its formal gardens. It is the Parish Council view that the office's basis for rejection is at odds with the office's recommendation to support Plym 03 Thank you Okay, thank you. Councillor Jefferies, anything to add? No? Okay. In which case, I'm going to propose from the chair that we move on from this site. All those members in favour, please.

01:28:55That's unanimous. Which brings us to the end then of Plym Tree. We have been going for an hour and a half. Would members like a short break? yep okay we will reconvene at 1535 okay thank you thank you for your patience members just

01:41:33Resolving some running order queries there we come now to Broad Hembury tier 4 settlement in the spatial strategy and we will dive straight in with I'm not going to try and pronounce BRHE, so we're sorry, Broad Embry 04 and we have, do we have Councillor Bob Nelson with us? No, in which case do we have a statement, Debbie or was that the one that was read out earlier?

01:42:05That was the one at the beginning of the meeting. Okay, so members, if you can cast your minds back to the points made there and we then come to Councillor Jefferies. I'd just like to start with a apology from Bob Nelson to not be able to make it he had a scheduling issue which meant he thought it was going to be in the morning and there was the afternoon so apologies from him for not being here and I know he would have liked to have made it and just wanted to say they are putting a lot of effort into this and sorry Councillor Jefferies I won't be the only one in the room I can't hear a word you're saying I'm sorry I got told off this by the last one I just sort of hang over the microphone bell more like this if there is a button on the podium at the bottom right that that you can use to raise it, just underneath the lip?

01:43:02I believe it's an extent of as high as it gets. Oh, never mind. I'll go for the stoop again. I find myself a slight disadvantage because I thought Councillor Nelson's statement was regarding this one and going to be read out just before that and wasn't here right at the beginning of the meeting. Is it possible to reiterate his points that were made? Debbie, could we have a very brief proceed of the relevant points?

01:43:27Could I just check that that covers, is that covering 04 and 09 as well? Sorry. Chair, if you're happy for me to do a brief on 04 that came through, included comments from Broad-Henbury Parish Council. The site's currently subject to a planning application for which their comments are on record. There are no outstanding substantive issues between EDDC and the applicants and that the site will be approved and outlined shortly this application refers to four affordable homes which will meet the identified needs and our housing needs survey we do not consider it therefore necessary to allocate two sites that was relating to zero four lovely thank you very much for that um all I can say about about site four is yes that that application is there but also to add that that's a rural exception site which is delivering a high well if it comes through will be delivering a high proportion of affordable houses for affordable and to markets right which I believe is pretty good compared with anything else that's available as a mechanism for building affordable houses the so so that would

01:45:04Provide six houses on that site without the need for allocation I think that's all I have to say on so thank you very much thank you Councillor Jefferies um just a quick question from me uh mr Freeman if we were to allocate broad embryo for uh rather than 09 as the parish council have requested um presumably the landowner would be well within their rights to withdraw the application they put in and just bring forward market housing well yes it would change the the balance of considerations on the applications quite markedly currently it's outside of the the settlement boundary and hence it's an exception site and living much higher portion of affordable housing than it would need to if it was within the settlement boundary or allocated so would potentially be quite counterproductive in terms of achieving affordable housing in the settlements the other issue as to why the officer's recommendation is is not to allocate that site and to allocate 09 is the difference between 09 not being in the national landscape and 04 being in the national landscape which poses challenges because obviously as we've

01:46:20Said at a previous meeting we need to be very clear about our justification for allocating sites within a national landscape and be able to demonstrate that the development can't be accommodated outside of the national landscape whereas obviously in this case it can be as our assessment of 09 demonstrates um so I think it's a challenging issue in terms of broad henbury I think in terms of delivery of 04 that's possibly better dealt with through the application process and the question is whether or not members wish to make a further allocation at broad henbury bearing in mind that this is a plan up to 2042 so it's not just what's coming forward immediately it's also what's going to come forward over the next 15 or so years okay thank you mr Freeman we have no other folks registered to speak so we come to committee okay in which case I will propose from the chair that we move on from site 04 for the reasons that are set out in the officer report. All those members in favour, please.

01:47:32That's unanimous. Councillor Jefferies, did you have any comments to add to the officer report on sites 5 and 7? I agree with the officer's report. Those shouldn't be brought forward. Okay, thank you. Members of committee, did anybody wish to speak on either of those sites? Neither are proposed for allocation. No, in which case I'll propose from the chair that we move on from sites Broad-Hembury 5 and Broad-Hembury 7 taking those two in turn members the proposal is to move on from Broad-Hembury 05, those in favour please that's unanimous and the proposal is to move on from Broad-Hembury 7, those in favour please that's unanimous, which brings us then to Broad-Hembury 09, Debbie did Councillor Nelson have any comments specifically on 09 or if we know them already um well it's worth a reminder I guess chair because that was some time ago wasn't it um so again so on brhe09 the parish council is opposed to this site uh our detailed reasons are contained in a letter to you but in summary there are massive heritage

01:48:51Impacts of this site the redrawing of the built-up area boundary simply to include this site is a cynical attempt to legitimise the site and redefine open countryside. The proposed built-up area boundary follows no natural topical... I can't even say that word, Chair, I'll need a cup of coffee. ...feature and conveniently departs from the National Landscape Boundary to include the site, which would then abut the NL Hedge Boundary.

01:49:19Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Debbie, Councillor Jeffreys, any items you wish to add? absolutely yes thank you to follow up the issues that the parish council had with this site there are lots of heritage assets in a relatively close conservation area and so they've got issue with that I'd like to look at it in terms of two different things one being as the gateway to the village as you drive in on the road you can see there to the west of the Site 09 that's the main way that you get into the village and I don't know if it's possible to look at Google street maps just to get an idea of approaching the village but it does form the part where you move from open countryside into a built up area and there is a tree line that extends across there which feels like a natural break on the way in and I don't I think the other the other thing is it does that you are entering the national landscape at this point and it the land does rise away so

01:50:36It changes the aspect of of how you approach the village and again we can't really see from a map but that that field gently rises up towards the village and so those houses will be visible on that site and would affect the character of the village which is a very historic village and hasn't hasn't seen strong development and the second point is it's it's it's a very simple version of this I'm gonna forget my words now search service village this is this the small smallest one out of the three that I've been representing today pay henry and uh and plin tree broad henry is even smaller and I would like to question the number of dwellings and how they're being brought forward but first of all the lane mr Freeman could you take us down the road and into broad henry please so this is coming up to the northeast you see the site there on your right and then this tree line further on just beyond the village hall is the kind of natural

01:51:54Break before you enter the village probably again that is seen from an aerial view on that forms a an area of vegetation which defines inside the village and outside admittedly the village hall is outside of that area but as a village hall it it defines itself as such rather than part of the residential area of the village can we yes so that line of trees and the hedge line there

01:52:47Forming the edge of the edge of the village as it were and uh and the gateway into it um also also noted is this is sort of a gateway to the blackdown hills national landscape as well um and if I could get slightly evocative about it it feels like you are entering a national landscape as you enter this village in terms of its heritage and and the landscape value it has okay thank you council Jeffries I think that's your time unless there's anything good well sorry for sorry to go about about aesthetic issues there will be the if I may very swiftly every very sweet thank you very much in terms of allocation of affordable housing and I'll invoke the same thing as other areas where we get lots of class queues happening the affordable balance is something really important to our rural communities and as we've seen from the other site which has been passed over where a rural exception site has been used to get a good number of affordable houses in I would question whether we should be allocating this site for 10 houses not only on the scale of

01:53:54The village and the fact that it would be increasing a large percentage of new new dwellings to a very small village but also whether we would be achieving what we need for local need which is affordable houses and I would like to see it passed over and given the opportunity for the village to continue with their community land trust and get another site allocated for a rural exception site which would bring forward 60 to 100 affordable houses in an appropriate place thank you thank you Councillor Jefferies I think we're probably all sympathetic to that concern um but I'm not sure we could necessarily do so and be consistent um with the way we've approached other settlements um in the plan given that broad henbury doesn't have I believe anything like a neighborhood plan ready to go um in in terms of regulation 14 consultation or anything similar not not not really the same thing necessarily um appreciate the point um mr Freeman anything to add on on that um well all I was going to say in terms of um scales

01:55:08Of growth is that just worth noting in terms of size of the um the population broad henbury has a this is the parish has populated 732 bed to Plymouth Tree where you've just allocated 15 which has parish population 648 so the total of the two sites at Broad Hembury would be 18 dwellings thank you thank you Councillor Jefferies I think it is it is worth pointing out those are parish figures not village figures and I think if you looked at the satellite view Broad Hembury village itself is probably fair to say a substantial amount smaller than blintry um mr Freeman's giving you sort of wry maybe you're right kind of look but um there we there we go um so coming into uh committee then this site is uh proposed or recommended for allocation by officers do any members wish to comment Councillor Jung I would propose that we accept the officer's recommendation okay straight in there Councillor Blakey Councillor Jung you need to turn your microphone off please I will second that do you wish to add anything further

01:56:31I don't think so do any other members wish to comment on this allocation no okay in which case then the proposal from Councillor Jung seconded by Councillor Blakey is to allocate Broad Hembury 09 those members in favour please I count 11. Those against. And those abstaining. One. OK, that is carried then, which brings us next up to Feniton, another tier four village.

01:57:15I think I'm right in saying yep okay two sites proposed or recommended excuse me for allocation in Feniton we're going to take those two proposed for allocation recommended for allocation sorry first and we'll start so that the Autry members who've been patiently waiting can leave with site Ottery 20. I'll give [member of the public] a moment to scroll rapidly through the entire section. There we go. Ottery 20, landline to the southeastern bridge cottages. And to clear up any confusion, while this has been grouped together with sites at Feniton, because it is also at Feniton, the parish boundary runs along that road at this section. So it is technically in law in Ottery St. Mary Parish even where that may seem a little bit ridiculous and we therefore come to I assume Councillor Granger is still not with us so we come to Councillor Johns.

01:58:19Not sure if you mean Councillor Granger physically or mentally but no he's not with us. Yeah Ottery 20 it does fall within the Ottery boundary I don't know who made these guidelines and where things allocated but that's how we worked out. Ottery, Fenatum 14 is also within lottery, by the way, half of it, just to let you know. I agree with the officers in part with recommendation to this. However, it does state the site or parts of a potential for employment allocation, though the site size is large and a part only may make more credible sense. This is a site where it suggests that further assessment work may be needed.

01:58:57It's very difficult to make an assumption or to actually decide what's best for here because my concern would be that if we did approve this for any reason, it could then come back for housing because it says that it could be mixed. For employment, depending on what the employment is, I don't have an issue with it. But I would go with the author's recommendation for the time being until I get more information, if that's okay.

01:59:22Thank you. Councillor Faithfull. If this site is simply about a change of use for a redundant poultry house, For the use of the footprint it is set on, I do not have any objection beyond the type of employment to be permitted. I would not support a change that included stripping out the orchard and forming a major set of industrial warehouses. Okay, thank you, Councillor Faithfull. worth highlighting to members that this is an employment allocation rather than a housing allocation just for absolute clarity I'm now informed that it could be mixed Mr Freeman do you want to clarify the situation here well I think the assessment focuses on employment it does say in the conclusions I think the concern with it being employment use only is that it's quite a large site for employment purposes and while a small employment site at Fenerton might be beneficial in terms of the sustainability of the settlement provide jobs alongside the housing I think there was concern about the scale of it as in as has been pointed out by a Councillor Vicky Jones I think one

02:00:53Option would be to reduce the size of the site if members are concerned about it as an employment site or you could make it a mixed-use site and there's a mixture of employment and housing sorry that's not not clearer in the report but I think there are opportunities either way depending on the views of the committee okay coming into I'm sorry Councillor John's we're we're in committee members Councillor Jung um can I ask about what the trees are here it's a orchard and looking at the map that the aerial shot it does seem to be a very well planted out orchard and we're therefore talking about cutting down a whole load of trees which I would be concerned about if an officer can explain and what the trees are and if they're is it is it a working orchard or is it a redundant orchard and how many trees are going to be cut down. So my understanding is it's an orchard in fruit production basically so I think the ecology section says there's no designated wildlife sites in close proximity

02:02:14It's liable to have limited on-site wildlife value because it's a fruit orchard basically so yes it would obviously involve the removal of the trees but I don't think the trees are a particular ecological value other than that of course they are trees okay members somebody else is doing it this time I've proposed too many Councillor Blakey go on then um yeah I think taking into account what mr Freeman has said that allocating this one seems sensible and for the potential for mixed use rather than pure employment use so I'm happy with those words in mind to propose it Okay, thank you Councillor Blakey, I'll look for a seconder, Councillor Howe do you wish to speak? I'm quite happy to second this and leave it as it is. Okay, thank you Councillor Howe, do any other members wish to speak? Councillor Fernley Because it's full of trees and they're mature trees, I can't support cutting them down when there's plenty of fields around that don't have things that are that mature purely for carbon capture.

02:03:38Sorry. Okay, thank you, Councillor Fernley. Councillor Bethany Collins. Just wanted to make the brief point that the primary school is already oversubscribed as a capacity for 210 pupils and it's currently got 229. So if it was a mixed-use allocation, I wouldn't be happy to support it. Okay, thank you, Councillor Collins any other members wish to speak okay in which case we have a proposal from Councillor Blakey seconded by Councillor Howe for a mixed use allocation on this site and I'm assuming mr Freeman that the exact mix would come back to us in the regulation 19 draft yes I think that's the further work we'd need to do that's okay okay in which case members uh you have the proposal, can I ask those in favour please? I count six and those against. I count four and those abstaining one. I thought we might have a chair's casting vote situation for the first time there, but no.

02:04:50Okay, in which case we'll come then to the other proposed allocation at Feniton the number for which I can't read off there. um fenio five fenio five very good um and we have mr ross bowen from expedite thank you chairman

02:05:20Um yes good afternoon I'm ross bowen from expedite planning speaking on behalf of the landowner firstly we welcome the officer's report recommending the allocation of the site for residential use. This has been an accumulation of a long process of analysis of options in Penetton and this is the rational choice. It's a large previously developed in full opportunity in the built fabric of the village. The site can provide an important contribution to local housing needs, delivering a range of dwellings and a significant number of affordable homes and help to sustain the Tier 4 settlement.

02:06:03The report confirms that there are no material constraints. It's in a sustainable location. It's accessible to services and it will deliver contributions to help meet the demands for services associated with the extra housing. The site is within single ownership. It's immediately deliverable and will help meet housing needs at the beginning of the planned period. I just briefly wanted to touch on two issues that are raised in the report.

02:06:36Firstly, in relation to employment uses, the site was in last employment use as a small horticultural business, which closed in the 90s, and it's been vacant for two decades. It was marketed for years, eventually went to auction, and we would argue it's entirely reasonable to conclude that this is not a commercially attractive employment site. Also, given the surrounding residential uses, we'd also suggest it may not be a compatible use with residential.

02:07:11The site is subject to a current plan application. This is addressing ecological issues, which is the second point I wanted to raise. We are working closely with the county ecologist and it's evident, whilst there's a number of ecology surveys ongoing that there are no fundamental ecological issues that would hinder development. We therefore respectfully invite members to confirm the recommendation to allocate the site. Thank you. Thank you and we come then to Councillor Myles Butler from Furniton Parish Council. Chairman just to clarify I'm not a Councillor. I'm a member of the public. I've lived in Feniton for as part of 30 years. I sit on the Parish Council's Local Plan working group. I was co-opted specifically for that purpose.

02:08:13The Chairman of the Parish Council can't be with you today, so he's asked me to make a few comments on behalf of the Parish Council. Thank you for that clarification. Well, you'll be pleased to know that the Parish Council, in principle, supports the recommendation to allocate this site for housing in the Local Plan it has opposed the current application for a number of reasons and those need to be dealt with during the planning process you will see looking on the site plan that a large area is shown as green and planted that forms a buffer between the site and the railway line the effect of having that buffer means that the density of development on the rest of the site is very high. So the council is very concerned about that density and what that does to the built fabric within the site. There are two other significant problems. The site is exactly opposite the sewage pumping station for the village. That sewage pumping station has terrible problems currently, which results in southwest water being on site many times a month to

02:09:17Tanker away sewage, and there is a stormwater problem in the location as well. As I say, those are issues that ought to be dealt with through the planning process, as should the lack – you've heard this before, I know a number of other sites – the lack of the continuous footway on what is the major road into the village at this point. So with those three kind of provisos, the Parish Council would cautiously welcome this site as a housing allocation.

02:09:49The Council supports very firmly your definition of Feniton as a Tier 4 settlement. And just to remind you, though you probably don't need it, what your strategy says is that modest development sufficient only to meet local needs is what is appropriate in Feniton. The Parish Council believes that this site will satisfy that. you are if you look at the top map on the two in front of you you will see that there are a great many proposals around Feniton there is a long history of developers trying to develop major housing sites in Feniton the parish council doesn't believe that that is appropriate in this location and certainly would be contrary to the Local Plan strategy that you are developing perhaps Gemini if you give me an opportunity on one of the other sites to talk in a little bit more detail about that I will but the positive point is that the Parish Council sees this as the best site to satisfy that modest development to meet local needs Okay, thank you [member of the public] come then into committee members

02:11:03Thoughts, comments, Councillor Howe? I am happy to propose this as per Officer's recommendation okay thank you Councillor Howe I saw Councillor Levine's hand first sorry folks uh do you wish to speak no okay does anybody else have any comments on this allocation no okay uh in which case we will go to a vote on the proposal by Councillor Howe seconded oh sorry Councillor Hayward I didn't see your hand that's right you were looking down at the time I'll stop you in your Mindful of what the speaker has said, I would find that that level of density is a bit too high for my personal liking.

02:11:46I mean, given the rural nature of Phenet, I appreciate it's quite built out as the map shows, but cramming 42 into that site compared to the density around it seems incongruous. However, the gentleman mentioned this buffer zone, the green area there. And I suppose then if you look at context further along the railway line, they don't have the benefit of that buffer. It would be lovely to have a buffer there, but it's weighing up that.

02:12:19Can we deliver houses that then provide affordable housing, provide some social rent, living without a buffer, or do we reduce the number down and reduce the value to the community for the safety of keeping the buffer there? It's a tricky one. But generally, I mean, I'm happy to support this, but I think at the planning stage, perhaps some tweaking of that might be necessary because that density is quite high if you were to dramatically reduce the area available for development by retaining that green zone.

02:12:51Thanks, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Hayward. I think probably members would find sympathy with that. OK. Attempt number two, then, for the proposal from Councillor Howe, seconded by Councillor Levine, to allocate site FENI 05. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. OK. We are then going to move to the request of [member of the public] on behalf of the Parish Council. we're going to move to G H E D 38 the elephant in the room or the elephant not in the room depending on your perspective [member of the public] thank you chairman if I can make some comments on this site I can save the time of the committee by saying that the the parish council broadly accepts obviously the recommendations in relation to the other sites but I just wanted to remind the committee that, as I say, there is a long history of developers looking at Feniton as a potential place for large-scale housing development. And some of this committee may recall back in 2014, four of these large sites became, well, they were refused planning consent, there was an appeal,

02:14:19And the district council successfully argued at a planning inquiry, what was known as the super inquiry that this was not a sustainable place for development and that was supported by the planning inspector at the time who said that development at the scale proposed without any changes to the infrastructure would damage community cohesion and would not be sustainable. So all but one very small site were thrown out at that planning inquiry.

02:14:52What the parish council would want to point out is that really nothing has changed to increase the sustainability of Feniton since that planning inquiry in 2014 and would obviously argue very strongly that if your plan is to be found sound at the examination in public, then due regard does need to be given to that previous decision. This very large site has caused great anguish in Feniton There was a public meeting to discuss it at which more than 100 people turned out.

02:15:27The school hall was packed and they were queuing out the door. It would put an intolerable strain on the village. You can see it would almost double it in size if anything like that were to be approved. There is a current planning application on a smaller part of the site, FENI 11, on your screen. Again, the Parish Council has opposed that and put in a number of objections to it.

02:15:56The infrastructure problems in Feniton are not going to go away easily. Many of you will know that this is a community that floods on a regular frequency. You've heard about highway infrastructure in many of the other villages. The same applies in Feniton. very narrow country lanes serving it. The school is at capacity. There are a number of major infrastructure issues which I say were examined in 2014 and nothing has changed subsequently. So I would just again draw your attention to the public concern in the village.

02:16:38When you had your initial public consultation on the draft Local Plan you received a petition with more than 500 signatures from the village. So feelings in the village are very strong about the way in which it is being viewed by landowners and developers as a potential place for large-scale housing development. Sorry one moment members just clarifying some procedural matters. Sorry for the momentary pause there members we're just clarifying because you see

02:17:389 and 11 are also up there they're not listed separately in the technical report and so we take all three of these together as one even if we have to vote separately on 9 and 11 site areas we'll consider them all in the round as part of one item if that yes so as if we're talking about an A and B allocation so we just had to deal with that little procedural hiccup there. And in view of the fact that we are considering 9 and 11 at the same time, I have a statement here from Jeremy Gardner of Pegasus Group on behalf of Taylor Wimpey, who control Site 11, which I will just read out for you. Good afternoon, Chair and members. This representation concerns Feniton site Fenney 11 being land east of Colstocks Road, Feniton. Its location is shown on the plan on page 20 of the report. Site Fenney 11 has been promoted for allocation as a standalone site alongside Fenney 09, making a wider site. Members should also be aware that the southern part of the Fenney 11 site

02:18:55Is subject of a current planning application for up to 86 homes, which will also deliver a number of benefits including flood alleviation for this part of the village. It is important that you appreciate the benefits that this scheme can deliver in considering the site for allocation. The report before you assesses Site Feni 11 as being part of a much larger site, GHED 38, for 225 dwellings, both in summary on page 21 and in detail on pages 291 to 295. However, on page 21, the following conclusion is reached. Taken overall, the more southerly parts of GHED 38, especially FENI 09 and more so FENI 11, have the greater suitability for development, with more northerly parts likely to lead to greater overall adverse landscape impacts. On this basis, part of the site, potentially FENI 11, could be seen as a possible option to allocate for development with no obvious overarching constraints. This is precisely how the current planning application, reference 240431MOUT, proposes that the site is developed. The master plan shows housing extending no further north than existing housing adjoining the site to the east

02:20:11At Ackland Park with a landscaped setting. Wrapping around the housing to the north and east are a series of drainage basins designed to intercept and control surface water runoff from the land to the north and northeast of the village. This will reduce flooding along Colstocks Road, which is a main cause of flooding around the station, complementing the council's own flood alleviation scheme, which is reducing flood risk in the eastern parts of the village. The planning application also proposes 50% of the homes as affordable housing, and the scheme will deliver at least 20% biodiversity net gain. The site is immediately available and can be developed in under five years, assisting the housing land supply position. Therefore, members are respectfully asked to consider the allocation of site 211 in the Regulation 19 Local Plan, given that the benefits that the site can deliver in the short term, particularly the flood alleviation measures which will benefit the western part of the village and the provision of 50% affordable housing.

02:21:09So that's a statement from Jeremy Gardner on behalf of Taylor Wimpey. I always thought it's remarkable people say respectfully ask as if they would ever disrespectfully ask but there we go that's the statement there I don't believe we have any more members of the public or otherwise registered to speak on any combination of the three reference numbers that are here so we come to committee and I have councillors Jung then Hayward Thank you Chair I do know this village quite well because of the flooding issues there and we are just about to start on the final leg of I think it's phase 3 or was it phase 4 of the flood alleviation and to suggest any further development in Infiniton at the moment would be a bit unfair in the residents of Fenerton.

02:22:18But as well as that, what we have proposed in Fenerton is appropriate for the community and this very large development would be disproportionate to the amount of housing that is already there. so I would propose to move on on this one, thank you Just for clarity feeling [member of the public] steely gaze upon me from the left, are you proposing that we move on from JGD 38 FENI 09 and FENI 11?

02:22:56Exactly Okay, thank you Councillor Jung I then had Councillor Hayward lined up to speak Ditto, Chair Is that seconding? That is Chair OK, thank you, Councillor Hayward. Do any other members wish to speak on this one? Sorry, these three. Yes, thank you, Councillor Howe. This isn't confusing at all, is it? OK, in which case we will go to a vote. We're going to take 09, then 11, then 38 in that order.

02:23:29So the proposal is to move on from FENI 09. All those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. The proposal is to move on from FENI 11. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. And the proposal then is to move on from the remainder of the area, GHED 38. Those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. OK, that's that nightmare out of the way with then. Next up then, we will do so that Councillor Faithfull can leave, should he so wish. We will take Fenny 14, which is a cross-boundary site. [member of the public], did you want to add anything on behalf of the Parish Council for this one?

02:24:18Chairman, just very briefly, I mean, the Parish Council does support the recommendation that the site is not allocated. This is one of the sites that was considered at that 2014 public inquiry and roundly rejected. I would just urge the committee to do the same again today. Okay, thank you, [member of the public]. Councillor Faithfull.

02:24:48Thank you, Chair. I just really want to say that just as much as Fennetton as so many other places, all this housing, if there's going to have the increase in housing, we need to have increase in other services as well. And Fennetton is not such a wonderful place. It might have a railway some other time, but whenever the train is down or the drivers are on strike, they're out in the sticks.

02:25:16Thank you, Councillor Faithfull. And can I remind members, please, that phones should be muted or switched off.

02:25:22Thank you. Is that because you switched it back on, Councillor Bailey? OK, coming into committee on site FENI 14, then do any members wish to speak on this one? Councillor Hayward, I saw you first. Well, I think we might have been flagging the same thing. Hello, Motul. It's definitely not off, Brian. Hello, Motul. Can I propose we move on, please?

02:25:55Thank you, Councillor Hayward. Councillor Howe? Same. Okay, good. You can tell committee is getting a bit fed up with this now. Very good. So the proposal from Councillor Hayward, seconded by Councillor Howe, is to move on from site Feni 14. All those in favour, please. That's unanimous. the remainder of the Fenerton sites are not proposed for allocation and I have no members of the public registered to speak so unless [member of the public] you wanted to add anything else on any of them on behalf of the parish council no I don't though I do that with a little bit of hesitation because I know that it is within the committee's remit to kind of just start debating some of these sites and including them in I hope I've judged the meeting right and I think that people are prepared to move on on all of these allocations on that basis I'll cease my contribution Thank you Jim Members then, does anybody wish to speak against officers' recommendation on any of the remaining sites in Feniton?

02:27:07No? Okay, there we go [member of the public], you're safe unless I propose them of course but no, that would perhaps seem a little bit harsh so we will go through then I will propose from the chair now that the remaining sites in Feniton are moved on from and if you give me one moment [member of the public] clarify which ones I'm referring to so I will be proposing that we move on from Fenney 01 06 07 08 Yes, FENI 01. No, that was that was Autry 20 that we allocated for mixed use.

02:27:57We didn't start with number one. We started at the end.

02:28:33OK, so I'm proposing from the chair that we move on from sites FENI 01. Bear with us. 06, 07, 08, 10, 13 and 15. Okay, very good. In which case then, members, we'll take each of those in turn. Voting arms ready. The proposal is to move on from FENNY 01. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. The proposal is to move on from FENNY 06. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous. The proposal is to move on from FENNY 07. Those in favour, please. That's unanimous.

02:29:33This must look ridiculous to the public. Those in favour of moving on from FENI 08, please. That's unanimous. Those in favour of moving on from FENI 10, please. That's unanimous. Those in favour of moving on from FENI 13, please. That's unanimous. And those in favour of moving on from FENI 15, please. that's unanimous okay very good uh that brings us to the end of this morning's meeting would members like a short break before we move to broadclist or shall we power on power on okay let's get through uh broadclist village then uh so we are now on agenda item 7a anything by way of Anne, you might want to mute the screen possibly, there we go yes, excellent it might come up as item 8 on the website because the public speakers list have been added but it is item 7A okay, [member of the public] do you want to take us in?

02:30:59Thank you chair so very briefly as with previous sessions we'll be looking at the west end and surrounding areas at this point in the meeting and again just to reiterate the process we followed has gone through a logical assessment of identification of sites leading through to site selection but this site selection very importantly is seen within the context of being a bottom-up component if you like with housing employment requirements housing requirements effectively mandated by government forming one of the top-down components and the spatial strategy, the where, the how much and why develop in certain locations forming another part of the top-down agenda. Perhaps worth saying that the western side of the district has seen a lot of growth in recent years and for various strategic reasons is seen as an appropriate location for comparatively higher level growth going forward.

02:32:00And we start with Broadclist Village and you'll see on the plan before you two areas of land are proposed as allocations okay thank you [member of the public] we are as with Feniton going to take these with sites recommended for allocation first and then we'll go through the remainder so we will start with Broadclist 29 and I have two objections here Firstly, [member of the public]. Okay, that's fine. Firstly, [member of the public], share it.

02:32:45It's been a long day. I'm used to speaking across Rainyfield, so we'll do that. So the first thing I really just wanted to talk about was my experience of living in the village for over 40 years, seeing its growth, seeing its development, and the impact that certain things of infrastructure have had on it as a village. living in on the town end road I have witnessed the flooding increase year on year to a state where last november was the worst that we've ever seen where you're looking at over a foot of water down at the bottom of town in junction and it coming up to our garage and lapping in to a level of speed due to the runoff and due to the increased kind of infrastructure of concrete that is placed onto the water table having on the local residents.

02:33:42So from my point of view, when we're looking at a plan and we're looking at a process, is how are we thinking about the people who already live in the village and the people that are actually, that democratically elect you guys as one of the decision makers and how that's going to impact us. So when you're going to build 90 homes, you're looking at putting a footprint of about 3,600 cubic metres of water displaced out of that location.

02:34:07Where's that going to go that is going to spread to the surrounding areas so that is something that I've not seen any evidence within a feasibility study to suggest that that's being thought about or the impact is actually truly taken into context the second thing is about the infrastructure looking at the state of the country roads if you are trying to get in and out of Broadclist between the hours of eight and nine or at five and six it's an absolute nightmare because from that location, your route is the Cranbrook Road, which is already a bit of a state because of all the people coming back and forth through Cranbrook. You can't go through Station Road because you'll have all of the schools backed up through there. You can't go through Townend when you see over about 120 cars within an hour, all parked, all lined, all there, having to do reversing, backing forward and backwards. So when you then add 90 homes, which adds 1.4 cars per household, 126 cars integrated into an area that has no, at the moment, feasibility or impact assessment

02:35:10That I can see that suggests how that is going to be mitigated or dealt with. I don't know where those people are going to have to go out via Wimple if that was going to be the case. And the assessment need that came from the neighbourhood plan found that there was only a need for about 44 houses within the whole parish of Broadcliffe. So where we're saying that we need to build houses, fair enough, but actually the need isn't in the village the need has not been shown that if you look on right move you've got houses that have been up for sale for over six months sometimes 12 months at reduced prices so there isn't therefore a over overarching need within the village to do that um I'll leave it there because I'll let dr carry on but thank you very much for your time I'm gonna have to run thanks okay thank you mr Gerrard. Dr Mason. Okay thank you committee. I appreciate now NHS meetings can be arduous but this is something else. I've been given authority to speak on behalf of over 50 very concerned

02:36:15Residents regarding not only Broadcliffe 29 but Broadcliffe 12. During the Local Plan consultation phase, 370 individuals commented that they were either unhappy or dissatisfied with development at Broadcliffe 12. To give you some context, this is more comments by a factor of five than for any other individual site being proposed. It's more than double the number of comments that the proposed new town south of Clisk-Honiton has received. And Broadclisk-29, which is national trust land, was rejected for inclusion in our neighbourhood plan due to the very real concerns around accessibility. 246 individuals raised concerns about this site.

02:37:16Absent pavements high quality agricultural land heritage concerns single track roads insufficient highway capacity flooding sorry I'm sounding like a broken record I know but all of these concerns have been raised about the sites in Broadclist which are recommended for inclusion and these very same factors are cited as reasons for rejecting development at other sites in East Devon. So I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense to us. The summary assessment does not mention the very severe existing chaffle bottlenecks at either end of our village onto the B3181, the waterlogged roads in winter that are completely impassable, or a GP surgery that could not exist its premises even if it wanted to. It did acknowledge pressures on both of our schools.

02:38:17The chap from South West Water who was dealing with the latest sewage overspill at Heathcross pumping station adjacent to these sites laughed when I suggested that lots of houses could be built here. You should have a picture in the papers sent out to you from us, I hope you do, of the flooding in Townend. It's adjacent to site Broadcliffe 29. Now you know as well as I do that development will greatly increase the likelihood of this happening in the future and on that day in November that Duncan referred to, water came into my property.

02:38:57So in summary, please please reconsider these plans. Today's Agenda Pact states that the Working Party group were enthusiastic about future development at Broadcliffe 12. Enthusiastic, I'm sorry committee, you represent us and we ask that you take on board the strength of feeling and all of the concerns raised by the residents about just how detrimental we believe development at this site is likely to be. Thank you. Thank you Dr Mason. Could you turn the microphone off Sorry, thank you. We come then to [member of the public], Parish Clerk for Broadcliffe Parish Council.

02:39:47Good afternoon, Chair, Councillors, members of East Devon Strategic Planning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Broadcliffe, as you know, is a Tier 3 settlement in the Local Plan and as a local centre, it is intended to meet the needs of local and surrounding areas. and I just want to talk generally for a minute about all the Broadcliffe sites that we're considering this afternoon for, to say for repeating myself and as we consider the allocation of sites for the forthcoming Local Plan we feel it's vital to prioritise sustainable development that strengthens our community without creating dormitory village along the eastern edge of Exeter and we firmly believe that balanced development must provide not just housing but also local employment opportunities to prevent unsustainable out-commuting.

02:40:38The NPPF makes it clear in paragraph 8 the importance of achieving sustainable development by this balance of economic, social and environmental objectives. This principle is particularly relevant here as we seek to ensure new development does not create unsustainable dormitory villages where residents are forced to commute long distances for work and instead it's essential that we integrate employment opportunities alongside housing. The Brockless Neighbourhood Plan broadly supports balanced and sustainable development and the priorities in the East Devon Economic Development Strategy 24-29 echo the objectives in our neighbourhood plan and stress the importance of building self-contained communities where people can live and work locally, thus reducing the reliance on car-based commuting.

02:41:27Recent discussions, I don't know if you've heard, in the all-party parliamentary group, APPG for Rural Services, further highlight the importance of prioritising rural development to ensure that smaller communities do not miss out on essential infrastructure and economic opportunities. The APPG underlined the need for investment in rural areas to make them more self-sufficient, a theme that mirrors East Devon's goal of reducing the out-commuting and fostering employment close to home.

02:41:57And furthermore, the APPG discussions emphasise local authorities must focus on ensuring that rural areas have access to the same economic and social opportunities as urban areas. So, Broadcliffe 12A and Broadcliffe 29, should the committee be minded to allocate, can provide local jobs, support the rural economy, and reduce congestion and emissions while all maintaining the vibrancy of Broadcliffe. but any impact of new development must be mitigated and as this committee has heard from our residents there are significant challenges with this site I ask the committee to be mindful that future applications do not just deliver on-site mitigations but work with Devon County Council Highways, South West Water and ourselves at the Parish Council to address wider identified issues thank you very much thank you [member of the public] and then we come to ward member, Councillor Eleanor Ryland.

02:43:09Thank you, Chair. Thank you, committee members. I must say I feel like I've been doing this kind of thing for more than half my adult life and for very good reason. Now, living as I do in Broadcliffe, I can confirm what Dr Mason mentioned about flooding issues, the narrowness of roads. This is a medieval village that was built for the cart and the horse and the pedestrian. Without infrastructure improvements that we know in previous strategic developments have lagged quite significantly behind the production of houses the life of our residents is going to continue to get worse year on year as it has for at least the last 15 years now obviously there are several factors that come into play in in making residents lives worse but being stuck in eternal traffic jams not being able to get a place for your child at school our doctor surgery although it is performing extremely well by all accounts compared to other doctor surgeries is now talking about closing its lists these are all really significant structural issues that do need to be

02:44:12Addressed and I would hope that any decision that was made by colleagues on the planning committee at a later date because at this stage we are really only zoning areas would include some serious conditioning in order to ensure that infrastructure is delivered upstream of any housing because we are already operating at a loss but I mean running behind the housing and that is not an acceptable place to be I didn't come into politics to make residents lives worse year on year but effectively that's what's been happening as more and more building has happened in my village which has tripled in size in 10 years and you know quite seriously a lot of the development in the west end of East Devon is actually in Borcliffe's parish so we are experiencing it daily and the best thing that can be said about all this development is that it is providing homes for people who really need them. We have two sorts of demographics hanging over our heads in this process, and one of them is the breakdown of the social fabric between young people and

02:45:17Older people who own houses. We need to be producing houses for our children and grandchildren. I often hear from people, where are all these people coming from? Well, the demographics of places like Cranbrook suggest that these people are not yet born. The demographics suggest that people are delaying starting their adult lives because they have nowhere to live. Is this really something we want to hand on to our children and grandchildren? I hope not. But at the same time, do we really want to be downgrading our infrastructure year on year because of development? So I know this is not your place to be conditioning things, but I think that going forwards I think the the team on on on these on these allocations should be aware that there will be a lot of disquiet about them on on the grounds of infrastructure roads um the roads network is not really appropriate for 21st century movement and we have a very not substandard but not very high performing public public transport infrastructure um in broadcast village if the committee is

02:46:18Minded to allocate these I would hope that the roads could be adapted to account for that and that also they'll be extremely high-performing grampian orders on anything to do with infrastructure such as sewage and school placement and doctor surgeries thank you very much thank you Councillor Rylands and the other public speakers I think you'll find a lot of sympathy from committee with the points made particularly on the infrastructure side of things coming into committee then I have Councillor Fernley first thank you as ward member another ward member for broadcliffe I echo what's just been said um we've talked a lot about access to sites um 129 I mean you need to do the street view down town end again because it's a single track road with passing places for most of its journey um you may be able to get some access out for pedestrians to cross into the um the more built-up area to safely walk to school but you're not you're not going to do it for vehicles um I mean okay vehicles could come out but it's just chaos

02:47:34Um it needs to be thought about if it has to be allocated it needs to be thought about with block list 12a and how are you going to get access to that are you trying to get access through 29 um ideally well if it has to be allocated then maybe you can get it through a part of 12b but to keep this access on the single track narrow lane it seems absolutely crazy we talk about schools the local school is full because other areas of broadcast don't have have schools and there seems to be not a lot of hope well in the short term of getting a school so you know we've got stack up backing up problems we've got people driving everywhere around Brooklyn burning carbon that we don't want to so I absolutely can't support this allocation okay thank you Councillor Fernley committee Councillor How and it's a comment I've not made before but I think I need it's time we did and that is regarding flooding because that is obviously very prominent with the residents and everything else unfortunately we really can't

02:48:46Consider flooding because the planning application would and on the planning application for any site it has to make no detriment to water runoff from a field other than the green field site it already is so attenuation ponds and everything else we've put into any planning application that happens to make sure the flooding downstream where you're affected so there you are is no worse and in fact should be slightly better but on top of that of course we got global warming as we know or global climate change or whatever we're calling it today which is making the weather worse which is why we're getting more flooding but I just think we need to explain the difference between it's not that we're not concerned is that any planning application in the future will not make any difference to the current state because of attenuation other than that I'd love to say no to this but I'm struggling broadcast is a tier 3 it's eminently sustainable but maybe someone else can pick up Thank You Councillor How Councillor Jung thank you chair I share

02:49:57Councillor Howe's concerns about flooding it's interesting that on one of the sites above that or just 12a does say Lake Farm and Lake Balm which makes me suggesting it could be flooding there and I know that road it does get all the way down through dog village it gets flooding down there if we can make a betterment a lot large betterment on the flooding issue and working with the developer and working with Devon County Council it it might help but by council how I can't see we've got to have some development in Broadlist and these seem to be the most suitable two sites. We're talking about 29 at the moment.

02:51:01So I would propose to support this as an officer recommendation. Okay, thank you Councillor Jung. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Brian Bailey, do you wish to speak? Right, okay. I've got to look for a seconder first. Councillor Davey do you wish to say anything? Yes I think it would be illogical not to allocate at least some land for housing here and it is possible to get, well certainly I managed to get to Broadclist, it was during the election actually to get to Clyst Vale Community College and I thought can I get there by bus from Exmouth and yes I could very good bus and I walked along the charmingly named Slap Arse Lane I know look it up it's there on Google Maps and found myself almost at the community college yes I know there are flooding issues there and I have seen them but it is a sustainable place and I think we've got to allocate some housing there. Thank you Councillor Davey, I think you've just won the name of the day award

02:52:35After Ting Tong a couple of weeks ago Councillor Brian Bailey, did you wish to speak? How do you follow that, John? Anyway I'll have a go I feel that Broadcliffe is one of the oldest communities in the area and just looking at that map just adding new onto old and it just doesn't work I mean looking at that proposal and taking in mind especially what eleanor said about the traffic the road conditions the flooding it's just not viable in my opinion so I feel I can't support it thank you chair thank you Councillor Brian bailey um but it's worth reiterating possibly brooklist is a tier three village I appreciate its services are under significant strain I live in the next village um I I know it reasonably well but it is a tier three village in the spatial strategy um other tier four villages have taken more than officers are recommending to be allocated here in terms of our approach to spatial planning in East Devon in terms of um having a consistent and a logical and an evidenced approach um to site allocations

02:54:01In the new Local Plan um broadlist has to take some development if that strategy is going to be viable um so I I thought I I thought I would just just slip that in there I I I'm gonna gonna move us on, Brian, because time moves on. You're going to disagree with me, Brian. I think that's abundantly clear from what you just said. So we have a proposal on the table from Councillor Jung, seconded by Councillor Davey to allocate Broadcliffe 29. Is there anything to add on top of what's already been said, members? Okay. In which case then we'll go to a vote on Councillor Jung's proposal for allocation. All those members in favour please? Eight, excuse me, those against? Two, any abstentions? No. Okay, so broad list 29 is carried. We will then move to site 12 and for members to note this site is split in terms of its recommendation. Officers are recommending that the southwestern field 12a is allocated and the remainder of the site at 12b is not with that said then we have uh mr chariot I believe has left so we have dr mason again if

02:55:35You wanted to add anything to your earlier comments okay thank you angie thank you thank you you've just consented 29 I think one of the things we need to talk about and think about is access for 12A 29 was it went forward in the neighbourhood plan and did not get community support because the access was coming off town end if the committee is mindful I think the only thing I want to say about 12A that I haven't already said if 12A if the committee is mindful to permit can we somehow sort out access into 29 from that site rather than off town end because town end green tree lane is a very small single track road with very high hedges either side it would be very difficult to get suitable access at planning stage into 29 whereas you may may be able to get it in through 12a should committee be mindful to permit other than that same comments as before no development without associated infrastructure please lots of it we can't build communities without infrastructure

02:56:55Thank you thank you angie Councillor Rylant anything to add well I concur with what angie

02:57:17Just said about um access since you have just allocated it's like 29 we should also allocate that's a 12a with the proviso that there is some kind of access that is not off a tiny narrow single track road where um you have to pass by driving into the hedge and I'm I'm not even joking. Angie touched on sustainability. I've heard the word sustainability at various points during the day. The sustainability of a village has many aspects. One of the aspects in which we could potentially make this more sustainable is by making it possible for people to work from home more so they don't have to go out. That was another thing that could come through conditioning at a later stage in planning. In practically every single development um Devon County has responded that there's not enough local school provision unfortunately that's a problem for them to solve and I don't envy them that but for our purposes if we do build houses that young people can live in and there can be children in then they can very

02:58:21Easily walk to school from here um the displacement of children from Broadcliffe school to other schools brutally is not really our problem so children who don't live in the village who are currently being driven in will not be able to get a place in Broadcliffe School in the future and that might potentially be one of the benefits particularly for the residents of Townend and Town Hill who are constantly having to dodge park traffic and worry how they're going to get out of their houses at the moment. It would be nice to think that these developments if they go forwards and I must stress you know it's a 20-year plan so it will take a long time to build this out if it is if it does go forwards that they would deliver actual positive benefits to the village which I've heard say must take its share of development which did rather make me smile because did I mention earlier that we've tripled in size in 10 years as a village I'm mentioning it again we've gone from 1200 people to 7 000 people in 10 years so I think we are doing our

02:59:22Share and a lot more so does rather make me laugh when people say no other community in in East Devon has taken this much development because it's simply not true. We all need development. Young people need development. Older people need houses they can move to when they feel they can't live in a house with stairs anymore. We need to be able to deliver that. What we need to do is to be able to deliver the houses that people need. We need affordable houses so that our young people don't have to leave and go and live in another community far from their parents and their grandparents and far from their support networks. If we can produce that through allocating these sites then I will be moderately happy but if we're not going to do that then we have to ask ourselves what the hell we think we're doing with our time because we have a lot of young people who cannot find anywhere to live and many of them are in Broadclist. So if you think you must allocate this second site then please can you

03:00:25Also try to condition access and all the other things that I mentioned earlier about infrastructure and again I will mention Grampian orders again because they're quite a useful device for making sure that we get upstream development. Thank you. Thank you Councillor Rylance. So in view of the comments regarding access Mr Freeman and [member of the public] have just been discussing this one because I think we probably all agree as a committee that the access onto town lane is shall we say not exactly ideal um to put it mildly um so what I'm going to do now is to propose that we move on from 12a and 12b but that these sites come back to the wrap-up meeting when officers have been able to assess and come up with some proposals for allocating a very small part of 12b to allow there to be access off that much better road to the east. So that's my proposal that we move on from 12a and 12b and that we come back to them at the wrap-up meeting to try and achieve some

03:01:45Betterment to the access for both 12 and 29 to hopefully address some of those concerns and Ed doesn't look too sad sat next to me so that's always positive in which case then I'm going to take us straight to a vote on that one committee just for time purposes so all those in favour for 12a moving on and bringing back please okay that's unanimous and uh then for 12b that's unanimous okay thank you very much members uh we'll then uh continue with the other sites at broadlist and we'll start with broadlist 09 uh angie anything to add uh no thank you chair this site is progressing through our neighborhood plan which we're quite excited about it's the first of our neighborhood plan sites to come forward and it's a real tribute if you like to the value of community-led planning that lets local communities choose what they feel is the best location for development thank you thank you Angie I think Councillor Rylance has just run away so we'll come into committee on this one then members

03:03:06I just proposed that we move on. Thank you. Yep. Councillor Bethany Collins seconding that one. So we have a proposal from Councillor Fernley seconded by Councillor Bethany Collins to move on. Do any members wish to speak on this site? No? Okay. In which case, you have the proposal. All those members in favour, please. That's unanimous. And then we come to Broadlist 22. Angie, anything to add? no okay and Eleanor is not with us I will propose from the chair that we move on from broadcast 22 then all those members in favor please that's carried unanimously okay that is all of the sites at broadcast then and as we've been going quite a while now I'm going to suggest that we take until 10 past for a short break I was told I didn't do it loud enough last

03:12:02Time so I did it louder okay we come then to agenda item 7b west Clyst and we have two sites to consider here neither of them are recommended so we'll start with broadclist 04 and I have angie thank you chair um dear committee speak to raise concerns regarding this potential allocation uh in relation to its impact on paltimore house and the surrounding parkland uh as you know Baltimore House, grade two star listed building, significant heritage value, and the surrounding landscape contributes to its historic and cultural importance. And we feel that development here would have a high adverse effect on the visual setting of this important heritage asset. Additionally, the site lies within the Green Wedge and the Cliffs Valley Regional Park, which again will provide valuable landscape for biodiversity, recreation, and community enjoyment. This site is not recommended for allegation. However, if committee were be inclined, we would require mitigations which include some designs around the heritage and landscape sensitivities, ecological protection and enhancement, sustainable infrastructure and transport, which would closely align with the Exeter LCWIP, the walking infrastructure

03:13:33Plan that Exeter's doing and the strategic aims around the Cliffs Valley Regional Trail because again we want to have sustainable travel through the parish, reducing reliance on the car and integration of the community. Flood risk, there's a little bit of flood risk, especially with Broadclist 04 and the eastern edge of Baltimore 07 and so I guess we're looking at suds, that sort of thing if it comes forward.

03:14:03The one thing I did want to just mention, though, really quickly, community integration, local services, and it's back to the whole, this is putting more pressure on existing services. It doesn't bring anything new to the table. Schools, health care, transport networks, et cetera. We already have Old Park Phase 1 and 2, which is at the bottom of the plan that is in front of you. we are working really hard as a parish council at community level to do community engagement empowerment building a resilient community it's really hard to do that without community infrastructure and one of the things if this ever goes forward we would like to negotiate is a community hub at west list I appreciate that's a big ask it won't come as a shock to the land owner because I've already had extensive conversations and ear bending sessions with him about that but we we can't do community development under a gazebo in the corner of the field very effectively tends to get wet and cold so in summary then um it does offer well

03:15:05Opportunities for sustainable development but will need significant mitigations and we actually agree with the officer's recommendation not to allocate thank you okay thank you into committee then. Members, Councillor Bethany Collins. I propose that we move on from the site. Okay, thank you. Is that seconded by Councillor Fernley? Yep, okay. In which case then, all those in favour, please. Okay, that's unanimous. It occurs to me that I neglected to make a brief announcement at the beginning. Members, we are going to see how far we get with the broadclist sites, but I'm going to guarantee that we are not going to be looking at agenda items 7E, F, J, K, L, M or N, which is those sites in X Valley, Clyst Valley and Wimple and Rockbeer wards today. So when we finish off, we will adjourn at least those and any others we haven't finished uh for the next meeting on the 1st of october which we had thought was going to be cancelled but uh sorry it's back folks I see a hand at the back briefly um I mean I don't I don't

03:16:29Really want to read the whole list out because there's quite a lot um but neither of the two sites in Baltimore, Polto 4 and 06, GHED 66, Soat 15, all of the Kludge ones, for want of a better way of saying it, the North Topsham site, the Soton sites and the Wimple sites. That's right. Okay, train of thought. Polto 7, then, members. And again, we have Angie. Anything further to add?

03:17:11No okay members in committee anyone wish to speak Councillor Bethany collins okay I'll second that damien okay uh the proposal is to move on from Councillor Bethany collins um all those in favor please okay thank you members that's unanimous uh which brings us then to um the monstrosity as I have disaffectionately nicknamed it a broad list 31 just for clarity um and we have nicolas sully from pierce planning hello um I'm nicolas sully I'm a principal planning consultant from pierce planning speaking on behalf of the mac mic group mac mic is an established strategic land promoter with 99 years of experience of development and is currently promoting more than 25 sites across the southwest of England. Representations were previously submitted on this site by a different company however after a marketing exercise carried out recently MACMIC have now been selected as the landowner's preferred partner for the promotion of the site. As outlined in both the representations to date and the site selection report there are significant public benefits associated with the development of this site over and above those

03:18:44Associated with other sites which are proposed for allocation these include the delivery of a section of the Clyst valley regional park to which there is currently no public access much needed housing included a full including affordable housing and a wide variety of other community and educational facilities importantly the site is controlled by an experienced and capable promoter is available for delivery within the Local Plan period and would make a significant contribution to the council's housing land supply it is noted that according to the site selection report the sole reason for discounting this site as an allocation was highway access concerns centered around the proposed main access point of the B3181 by a land owned by national highways who stated in their previous response to the further draft Local Plan consultation that there was no agreement in place to use this land for access to the Mosshane Lane site.

03:19:42However, I am pleased to be able to report to this committee that MACMIC is in fact currently engaged in positive discussions with National Highways regarding the creation of a new access into the site via the B3181, as well as with Devon County Council, which currently maintains the land under a side roads order. It is therefore fully expected by our client that an agreement will be reached prior to the Local Plan Regulation 19 consultation, our client is happy to share and discuss with officers the ongoing dialogue with National Highways and Devon County Council.

03:20:16It is also important to note that MACMIC's appointed highway specialist has advised that in their professional experienced view, the land can be safely, suitably and appropriately accessed via the B3181 in all technical aspects, with no adverse effects on the local highway network as summarised in the site selection report this site is a sustainable location and would deliver a significant amount of housing and related facilities in the location that would align with an emerging Local Plan strategy without a significant adverse environmental impact these are key strengths of this site and ones which should not be overlooked as access into the site by the B3181 is expected to be resolved shortly it is therefore requested that this site is not discounted as an allocation at this stage thank you okay thank you miss sully uh angie thank you chair uh while development is necessary to meet housing needs we appreciate that we must assure that every new project aligns with the principles of sustainability and this allocation we feel falls short on several critical aspects it relies too heavily on existing infrastructure it lacks the

03:21:33Provision of new public services and falls short of addressing access and transport concerns especially as outlined in the pinhole area access strategy regardless of whether the access is or is not secured off the B3181 the impact of traffic generated from those thousand homes will be significant and the pinhole area access strategy should be updated to reflect this as part of any discussions should the site go forward. What haven't I covered? Let me just skip through here a minute because we're tight on time. We would require contributions for additional healthcare facilities, schools, community spaces. These are at capacity. We have heard earlier that there is a displacement effect where schools are maybe bringing in children from further afield. This is not the case at Westclist or at Broadclist. The school is capacity and is on the verge of turning away children that do meet catchment criteria. So it is not a case of their coming in from outside in terms of the pupil placement allocations. The plan acknowledges the need for a new primary school and further secondary capacity, but it doesn't provide any concrete

03:22:51Commitment to delivering those what else do I want to talk about this the LCWIP should be coming forward as part of this the national highways we've just heard be resolved, the stopping up of Langerton Lane has made any access from the south western corner very undesirable it's not going to work coming in from that corner really, so I think that's all I want to say, thank you chair But just to conclude, we feel it doesn't quite get there in terms of sustainable development with too heavy a reliance on existing infrastructure.

03:23:28Thank you. Thank you, Angie. I have to say I disagree. I don't think it gets anywhere near close when it comes to sustainable development. I don't think this proposal is anywhere near big enough to deliver the scale of infrastructure that is required for the number of houses we're talking about. The access issue, and respectfully to the comments that we've heard, we have no actual evidence is achievable.

03:23:55We've been told categorically by national highways. I think they've stolen my phrase and said over their dead body will they ever give away access over their land to the B3181. It's horrible. I've got nothing further to say. I'm sorry, Mr. Freeman. Without any further ado at all, I'm going to propose that we move on from 31A and B. And I think the entire committee are probably going to second me.

03:24:26Not that that's constitutionally permissible, but there we go. With that being said, I'm going to calm down and I'll come to Councillor Hayward.

03:24:36Thank you, Chair. Predisposition is a wonderful thing. Can I just ask Mr Freeman, given that we've had speakers, quite a few speakers including yourself, talk about infrastructure, would you be able to just let me remind me of what our current infrastructure gap is? Not to the penny, but in round millions, how many millions of pounds we're behind currently? But in the adopted infrastructure delivery plan for the current Local Plan, I think has about a £70 million funding shortfall just for Priority 1 projects alone.

03:25:19I think if we take in the other priority levels, it's over £200 million. So currently, just for clarity, we're £200 million short of what we need from development to cover the infrastructure that we need. Well, priority one is what's essential to deliver the plan. So that's the key one is the £70 million, the £200 million relates to things that are needed but not necessarily essential to deliver the plan.

03:25:51So on the basis that we're already £200 million in the red, effectively, of infrastructure funding, I do have to echo the Chair's passionate speech that actually delivering or proposing another development that takes us even further in the wrong direction would seem not to be a good idea.

03:26:15Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Hayward. Put slightly more diplomatically than me in this particular instance, I must say. Do any other members wish to speak on this site? No? Okay. In which case, I'll take us to a vote. First on 31a, the proposal is to move on. Those members in favour, please? okay that's unanimous and then the same again for 31b the proposal is to move on members that's unanimous either way we've just voted to move on that brings us then to uh agenda item uh 7d lodge trading estate uh and site reference broadclist 27 Angie. Thank you chair. Broadcliffe's neighbourhood plan offers broad support for this allocation. It recognises the benefits that local employment can bring to our community. The only concern we have is around traffic impact and those of you that are familiar with any applications in this area will know where I'm coming from. Any vehicle movements on station road particularly from large vehicles are going to exacerbate the current issues. Traffic surveys by Devon County Council and by ourselves as part of the Neighbourhood Plan preparation support the data that

03:27:45Demonstrates those increases. The more pressing concern comes from parking around the railway bridge and there was an agreement at Hattock to put a trial of traffic lights on that bridge. I believe there is a funding gap to actually allow that trial to go forward. If, as and when, this site is coming forward, we really ought to look at that just to see what else can be done to prevent any more misery on the bridge.

03:28:15It creates a very lengthy single track road and you can't see what's coming. If you've got big stuff coming towards you, they are committed and you're in the way and nobody can go anywhere. And we've had a few incidents where there's been lorries almost tipping into the children's play area, which is slightly tedious. And it creates a lot of congestion and heartache for commuters and school runs.

03:28:41The only other thing I wanted to talk about really on that note is whether initially until the issues with Station Road and the potential diversion of the southern end of Station Road as well are sorted out whether the site should be consented for B1 and B2 use but not B8 at this time until the infrastructure and access is sorted out, as it were. Other than that, the neighbourhood plan supports, happy to support.

03:29:16Thank you. Thank you, Angie. Just before I propose something along the lines of what Angie has just said, can we do that? Rule out to B8 use until the infrastructure improvements are delivered? I think there's probably worth a conversation with Devon County as the highway authority given that would be the predominant reason for doing that. You've obviously got I think some BA uses within that site already and certainly HGV is going in and out of the site already.

03:29:56So it's, well I understand the sentiment is whether or not it would lead to a material increase that would be harmful in itself. So it's probably worth us having a conversation with County Highways before we reach a conclusion on that, I would suggest. OK, assuming that can happen even if we vote for an allocation now. Yep. OK. In which case, Councillor Hayward. My apologies, Chair. I'll be very, very brief. It's really a question for Mr Hunter, a bit of clarity for myself.

03:30:27It's just suddenly occurred to me that I do have a relative who rents a unit on Hungry Fox Estate. And I appreciate that's an estate below. I mean, again, I appreciate, I know you've said before that the decoration should be mine. But I'm just wondering, I mean, it wouldn't affect them probably any more than any other trader. But I suppose for the sake of probity, I should declare it.

03:30:56Maybe it affects nri won't affect me but would you think I should just disregard it I've just spoke to mr Freeman about it he said that it's not particularly near uh so you know it doesn't think that it would affect it so on that basis it's only if you believe that the application will affect the finances or well-being of your family member if not then there's no declaration to declare but thank you for checking thank you mr hunter thank you Councillor Hayward Councillor Fernley yes echoing all the previous things if we can reduce the amount of lorries coming out of that area you know I cycle down Station Road people think I'm mad but I have met lorries you know they're taking the whole width of that bridge as I'm trying to get around it so I took on traffic lights absolutely necessary thank you was that a proposal officers recommendations yes okay do I have a seconder Councillor Blakey yes I'll second it and I will just have a brief comment as well which is that the vehicle traffic from the businesses

03:32:05There currently which always seem to be at their busiest around sort of five o'clock in the evening and eight o'clock in the morning up to and including articulated lorries with 40 foot trailers it does create a great deal of difficulty in Station Road exacerbated then by the T-junction at the end of it where it joins London Road and certainly I think any future development here which as a general idea I support will need significant work to be done on road access which will include I think the road layout design for the Blue Haze expansion of Cranbrook so actually getting our road junctions onto the London Road that is an opportunity not to be missed we we need to deal with the problem that is station road and probably in my view turn it into a one-way section up as far as the road bridge anyway long-winded way of saying yes um seconded thank you Councillor Blakey okay uh do any other members wish to speak on this one then no okay in which case we have a slight errata from mr Freeman well just to clarify that

03:33:29The employment land area shown on the screen at 8.24 hectares is both um 27a and b so I apologize as that's an error, the proposed area to be allocated is I believe 1.89 hectares which is 27A only Okay, thank you Mr Freeman, and with that clarification then we will go to a vote I was about to say So the proposal from, although Councillor Fernley is now giving me a quizzical look, do you need to clarify something?

03:34:06So this is the whole the whole site no so officers recommendation is to allocate that part that you see in green on the map the 8.24 hectares that you see there is the whole site so that's an error it should only be 1.89 is the green area and the rest is is not to be allocated okay so the proposal from Councillor Fernley seconded by Councillor Blakey for 27 a is to allocate B is to move on so we'll go to a vote on each in turn as always.

03:34:4027A, those members in favour of allocating, please. That's unanimous. And 27B, those members in favour of moving on, please. Councillor Hayward? Are you voting? That's unanimous, thank you. Okay, that brings us then to Agenda Item 7H, land north of Science Park and site Broadclist 23... That's wrong, isn't it? Yeah, no, we're doing it in the order of the covering report, not of the items on the agenda.

03:35:21So we come to broad list 23. Oh, that is right. Sorry. And we have no registered speakers on this one, so we come straight to committee. Recommendation from officers is for a mixed allocation. Anybody wish to comment? Councillor Hayward. Just because we're sort of flipping backwards and forwards, which page of the report is this on, just so I can get to it? Because obviously we've skipped over poll 04 and 06.

03:35:50Yes, we have, yes. Page 457. 457? Of the whole agenda pack, I think that is. Land North of Science Park. 7 or 8H, depending on which way round you do it. Got it. Yeah. It's report 7H or 8H. Yeah, there we go. Okay, everybody with us? Okay, so there's no registered speakers. The recommendation from officers is for a mixed allocation, two hectares of employment, 90 dwellings. Any members wish to speak? Councillor Fernley.

03:36:38I live quite close to this it's been known that it's going to be developed or it's been on the cards ever since our development was built so to have some employment close we talk about sustainability again to have some employment, more employment close by would be really beneficial for the residents particularly if they can actually set up little businesses over in that direction I don't know if that's exactly what mixed use means but I'm hoping it is so I support this recommendation and hopefully it might bring forward some more money to help build us a school too Was that a proposal Councillor Fernley?

03:37:20It is, okay, I will second that happily in this instance Councillor Howe, did you wish to speak? I do unfortunately yes I suppose the query I've got is we keep going on about the Science Park expansion this is adjacent to the Science Park and I'm kind of wondering why we're doing it as mixed use if we need to expand the science park surely we should be allocating a solely science park expansion?

03:37:54I think the developer would rather the whole site be developed for housing I think that was their preference we did look at a science park expansion but some of the land within the science park hasn't yet been developed out and I think long term it's likely to be the latter stages of the plan before it is and on balance discussing with our economic development team we felt that a mix of housing and some small business units to meet more local needs rather than the much more sort of prestigious big development on the science park would well effectively make a much more sustainable development can I say thank you it's perfectly summed up what I needed to hear I think Councillor How is scheming for another report Councillor Hayward thank you chair obviously sort of extra consolation to council how as part of what's been going on in the science park over the last two years I believe that they are the board are proposing to bring an LDO forward for the entire site which will provide some clarity and as you know there's been

03:39:06Land swaps and moving here and there and hither and nither to work out what the future is for that site so I think it's all part and parcel of the bigger picture I think thank you Councillor Hayward okay uh we have a proposal then from Councillor Fernley seconded by Councillor Olive uh that this site goes forward with that mixed use allocation shown all those members in favor please that's unanimous okay uh which brings us then to agenda item 7g uh we're going backwards in the alphabet now um which is site broadlist 26 uh the gypsy and traveler site allocation at langerton lane uh and we have mr sorry Councillor Fernley uh can I declare an effects and prejudicial nri on this one I got it right there um effects and prejudicial does mean you'll have to leave the room after okay got that one okay mr phil wakely Thank you for waiting.

03:40:22Is she leaving the room? Oh, no, after public speaking. Thank you, Chair, and good evening, everybody. I'm the group chairman of First Pinot Scout Group, a thriving scout group whose headquarters are located on Langerton Lane, directly opposite to Ash Piggery. We currently have approximately 85 young people in our beavers, cubs and scout sections, aged between 6 and 14, and we'll soon be hosting Exeter East Explorer Scouts, who have some 30 members aged between 14 and 16. And in addition to our own Scout Group sections, we also play host to Pinhoe Rainbows and Brownies, and with the Guide Unit probably joining us after the New Year. The various Girl Guide sections also number approximately 80 young people aged between 5 and 12, making a total, if my arithmetic is correct, of approximately 200 young people using our Scout Hat. Meetings are held in the Scout Hat every evening during the week, with extra activities taking place during the weekend, including overnight camps.

03:41:45Some midweek daytime activities also take place. Although the Pinot Scout Group is over 100 years old, we've been at the Langerton Lane location since 1992, when Bovis Holmes took over our then home on Pin Lane. As you're aware, Langerton Lane below the railway is now a cul-de-SAC and has been designated a green lane, suitable for walkers and cyclists and is very, very popular, certainly amongst dog walkers, because I'm one of them, but is still used by motor vehicles, driven by our parents, and also for the Rifle Club and for the Plymouth Brethren just up the road from us. Although many of our young people walk to meetings, we do still have a number of parents who drive to the Scouter. And as you can probably imagine, chaos ensues both before and after our meetings, as the road is definitely not suitable for that level of traffic. During our meetings, leaders will park their cars unaccompanied, both in our small car park and on the road, particularly when meetings are consecutive. And so we've got parents picking up from one meeting, parents delivering for the

03:43:05Next meeting, so there just is no room. And during the 90s and the early noughties, we regularly had unwelcome visitors who came from the traveller's site on Avocet Road, on what is now South an industrial estate, with our gas bottles being their main target. Would you allow a traveller's site opposite a school? I believe our scout headquarters should be accorded exactly the same status as a school, given the number of young people using the scout up throughout the week. Hearing news reports of itinerant travellers intimidating innocent passers-by I would not be happy to leave a young child anywhere near such a site even if that child is adequately supervised. Could I ask you to wrap up please [member of the public]? Thank you Just one paragraph. If the proposed site is approved the scout group will be forced to spend money that we can ill afford and additional security measures I guess we'll need to apply to Broadcliffe's Parish Council for a grant and for all the above stated reasons the scout group is registering an objection

03:44:12To the proposed site. Thank you Thank you, [member of the public]. Angie. Thank you, Chair. We recognise it's crucial to provide suitable accommodation for all of our communities, including the gypsy and traveller population. However, this site raises significant concerns that should be considered in looking at its viability for use. The site, as you can see, is in very close proximity to both the M5 motorway and the Exeter to London Waterloo railway line, both of which contribute to considerable noise pollution.

03:44:54In 2019, we had a planning application on the field immediately opposite the site, and the planning reference 191950MFOL, and it was acknowledged that the site was deemed unsuitable for residential development due to the noise levels. Triple glazing and other soundproofing methods were recommended in that application as means of mitigation, but these solutions wouldn't be appropriate for the types of accommodation commonly used by the gypsy traveller community such as caravans or mobile homes. These homes simply cannot accommodate the same level of soundproofing as permanent structures. Moreover the report from the planning officer raises concerns around the infrastructure of Langerton Lane itself. We know it's a narrow road now has no through access and it's a lane that requires significant work and cost to upgrade it accommodate any development along its length this lack of accessibility could place an undue burden on residents and limit their ability to access essential services and facilities although it's acknowledged the site is near major transport links direct accessibility remains a challenge particularly for a community that may already face barriers to accessing services

03:46:08In terms of equality it's important to emphasize that the courts have designated gypsies and travellers as a protected race under law. This legal status affords special protections under the Equalities Act, which obliges us to ensure fair and equal treatment. It's our duty as policy makers to ensure that we are not providing environments that are detrimental to well-being. By allocating a site that is deemed unsuitable for typical residential development due to noise levels, we risk treating this community unequally. They deserve the same standards of living and protection as any other group, and we cannot be conscious designate a location that would expose them to such challenges. There's a note to suggest that the site has been suggested due to its historic significance as a stopping place for gypsies and travellers, but we must balance this with the need to ensure living conditions meet modern standards of habitability. A significant area of the site, the southern and southwestern edge, is located on land that is liable to flooding further raising questions about whether this location is truly

03:47:13Suitable for sustained accommodation so in conclusion while the proposed site at langerton lane may have historical significance the practical challenges it presented noise pollution inadequate infrastructure and risks of flooding make it unsuitable for the gypsy and traveler community as a protected race gypsies and travelers are entitled to the same rights and considerations of any other group. Our responsibility is to ensure we provide safe, healthy and dignified living conditions for all residents and I urge the committee to reconsider this allocation and to seek alternative sites that better meet the needs of the gypsy and traveller community.

03:47:50Thank you. Thank you. I would point out perhaps briefly in response to some of those comments. If you look sort of in mathematical terms vertically opposite the site on the other side the m5 and the railway line um there's some residential uses there as well um who I'm assuming are going to suffer from the same problems with the noise environment as um I I appreciate that there may be slightly different characteristics but um that's that's a that's a fair observation that that is fair observation okay into committee then Councillor Fernley I think you need to um pop out briefly I don't know I will look to legal yep okay that's fine um thank you chair um angie has very eloquently and um phil has very eloquently described the problems of this road so I don't have too much to add except this particular site is the site that I have had the most emails of any site in the whole Local Plan. Over 30 in about 24 hours, once it was realised that this was

03:49:13A possibility. The Green Lane, in a time of climate emergency, the Green Lane has become an absolute boon to the area. Dog walkers, cyclists, walkers trying to get to and from the station, to and from the doctors. As there are no facilities in Tide Barn, we are very reliant on getting through into Pinho, to schools, etc. If any more development happened on Langton Lane, it would be such a travesty to take the road backwards, making it less safe for people to walk and cycle to and from Pinho. Is the bridge over the Pimbrook strong enough to cope with heavy lorries that would be needed to take large caravans onto site a much better use for this area would be an extension to the country park which is in the cliff valley regional park to allow an exit through the park suggestions in from tide barn through to pinhoe and and vice versa so it shortened walkers um journeys I can't support this application okay we have no other members of the public registered to speak then so we come

03:50:50Into committee and I have Councillor Blakey thank you chair um I'm going to agree substantially with what angie hurran has said um it's a requirement I believe that we ensure that we apply the same standards to the um the traveling communities we do to the permanently settled and we should not be putting those people who choose that lifestyle into a position where they're going to suffer any kind of environmental harm.

03:51:24[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

03:52:46But as Councillor Blakey says, there is distinctions between those who legitimately want to have a gypsy Romani lifestyle and those travellers. And within that, we now have a subset. We have van lifers and those people who have no intention on staying on such a site. And I had the opportunity to talk to a group recently in Actwinster and ask them why they didn't use the Egyptian traveller site in Axminster and Horkchurch and they were unequivocally told me why they won't use it. So actually you can build it, they won't use it that particular group.

03:53:24Travellers are by their very nature transient so we provide sites, there's no guarantee they'll ever be used but the law, planning law says we must provide them and indeed a great many children who occupy such places suffer dreadfully and they suffer from education from poverty from social stigma and so some of the comments that have been made I found a little bit offensive today because it implies that you know normal people are horrified and are at risk that's not the case the groups themselves are at risk and I'm grateful for Angie to pointing out that they should be afforded exactly the same rights to environmental standards and safety as everyone else.

03:54:13But it comes back to the issue of, and Council and I will raise this a couple of meetings ago, if not here, where? We're obliged to provide them and it seems that wherever we try and methodically and sensitively and carefully develop a plan for a site, it's shot down immediately because no one, it seems, wants such a site near their properties. They fear crime. They fear property devaluation. They fear all sorts of manner of things. So on this, I mean, it is incredibly close to the M5 and a railway line. And as has been pointed out, it's very difficult to triple glaze a caravan or mobile home. The cost would be prohibitive. And I think even the structural integrity of it wouldn't allow it um but I I'm really constrained chair because we we have to provide such places but on the flip side I know a great plenty of the community just won't use them um so I I don't know how we as a planning authority how any planning authority overcomes this issue

03:55:22I really don't but we can keep on looking at sites uh and effective what you eventually come to is finding a site that's so far away from any other centre of population, but then you've created a problem yourselves. The people who live there, stay there, they have an equal right to access to services, access to education, access to medicine. It's a tough one, Chair, and I wish there was an easier answer that we could just wave a magic wand and find it. Thank you.

03:55:55Thank you, Councillor Hayward. I see you, Councillor, how I'm going to speak. first, if I may. Sorry, I just wanted to add a couple of points to what Councillor Hayward has just said. We've heard mention of the railway line a couple of times. I live right next to the railway line. The front of our house is about probably not even 10 metres off the front of this very railway line down by Wimple Station. This is not a busy railway line it's not a particularly noisy railway line you get two trains every hour it's it's nothing you don't even notice it um I I take the point but it's it's just not a significant detractor to amenity um and that's coming from someone who's lived next to one for over 15 years um you you just don't um I actually lived next to the great west road the a4 in london as well for the first 10 years or so of my life and quite frankly I didn't notice that after a while either but um that's that's by the by the other point I wanted to make and it's it's about this

03:56:57This access issue um and I've got to say along the lines of what Councillor Hayward has been saying I think it's a little bit of a convenient um reason to to not say something else um as as the the gentleman from the scout group has already said 200 kids coming here over the course of the week You've got the Plymouth-Bethwin site, you've got the shooting club. I'm reliably informed by Mr. Freeman that we'd be looking at no more than 15 pitches on this site.

03:57:25It's not like you're going to have a small armada of caravans coming down here at all hours of the day. It's simply not the case. I don't buy the argument. The only thing that gives me pause here is the amenity point that Tanji has eloquently made in would we be allocating this site for housing if we weren't allocating it as a gypsy and traveller site. And I think that's a question I need an answer to if I'm going to make a recommendation here.

03:57:59Mr Freeman. There's a couple of things I'd say on the noise front. One is just to the north of this site, the opposite side of the railway line, you have a travelling show person site, which is already there. I'm not sure how many pitches are there, but I think they chose to live there and came through the planning application process and lived there. So there's precedent for travellers in this location, knowing the noise implications, I would suggest.

03:58:36The other thing is obviously the other side of the motorway, you've got development that's actually closer in the form of houses, admittedly, but closer to the motorway than this site. The other thing is this site is actually lower than the motorway, which I don't profess to be any expert on noise, but generally if you're lower than the source of the noise, the noise impact is much reduced compared to when you're above the source of the noise.

03:59:02If anyone's ever stood on a motorway bridge, you'll find the noise is quite overbearing, whereas if you're actually stood below the road level, you hear much less. um so I think our feeling is that yes there is a noise issue may well need mitigation um but I don't think it's insurmountable looking back at the application on the opposite side of the road that angie holland was referring to uh it looks when the environmental health comments like very little mitigation was ever proposed as part of the application so it wasn't that it couldn't necessarily be overcome it was the applicant didn't really make much effort to overcome those issues um so I don't think that's insurmountable um but I can understand the concern um in terms of allocating this for housing I think I think it's borderline in terms of housing um because it is slightly detached from the rest of the mosshane development um but we obviously struggle to find gypsum traveler sites I think this is the only remotely feasible site that's been put forward through the process for a gypsum traveller site and actually for

04:00:16Those purposes I think it's pretty good in terms of its relationship to other development services and facilities so that's why it's recommended in the way it is. The one caveat I'd pose is that the site is currently on the market so I think the current landowners put it forward originally a couple of years ago now as potential for a number of uses including Egyptian Traveller Sight we obviously don't know what future owners might feel as to whether or not future owners would actually deliver the site but I don't think that should necessarily have a bearing at this stage in terms of whether or not you wish to allocate it but we'll need to be mindful of that moving forward with the plan Thank you Mr Freeman, Councillor Howe Following on the same veins as just been spoken about I am minded to push this off to when we come back purely for the fact that I think we should have some sort of environmental health report on noise, I don't think it's going to be an issue

04:01:19But just blindly guessing to a certain extent it would be nice to have an environmental health officer say yep, should be fine or whatever mitigation possible the other thing I wish to ask and it's sort of semi-thing we did used to have allocated a pot of money to buy a site and hearing this one is possibly up for sale I'm just wondering one if that pot of money is still available because by far wherever we do allocate a gypsy and traveler site I believe the only proper way of doing so is by having our ownership of it and then our control of it and as such that to me makes a lot more sensible a lot more manageable in every other way so I suppose there's a twin-edge sword their question and possibly asking to delay decision on this until we have further answers I think I'd be right in saying answering the second half of that would probably require a part B meeting it would certainly require a separate meeting I would suggest where I could provide more to that information and yes

04:02:34Potentially in part b so I wouldn't suggest we approach that issue now and in terms of the environmental health angle or are you satisfied uh we can certainly get advice from an environmental health team if that would help um I don't believe we have so far we have discussed it with them um but we don't have any formal feedback from them can you indicate what their informal thoughts well um it was more of a general discussion about what a gypsy and traveler site might need and whether that railway line and the proximity to the main road were absolute constraints and no they weren't but I can get more detailed feedback I mean I've got to be brutally honest committee I'm I'm minded to propose this for for allocation I I take I take the points Councillor Howard has made Councillor Hayward did you want to say something um only that I I personally minded to to support Councillor Howe proposal um I live next door to a railway line first six months it was held and you don't hear it some of these residents won't be here six months so it might

04:03:48Be held for them uh appreciate that was the paddington main line so it was you know a bit closer but after six months you're quite right you just you don't hear it your guests when they they come and stay do hear it um the question I suppose just beyond what Councillor How has mentioned is if if we don't allocate any is that a deal breaker for the entire plan I mean we so you know if we didn't do this we couldn't find any others would our whole plan fail because we haven't allocated something when we arguably have the opportunity this comes back to the point about council house proposal we can just park this for the time being to allow some environmental health checks to do some research about whether some funding is available and I do agree owning the site outright is eminently preferable especially as there's a house for a manager on this site purpose built to help keep some of the perhaps more troublesome issues that may arise in check because you'll have a manager on site that will be their job rather than just 15 empty

04:04:52Concrete pads come and go as you want and and whatever might happen then so I am going to second council house I guess proposal to move on subject to asking for that information but it'd be helpful to know about our plan status if we didn't allocate any thank you um through chair I mean I'm mindful that we probably need to bring a paper updating members on where we are because we've recently received an updated gypsum travel needs assessment which is part of the evidence space for the Local Plan I mean fundamentally we are required through the Local Plan to meet the housing needs of all groups in society basically so we do need to show that we are meeting the needs of the gypsum traveller community um obviously we have uh I think 15 pitches coming forward at Cranbrook at the expansion areas which are sort of in the pipeline um and potential to deliver as additional gypsum traveller pitches at the second new community as part of that so we are starting to build up a pipeline of sites what makes me nervous I suppose is that that's a pipeline that's

04:06:01Still some years away and and the need is is phased over the planned period so it's demonstrating that we can meet the needs across the whole planned period which is where a site like this would help to meet needs in the shorter term so I think we can make a case in terms of how we're meeting the gypsy and traveler community it would be a much stronger case with a site like this in the mix could I just add as well looking at the gypsy and traveler needs assessment that we've just received the majority of these pitches although they will meet gypsy and traveling needs we're talking about settled families who perhaps are traveling through the summer holidays or perhaps the dad is away traveling and it's the rest of the family it's the people with caring responsibilities and older retired gypsies and travelers more so that are looking for these sorts of pitches so I wouldn't envisage there being a high turnover of residents I mean angie will be aware that there is already a gypsy site at paulclist it's only a very small one

04:07:07Has a handful of very long-term residents and I think most residents of brockless wouldn't even know that that site existed and in fact some of the demand that we have is from families from that site who have created their own families and are now overcrowded and they're looking for somewhere else so I think we are talking more local families um more so than transient people Councillor Davey can I just check is that the site on the other side of the railway line that you're referring to no it's not actually it's a site on the edge no it's a site just outside of Brockless village close to one of the sites that we were talking about earlier it's not very well known at all ok yeah I'm in I feel it's probably best of a bad job but I'd be inclined to allocate this it's further away than the houses on the other side where I don't I take the point about triple blazing but people don't necessarily want to keep their windows closed all the time

04:08:23I don't want to live within earshot of the M5 I have to say, I turned down a house for that reason but I think some mitigation could be put in putting trees along that side of Langerton Lane would probably improve the environment generally and help create a sound barrier there's already quite a belt of trees along the M5 there and I suspect environmental health would say well it's a nuisance but it's not kind of damaging to ears or anything so they would not want to be particularly involved in that and I think it's a choice whether you're willing to put up with that or not but and I take all the points about you know applying the same levels as you would for other residents but on the other side residents are even closer to the M5 and we presumably consider adequate mitigation as provided by the tree screening there.

04:09:38Thank you, Councillor Davey. I have to say I broadly agree. On the basis that Councillor Howe didn't actually make a proposal a minute ago, I'm therefore going to move from the chair to I'm going to exploit the technicality for all it's worth, Councillor Hayward. I am going to move from the chair that we allocate this site in line with officers' recommendation. I think it's the right thing to do.

04:10:06Councillor Hayward, did you have anything to add? Did I see your hand a second ago or was I imagining it? Oh, no, no, no. Okay. Well, Mike didn't actually make a proposal. And if he did, I think he said he'd probably be happy for me to amend it anyway. um so um on that basis then we have a proposal from the chair to allocate uh this site for a for gypsy and traveler accommodation in line with officer's recommendation um all those in favor please that's I see four those against and those abstaining two so that is carried thank you members OK, it is ten past six now. I did say we would finish at six. We have one last set of sites to consider in. No. Right. OK, fine.

04:11:05In which case, then, we are going to adjourn today's meeting for the 1st of October, where we will consider agenda items 7I, 7E, 7F, 7J, 7K, 7L, 7M, and 7N.

04:11:31That meeting will be on the Tuesday the 1st of October starting at 10am thank you members