To receive any questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.
Minutes:
Mr Smith (Chair of Cullompton Town Team) referring to (Cabinet 28 January 2016) Minute 130 – Masterplan – North West Cullompton Urban Extension) asked that the Council make every effort to ensure that the North West Extension is built in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges and not the Manual for Streets (MfS). With houses facing onto a new busy road, death or injury would be inevitable. He then quoted from a letter that had been sent to Members in which he stated that:
At a meeting of the Cullompton Town Team on the 4th February, we were shocked and alarmed at a report that was received concerning the Northern Relief Road planned from Tiverton Road to Willand Road. The Town Team has requested that I write to you on their behalf.
It was reported from the meeting in Cullompton on Thursday 28th January that Ian Sorensen had held to his view that this should be a narrow street with houses fronting directly onto it “to use pedestrians to slow the traffic down”.
Brian Hensley’s email reply to John Berry on 15th February 2016 demonstrates a catastrophic misinterpretation of the Manual for Streets (MfS). He says “Kingfisher Reach was agreed through an unusual route. Mid Devon planning committee members originally wanted an extension of Swallow Way, to a similar standard. That type of layout, with a separate distributor road was much more expensive and was effectively made obsolete by the introduction of the Manual for Streets in 2007.”
There is no way that the MfS made a Swallow Way standard of road obsolete – please read again the MfS title page:- “Manual for Streets, published March 2007, gives new advice for the design of residential streets in England and Wales. It represents a strong Government and Welsh Assembly commitment to the creation of sustainable and inclusive public spaces.”
Please also read again the Introduction:- “ Its (MfS) scope is limited to residential and other lightly trafficked streets, although some of its principles may be applied to other road types where appropriate. It is not, however, meant to be used for trunk routes of any description, as these roads are covered by the Highways Agency’s Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. “
Kingfisher Reach is now a continuation of Swallow Way which is a distributor road. Recently, the junction between Swallow Way and Kingfisher Reach was consciously altered so that all of the Swallow Way traffic is directed through Kingfisher Reach – so it is obviously not “lightly trafficked” and is so outside the scope of the MfS.
Mr Brunt again referring to (Cabinet 28 January 2016) Minute 130 – Masterplan – North West Cullompton Urban Extension) stated that: I have been a Cullompton Resident for over 40 years. I own the 18 acres of land to the western edge of the allocated development area under the masterplan and wanted to be involved in the masterplan development but was prevented from so doing unless I was prepared to sign up to one of the land promoters virtually giving them complete control over my land and its development. I was approached by all the land promoters in turn but they would only take my land forward if I signed up with them. My architect and professional advisor on my behalf approached the professional firm (Messrs Clifton Emery) engaged to draft the masterplan but even after several requests, they were not prepared to enter into any discussion at all due to “client confidentiality”. Was this masterplan under the control of the District Council or under the control of the land promoters? Why was I prevented from being involved in the masterplan unless I signed over my land to one of the promoters who in my opinion had very little practical knowledge of the needs of the local community. I circulated a letter to you last week setting out my intentions for the land and would like to pay tribute to the help I have received from several Members who I understand will be putting forward an amendment today to address my concerns over the formulation of the masterplan. Please may it have your support?
Mr Davis again referring to (Cabinet 28 January 2016) Minute 130 – Masterplan – North West Cullompton Urban Extension) stated that he lived next door to the proposed entrance to the site, as a resident he did not agree that St Georges View should be the temporary access to the site it was too narrow and not wide enough for 2 trucks to pass, he requested that the access be reviewed.
The Chairman indicated that the Head of Planning and Regeneration would provide answers to the above questions during the debate on the item.
Mr Freeman referring to (Cabinet 11 February 2016) Minute 153 – Establishment) stated that he worked on a daily basis with Building Control and Planning officers, over the past 3 to 4 years the number of Building Control officers and inspectors had decreased considerably from 6 inspectors and I full time manager to a part time manager and 2 inspectors. He understood the constraints and the need to reduce officers. He asked the authority to look into this and reverse the trend.
The Head of Planning and Regeneration explained that there were 4 Building Control inspectors within the budget and the current situation was temporary. A report would be put before Cabinet at its March meeting in relation to joint working with North Devon with regard to Building Control. Currently the authority shared a Building Control Manager with North Devon to seek a more robust service.