YouTube team keep it clean. What's going on is engraving here with another video and Good morning. A great morning. Actually, um, hope all y'all are doing well. I'm a little I'm a little tired right now. I went to sleep at like Three in the morning didn't had to wake up at 8 30 so that Little tired right now, but I'll be all right. But anyway Good morning to all of you guys And happy 6k day. Happy 6k day. We have officially hit 6,000 subscribers So that's that's pretty nice. That's a nice benchmark, but That's just only the beginning. We got a long way to go. We got a very long way to go But I appreciate um, I Sincerely I do appreciate everybody that subscribed to the YouTube channel Everybody that comes through on these videos on the Madden videos and soon on gonna be on the 2k videos, too But I appreciate everybody that comes through and supports the channel Thank you very very much for that and I'm just proud of y'all man. I'm proud of y'all. Thank you for being a part of this channel but anyway Last night we saw the nasty injury to Odell Beckham, Jr. We saw that the Browns player I think it said they said his name was Bobby Calhoun. I think his name is like Brian Bobby Calhoun Odell Beckham, Jr. went out for the catch caught the ball and then the cornerback went low at his legs Now a lot of people were debating. Oh, is that it was that a nasty hit me personal opinion football opinion? No, it wasn't a nasty hit at all We talked about that last night because what what is the cornerback to do because the NFL talks so much about Oh, they they trying to prevent CTE trying to prevent concussions But they don't They and they don't want people aiming at people's heads They don't want you to aim at people's heads. So they want you to either wrap up or tackle them low What happens when you tackle them low stuff like that can happen, but it wasn't a dirty hit at all But unfortunately, Odell Beckham, Jr.'s leg bent the wrong way now First before we get into it again, let me let me introduce myself because I don't want to be rude Me I'm engraving this. This is my YouTube channel engraving vids and I'm a Ravens fan, but We talk about everybody all teams all 32 teams on this YouTube channel So if you a fan of any one of the 32 teams, or if you just like football Make sure you subscribe if you haven't already And and turn the notifications on too and make sure you leave a like on the video as well But back to last night Oh And if you want to follow on Twitter Instagram and snapchat everything is engraving vids.  He First he took the hit. He took the hit. He appeared to be in a lot of pain And maybe he was just scared to maybe he was like man, I just felt my leg been back I don't know what's what this gonna mean for my season Because I want to contribute to the team. I want to win games and I want to make plays but this might change it So his leg been back. So then They were saying oh Odell Beckham, Jr. Couldn't even get back to the couldn't even get back to the locker room under his own strength so That was the initial and when we did the video last night Before I saw the second video I was like man, I felt for Odell and I mean I still feel for I feel feisty football play That gets injured because it sucks, but in this case Odell Beckham, Jr.   They're not just gonna they're not gonna Let you just be on the ground like that especially if you just had an injury where your leg got bent back and it just That's when it's that's when it just it started not to make sense to me And I was like man, this looks like something off of WWE. It really did It looks like when the when the WWE one of their wrestlers will Have an injury or whatever or get hurt backstage or something and they'll be on the ground And they they wave off the medical staff or whatever It just reminded me of something like that because that's exactly what it looked like because they had a camera on him He was be who's on the ground and whatnot and he was in all this pain and whatnot and I just like man Is this dude is he just being a trauma queen and is he milking this thing for attention? I don't know I Don't know but that's that's what it's seem like again. This is no this is no hate towards Odell Beckham Jr At all. I enjoy Odell Beckham Jr. He's a beast of a receiver. He's a beast of a playmaker. He's a beast of a dancer He is very I think Odell Beckham Jr Is very good for the game of football because he makes it fun. He makes it fun. I think I mean excuse me I think Odell Beckham Jr is very great for the game of football Because he really he makes watching it fun He makes watching the Giants fun because it's like you always you just waiting for him to do something Crazy you waiting for him to make a big play and like I said last night He's one of the best receivers in the league and he's not overrated at all It's not because of the catch the dude is a monster And it's like you just know and he backs up all the dancing that he does for every dance that he does He makes plays to do those dances He's not one of them players that's doing all these dances But not doing anything on the field and in order for him to do those dances to do those celebrations He has to get into the end zone and he's used to doing it. He does that and he can do it. Anyway, we even saw my part returns I believe it was last season. They put him at part return. He got two touchdowns, but they both got called back. I Was heated for him.  I don't get his touchdown but I mean, I don't know so we'll see anyway, I I Just I don't I didn't know what to think of that last night because it just it just remind me of WWE It reminded me of WWE because it's like man They had a camera on them. It was no no medical staff. No trainers around them Then all of a sudden one trainers decided to appear You leave Odell Beckham, Jr. Alone if he's hurt especially that injury and then all of a sudden a trainer appeared out of nowhere So I was just like, huh I really I wasn't really feeling that and I felt like it was just the injuries getting milk But hey, who knows cuz I don't anyway appreciate y'all watching Let me know if you think he was really milking that injury or not man cuz I It seemed like it. It seemed like the media TV broadcast seemed like everybody was just milking that injury. So let me know what y'all think I'll see y'all in the next video and I'll see y'all got a matter of video coming out later today, too In about in about 45 minutes Well, it's just it's just another depth chart video And if you are really good at Madden if you think you're really good at Madden You need to watch that video Because I want you to play with the team whose roster I showed you how to set up anyway I appreciate y'all watching Make sure you leave a like on the video and subscribe to the YouTube channel if you haven't but I'm out and it Yes, it was a clean hit. It was a clean hit


Hey everybody, what's going on? I am Greg Sussman. Join me today by Drew Dinkmeyer of dailyrotor.com, which you're gonna break down tonight's NBA Slate. What's happening, Dink? Not much. Rested after a big long weekend for me traveling, so I'm back and ready to go at it with some NBA action. You can see in his face, folks, he's raring to go with all of that tan and that rest, and he's gonna help us win some money tonight by giving us three stars and three value plays. We begin with his top star on the board, and that's Atlanta's Trey Yong.  Trey Yong versus John Morant. Why are you going with Yong? Yeah, it's great to see these two young point guards who are really gonna be the future of the league playing tonight in a 240 total, the highest total on the board, fast-paced environment in Atlanta. Trey Yong typically has higher assist rates at home, and this game environment should be a great one. Not only is it a high total, but really tight spread here with Atlanta favored by just two. We think Trey Yong is well worth the price tag right around $10,000 and should be able to outperform that tag and offer one of the best upsides on the slate. His assist number's just better for John Morant, like Drew said, and the price is right. Trey Yong is gonna go off tonight in a very fast-paced environment at home against Memphis. It's gonna be fun, and it's one we'll definitely have our eye on. Another fun one is the Cleveland Cavaliers. I like the Cavs tonight in this spot, and I like Andre Drummond in that front court. We'll see if Tristan Thompson is active, but Andre Drummond makes a lot of sense. Yeah, it sounds like Tristan Thompson won't be able to go tonight, and that should really up the minute ceiling on Andre Drummond, perhaps get back to those upper 30s minutes that we saw in his time in Detroit. And the price tag has steadily slipped since he's moved over the Cavaliers. He hasn't been playing as many minutes, hasn't been able to put up as big a fantasy point production. He's always had pretty good success against Rudy Gobert, and it's surprisingly the type of matchup that should keep him on the floor quite a bit. So I think this is a good kind of by-low opportunity on a star in Andre Drummond. It's a big man versus big man battle, Rudy Gobert and Andre Drummond. And like Drew said, that could mean Andre Drummond sees a ton of playing time. Especially with Tristan Thompson not expected to play for Cleveland. Drummond, a fine and yet kind of sneaky star on this slate. A not-so-sneaky star is San Antonio's DeMar DeRosin. The Spurs will not have LaMarcus Aldridge tonight. Yacob Pertle also expected to be out for the Spurs, which means DeMar DeRosin is in autoplay for May. Yeah, there's just a lot of upside here for DeMar DeRosin, and it's really gonna open up a ton of usage. We've seen this kind of throughout the season. Whenever LaMarcus Aldridge is sat, DeMar DeRosin's numbers across the board have spiked. The usage rate has gotten up around 30%. The assist rate has spiked. Even the rebounding rate has spiked here. It's not a particularly exciting matchup against Indiana, a team that's a pretty good defensive team on the whole. But it's a really good price tag, and he's a guy that should get into a ton of your lineups simply based on the volume he's gonna have at his disposal without LaMarcus Aldridge. Absolutely. Get DeMar DeRosin in your lineups here. The exposure, the usage is all gonna go through the roof of the price. Not high enough. DeRosin, a clear lock for lineups tonight. Another smart play that probably should be a lock is his teammate, Trey Liles. Liles is gonna start at center tonight for San Antonio, making him an excellent play in place of LaMarcus Aldridge and Yacca Pertle. Yeah, it's a tough matchup for Trey Liles against kind of that big Indiana front court, but San Antonio really doesn't have anyone else at this point. And Trey Liles played close to 40 minutes last time out, and we'd expect him to get into those mid-upper 30s. The price tag simply doesn't account for that, as the absence of both LaMarcus Aldridge and Yacca Pertle just leaves them so thin in the front court. So there's gonna be a lot of value to be had in that San Antonio front court tonight and Trey Liles is one of those value plays. Absolutely, you're gonna see increased usage across the board for several other players. Tonight, Trey Liles is costing the least and should get an opportunity to play. We'll see how successful he is in that front court, but Liles is just too obvious to leave out of your lineups. But who will see that increased usage alongside DeMarco DeRosin? It's probably his teammate, Rudy Gay.  Yeah, Rudy Gay's been hovering in the teens in minutes kind of over the last three or four weeks or so. And last game, he got up around 30 when Pertle went down early. So we expect him to start tonight in that thin front court that we just talked about with San Antonio.  So they're gonna need Rudy Gay's kind of size and athleticism there. And I think he's gonna have some mismatches on the perimeter as well. So I think the Spurs are a great source of value tonight without LaMarcus Aldridge, without Yacca Pertle, playing at home, still have a reasonable kind of 110 implied total or so. And these guys are really cheap.  He's gonna get that playing time again now and potentially that opportunity and he's priced closer to four K tonight. Priced closer to $4,000, Rudy Gay in a good spot to exceed that value on Fandle. Let's get him in there alongside Trey Liles, Martin Rosen, we're all about the San Antonio Spurs tonight. One final value play that we do wanna mention here, Drew, and that brings us to Kyle Anderson over the man for his Grizzlies. Obviously the Grizzlies have been beat up as of late and Anderson is one of the players that's reaped the benefits. Yeah, we know everybody's gonna talk about the fast pace in Memphis and Atlanta, two teams that play at the top of the pace in the league, but we want the slow mo. We want Kyle Anderson's kind of slowing it down, getting those steals and blocks, contributing across the board. He's seen increased minutes in the absence of Brandon Clark and Jeron Jackson, juniors. They've had to play some smaller ball lineups that have played Kyle Anderson closer to the four. And I think it's really helped his rates kind of across the board. The playing time's really consistent. Atlanta's a team that gives up a ton of steals and blocks. I think this is a good spot for Kyle Anderson to outperform his price tag. All right, Anderson gonna outperform that price tag fast-paced game. All the reasons that you know you need to play the Grizzlies, we'll just do it with Kyle Anderson, who's affordable tonight. That's gonna do it for us here on The Fan. It'll hurry up, Drew. We appreciate the time. Good luck tonight. Thanks so much, Greg. Enjoy the games tonight. Absolutely, you as well. Tomorrow, we'll take a look at this week on the PGA Tour with Jim Masanis and Davis Maddock. Have a great night. Enjoy the NBA games. See you back here tomorrow.


In 2003, the European Tropical Network found three hundred and thirty-three cases of this disease in Europe and among the people that were infected, this is sixty-four percent of male constitutes sixty-four percent, the average age was twenty-nine and a half years and then of European origin was fifty-three percent and then tourism fifty-two percent. So, if we look at this disease, when travelers, even the Georgia, the crystal poridium that were found in the west water, one thing I did in 2013 was I had to measure the concentration of this parasite in winter, summer and spring. And I found that in winter a huge amount of the parasite were being found in the water. Why? Because in summer a lot of people travel out of the country. So we have little concentration that in winter when they are back they come back with the parasite and that is why in the west water treatment plan we found a lot of them during winter than all the other seasons.


I just think it's the craziest thing ever. And I mean, you know this by now about me that I just get like blown away every time I do this. It's so wild. Okay, so let's watch the whole thing. We've watched it once. Let's watch it again. Interphase, no problem. Same as mitosis, it's exactly the same. G1, you can't tell a difference, but the chromosomes do not have sisters in G1, but you can find your homologs and practice, practice identifying homologs. The beginning of S, we have a certain amount of DNA. At the end of S, we've doubled it because in meiosis and mitosis, it's the same. We double our DNA in S. We peaked at those chromosomes, now we have sister chromatids. This is the significant thing that happens in both meiosis and mitosis. Sister chromatids are identical. Homologs are the same, but different. Interphase, getting ready to do some dividing. Now, why I have an empty slide, I'm really not entirely sure, but the events of Prophase I have unique qualities. First of all, the things you would expect happen. The DNA condenses into chromosome logs. The centrioles move to the poles, the nucleolus disappears, the nuclear envelope disappears. The different thing, loud and proud, yell it out, friends. The homologs hook up. Good job. And we're gonna do the little timeout to see what crossing over is. What have I shown you here? These are homologous chromosomes. Let's point to something. What are those things I'm pointing to? Those are sister chromatids. What are these things I'm pointing to? Those are genes. Every chromosome has genes, and sister chromatids have identical genes to each other. Homologs also have the same genes, but not necessarily the same alleles. Remember that sisters have identical alleles. If it's the A gene and the B gene, sister chromatids both have big A, and in this case, big B. But homologs can have different forms. I have to get a drink of water. I'm not stopping. I'm really close to finishing this, so I'm gonna finish. I just can't yell quite as loud. What? Okay, we had our, oh, what are we gonna call these things? Hold on, hold on, my mouse, there we go. What do we call those guys? Those are different forms of the same gene. Those are our alleles. Alleles are different forms. This sets the stage for crossing over, so we get to watch it. Before everybody has their own alleles, after crossing over, they swap. They literally swap chunks of DNA. Because we've color coded sperm parent and egg parent, we can track the crossing over when it occurs. We would not cross over a B allele for an A allele. That would not happen, because that's like crossing over a head for a leg, and you wouldn't wanna make that trade, because then you'd have two heads and no legs. Bad idea. Okay, crossing over happens in pro phase one. And ta-da, we just made it occur. Pro phase one continues, we jostle around, we're jostling and jostling. This is why they say pro metaphase exists, and I think they say pro metaphase exists for meiosis as well, but I ignored it and just did metaphase one. Homologs have lined up on the metaphase plate. Anaphase one, we split homologs. That's the event. Cytokinesis and telophase occur, and we now have two daughter cells that are haploid, because they only have one copy of each chromosome. Even though they have twice as much DNA, count your centromeres, that's how you know. Pro phase two is the same as mitosis, and all we're doing is lining up our sisters on the metaphase plate. Metaphase two, sisters are lined up. Anaphase two, sisters split. Telophase two, sisters are in their poles and cytokinesis, we split the cells. We now have four unique haploid daughter cells, because we went through the process twice. Let's do a summary. This is what we started with. So we started with our pairs of homologs. That was an original, it was a diploid cell that we started with. After meiosis one, we ended up with two haploid cells. Look at that. Convince yourself. Six chromosomes in the first diploid cell, only three in the two daughter cells. And then split again, and we end up with the four unique gametes. The thing that we could do is we could make a copy of this entire PowerPoint and do a different alignment during metaphase one. We could do, we could line them up differently and we would end up with different gametes. The other thing, I said there was nothing new in this summary, but I do wanna add one thing that I don't think I've said yet. When we talk about independent assortment and the eight million possible gametes resulting from independent assortment, that does not consider crossing over. So crossing over means that those eight million are actually not identical. They are likely very, very different. Okay, meiosis is amazing. Heredity is next. And then of course we have to talk about sex. So stay tuned for the lectures that are coming.


Nigerian residents of Aduakiti, the capital of Aikido state, have criticized the country's current situation as pathetic and unacceptable. They criticized Nigerian leaders for failing to capitalize on opportunities and potentials citing the removal of fuel subsidy as a factor that has worsened their challenges, reduced their purchasing power and added more burdens to their plight. And besides, the government has to do something urgently because the cost of living is just twice. The salary that we are being paid cannot be measured with what we are witnessing in the town, what we are buying. So the government should do something. This is not the Nigerial of our dream. We need to pray for Nigeria. I urge all Christians, we need to pray for this country because we don't know where we are going, we don't know where we are as of now. So we need to beg God to come and assist this country to change this to better. Going to challenge all our leaders to keep focus. I know that at the end of the tunnel, testimonies will be shared. And I want to encourage the masses, the Nigerian citizens to please keep praying for our leaders. Let's all cooperate, let's all keep faith that Nigeria will be a place to be, to be a better land, to be a green pasture for everyone to dwell in by the green. So you get notified about fresh news updates.


o the school and the college for instance one kilometres to the village college which is a fair distance really one of the furthest of any of the sites that were looked at it isn't in the green belt but it's in the countryside it borders the conservation area and listed buildings so it does have a lot of constraints and I don't think it from this sort of very simplistic assessment you could say that it's a better site than the application proposals when we don't have any sort of application on that site but I think it's clear that it's not a it has a lot of problems in comparison with the application site in terms of the there's been a sort of fair discussion around green belt issues again just to clarify the proposals as they are an affordable housing exception site they do meet the criteria for exceptional development within the green belt so they wouldn't be in appropriate development in the green belt I think that's just sort of worth clarifying I know there's been some sort of consideration around whether it's a small is it small and limited in terms of kind of an exception site it's bigger than some of the other exception sites that have been considered you know I think you also have to look at how it sort of fits on the site and the kind of visual impact and they also the visual impact assessment does show how it does fit within the kind of built up area of the village quite well in terms of it's well screened by those other, by the site boundaries and so on so it does you know that's also got to be a factor in terms of sort of green belt considerations and yes it's less than half the housing need that it's required in the village and so these are all considerations I think you know if you just focus on the number on its own it's not the whole picture in terms of drainage we will be able to secure a sort of full detailed drainage strategy that in terms of water pooling on the site there are measures that you could look at in terms of you know the sort of finished floor levels of the proposed houses in terms of run-off all the consultees are happy that it's not going to be at risk of flooding or result in kind of flooding of surrounding sites I think that probably covers me to the point that's it thank you chair okay thank you Members I think we've had a lot of information put in front of us now I feel we're probably in a position to be making a decision but I will offer one final opportunity for any final questions unless if that would help members in any way at all nope I can't see anyone so before we go to a decision I think it's important that we identify if we are thinking that we want to refuse this I think we need to be clear about on what reasons so this is what I've heard so far and I will ask if this is correct so one reason for refusal could be that it is outside of the village framework which is contrary to policy S8 the green belt intrusion test has not been fully met the density is contrary to policy H8 the rural exception it is a rural exception site and the site selection process hasn't been met those are my rough notes I probably need someone to help me expand on that but what I've got written down is that's contrary to policy H11 so those are the planning reasons I have I've heard during the debate for refusal can I just ask members quickly if that encapsulates everything or if I've missed something yep I think I'm guessing nods and equally on the flip side if members are inclined to vote in favour we have had a suggestion from the officer to include a condition around detail around the crossing point perhaps sure ok perhaps you could say that Phil so through you chair I think we've heard the discussion around the details of the pedestrian crossings and they are indicated on an access drawing as part of the application but as Steve has suggested we could add an additional condition to review that and see further detail subject to a condition which we could agree wording on with you chair if that's agreeable to members is that agreeable to members I'm seeing some nods so should members be inclined to approve then we'll include that condition wording to be finalised nothing on the road width of the road to make it adoptable yes so we actually didn't cover that did we so there was a question around would it be possible to condition road width to make it adoptable to highway standards I suppose it technically could be possible to put a condition on like that but I think it could have be a bit limiting in terms of when we start to look at the reserve matters in terms of the overall layout and the urban design implications and I'm sorry I think this is the point where we need to do this because people having roads not adoptable by highways means that there ends up being a management company that ends up charging those who are living there even more and many residents are complaining about this now they pay their council tax and they have to pay this on top of it because you've got all these things that a management company has to do so at what point are we going to say look can we at least just make it adoptable because right now nothing's highways has already pointed it out so we have been warned please let's take up that warning well officers I don't know if you want to respond to that well it's tricky to I don't think we could really put a condition on to require it to be adopted because there are other parties involved in terms of the highway authority that would have a say on that so so essentially the advice to officers is that would be unwise to condition that because it might not be enforceable essentially is that right yeah so I don't think you can it doesn't pass the tests of reasonable enforceability I don't think because a section 38 agreement which was the adoption agreement is a document, a separate document that has to be drawn up between the land owner the applicant goes through a process of certificates as to maintenance and all this kind of thing that and these days we're seeing fewer and fewer developments with that are adopted certainly the other councils that are represent it's not unusual so I don't think so I think I think nationwide is probably the same thing so unfortunately I don't think you can do it because I think that any such condition would just be appealed okay Councillor Carn is that on this point yes it's basic on this point I was coming in this is a really rather exceptional circumstance that we have evidence of problems with drainage a concern about drainage and it's absolutely essential that the the street is maintained and the only real way to ensure that is to ensure that it's managed by a public body and therefore I can see that there is an argument which might be rather exceptional in this circumstance I don't so I I just wonder whether the member of the office could look at whether that might be a factor which could cause a different approach I think we've had legal advice saying that it wouldn't be possible to include that as a condition however we'll hear from councillor Fein I'm guessing it's on this point it is I think the important distinction here is that as I understand it councillor Hawkins is not suggesting we should make it a condition that is adopted which I think perhaps councillor Carnes' point but that having specified a width the width specified bearing in mind that this is not one of the reserve access is not a reserve matter in this case the width specified should be such as to make it adoptable if that is agreed we can't make it a condition that it should be adopted but can we specify the minimum width which is what councillor Hawkins I think was seeking interested to hear the legal view on that if we can specify a width which would make it adoptable but the ego is the highways discretion whether they do then adopt it or not we could have a condition on to say that the access road should be a minimum of 500m in width similar to some of the other conditions that say it should be 10m from the boundary so officers would be comfortable including that as a condition I think I think the thing that I said is yes but I'll come on to councillor Heather Williams we're we're not trying to test your patience on the subject chair can I suggest that the wording is that we require the roads to be made to an adoptable standard not that they are adopted because we sit here and specify a width now the adopted standard width changes between this build out whereas if we say to an adoptable standard we are future proofing it if it is to go ahead so I'm not trying to be a nuisance but I do have fears if we become prescriptive then we are going to have a problem potentially later and equally it could get smaller you just never know with these things so adoptable standard and if we can't have a condition which would be preferable at least in informative thank you chair sorry chair, yet with your permission unfortunately it's a nice idea that you can't have or if you do have to an adoptable standard the condition has to be enforceable and you're going to need to employ a highway engineer to say this is to an adoptable standard and there may be a conflict in what county highways would say is that's not to their standard so I think it's just it's an impossible task because it's the the the highways department are the statutory local authority responsible for roads so if it was adopted under section 38 agreement that would be to their standards but I don't think the district council have the expertise or even if they were to get a highway engineer consultant that you could ever deem that safely to an adoptable standard I hope that makes sense it's just because you are kind of stuck in this position that if the county aren't adopting it you can't then say it's an adoptable standard but house buyers have a choice whether to buy a development that's not been adopted and they through due diligence and marketing and marketing let's hear from councillor Richard Williams I was going to make the same point about adoptable standards I mean surely there must be something we can do here in terms of having some reference point about an adoptable standard and I know maybe I'm pressing my point but I would just make a point to other members as well we're talking about affordable housing we're apparently putting or some members are planning to put significant weight on affordable housing against the green belt is a housing development where the people who end up in these houses could be clobbered with maintenance charges I mean that must cut against the affordable housing factor but on the point of highway surely there's something we can do there must be something I'll put that to officers then obviously you've heard members' concerns and what they would like how is the best way in legal planning terms that we can incorporate that into a decision to build a variable I'm sorry there is no objection from highways but what highways are said is from the indicative plans the roads they will not seek to adopt them for very reason that it doesn't meet the minimum standard for adopting roads so all I'm asking is let's at least say that we want to see them build the roads to adoptable standards as a minimum then it's up to the highways to go yes or no they won't for affordable homes please this is for affordable homes we can't not do something to make sure it carries on being affordable so can we clarify the legal standpoint and the legal advice we're getting from our lawyers is that we can't put that as a condition would it be possible to put that as an informative so essentially it's unenforceable but we can say we would recommend that the roads are built to an adoptable standard there must be somewhere we can get to we can get to the solution well possibly but it wouldn't have the same obviously clout as a condition which is I think what members are after I think just my concern is that you can have the words to an adoptable standard but what does that mean I don't think that passes the test of precision needs in to impose a planning condition or is it enforceable because who enforces it if it's adopted but highways are not adopted you can't make an agreement to agree but there's no they will look to it but it's obviously they can't guarantee that until there's an adoption agreement well yeah my advice is you can't but if members take a contribution then draft the condition to adoptable standard but I don't know how you would I don't know who would be appropriate officer at the district council to take a look at to walk along to the road and say yeah that's to adoptable standard or who you're going to employ to do that okay I think I think we've had the legal advice last comment I think and then we can hopefully wrap this up I appreciate the legal advice Jeff for myself could I add this to the list of reasons the fact that the roads potentially you where we're at because what we can't do is build affordable housing make exception for affordable housing and then put the cost of running that on to people that are you know by definition require affordable housing is there something in the planning terms that means actually this whole issue which is a very real issue is a reason for saying this is not the place because if there isn't space to do adopted roads and we're already putting more houses in that's dense you know it I very much appreciate the concerns that have been raised by members but feel that this is just strengthening my side of the debate to be quite frank I'm not sure which reason material reason that would be to refuse it affects the planning balance of very special circumstances it lightens the weight of the affordable housing I would just know since I've got the microphone so I've butted in but you know there is a policy document from the Department of Transport which says highways adoption the adoption road to the public highway advice note there must be objective criteria if you say adoptable standard that clearly means something means something to the county and according to the Department of Transport it means something so it's not an uninforcably vague requirement but given that I'm likely to vote against okay I think I think we need some clarity on this then we have the legal advice which is no you can't have that as a condition whether we want to go against that advice or have it as an informative as opposed to a condition which is uninforcable I think we need to make that decision now Martin you wish to come in I just simply want you to say that if there is concern about the term adoptable standard we just simply have to say five metres which seems to be something which could be enforced and would provide the possibility at the detailed stage of providing road system which is adoptable at a later stage give the opportunity whereas if you don't do the five metres now the likelihood of it change there is always the possibility of it changing but there's been no proposals to change that in the short term as the minimum standard so that's what we have to work with Councillor Ariel Cahn will you make in the same point okay okay unless anything's changed what I understand the position to be is the legal advice is we can't have a condition saying it needs to be adoptable standards we can have one specifying a road width so I suppose we as a committee need to decide whether we want to include a five metre condition in any approval or if we include adoptable highways adoptable standards as informative Councillor Harvey could we not have to adoptable standards and in any event no less than five metres any thoughts Councillor Hawking thank you Councillor Williams for this this is the highways document and it says plan authorities may impose specific planning conditions for the approval of details and this may include those set out in their appendix so we may impose specific planning conditions it's a highway this is from highways it's clear to me that this committee does want to see some condition imposed it would appear from what Councillor Hawking has just read out that that may be possible it is I think going to be within the capability of officers to draft something that meets the general wish of this committee both those who are inclined to oppose it and those who are inclined to support it and it is that would then be in theory enforceable according to the I don't know where that guidance came from but the government's own guidance so I think we should leave it to officers to draft something maybe in conjunction with yourself that would meet the concerns of the committee so that we can move on to the national principle Councillor Williams can I say obviously this is something that is really important to members and I jokingly said we should have dealt with this after lunch but equally I do think we have thrown a lot at the officers right now and there's documents very useful documents being raised potentially is it better to allow officers time to digest and maybe give them the access to the document that's been searched before we come to a conclusion I appreciate we're all keen to get on but equally what we don't want is something done in haste and not considered fully for the future okay I appreciate the suggestion I think we have made some progress though from what I understand so I feel I understand we may have made some progress sorry I've just been reviewing the condition that we suggested previously around details of the pedestrian crossing being agreed with you as an additional condition and given that those the same drawing that we have the drawings set out within the application have got the access road and the pedestrian crossing details within histon road I've just been looking at whether we could reword that condition to state the following which is notwithstanding the details set out on drawing number 22938 08020 0101 which is the access design drawing details of the access road and pedestrian crossing shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority the details shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details and the reason for that will be in the interest of pedestrian and highway safety in accordance with the policies HQ1 and TI2 of the local plan that would be the gist of the condition that I could suggest Councillor Hawkins thank you chair it also should include the roads in the development itself because that's what highways is saying that they will not adopt as well it's there in paragraph sorry my understanding is it's just the access to the site that is we're looking at today the roads within the development themselves will be a reserve matter that's how I understand the application right okay let's start with that I will make this point again whenever this comes up I think that's been noted so with the rewording of the original condition regarding the pedestrian crossing as Phil has just read out to members Phil that encapsulates what we're trying to achieve here in terms of getting the access which is the only thing we're talking about today up to the correct standards should we grant approval does anyone disagree with that no okay well I think we've found a middle ground anyway so I think with that we've outlined the reasons for refusal should members be inclined to refuse should members be inclined to approve we've got a some updated conditions which I believe are agreeable to the committee so I think with that we are now in a position to make a decision so I'm going to ask democratic services if they can launch a electronic vote for us so the recommendation we have members is on page 70 and the recommendation is to approve the application subject to the conditions listed in the agenda as well as the additional condition that we have just outlined so members to vote press the blue button to signal you're here if you're in favour press green if you're against that press red and to abstain press yellow I should say Councillor Harvey you are illegible to vote as you weren't here for some of the debate so you might have to remove your okay what is an abstention for that reason but shall I remove it? okay fine one step ahead of me are all the votes in so we have nine votes in total five in favour four against so that application is approved thank you members it's half past one do we, do members feel a lunch break would be appropriate now? okay so as it's bang on half one we'll have a half hour break so we'll be back to start again at two o'clock on the dot good afternoon everyone and welcome back to South Camershire District Council's planning committee we're currently up to agenda item eight in proceedings which is on page 87 of members agendas the application before us is at the car park in Walklingway Milton the proposal is for the installation of a 10 bicyclytes bike shelter in the car park the reason this is before us today at the planning committee is because the applicant is the district council the presenting officer is Amy Stocks who I believe is joining us online good afternoon Amy good afternoon can I just quickly ask Gabriel to turn his camera off please we will come to you Gabriel thank you, sorry Amy so yeah over to you any updates if there are any to the agenda and then if you could introduce the item for us please yep so just assuming everyone can see my screen at the moment the presentation we can yep perfect thank you I think I said this is for the installation of a 10 bicycle kind of bike shelter at the car park at Walklingway in Milton quick update on condition 2 there were some submitted drawings which were included in your plans pack which weren't included in under condition 2 I have highlighted where this condition changes so it's just to amend the wording saying that the work to be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans while before the wording referred to advertisements where there is none proposed during this application so we've just removed that from the wording as well as the inclusion of the two plans so just for some site context the proposal site lies within the Milton Village framework the site currently comprises of a car park which serves 24 neighbouring flats and provides 24 car spaces the site is bordered to the north south and west with residential properties while the east boundary is of the site is shared with the actual Walklingway road so the application seeks planning permission for the erection of a covered communal bicycle shelter on the car park within the car park grounds the communal bike shelter will be used by the council owned flats of the Walklingway residents just so some pictures were included on the application which just shows something of a similar structure of what will be erected there these are the additional plans that were submitted so again this is something very similar to what it would look like it's just your standard bicycle shelter really at the moment there isn't any provision for cycles on the site for people who do own them in the flats so this would be an improvement in increasing that provision as there is none again just an assembly drawing of the kind of structure you seen previously of what will be there I've just taken some pictures when I went to site so the actual bike shelter will be going in this area here where the bins are currently being put out on bin collection day I have requested under the conditions that a location for bin storage is submitted to us prior to the occupation of the actual cycle store just to ensure that there isn't an over spill of bins on the Walkway or anything like that the sorry the car park does not form any essential part of the local character and is not considered that the shelter would jeopardise the local features of the greenscape or anything like that or landscape ecological or historical importance the 24 flats that utilise the car park do not have provision for cycle storage there is a need for this infrastructure in order to support the existing development in line with the council's vision for sustainable transport officers considered that the loss of one car space in this location here would for the provision of the 10 cycle spaces in accordance with the relevant policies which prefer to sustainable transport and parking provision retrospectively would be acceptable as a council we try to promote sustainable transport and as Milton is a 25 minute cycle from the city centre officers do consider that the loss of one car space to allow for the actual doors to open up into the car park to allow people to put their cycles in would be appropriate and would be acceptable the next one again just another close up of where this would be going so it wouldn't be encroaching onto highway land or anything like that it would be just going in this location here which would then take up this bay which you can see is currently being used for bin storage the application has garnered quite a lot of support from councillors and from third party representatives there has been a one objection from the third party rep which should voice concern in relation to a presence of a shed within the wider car parking area and how this would impact the number of spaces said to be existing on the site in the application officers did check that this piece of land was within the council's ownership and that this shed that is there at the moment is unauthorised and isn't accepted so it could be removed if necessary it's not on it's on council on land it's not been the piece of land hasn't been given to the owner of the shed or anything like that Milton Parish Council have no recommendation for the scheme the parish council did previously query that there is a stump here shown if there could be a tree replaced but given that the stump doesn't add anything to the landscape officers do consider it would be a bit unfair to ask for its replacement the highways the local highways authority don't have an objection to the development principle but did voice some concerns on the reliance of the five spaces shown here in the application to provide relief of the loss of the one space within the car park boundaries and there was also requested proof that the 24 spaces that said that there is existing be kind of shown there are no parking bays outlined on the site not designated specifically not clearly so the removal of the one space is considered acceptable given the no provision on site for the cycle store but in regards to actually demonstrating the existing 24 car spaces it is considered that the car park was constructed in accordance with policies of the local plan back when it was approved in 1969 so to hold the site accountable to new policies in relation to parking parking provision and basizing would be unfair through this application and again just to reiterate with Milton being so close from the city centre it would be likely that not all of the occupants actually have of the neighbouring flats have cars and would actually need cycle storage which they don't currently benefit from so in the bin storage would be secured through condition just to reiterate that given that there was quite a few bins shown in the location of the cycle store so just a very quick presentation officers do recommend that the application is approved subject to conditions thank you thank you chair thank you very much Amy we do have a few public speakers on this application members but before we move on to that does anyone have any questions of clarification for the officer Councillor Richard Williams thank you chair just a quick one could you just clarify for me which way the bus shelter will be facing the cycle storage busway is on the brain why would that be it's the cycle shelter is it facing out towards the road and then because I'm just thinking if it's facing into the car park we'd probably lose two spaces rather than one because people would be needing to come around it it is facing into the car park so it would be opening up into the into the car park area rather than the highways that wouldn't be suitable as given that it would block footpaths so the applicant has put it so that it does open up into if I get up a quick plan just to show quickly it should have been included in the plans pack there we go if I share my screen quickly once again just to show it's a very plain plan in that sense where you can see where the locate assuming my screen is visible again this is where it would be locating it would open up so it's more so kind of not the grass verge where those bollards are so the actual doors would open up into one space while this is included onto where the bollards were shown in that photograph I can get that photograph up again if needs being so essentially the bike store won't be in a parking space so the access to and from it would be using that space apologies yes I should have made that clear understood thank you Members any further questions of clarity or can we, Councillor Hawkins please thank you chair from the photograph that we saw we can see that the bins tend to be put in that parking space now how, where are they going to be allowed to put their bins if not there so so there was an update from the applicant this morning which did say that they are looking to find a new location I believe it's condition three or four put onto the plant that says that they will have to submit a yes it's condition four they would have to confirm the location of the bin store to ensure that these bins are kept off of the local highway and things like that as there is going to be a cycle store in there prior to the actual use of the cycle store so they would be able to build it but they just wouldn't be able to use it so it is in their best interest to get that information over to us sooner rather than later as I don't believe this is an actual designated area for the bins anyway it's just more so just by they've been gathered that's clear thank you for that okay Amy thank you for that we may call on you a bit later on but we're going to move on to our public speakers now the first of which we saw slightly earlier Gabrielle Bienzebas I'm sure that's the authentic pronunciation can you hear me? very faintly, is there any chance you could increase the volume or move closer to the mic possibly? yes one second is that any better? very slightly, still very difficult to hear you okay I mean if this is the best we have we'll do our best to accommodate you Gabrielle so am I right and thinking you're representing CAMP Cycle today? no I am a CAMP Cycle trustee but I represent Milton Cycle campaign so Milton Cycle campaign well I'm the leader of Milton Cycle campaign so Milton Cycle campaign won the £15,000 grant from the CO2 community back in 2020 and this is part of that of one of those schemes that we kind of put in into the plans so we have a few comments to make on this application so we support the application but we have a few concerns so the main concerns remain on these several stands that should be this sank into concrete to make them more secure and more difficult to remove or have shared nets also called security nets does to make it more difficult to remove those stands and impede or basically audit that cycle theft if access was to be gained to the set the Coder Padlock which I believe is one of the one of the items that the cycle store comes with a Coder Padlock we would like that Coder Padlock the number to be three to six months just because when there is a number it's likely that more people will find out and it's just for security purposes it makes sense to have that number being replaced or updated frequently or replace it with a key key by padlock instead and have a master key at the party's office which is just across the road actually and one observation that I'll make but I'm aware of this in as I kind of I kind of being pushing through these plans is that there is not sufficient cycle parking for all the residents and also the cycle parking that will be provided will only be suitable for standard two wheel cycles so that's image one from the LTM from figure five two from the LTM 120 so no hand cycles, cargo bikes stand them so cycles with trailers or any other cycle types that you can imagine so it's only standard two wheel bikes which is possibly okay for the use but you know it's just to be it's an observation and the last one it's one to do with the visibility of the shed from memory I don't think the area is that well lit and also the the shed will be located adjacent to the car park in this area which is currently it's just a grass strip and my observation is that it might be a good idea seeing as there is quite a lot of car movements not that many car movements but there is some car movements in and out the site to maybe mark the edges of the shed with reflective tape or some sort of reflective material in order to do a visibility of the shed and those are my comments Great, thank you very much it's useful to hear those Members, do we have any questions of clarification for Gabrielle? No, I can't see any Gabrielle, thank you very much for taking the time to join us and give us your thoughts Those were very... Martin, did you want to ask? For the... Okay, we'll come on to that in a second We do have one more public speaker before we move on to the debate and we have the local member, Councillor Judith Rippeth who's joining us virtually Afternoon Judith, you're muted Can you hear me now? Yes, there you go Here and see you fine I think you know the procedure three minutes and then we may ask the questions of you so please whenever you're ready Thank you The idea for secure cycle parking at this location first came about through a successful grant application to the Zero Carbon Community scheme The site is within easy cycling distance of many places of work in Cambridge and Water Beach which are quite commutable on a bicycle such as the Science Park As you will have seen on the plans, the shelter will use one car parking space and a small area to the front of it which currently has number of bins scattered next to a tree stump Although the photos show lawn in front of the block of flats, the area near to the bins is obviously not usable in the summer because of the smell I've had to confirm that the matter of storage is being taken on by the Assets and Compliance team who are looking into changing the bins to larger ones and fewer and additionally creating storage area for them Importantly, if granted permission this would be implemented before the bike shelter This will have the additional benefit of tidying up the immediate environment and improve the amenity Although anecdotal evidence and not an official survey I can confirm that I've visited the flats on both a weekend and during the week and at different times a day The car park has never been at capacity and indeed often with many spaces left vacant To enable residents to make more journeys by bicycle or indeed in some cases not to require ownership of a car at all this shelter will enable them to make that step, removing the need to carry bikes up to their cases and into flats or stored on balconies I ask that committee supports this application which will have both environmental and health and well-being benefits and make life for residents just that little bit easier Thank you and I understand that Lawrence has a couple of short statements from my ward colleagues We do have written comments from councillors Brannam and Bear Park which we do have physical copies of here I wasn't proposing on reading them out but essentially they are wholeheartedly supportive as you have been of the application I just wanted to check that Everyone is in possession of those Members, do we have any questions of clarity for one of the three local members? No, I think that's extremely clear Judith Thank you very much for I'll stay on to see what happens Those are all our public speakers We'll move into the debate section now Councillor Cahn, I think you had a I had a question on the office It seems to me, it appears to me and maybe the office could confirm that this actually is permitted development for a local authority development under one of the permitted development things, it's small building less than four metres high and I would think below the volume I just wanted to explain to me why that doesn't account and why an application has been put in by our three U chair it's not permitted development flats don't benefit from permitted development rights so they can't install that without planning permission It's because it's a local, it's a flat housing development rather than a general It's also an outbuilding forward of the main building line as well so it wouldn't be permitted development on that basis Okay, thank you very much Members, does anyone wish to ask any further questions of clarity of officers or make any points for debates? Councillor Heather Williams, please Thank you chair Just in relation to the comments that were made about lighting I'm just wondering if we're able to put a requirement for lighting or reflective material as well as requested and whether we could just condition that to taking on forward the comments that were made on the basis that it is our application as well so I'm sure we wouldn't appeal ourselves chair Three chair Condition three talks about materials to be used in external construction of the development and as you can see it's a fairly standard metal type structure that will be put on the side in terms of reflective material I think that's something we could include as part of the structure but I think lighting is probably a step too far in terms of being a reasonable requirement as a result of the scale of the development Chair, if I may then can we condition reflective material and inform ourselves of lighting please So you're proposing including in condition three specifying reflective material then adding an informative if possible proper lighting Officers, do you need to chip in on that or is that clear? I'm happy to include the reflective material and as part of condition three and informative yes Okay, good Members, does anyone have an issue with including those two points? Okay, so we'll include those should we vote to approve this Members, does anyone wish to make any further points or like me do you feel in a position to make a decision? Agreed, okay well members we have the recommendation is on page 96 and that is to approve subjects of the conditions laid out in the papers with the addition of the reflective material in condition three and the informative around lighting Members, does anybody wish to vote against or of stain on that recommendation? Nope Can we take it by affirmation that is agreed? Agreed, okay so that is unanimous Thank you very much everybody Thank you Amy We're now on to agenda item number nine which is on page 97 of our papers The application is at Braybank Barns Ellsworth Road Connington, the application is for a single story side extension the reason it is before us today is because the applicant is related to a staff member of the council so it has to come to us as a matter of process The presenting officer is Dominic Bush who I see has joined us online Dominic, good afternoon Good afternoon Dominic, I'll hand over to you then if there's any updates to the reports in front of us please do give us the updates and then introduce the reports, please Thank you Perfect, thank you, can I just confirm if you can see my powerpoint? We can There are no updates to the application and as you just mentioned the application is for a single story side extension at four Braybank Barns in Connington There are two applications there's the householder application and then the listed building application the same proposal The application site as shown on this map is located in Connington and is accessed from Ellsworth Road running to the west The property is a single story semi-detached dwelling which is attached to three Braybank Barns at the south shown here Whilst to the west of the site is the residential gardens of three Braybank Barns The application site was a previously agricultural outbuilding that has been converted previously to a residential use This GIS map shows a larger view of the area with the grade two listed Braybank Barns farmhouse further to the south of the site The application site to which this application is concerned is currently listed due to its proximity to the grade two listed farmhouse as well as the date the application or the property was constructed The property is also located outside of the development framework of Connington which is shown by the dash line to the west This is the proposed site plan for the application with the proposed side extension shown here to the north elevation of the existing property Here are the existing and proposed elevations with the extension shown here at the bottom This is the existing and proposed floor plans Here are some contextual photos of the site This is the front of the property looking to the west This is looking south from the north of the property where the extension will join the north elevation This is looking south west from where the extension will sit towards three Braybank Barns with the residential gardens visible in the foreground This is looking south further down the site with the listed farmhouse visible in the distance This is a closer up view of the farmhouse This is the view of the listed farmhouse from along Ellsworth Road The conservation officer held no objections to the proposal and the detail of their opinion can be seen in section 6.2 of the report and as laid out in section 9 of the report the recommendation is for approval subject to the following conditions Thank you, Chair Dominic, thank you very much Members, we have no public speakers on this application so I think we can go straight to debate and any questions of clarification for the officers Members, over to you if there's any Sorry, so Members, over to you if there's any questions of clarity for the officer or anyone wishes to chip in with a debate we'll go to councillors Hawking, Sanford and then Martin Cunn Thank you, Chair Three, it's just some clarification and again this is to do with dimensions so forgive me if it might seem a bit a small issue but it's not We have in paragraph 3.2 where it says the single suicide stories extend by approximately 4.66 so the north 5.3 metres wide and then in 8.16 we have 6.5 metres and 4.9 metres so how big is this extension just those numbers are inconsistent So Dominic, if you could confirm the the actual scale of the extension Sorry, apologies This might be a bit clearer if you can see this the internal measurements of the extension so it's 4.3 metres internally to the north and then 4.226 metres in width That's a different set of figures to what's in that report So the ones in the measurements in the report one of them will be the external measurements I can't measure them at the exact moment in time but I can come back to you with the measurements externally if that would be helpful I'm not sure it's clear about my question So Dominic, in 8.16 of our report it says the extension is 6.5 metres by 4.9 and then earlier in the report somewhere which I've now lost it says it's slightly smaller So it will be the smaller measurement it's not 6.9, sorry So we should go by 3.2 in the report which says it's 4.66 wide by 5.3 Is that correct? If we take in the measurements in 3.2 of the report Thank you Sorry, it's just We've clarified that Councillor Sanford, please Thank you Chair I am somewhat familiar with this property having put leaflets in there mailbox on a number of occasions recently Are you declaring an interest then? That's not an interest As long as the mailbox remains that's fine It is a rural location The property does not overlook other habitation and it is not overlooked by the habitation As the proposed materials match those of the existing property that would be my only concern I see that's called out in 18.7 that it will be matching So I would be inclined to vote in favour of this application Thank you Councillor Martin I see that the extension is proposed with a reduced roof line set back from the original building which makes it look rather like a little tag-on In this instance I know this is generally what is requested of extension but in this instance I think the building would have been better if the existing line was continued and the existing size continued so that it was seen as part of the original building I think it would look much less of an add-on and I don't think there's sufficient reason to refuse it because we have to deal with what's coming but it's just a comment that one has to be a bit more careful sometimes in not always following a doctor in a response to these occasions I think that comment has been noted Members Is anyone inclined to either vote against or abstain on this? I haven't heard anyone with any negative comments that they think are warrant refusal but if anyone would like to put that forward now please do Members we do have a recommendation on page 104 which is to approve subjects to conditions as laid out in the papers Does anyone wish to vote against or abstain on that recommendation? Members Can we take that as approved by Affirmation? Agreed So that's unanimous approval Dominic, thank you very much but if you stay on the line I think you're going to present the next item to us as well which is a follow-on so a gender item 10 members same reason it's in front of us but a slightly different application Dominic, perhaps if you could introduce that to us please Do you want me to run through the presentation briefly again? It will just be the same presentation but that's fine If you could outline what the difference between this application and the previous would be We don't need to go into detail again So the disability application is just concerned with the heritage aspect of the proposal So that would be the impact on the listed building which is located here and as highlighted by the conservation officers comments the heritage importance of the property is related rather to the relationship between the properties within the farmyard rather than the individual property and therefore the proposal is acceptable in its modest scale and the impact it would have on the proposal So for clarity this is just the listed building consent that needs to be sought because this application is within the cartilage of a listed building albeit the building itself is not listed Correct Okay, thank you Members Any questions or my view is it's fairly straightforward and we can probably move to a decision on this unless any members have any pressing questions Nope Okay, well members we have a recommendation in front of us on page 110 and that recommendation is to approve subject to the two conditions as laid out in the papers. Do any members feeling inclined to vote against or abstain on this recommendation Nope, can we again take that by affirmation to approve? Agreed so that is also unanimously approved Dominic, thank you very much for that and with that we'll move on to agenda item 11. This is an application at 6 Marys Green Great Shelford The proposal is the demolition and replacement of an outbuilding in the cartilage of a grade 2 listed building The applicant is a Mr T hacking and the reason it is before us today is because again it concerns the demolition of a listed building We have the presenting officer, Karen Pell Coggins who's with us on the screen Karen, good afternoon Afternoon members Apologies chair, I just realised I may know the applicant so I'm just as a potential interest Does that preclude you from taking part? No, maybe a former colleague of mine Okay I suppose it's up to your discretion whether you continue or not I suppose Yeah, maybe I'll go and sit this one I've actually just I think you just fancied a break Yeah, I do You know I need to leave frequently Okay, so the clarity council Richard Williams may or may not have a conflict so he's playing it safe and removing himself for this item and presumably the next So with that, sorry to interrupt you, Karen We can see your presentation on the screen so if you would like to present the report to us and then hang around in case there's any questions Sure, so this is two planning applications One, a householder application for erection of an outbuilding and secondly a listed building consent application for demolition of the existing outbuilding Bear with me So the site is within the development framework of Great Shelford outside the conservation area which you can see the pink line here The conservation area is to the south of the site and it is a grade 2 listed building The I just move on to the site plan The outbuilding is to the north west of the existing dwelling single story outbuilding not in a particularly good condition and the application seeks to demolish this outbuilding and replace it one with a very similar scale design etc Then I just move in on so it's an aerial photograph of the site so you can see the listed building here it's situated so this is Maris Green to the left hand side of the picture here This is the outbuilding with the roof and the listed building faces westwards towards the garden of the main garden of the property These are some photographs from the street so this is on the left hand side is the photograph of the listed building which is the render building here This is the existing outbuilding which is to be demolished and replaced an existing tree which will be removed just here Again this is from coming up Maris Green towards the site so again you can see the outbuilding here the existing listed building here behind the neighbouring property which is this garage and house in the foreground Here's a photograph from the garden of the listed building which shows the rear elevation of the outbuilding currently and the building on the left hand side here is the garage to the neighbour Then I've just put some photographs in so you can see the sort of character and appearance of the main listed building so the one to the top left is the front elevation main front elevation the bottom left is the rear elevation and then you've got all of the elevations of the outbuilding which shows you this one is the one which faces the road this is the one which faces the parking area the one which faces the garden and then the one that faces the neighbour So in terms of the existing floor plans the outbuilds used as a studio storage area storage area storage garage at the moment although it's mainly used for storage simple design with a dual pitched roof and it's timber cladding as you can see in the photographs and corrugated tin roof The new outbuilding to replace that again would be a studio and a study stroke workshop area again a simple sort of dual pitched roof building which would be timber weather boarding with corrugated tin roof painted black there are some roof lights and a flue will serve a wood burner within the studio area So the main considerations for the full application is the principle of development the character and appearance of the area, heritage assets trees, biodiversity and neighbour amenity and then for the list of building applications which will come on to is the impact on heritage assets Thank you Thank you Karen Members, do you have any questions of clarification on Karen's presentation before we move to our public speakers Nope, I don't think we do so thank you Karen we will come back to you but we're going to go to the parish council representative Councillor Greg Price who I believe is joining us online Councillor Price Good afternoon Chairman, thank you I'm speaking on behalf of Great Shelford Parish Council and we are in support of this application we have obviously looked at it and we believe that a sympathetic development will enhance the local area however we would like the tree that will need to be removed to be replaced elsewhere on the property of a mature native tree Is that it? Okay Short and sweet Yes Thank you very much, it's very concise and we appreciate you taking the time to join us to give us your comments Members, do you have any questions for Councillor Price I don't think we do Councillor Price so again thank you very much It's time to speak to us this afternoon We also have the two local members for Shelford who are actually with us today in the committee Councillor Fein and Jackson Woods Gentleman, I don't know if you want to speak as local members at this point it's not essential but you may speak in the debate as committee members equally Councillor Fein Thank you Chair I think with Councillor Jackson Woods I'll go first on this Yes, I think this is a very simple application really Marius Farm is an important 17th century building The outbuilding in question effectively protects it, shields the position but it is not in very good condition, I have to say I haven't actually been inside it to check the structural condition of it but clearly it is in need of works and the heritage officer has said that proposed replacement building which is slightly different from that previously considered has no concerns about it is very sympathetic it's covered in very similar materials it's a very similar scale and design materials and I make no comment on the tree the trees officer says that it's not in particularly good condition however it is sort of directly against the current building so inevitably it's not in the best condition the trunk sits against the building so I have no views on that but I do think that it does make sense to approve the replacement of this probably 20th century we don't know the exact date it could be 20th century outbuilding with a new building of similar and sympathetic design Thank you Councillor Fane Councillor Jackson Wood, would you like to speak as local member? Yes, thank you as Councillor Fane mentions although I'm not familiar or not had any partake in this application to date I am familiar with the exterior of the building which is in a relatively dilapidated state certainly from its external experience sorry, its external I can't speak appearance, there we go sorry so absolutely I'd be very supportive of something that was very similar in appearance albeit a lot newer and better so I think it would definitely enhance the road in the surrounding area Great, thank you very much those are all our public speakers I think we can move into the debate part of proceedings and if members have any questions of clarification as well then now is the time to ask Councillor Heather Williams and then Hawkins Thank you chair, it's just in relation to Councillor Price about the tree if that's something that we can condition looking just for a nod or a shake of head or that was a look that means it's a no so okay, we've posed a question, it would be nice if a tree was planted but it's been made very clear to me that's not possible but as there is general consensus and support chair then I see no reason my committee would deviate from that So just on that point I'm assuming that the response would be it's unreasonable to request a replacement tree planted Yeah in this instance chair if it was a protected tree by a tree preservation order or in the conservation area then yes I think there would be some grounds to say it was a reasonable position but in this instance now they could obviously remove that tomorrow and there would be no requirement for us to be able to replace that tree in any form so in this instance my advice is no Okay understood Well councillors Hawkins sorry councillors Hawkins Martin, can't please Thank you chair, a quick one hopefully the paragraph 7.1 on page 115 where it talks about the third party representation, I just wanted to confirm because obviously they're concerned that the building doesn't overhang the neighbour's land and I presume that's the one behind Can we confirm that the building is not higher than what the proposed new building is not higher than what is there now Karen, that might be one for you I think the question was around the third party representations of that just didn't want the gutters on the new building to overhang the neighbouring property is it, can you just clarify one if that is the case and two the new building would be larger than the existing Yeah, no problem so the site plan submitted with the application shows the roof plan of the building gutters would not overhang the neighbouring boundary and the height of the building is exactly the same as the existing building Thank you, it's just been pointed out 8.33 does confirm that the guttering doesn't overhang the neighbouring property so hopefully that has alleviated the concern of the third party Martin, please Simply I wanted to comment that I always quoted that the tree is a yew tree looking at the picture we look more like a blue seed of old spruce which are non-native trees and so it would be less that would just make it less serious consideration than if it was a native tree Okay Thank you very much Members, again any final comments before I move us to a decision Okay Members, we have a recommendation page 119 and the recommendation is to approve subject to the conditions listed in the in the agenda papers Members, does anyone wish to either vote against that recommendation or abstain on the decision I don't see any, can we take that by affirmation that we approve agreed so that is unanimously approved Members, last application and it is linked again as the previous two were so Karen hopefully you haven't left yet, you're still there If you take us through agenda item 12 which is the same application but is the listed building consent that goes with the application we've just approved Yep, so can you see my presentation We can Excellent I will leave it on this mode if that's okay So, as you've seen it before so the listed building application is for demolition of the existing outbuilding so many issues to consider are the impact on heritage assets with specific reference to loss of any historic fabric Thank you, happy to show any details that you need to see again Thank you Members, as with the previous two applications in Covington this is essentially the same application but it's the listed building consent that's required as the building proposed to be removed is listed Members, do we have any any questions on this one for the officer or is it all straightforward as I think it is Councillor Heather Williams Sorry to disappoint, Chair If I could just ask Karen about materials in destruction you mentioned about that is there any way of trying to ask for the materials to be when it's demolished sensitively so that those materials can be reused or is that not possible just to try and keep the historical fabric because there will be other properties that could benefit from that material rather than bulldozer attached to it It may I wouldn't say it's necessarily appropriate given the quality of the materials in terms of what the materials actually are then and they're not in particularly good condition but that is something that potentially could be conditioned, I wouldn't recommend it though necessarily Your advice is taken Karen Thanks Thank you Members Anything further on this one Are we all in a position to make a decision Okay, well we have a recommendation on page 127 and that is again to approve, subject to the two conditions laid out in the papers does anyone wish to either vote against or abstain on that recommendation Can we take it by affirmation that is approved so that is unanimously approved Karen, thank you very much Members, we're at the end of the planning applications we need to look at now we do have two more items on the agenda that's the enforcement and appeals report I would ask if someone could go fetch Richard because I'm hoping he's not conflicted on the last two items so we're just going to I don't think we need to break for this we're just going to fetch our member back so people can give us 30 seconds John, are you presenting the next item the enforcement? Yes, I am chair, thank you very much it would just be a note to flutter the other exit this summary chair we're just waiting for a member to come back who is now with us so if we're ready we'll move on to agenda item 13 which is the enforcement report and we have John Shuttlewood joining us virtually John, good afternoon Good afternoon chair, nice to see everybody So I'll hand over to you to introduce the report for us please Thank you very much chair this is the report for September basically just summarising all August events so at the end of August and start September we're 142 open cases in South Cambridgeshire rise of four from the previous month so we had 16 new cases opened and 12 investigations completed we served one enforcement notice in the parish of Linton that was regarding operational development updates to service delivery still current vacancy in the principal enforcement officer lead role that has been out for external advertisement in the past weeks hopefully we have attracted some candidates and officers will be interviewing any of those candidates in due course however following a very successful recruitment process I'm pleased to announce that Tony Wallace has been successful in recruitment for a senior planning enforcement officer on a permanent basis Tony was as you may know acting up into that role for the past six months turning the page and going down onto last month we reported the introduction of new ways of alleged breaches of planning control being reported online along with new online web content in reference to what councillor Hanley said last month about communications we are still awaiting a full suite of communications to be released in the coming months but I would ask members I'd be very great for if you members could steer any parish council requests at the moment to lead inquiry form and make them aware of it it would actually make they then have the opportunities to upload any additional documents and photographs themselves and once they've submitted everything online they then get back once the information has been validated they get back details of the case officer and a case reference and a point of contact should members wish for specific updates on any sites please come to me permanently just come to me individually and I will play offline via email I'm happy to meet you in person I'll give you a telephone call updates on Smithy Fent an experienced enforcement officer has been allocated to the Smithy Fent site investigation and the officer has undertaken a site visit and has begun engaging with the on-site community on issues to do with the lawful use of the site the site visit has indicated very low levels of occupancy across the site where there are several empty and vacant awful pitches the compliance team are therefore working with council colleagues to explore and agree the council's approach to the site and ensuring its appropriate occupation and management now I understand the officer Neil Langley was due to meet some of the occupiers on the site in a very new future unfortunately this meeting has had to be rescheduled that's a report chair thank you very much if anybody has any comments or questions I'll take them now thank you John thank you very much for that we do have a few in the room so councillor Heather Williams and then Hawkins please thank you first of all just echo congratulations to Tony because I know I think we all know he's been working very hard on acting up in his role so that's good on the vacancies I just want to clarify because there's also a vacancy on the Cambridge City only side I take it that is dealt with amongst the Cambridge City only staff we're not having to make up for that and therefore losing hours on our side of things so some reassurance on that please and in relation to Smithy Fen now there are I won't say who but there are only two councillors that are on this committee today that this agenda item does not predate and it may actually predate all bar one so I say that but it's been on the agenda every single meeting since I got elected we have real issues with that site for a very long time and just this little paragraph here that says we've allocated probably yet another person to it doesn't really give a sense of encouragement that we're making progress and there are safeguarding issues in relation to the site as well and I feel like I am channeling councillor Nick Wright right now but even if we can't have it here can we have a briefing chair or something on this site because I know councillor Hawkins in the past said it's very frustrating when you've got an application that's on for a period of time nothing has been on more than this and it really does feel like it's never ending and I know it's a particular issue for the local residents so can we have some sort of briefing perhaps or meet with officers as committee or whatever whatever it is that means we get more than these couple of sentences because it's such an important issue that being said with everything else what you were saying about to parish councils as well if you really handy we had something that wrote down if you wanted to communicate that send it out to us and I'm sure all members of the council would send it on to their parishes and encourage it but probably better to give us something in writing than let 10 councillors here interpret their own way of what you've just said and repeat it to parish councils alright thank you chair thank you for that so John I think two questions there one regarding the vacancy in Cambridge city is that up for Cambridge city to recruit rather than us in Southcams and two would it be possible for interested members to get an offline briefing on Smithy Fent to go into a bit more detail thank you chair far answer Councillor Williams questions in reverse so the writing of the email yes and I can send that across to all members and in fact to get that to all councillors that'd be fantastic with regard to Smithy Fent I can certainly take that back to Stephen Kelly executive officer and Neil Langley who is working on the case and I will let Stephen contact you regarding that but it's obviously not just the planning issue on site as you allude to there are safeguarding issues which can suggest it's police it's housing as a whole manner of suite of issues on site there and regarding the city and the district council split you asked the question as whether the district is some way kind of compromised as through the vacancies of the city and whether there's some kind of imbalance at all I'd just like to state here at the moment that I am actually was originally a full city officer dealing purely with city and due to the amalgamation of the two areas in the shared service and the fact that the enforcement team on a day to day basis has now come together I am now taking my time out from the city and working on district council so the city might actually say in reverse that they're actually losing some officers as well but currently basically the enforcement team is part of the shared service the shared service we are Southcams employees so we are Southcams employees Southcams put out the advertisements for the shared service across the two local planning and authority areas but we try our very best to have per ratio the same amount or resources in both the city and in districts Thank you John we appreciate that but I think Councillor Williams would like a bit further clarification if that's okay Yes, thank you, I want to clarify that question particularly it's not a case of where people have traditionally worked or not it is joint service but it does say on here Cambridge city only and then says of the vacancy what we don't have is sort of SCDC only so I'm asking if that's happening or what are we seeing that SCDC only is having to compensate at the moment for the vacancy and where are we at we've heard where we're at with the vacancy for the principal planning but where are we at for the planning compliance officer nothing in relation to how you're spending your time or historically which officer is compensating for which authority specifically around that vacancy to ensure that both councils are receiving the service that they will require thank you chair and so go on John I was going to say how understood it was that all the greater Cambridge planning service enforcement team is everyone in this list in the agenda I think perhaps the Cambridge city only might be a bit misleading unless you're saying something else I thought everyone was one happy family now everyone needs one happy family chair I can report that I'm actually struggling on my report I printed out to actually see where it says Cambridge city only so perhaps that's just my copy but I can assure councillor Williams that all all officers in the team work on both codes city and district 130 if that helps okay I'm afraid I don't have a massive document in front of me councillor Williams but I will take your word for it with regards to the senior enforcement post that is due to close I believe on the 5th of October so we see what candidates we get from that I understand that there has been some interest shown about that post thank you thank you John thank you chair thank you so I've got a list of speakers I'm not sure if it's up to date I've got councillors Hawkins and Carn is that historic give them to me a platform okay thanks thank you chair on the issue of Smithy Fein we have been doing a lot of work in the background we did actually have a consultant do some work on this we have been doing a lot of work in the background we did actually have a consultant on this and what we found is there's a lot of sites that are no longer occupied as you probably heard and there's some things that are not applicable now that were there and etc etc so they're a lot more complicated than has you know that is seen on the surface but there is work on it and yes you know we've had to change the personnel has times gone on there is progress on it and we'll take it forward to have some briefing on the other I understand that I understand that but just so I show you that it's not quiet on the compliance is what we call it now actually there was a notification through the chief exec update at the beginning of August about what the new process is and in the website and stuff like that so I think if you look back you see that we already have actually sent confirmation out to members and if memory serves me right we also had one from communications team but we can send that out again just to remind members yeah that's fine I'm saying that to everyone and last but not least I thought we were going to have a briefing on the compliance the new compliance policy for the planning committee am I missing that can we look at that please thanks okay I think officers have taken that away specifically members does anyone else have any further questions for our enforcement officer John no okay well John thank you very much appreciate it's always difficult being at the back end of the agenda because you never know when to join but we appreciate your patience so thank you very much and I'm sure we'll see you at the forthcoming meeting thank you very much yes you will okay members this is agenda item 14 and I believe Mr McIntosh will be presenting this one to us thank you chair the item is for information for members if there's any questions I'm happy to ask them or take any queries away if I can't answer them off the top of my head now but yes obviously it's the usual format in terms of appeal decisions under awaiting decisions and one sort of in the pipeline being prepared I don't know if there's any queries I'm happy to take those now I really wanted to ask about the bill on Implington Lane which I was very glad to see has we were dismissed it was quite a complicated it was an issue where we disagreed with the reports of the land drainage issue I just wondered what issues had been the main how the inspector dealt with that issue the fact that we disagreed with the statutory consultees on that one in our reasons for refusal what was the main supporting how could you respond because I thought it would be interesting to find out sorry can you just confirm which item it is number 60 Implington Lane the decision I haven't read the decision myself but I'm happy to get a copy of it across to you if you'd like to read it I can get that for you and send it over thank you very much councillor Heather Williams thank you on page 137 I don't believe we've ever been turned away before so just some explanation as to why on that application we were turned away thank you chair yeah I imagine it's been deemed to be out of time by the planning inspector sold that basis to the appeal can't proceed so for clarity it's not Osdor's been turned away the application to appeal has been turned away because it's passed the decision time presumably as I'm guessing they're appealing a refusal the appeal is not going to be allowed presumably as it was a retrospective that should now need to be enforced or a fresh application forthcoming it either rose to options I'll have to check with the enforcement team about the status of enforcement action I'll say if we could because I think it's really important if we've managed to uphold something appeal them especially retrospectives that we do then enforce thank you chair absolutely as we had in Gertan last month appreciate you weren't here actually if members remember that one members any final questions on the appeals section of the agenda nope okay members I think we've got that we're at the end so thank you very much everyone officers, members of the committee anyone that's joined us from the public to addresses today yep thank you very much for your involvement the days of our next meeting is Wednesday the 12th of October