Strategic Sites Committee - Thursday 19 February 2026, 10:00am - Buckinghamshire Council Webcasting

Strategic Sites Committee
Thursday, 19th February 2026 at 10:00am 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  2. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  3. Ross Herbert - DM Majors Team Leader North/Central
  4. Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager
  5. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  6. Cllr David Moore
  7. Cllr Mark Roberts
  8. Cllr Penny Drayton
  9. Cllr Phil Gomm
  10. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  11. Cllr Andy Huxley
  12. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  13. Harry Thomas - Democratic and Electoral Services Officer
  14. Cllr Mark Turner
  15. Ms. Katherine Stubbs
  16. Cllr Alex Collingwood
Share this agenda point
  1. Harry Thomas - Democratic and Electoral Services Officer
  2. Cllr Alex Collingwood
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Phil Gomm
  2. Cllr Alex Collingwood
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Andy Huxley
  2. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  3. Cllr Phil Gomm
  4. Cllr Alex Collingwood
Share this agenda point
  1. Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager
  2. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  3. Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager
  4. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  5. Public Speakers
  6. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  7. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  8. Public Speakers
  9. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  10. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  11. Cllr David Moore
  12. Public Speakers
  13. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  14. Cllr Phil Gomm
  15. Public Speakers
  16. Cllr Phil Gomm
  17. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  18. Public Speakers
  19. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  20. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  21. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  22. Cllr Phil Gomm
  23. Public Speakers
  24. Cllr Phil Gomm
  25. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  26. Cllr Mark Roberts
  27. Public Speakers
  28. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  29. Cllr Mark Turner
  30. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  31. Cllr Mark Turner
  32. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  33. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  34. Cllr Phil Gomm
  35. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  36. Cllr David Moore
  37. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  38. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  39. Cllr David Moore
  40. Ms. Katherine Stubbs
  41. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  42. Ms. Katherine Stubbs
  43. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  44. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  45. Cllr Andy Huxley
  46. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  47. Cllr Andy Huxley
  48. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  49. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  50. Cllr Mark Roberts
  51. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  52. Cllr Mark Roberts
  53. Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer
  54. Cllr Mark Roberts
  55. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  56. Cllr Penny Drayton
  57. Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager
  58. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  59. Cllr Mark Turner
  60. Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager
  61. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  62. Cllr Phil Gomm
  63. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  64. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  65. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  66. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  67. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  68. Cllr Mark Roberts
  69. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  70. Cllr David Moore
  71. Cllr Alex Collingwood
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:00:00
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:00:07
Good morning everyone. Good morning councillors, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the meeting
of the strategic sites committee. Please note that this meeting will be webcast and the
public and press can see and hear throughout the webcast. In the unlikely event that there
is a technical issue with the webcast, the meeting will be paused until there's issues
been resolved. There are a couple of housekeeping items. Members please note
that mobile phones not missed you in the meeting so you turn them off or put
them on silent. iPads can be used to access the modern gov app. Members if you
wish to speak please raise your hands at the appropriate time. Please remember to
turn on your microphone before speaking and again switch it off before you're
finished. In the event of a fire alarm, now this is very pertinent because there were
three fires yesterday, one at West Street Car Park Marlowe,
one at Wickham offices for the council,
and also Judge's Lodgings.
So they do physically happen.
But if there's a fire alarm, please
use the nearest fire exit and assemble in the overflow car
park, which is situated to the right of the main entrance
when you came in and when you exit the building.
If there are any members of the press present,
please can you make yourselves known?
I don't think there are.
And before we move to the first agenda item, I'll ask each of the members and officers to introduce themselves, starting with Ross.
Ross Herbert - DM Majors Team Leader North/Central - 0:01:36
Good morning everyone, my name is Ross Herbert, I'm the team leader in the majors north central area.
Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager - 0:01:43
I'm Helen Fadibe, I'm the planning consultant and I'm leading on the application, thank you.
Hi, Lisa Malloy, I'm Senior Highways DM Officer.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:01:55
Cllr David Moore - 0:02:02
Good morning everyone, Councillor David Moore for the Fondance of Stoke Poachers and also Chairman of the East and South Area Planning Committee.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:02:06
Mark Roberts, Member for Amherst from Chesham Voice. I'm also a member of David's Committee.
Cllr Penny Drayton - 0:02:16
Councillor Penny Drayton, Ward Member for Flakway Heath and the Woburns.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:02:22
Philip Garvin, Councillor for the Quaint Award.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:02:26
Jonathan Waters, Councillor for Pentile is Green and Lattewater.
Cllr Andy Huxley - 0:02:32
Andy Huxley, Councillor for Aylesbury East.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:02:38
Good morning everyone, it's Patrick Feeley. I'm a ward member for Grendon and Glaedens.
I'm also the Chairman of the North and Central Planning Committee.
Harry Thomas - Democratic and Electoral Services Officer - 0:02:48
I'm Harry Thomas, I'm with Democratic Services.
Cllr Mark Turner - 0:02:53
Mark Turner, Councillor for the Chiltern Villagers and Vice Chair of this committee.
Ms. Katherine Stubbs - 0:02:58
Hello, I'm Catherine Staffs, I'm Senior Planning Solicitor.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:03:05
I'm Councillor Alex Collingwood, I'm the Member for Marlowe, Marla Bottom and Chairwoman of the committee.
Okay, agenda item. So do we have any apologies for absence, Harry?

1 Apologies for absence

Harry Thomas - Democratic and Electoral Services Officer - 0:03:13
Yes, we have apologies from Councillor Morgan and Councillor Roberts is sitting to substitute for her today and we also have apologies from Councillor Chilva.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:03:22
I see there's a couple of...

2 Minutes

Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:03:27
If I could give apologies to Mabou, who's actually on holiday.

1 Apologies for absence

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:03:33
Thank you Councillor Conlon. And then there's Councillor Munger who may get here, may not get here, but on the journey I've just had, good luck.
Agenda item 2, the minutes of the meeting.

2 Minutes

Do we agree that the minutes of the committee
will be held on the 18th of December?
These can be paged on page 3 of your agenda pack.
Agreed.
OK.
Thank you.
We'll now sign those.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. I now sign those as a true and correct record.
Item 3, are there any declarations of interest?

3 Declarations of interest

I don't think there are. I think Councillor Chilva potentially might have had but therefore
hence why he's given his apologies because he might have had his bucks advantage I think.
Cllr Andy Huxley - 0:04:54
I don't think I need to declare an interest as this is on probably the next patch to my
ward, Chairman.
So you're the neighbouring ward Councillor but it's not your ward itself. Yeah, indeed.
Councillor Gough.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:05:04
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:05:07
I don't think I have, but going back to the date, this was one of the first projects as a council I first ever spoke about, because it was Ellsbury East.
But I don't think I've got any interest in there at all, but better to be safe than sorry.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:05:20
Thank you, Councillor Gough. No, I don't think you do either.
Okay.
Okay.
So we're now going to consider the officer report.
I'll clarify all in which application we considered.

4 23/03221/ADP - Aylesbury Woodland College Road Roundabout, North Aston Clinton Buckinghamshire

The Planning Officer will introduce the application with any relevant updates.
The local members, parish, town, council, representatives, members of public, and the
applicants, stroke agents, will be invited to read out their statements in the following
order.
Local members, parish and town council representatives, any objectors, any supporters, and then finally
the agents and or applicants.
After each public speaking statement, members will be asked to, the speakers for clarification
on matters that they raise in their statement.
and these must be addressed through me as the Chairman.
I will then ask members if they have got any technical questions of the Officers.
Following this, the entire Committee will then discuss the application.
Members may seek further clarification of the Officers on points regarded in the application
or points raised by speakers in the main debate.
Officers will respond to the issues and questions raised by members.
Committees will then make a decision by vote
and the members will need to propose and second the recommendations.
Okay. So we now move to item four, which is application 23 forward slash 03221 forward
slash A for alpha, D for Derek, P for Papa on page seven of the agenda.
A pack. Could I ask the public speakers to respond after a call to names to indicate
your attendance and please ensure your verbal representations of the committee relates
the relevant planning considerations,
regarding the planning application being submitted
and being considered.
And don't include any personal comments.
And then the public speakers will be called and come to sit
in front of the table there.
A bit like a mastermind there,
but that's the table you've got today.
And then after that, members will then ask any points
of clarification.
Okay, so we've got Mr. Gary Tucker.
Okay, that's fantastic.
I understand you're the applicant.
I feel there will be a couple of other gentlemen with you,
but I don't think they're going to be speaking.
It's just, okay, thank you.
Excellent.
I now call on the case officer, Helen Fadipe,
to introduce the report on the application.
Over to you, Helen.
Okay, thank you.
Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager - 0:07:41
The item before you, 2303,
03221 ADP,
relates to a reserve matters application,
which is for access layout scale appearance and landscaping,
and is for phase one works
to the Woodlands Roundabout improvements
and associated flood mitigation.
and landscaping, and it is post -once to outline planning permission reference 160104 slash
AOP and approval of conditions 4, 9, 13, details of access layout scale, and also landscaping
15 slab levels, condition 16 drainage and soaps 29, construction environmental management
Plan 36 flood risk aspects and the plans have been amended since it was submitted.
This slide before you shows the phases for Ayersbury Woodlands application. The Phasing
plan was part of the section 106 and phase 1A is the roundabout and that is what we are
considering at the present time. This slide just gives you the site's context in terms
of its location in relation to some of the settlements in Eastbury. That's Eastbury,
Ante -Clinton and Twing, and then you've got Wendover there, and that's where the roundabout
is. This is an aerial view of the roundabout showing its current extent, and this shows
you the red line application, the red line boundary for the application. And the blue
line boundary being shown is that of Andingfield. And the main reason why that is showing is
because the application is jointly submitted by Tello -Wimpy, who are the developers and
owners of Andingfield, as well as Buckinghamshire Advantage, which is a Council -owned site.
Hence, the application is being brought before you this morning because of that linkage with
the Council and also because of the strategic nature of the site.
This slide shows both development sites that the roundabout would serve.
To the left is the Amdene Fields development and to your right is the essence of the Woodlands
development.
As you will be aware, there are several link roads being proposed in Asbury, and this particular
roundabout forms a very vital connexion to enable the eastern link road and the southern
link road to then connect to the eastern link road that's already been approved as part
of the Kingsbrook development, which is to the north.
And then the proposed south link road in Amden Fields is to the south, which is the one shown
in yellow there.
And so the roundabout itself, it's a vital piece of infrastructure as it would link both
the Eastern Link Road South and the South Link Road.
And it will contribute towards a continuous ring road which is supported in the adopted
ASB transport strategy.
This slide in front of you shows the emerging development contest in Asbury, and it shows
both the Woodlands and the Amdum Fields developments in relation to the AGT sites.
A couple of them are of the sites on this slide that's AGT too, but it just shows you
the quantum of development that will take place.
The roundabout will provide direct access
to nearly 5 ,000 new homes,
significant amount of commercial floor space,
GP surgeries, 120 elderly care accommodation,
open spaces and highways, sports village,
strategic drainage system.
In total, all of the digital sites
we deliver more than 10 ,000 new ores.
This slide shows the connexion and linkage to ending fields. That's the Southern Link
Road in terms of the plant and that's already been granted approval and part of it is already
under construction. And the woodlands roundabouts will be delivered by Taylor Wimpy as part
of the Andean fields development.
During the site visit, one of the members asked
for an overlay map to be produced, and that's this plan
that is up before you.
It shows the current roundabout in orange, and then in blue,
is the proposed roundabout, and this just gives the scale
and extent of the roundabout.
I would like to say that the presentation is going
to be jointly, you know, it's a joint presentation
and I'll be handing over after a few slides
to my IWHIS colleague who will go over the plans in details.
But the main thing to note here is that it's going
to form a five arm junction and I will talk about that
in the next couple of slides.
So this slide shows the proposed roundabout
and is for a signalised hamburger with five approaches.
One to save the amding fields development
and one to save the eastern link roads.
So this will save the amding field development
and that will save the woodlands development.
In the proposal, it will be stopped
around the pending way woodlands
come forward for development.
And it also includes pedestrian crossing
on the A41 Western approach and the Southern Link Road
approach and the provision of an increased flare
northbound on the Eastern Link Road.
And it's going to have an increase to lane exits
on the A41 Westbound towards this bridge.
And so it's very important to note, as I said earlier, that Lucy will be taking you in details
through the exact movements and the pedestrian access, vehicular access of the skin.
What I'd like to point out is that the proposal would involve the loss of trees from the existing
And whilst that is not a loss, that was, I'm looking for the right word, it wasn't something
that the landscape officer supported in full.
However, the landscape department realised that there was opportunity for planting to
be provided off -site and in respect of that they were quite comfortable for the planning.
That if the plan is to be approved then it should be conditioned asking for more details
and that's what we've put before you.
And there will be opportunity for planting outside of the red line boundary.
This just shows some of the improvements to the un -stink planting of the skin.
And I've included this slide just to show the context of the planting that will take
place outside of the red lime boundary before you. So this particular master plan is for
Amden Fields and it shows the suitable alternative green space, sang, and that sang is being
provided to avoid an adverse effect on the integrity of the Chilterns Beechwood Special
Area of Conservation Area.
And so it gives opportunity for more greenway and planting to take place just by the, you
know, I just think to the roundabout as well as to the astinct cleansing side of the road.
It should be noted that a roundabout design code was approved by the Council and the plans
are in full compliance with the approved code.
I will now hand over to Lucy to take us through the details of this case.
Thank you, Helen.
The next slide, please.
Thank you.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:18:28
So this is the illustrative plan which was submitted and secured as part of the outline
application for the Woodlands development.
So this was secured as part of the Section 106 agreement.
This is the final layout which was subject to assessments and determined suitable to
serve both the Hamden Fields and Woodlands developments as well as the wider strategic
link road network as Helen has previously shown.
The subsequent design code and reserve matters application, which is before you today, was informed by this illustrative layout.
So this is an extract from the approved design code which demonstrates the vehicle movements around the junction.
As you can see there's a north -south movement through the centre of the junction between Hamden Fields to the south and the Woodlands development to the north.
as well as movements around the circulatory carriage rate
between Aylesbury, Aston Clinton and the existing A41 bypass.
This slide also demonstrates the approximate location of bus stops
shown as the blue circles on the A41 Aston Clinton Road.
So that's actually similar to their current positioning.
Next please.
So this extract from the design code highlights the location
of the pedestrian and cycle infrastructure on the roundabout.
This includes safe and suitable crossing points shown by the pink arrows,
which are signalised and are designed for both pedestrians and cyclists.
The location of these crossing points follows the expected desire lines for pedestrians and cyclists through the roundabout.
This slide shows the detailed plan of the roundabout which has been submitted as part of this application.
This plan in particular also shows the tracking of a large refuse vehicle navigating around the roundabout
and demonstrates the vehicle movement as per the approved design code.
So this tracking has been reviewed as part of the assessment of this Reserved Matters application
and is considered acceptable at this stage.
And then finally I've also included a slightly more zoomed in version of the detailed plan
to show the signalised crossing point locations
and their layout, which include a suitably sized
refuge island between each crossing element.
For information, the orange coloured path
denotes a three metre wide shared footway cycle way,
so that's around the roundabout,
and then the red and black path to the south
from the SLR denotes a five metres wide
segregated footway and cycle way.
So this provision is all in line with the approved
design code and the illustrative layout.
As you'll be aware, given the roundabout is highway infrastructure, it will also be subject to a full technical review during the Section 278 detailed design stage,
which will include further road safety audits, and this stage will also secure the final details of a number of elements, including signal plans, lighting, signage and surface materials, to name just a few.
But thank you, that's everything from me, I'll pass it back to Helen now.
Okay, thank you very much.
Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager - 0:21:35
In terms of other matters, I would like to draw your attention to condition 36 of the
original permission that has been amended through a non -determination application as
stated in the report and it is to allow any residual flooding to be accommodated elsewhere
in woodland sites.
On the basis of the change to that condition, the environment agency was able to approve
the discharge of condition.
The other thing I would like to also bring to your attention is about the delivery.
We did have a couple of comments regarding the delivery and phasing.
All of that will be controlled through the highways and it's called section 278 in terms
of how the construction will take place.
However, the main trigger point is that it has to commence, you know, it has to be built
prior to commencement of development of any dwellings in past E -S1, E -S3 and E -N1, E -N4
of the woodland development and prior to the first occupation
in any development in some of the e -passes as well.
It's also useful to draw your attention to the addendum
that was submitted yesterday.
There's a new paragraph 1 .13 test to be added that's
In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of this resolution, such as to
delete, vary or add conditions, informatives or reasons for approval or refusal, prior
to the decision being issued, the Director of Planning and Environment has delegated
authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman, provided that the changes do not
exceed the substantive nature of the strategic sites committee resolution.
The other change I would also like to bring to your attention is inclusion of a plan reference
number in condition one.
And that is the plan reference O2PO4 drainage that was missed out in the list that's presented
in the report.
The other thing relating to condition is the numbering of the conditions.
Please note that the condition number that should follow four should read as five and six, not as it currently reads.
Finally, our point of clarification, paragraph 5 .74 and 5 .75, heritage, relates to the assessment that was carried out as part of the outline.
Because it is a reserved matters application, we often have to reference what we've assessed
in part of that application.
So the Woodlands Render Bar itself is not near any heritage assets as has already been
set out.
So to conclude, the proposal that is before you would bring significant improvement in
in terms of creating the linkages between the south link road and the eastern link road.
And it will provide much needed housing in the East Greenville area.
And as such, members are being...
And so the recommendations before members is that permission be granted subject to conditions.
Thank you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:25:40
Thank You Helen and Lucy for that very detailed and thorough presentation. We
now hear from Mr. Tucker the applicant if you could please come to the table.
Once the timer actually starts you'll be and begins you'll be have three minutes
of speaking time.
Public Speakers - 0:26:04
I'm just hiring to know where I'm good to go. Thank you Chairman and good morning
councillors. My name is Gary Tucker I'm a strategic projects director for Taylor
Wimpey and had a lengthy involvement with the planning context for both
Hampton fields alongside the Aylesbury Woodlands development. As I tell in your
officers comprehensive report this is a reserve matters application in respect
the improvements to the Woodlands Roundabout pursuant to the outline planning permission
for Aylesbury Woodlands together with approval of associated conditions. The principle of these
improvements was approved as part of the outline planning permissions for both Aylesbury Woodlands
and Hamden Fields in 2022 in the context of the wider Link Road strategy around the town.
The Woodlands Roundabout is a strategically important junction on the local road network
and the improvements will significantly improve its capacity and efficiency of operation,
in addition to providing connexion to both the Southern Link Road through Hamden Fields
and the Eastern Link Road South as part of Aylesbury Woodlands.
The through lanes across the roundabout will be fully constructed as part of the works,
but will only be open to traffic once the Eastern Link Road South has been provided and is similarly open.
Appropriate traffic management measures will be provided in the interim on both the approach from Southern Link Road and within the roundabout Central Island.
The detailed design work that underpins this application has included further detailed flood modelling,
which has been through rigorous testing and scrutiny by the Environment Agency leading to their no objection response to the application.
The improvements represent a £12 million investment into the local road infrastructure without any requirement for public funding.
that will unlock the planned growth within the adopted local plan.
Subject to your approval of this application in line with the Office of Recommendation,
we are in a position to commence the improvements in Spring that will enable them to be completed in early 2027
to coincide with the opening of the Southern Link Road through Hamden Fields and providing a continuous connexion between the A41 and the A4010 Risborough Road
via the South East Aylesbury Link Road and Stoke Mandeville, Rilly Froad.
Thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you Mr Tucker.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:28:18
Obviously you've given a very good detailed technical explanation there.
Do any of the officers need to make any clarifications before the members actually ask any questions?
Are we good?
Yeah, we're good? Okay.
That was the Councillor.
Councillor Fionn, over to you first.
Thank you very much.
Let's stop good morning.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:28:43
Just a couple of points if I could.
On the roundabout, it's showing two laybys.
I just wondered why.
And the other bit, if that green area is at grass,
so therefore is there a service road to get to it to carry out remedial work?
The laybys are there for operational maintenance,
Public Speakers - 0:29:05
So the roundabout itself is signalised, so it's to provide a safe location for any maintenance of those,
of the traffic signals during its operation rather than them needing to park on the carriageway.
And the green areas within that then that's where that's yeah some of it will be grass, some of it
will be landscaped through there and again the laybys would allow for its future management and
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:29:36
So you don't need any access off of the roundabout to get to those green areas?
Okay, thank you.
Councillor Moll?
Thank you, Chairman.
Good morning, Mr Tucker.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:29:50
Cllr David Moore - 0:29:51
You said in your speech that you want to crack on quickly if this is obviously, if this is approved.
What is your programme for the Section 278 approval, including all the audits,
and ensuring that you meet that deadline that you mentioned.
Thank you.
Yeah, that's correct.
Public Speakers - 0:30:09
The detailed design and technical approval process
is well advanced and the section 278 agreement itself
to enable them to commence is going through
the legal process at the minute.
So obviously commencement, as you rightly say,
would be subject to those elements falling into place,
but we're on target for in line for a commencement
on spring at this point in time.
Councillor Gough.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:30:36
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:30:38
Excuse me, thanks for that presentation.
So you mentioned hopefully it'd be completed by 2027
and you referred to, you know, traffic coming from,
through Hamden Fields, et cetera,
which would then come from the Prince's principle way.
So the concern is, is the delay in the next section.
That's where I'm gonna go on that one,
because we all know that we've travelled that way
for many years and this is a godsend that this is coming.
But the question would be is if we're gonna congest
all that traffic up to 20 in 2027,
when are we gonna release the next piece?
I know it's a forward question,
but it's a question that does need to be asked, Chairman,
at the end of the day.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
A very good question.
Public Speakers - 0:31:20
The delivery of the Eastern Link Road South
is obviously related to the delivery
of Aylesbury Woodlands development itself.
so is reliant on the progression of that.
Similarly, without this roundabout,
the Southern Link Road can't be properly connected
to the existing Woodlands roundabout, which then means
that when the Southeast Aylesbury Link Road opens,
the problem sort of moves backwards,
so it sort of congests further Western Turbille and Bedgrove.
So I think one of the key things is
these improvements will significantly
increase the efficiency and the capacity of Woodlands
roundabout which is a bottleneck on the on the local road network now so the
movements of traffic notwithstanding that missing connexion up to Kingsbrook
it will still improve the efficiency of the movement of traffic in the area.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:32:15
And if I might come back on that, you're quite right it helps with efficiency
it's just you just mentioned it's a bottleneck now and with that additional
traffic coming in from Risborough you know we can't wait to see the next line
and then the next line after that.
And then we have a complete road around the whole of Ellesbury.
But thank you very much for that presentation.
Thank you.
Thank you, Casco.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:32:36
I've got a slightly similar technical question.
In terms of the operation of the roundabout,
I've got the main picture.
The last slide I've got is the really quite nice in detail one.
And my query in my mind was, my understanding
with the signal phasing, I assumed that in effect
the Ring Road will become the priority road
by where it goes, goes like that, south to north,
in effect, goes through the middle of the roundabout
will become priority.
My query is that the yellow hatching,
obviously, coming from Marlowe,
Handy Cross is an absolute nightmare,
and there's not enough yellow hatching around Handy Cross.
And my query is, at what point do,
I know you've obviously modelled all this
and the rest of it, but to Councillor Gough's point,
If you've got all this other traffic coming from the 4010,
you know, what you could end up with, sorry,
was you end up with bottleneck,
because everyone just tries to keep jumping round the,
roundabout, if that makes sense.
So is there, within that 278 agreement,
does that where you have that more technicality of,
you need to put additional yellow hatching
to the sort of northern circle, if that makes sense,
to the southern circle to make sure
that they do operate properly, if that makes sense.
Because what you could end up with,
stuff coming in from May 41 and from Aston Clinton and all of a sudden they're all trying to jump the lights to each other and
you end up with it just clogging up and in all they're clogging back to 4010 if that makes sense.
So how would, is that what you decide today or is that something that actually the 270 technicals if that makes sense?
Public Speakers - 0:34:10
That's sort of dealt with through the technical approval process and particularly the the timings of the
signalization in there. One of the benefits of
modern -day traffic signals is they're intelligent and can talk to each other
so it will determine if there's a particular arm of the roundabout which
is doing it which can then change the timings of the signals themselves so it
sort of keeps that efficiency rather than it absolutely getting to a bottleneck.
So I think the yellow hatching is just there as a visual reminder to the
to the road users to actually keep that clear to enable that interchange between
the signalization of the different arms.
I thought we now have powers that we've
got certain yellow box junctions, particularly
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:34:58
in High Wycombe, where they are physically camera controlled
and people will get fined.
So I assume this will be designed in a similar way.
Am I missing something?
That was always the ultimate expectation,
is that if you certainly move the way that they've
been set up where we are in Wycombe, if you transgress,
you will get fined.
Yeah, you're right.
They do exist across the county and other areas.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:35:20
So this may well be the case that it exists in this roundabout too.
But again, that would be 2008 design and the signals and all of those details
will determine that.
Sorry to come back.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:35:31
I, I, I'm so happy you mentioned intelligent light in there because that's
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:35:34
happened more and more. I might be a bit ahead of the game here because I know
quite a lot about highways back in the day. So would this be linked to,
so you say that would be intelligent. Would that then link,
I might be asking the question far too early,
but would that link to the next section, which goes down
to where the Holiday Inn is, and then on down
to where the garage is, because they're all intelligent -minded
as well?
I don't know if that's part of the design.
Sorry, I'm back.
Public Speakers - 0:36:01
Once it's connected to the network and in operation,
that's really within the remit of the council themselves
and the Highways Department in terms
of some of that connectivity in there.
But there are those further works, particularly the Bedgrove and Holiday Injunction,
that will be implemented in due course where the signalization will be optimised as part of that.
That may then provide the opportunity to provide that connectivity so it releases the pulses of traffic through to improve the efficiency of the network.
Sorry I asked the question earlier, but I know if people are watching, they're beginning to always give you...
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:36:37
So we've jumped the track there for you. Cheers to everyone.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:36:41
Are there any other questions the members need for clarification?
Oh, Councillor Mott, Robert, sorry.
Yes, question really about the bus stops.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:36:50
There's a note that there's a minor change to the locations of the bus stops.
But I was just wondering with the increased traffic volumes there
and the fact that the new design's got slip roads in it,
how they still seem quite close to the roundabout.
and now that it's got slip roads, how that operation of the bus stops would be affected by that?
Public Speakers - 0:37:20
The detailed design includes the bus stop, obviously on the inside lane of that.
On that particular thing there's an extended two lane merge going from the roundabout towards town,
so there's actually two lanes that are clear past the bus stop.
In the current thing there's obviously only the one lane there,
So when the bus stops, that's what causes or can lead to the delay.
But there will actually be clear running lanes past the bus stop as a result of these improvements.
Thank you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:37:51
Okay, I don't think any other questions or clarification.
I thank you for your time, Mr Tucker.
And obviously we'll then carry on from you guys.
You can return your seat and I'll bring us to the end of the public speaking part.
and then obviously happy to stay and watch the conclusion of the debate.
Do you have any, so members, do you have any technical questions to the officers?
I've got obviously, I'm going to ask Councillor Turner first because he's very quiet and I'm going to go round that way.
So I've got Councillor Turner, Councillor Feeley, Councillor Golden, so Councillor Turner.
Cllr Mark Turner - 0:38:24
I appreciate we've got Section 278 technical approval process
for these things, but just going back
to the hatching part really.
The crossing is very close to hatching.
If traffic is coming through the middle of the roundabout
and is coming along there and the lights change,
they could be left on the hatching.
It's just a concern, so it's not so much a question of technical, but just wondering
if that is something that is sort of dealt with within the Section 278 technical approval
process.
Yeah, exactly, and that will all be considered.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:39:05
I suppose the point of the hatching is to prevent that, is to prevent people ending
up just stopping on the hatching area, but I suppose, yeah, like I said, that will be
dealt with through the technical approval, and if it's camera controlled and fined and
like that, then hopefully that will prevent issues occurring in the future.
It's not, I think it's more the fact that people will be trapped because they'll be coming through,
Cllr Mark Turner - 0:39:29
the lights change. Would there be that much of a gap for them? It really looks very close
to where the hatching is. I mean, if that was one or two cars and there's three cars moving,
four cars moving along, it would be very easy for them to be caught. And I think it would be an
unfair process if they were fined when they didn't have the capacity to stop earlier on
before the hatching.
So just a point.
Yeah, that's a fair point.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:39:54
I think that'll be considered at the overall operation of the junction because there's
also future road safety audits that this will be subject to.
So including kind of once the roundabout's operational, there'll be a stage four road
safety audit, which we'll look at how that works in practise, in reality.
And if amendments need to be made, then they can be at that stage too.
So it will be kind of a process seeing how it works.
If amendments need to be made, then they will be at that stage.
Is it actually modelled beforehand, or is it?
Yes, yeah.
It was fully modelled as part of the outline application too.
Councillor Feeley?
I think you came to get.
All right.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:40:29
So back to Councillor Gough again then.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:40:34
Oh, so you're not speaking.
I could let Councillor Moore go first, but I'm not going to.
So I just, I find this fascinating, this roundabout really.
And I must admit when we went to view it, it helped immensely.
So I'd just like to clarify, please, which ways are going to be continuous merging or are they not?
Because I'm looking up there and it looks like coming from Woodlands, you have a merge onto the A41 Watford direction.
and then when you have Ellsbury coming out, you have another, is that a merge coming to the left, going to Woodlands?
Do you see what I'm asking, what's going to be a continuous run? Because now roughly what the traffic is like up there is.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:41:25
It's all signal controlled, those movements are all signal controlled. They're not a merge, kind of free flow merge onto the A41 pipeline or into the Woodlands development.
Thank you very much for clarifying.
Councillor Molyneux, you're very patient.
Thank you, Chairwoman. Thank you, Councillor Gough.
Cllr David Moore - 0:41:44
I'm very new to Section 278, so I'd love to be enlightened on
perhaps the triggers of Section 278, specifically
what is approved and fixed by this Planning Commission
versus what is still subject to change,
so signals, markings, signs, etc.
And what trigger and threshold would it be to return to committee if those changes are,
let's say, material?
Maybe a question for legal as well.
I'm not sure.
Thank you.
Yeah, that's a fair point.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:42:17
And I think especially for this application, because it's so heavily reliant on 278 approval,
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:42:20
and obviously we've got the planning application, it's a bit more unusual because we wouldn't
normally just get a full highway infrastructure application.
So I suppose the 278 process is normally influenced by what is approved at planning stages.
You have to get planning outline, planning approval before the 278 process can start.
I suppose the purpose of the reserve matters planning application is more the principle
of kind of if everything fit from kind of landscaping perspectives and all of those
aspects are they all acceptable?
and then the 278 process kind of comes in sometimes in conjunction with or towards the latter end of
those reserve matters
applications to determine like we said, it's the detail kind of the highway. It's basically all the
the construction element of it
The phasing, the delivery, the signals like we said, all the lighting, all of those really detailed plans that you don't often see as part
of a planning application, so it kind of, it just goes into that extra level of detail.
It's quite a hard question to answer without just saying it's, it's just the detail of
it ultimately. I don't know if that really answers the question enough, sorry.
Cllr David Moore - 0:43:38
That's helpful. It's more a question of the triggers as well and the threshold to, is
that something for legal maybe? Well I think that's sort of part of the Section
Ms. Katherine Stubbs - 0:43:48
278 agreement itself, so that will set out those triggers. But it is a sort of highly
technical detail of the delivery so it's not actually planning application in
itself obviously it's dependent on this permission and the outline permission
in turn prior to this and so therefore it's not something that's susceptible to
come into committee. But I get where Councillor Moore was coming from because you
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:44:16
had enough of a deviation from what we approved today there must be a trigger
that brings it back and says actually we agreed A,
you got to generate with Z, there must be a point
where you come back at that point.
So it's a technical detail,
so it doesn't vary the permission itself.
And this permission gives the strict parameters, if you like,
Ms. Katherine Stubbs - 0:44:35
of the technical details that go into that.
So if it deviated from the outline that, sorry,
the outline or the details that you're considering today,
then it would need a new permission effectively and then it would come back.
I suppose it's probably also worth adding that throughout the process of looking at this Reserve Matters application,
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:44:59
we've also been in quite heavy discussion with the delivery side of the Highways Diem team who look at the 278 applications.
So they've been made aware of what's been submitted as part of the Reserve Matters approval the whole way through.
So if there was anything significant that they thought, actually that's never going to get through 278,
that would be something that they would let us know at that stage and we could
kind of influence that as part of the Reserve Master's approval so it didn't stray too
far from what would then be looked at in the 278 if that makes sense. So there's
kind of a lot of cross -boundary discussions that happen especially for
highways infrastructure because the 278 process is so fundamental we wouldn't
just say yeah that's fine just deal with it if you know what I mean.
Huxley, you've been very quiet so have you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:45:43
Cllr Andy Huxley - 0:45:48
Thank you Chairman. Where to start? I first came to Aylesbury in, I think it was 1971,
and when all we had was a straight through road which took you into Aston Clinton, there
was no bypass or any other roads coming into that. I'll keep it short, my concern is,
first of all over is rush hour traffic coming in from the the bypass if you
like the Astor Clinton bypass. As a three -lane situation traffic does build
up around that on the roundabout and stacks up back along the bypass which is a slight
concern in the first place but when you add to that traffic lights at the roundabout you'll
have traffic lights then along the A41 going into Aylesbury with the potential of another
set of traffic lights because there is another development between Woodlands and Aston Reach
which is starting to unfold.
So my concern is obviously making sure that that works
at that roundabout because I can see traffic unfortunately
stacking up nearly to Watford if you're not,
you know, to be slightly overcultures if you like.
Completely fair point.
We appreciate your, the concerns.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:47:48
I suppose the only answer I can probably give is the fact that this roundabout was modelled
extensively in a 2034 future year.
So with quite a lot of extra traffic expected, so with that expected traffic growth, also
including all of the Valp sites.
So all of those, all that development traffic was included within the model.
So it accounts for quite a robust future scenario,
I suppose you could put it.
But I appreciate the concerns along the A41
as well with the other signals.
And like was said earlier,
the fact that we have intelligent signals these days
means that it will hopefully make
that process a bit more streamlined.
And again, that will be looked at in the details
of the signal plans through the 278 process.
Thank you. I don't, I don't see it as a problem during the day, but, uh,
Cllr Andy Huxley - 0:48:43
just that key times probably between, I don't know,
four and six if you like in the evening, which, uh, uh,
it can get, uh, uh, pretty busy if you like.
Yeah, definitely.
And it is those peak hours that we look at extensively during that modelling
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:48:59
process because obviously we're aware that is the highest amount of traffic on
the network at the time. Um, so yeah,
the only assurance I can give you is it was modelled extensively in order to make this acceptable at the outline stage.
Councillor Roberts. Oh, sorry, Councillor Drake.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:49:20
Yes, it was a separate point building on the same point that Councillor Huxley just raised really.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:49:29
The
The modelling is looking at the end state
when the north -south is the primary route.
But today, the east -west route off the A41 bypass
is the primary route.
So I was just wondering if you've modelled
what the interim state looks like
when the roundabout's built,
but the other traffic, north -south traffic flows
aren't there and it's still that the main traffic flow is from the east -west.
Yes so during the outline application so obviously you have the outline
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:50:08
application for the Hamden Fields development and then you also had a
separate outline application for the Woodlands development. Now both of those
included this roundabout within their section 106 agreement and their
permission but both of the applications also included a standalone scenario so a
scenario where one or the other didn't come forward.
So that in essence would be, so for example, in this instance, let's say Woodlands didn't
come forward and we've got Hamdenfield, so you wouldn't have that through road.
So you'd only have the phase without the through road.
That has already been modelled as part of the outline application because they modelled that
standalone Hamdenfield's application.
So when I say it's just Hamdenfield's also includes all the other VALP scenarios that
was modelled with the future year traffic growth etc just without the
Woodlands development so you wouldn't have that link road. So in the interim
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:51:03
state it would be almost like three main routes from Hampton fields and then the
two approaches from the A41 but without the Woodlands traffic. Yeah and then the fourth arm with the Aylesbury Road.
Lucy Molloy - Senior Highways DM Officer - 0:51:17
Yeah so exactly that would be four arms of the roundabout. Yeah okay and that has been modelled and taken into account.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:51:21
Yes, the Hamiltonfield standalone scenario was also modelled, yeah.
Yeah, okay.
Thank you.
Councillor Drake.
Thank you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:51:30
Cllr Penny Drayton - 0:51:33
On a slightly different vein, the actual construction of this, when we went on the site visit, we
didn't at the time have an overlay of the two roundabouts, which has been provided,
which is great, thank you.
But it struck me particularly on the site visit, the change in the size of this, which
is then clear on the overlay.
I mean, you're looking at an area probably three times
what's currently covered.
Obviously, the roundabout needs to go in place.
It has got outline planning already.
I just want a bit of understanding and reassurance,
I guess, on when the actual works are happening,
what extra area is going to be used,
and how that would be restored after.
Because there is quite a lot of greenery, trees, bush,
and just natural landscape which is being cleared
for the roundabout itself.
I'm just wondering how much more is being cleared
for a work site and how you would be repairing that afterwards.
Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager - 0:52:40
In terms of the planning that we've looked at,
they've provided landscaping details
and that includes making good of any of the areas
that is adjacent to the road itself and its alignment,
and so that will be planted.
And we also have a condition in the plan
which also requires for them to show details
of those landscaping.
So any, for all the areas in and around,
I'm just trying to find the actual condition,
but it's a condition in the,
that we've put into the report that will ensure that all the areas around the road will be planted.
So it's not going to be any areas that will not be landscaped after works have ended.
So I'm looking at the conditions.
Yes, that is condition three would be attached
if the application is sampled by maintenance.
Is that the transition piece?
Because when you read the update, it just talks
about soft landscape proposals,
soft landscape management maintenance programmes,
soft landscape specification, but it doesn't talk about...
No, it's the condition.
So it's actually condition three on page 33.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:54:02
Okay, okay, so that's the bit that covers that because obviously in the bullet points it didn't detail that bit.
So I was like, okay, okay.
So I think that then answers your technical question there, Councillor Drake,
and that it's actually specifically in condition three to do that transition piece and making sure that it makes good but thereafter, if that makes sense.
So that's specifically dealt with in condition three.
Because I looked at the update and went, where is it?
Like you did.
Okay, Councillor Turner.
Cllr Mark Turner - 0:54:35
Just a bit more on that in terms of the fact that the objection for arburet culture suggested that perhaps they could have been planting within the red line boundary.
It looks on the condition that it's compensatory tree planting.
Is there a reason why it can't be planted within the boundary because that looked like it was one of the objections?
Helen Fadipe - Technical Team Manager - 0:55:00
Yes, I'm not technical, I was technical reasons which also affects highway safety.
And the other thing is that in the hamburger itself there's going to be a large storage
tank for flooding and so being able to then plant on that is not going to be something
that would grow.
And so from a drainage perspective and an always perspective, there is no scope for
trees on this particular roundabout.
Hence, I showed the plan at the end of my presentation about all the landscaping that
will be taking place just in and around the roundabout, you know, but not in terms of
the embargo itself.
I think that's the end of the technical questions piece.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:55:50
Obviously, we're now going to the main debate.
Obviously, there were a number of us who actually went
on site visits.
I want to note to those members first.
And I think, like, as Councillor Combs said,
I think it was really instructive us going on site.
And that sounds weird to go and look at a roundabout,
but actually it really was instructive
of actually what's reality of where it's,
what's physically there today, which is a roundabout.
I don't know if you're going to have a new read about it, but obviously Council has gone, but you still have the debate.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:56:18
Thank you, thank you new Chairman to allow me to open for someone who has lived in Ellsbury a little bit longer than my colleague to the left,
and always lived that side of the town as well, so I've experienced the congestion that's there.
As someone that has lived there nearly all my life until recently, the last 20 years, I must admit to see a controlled roundabout,
I believe will help with the traffic flow down there.
That could have been required a few years ago.
I did have concerns straight away that with a new congestion
that will come in from Hamden Fields,
we don't know what direction that's gonna go
for those that are gonna move there.
Let's get that.
It could move into the town or it could move up to Watford.
What I do like though, with the new relief road
going in through Hamden Fields,
I don't know until we experience it in 2027,
that some of that traffic coming in from the A41 will then go in the opposite direction
through Hamden Fields across to Prince of Switzborough because that's where we know
a lot of the commercial traffic goes.
So it's great and I do like the way it interlinks in there.
As a person from Elsbury, this should be there years ago, I'm very supportive of this roundabout
today and that's where I'll leave this.
But I appreciate all the work of those that are put into this job and it looks good.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Gough.
Councillor Feeley?
And then followed by Councillor Walters.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:57:42
Thank you, Chairman.
It's a long time coming, this roundabout.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:57:47
Ten years or twelve years, ten?
Yeah.
I think this application is a very technical application.
when you're looking from a highway's point of view.
And it's been looked at from a number of different sections.
And it's really good, really good that you've come
up with solutions like this.
I think the good thing is there's no objections
to this application.
The report is very detailed.
And also it addresses some of the other elements of it,
such as landscaping and flooding.
And that's covered in the report under conditions.
So I think overall we have an application that we want to go forward and they've looked
at the various elements to it with the additional build out for the other estates.
Also the thing about the additional paragraph in the report is important and that's there
as well.
So from my point of view the conditions are there to cover it, the opportunity for any
amendments are there and also the other areas have been addressed and having said that therefore
I think we should go with officers recommendation on this occasion and to congratulate the team
on what they've done because this is a really detailed piece of work and
Obviously the developer can now move forward on this element of their come back with the other work
Chancellor Feeley, I've got Councillor Waters followed by
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:59:16
Councillor Roberts and Councillor Mott
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:59:24
Thank you Chairman. This is a real piece of strategic infrastructure which basically opens up future homes and other facilities for the people of Aylesbury including sports etc.
if we're looking into woodlands, hamden fields.
It also is part of that piece by piece,
gradually bringing together the relief roads
going round Aylesbury, which is needed as soon as possible.
There will be times, I think, in the construction of it,
where I think if you're regularly
probably going up the A41,
you're probably gonna find it quite a difficult
construction period.
and I'm hoping that the developer has got a very good plan
for dealing with that.
I also think because of the timing to some extent,
it may have taken a long time,
but probably because of the intelligent systems
that can now go in,
that probably if this went in a few years ago,
it wouldn't have the capability and the flexibility
that is now deliverable,
and obviously year by year that gets better.
And I think all the questions which were raised
by the committee members were very valid and the concerns
which would represent the community.
And to make sure that this was done very well.
Again, like Councillor Feeley, I would thank the team for the work
that they've done and I would second Councillor Feeley's
recommendation to accept the recommendation
from the officers.
Thank you, Councillor Walters.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:01:03
I've got Councillor Mark Roberts
and then Councillor David Marf.
Yes, having spent many years travelling up the A41
Cllr Mark Roberts - 1:01:11
through Aston Clinton before the bypass was built,
I have to say the existing roundabout and bypass
was a delight when it came into effect.
And I think we all totally understand the reasons now
why this new roundabout is remodelling because of the the need to to route
around Aylesbury and the future developments there so from that point of
view it is a an important development and I welcome it from that point of view
I have concerns like Councillor Waters about the interim period and
construction period and how the traffic flows will be managed so I trust that
that will be done.
I also have a slight concern for the future around
if the traffic flows work out differently in future
from as expected, whether the hamburger design
might get in the way of any future remodelling
or adjustments to the design.
But overall, I'm happy with the information
that's been presented and happy to trust that the modelling and the highways
recommendations and the technical analysis will address the issues so on
that basis that support the recommendations. Thank you Councillor Roberts.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:02:39
Cllr David Moore - 1:02:42
Over to Councillor Moll. Thank you Chairman. Apologies for missing the site visit but it was
good to have the team's briefing and thank you officers for your report and I
want to firstly say I very much endorse what we've heard today from members. I
I'd like to say I could narrow this application down
to about five tests, because I think it's important
as members that we test an application.
And I feel the first test being that the flood risk
phasing is safe and ensuring that, you know,
we're not having open -ended reliance on later phases.
The second being ensuring that we are making the decision here
and not the Section 278 doing all the decision making.
and understanding, clarifying what is fixed today
and what could still change materially.
And thank you for clarifying that.
So I feel that satisfied.
Also, I don't think we've mentioned the ELR arm,
ensuring the phasing is clear on that as well.
Also, landscaping on the fourth test,
ensuring that's deliverable and ensuring conditions three
and four are tight and that the where feasible elements,
don't evaporate if that makes sense.
And the final test, test five,
which is the local practicalities.
And we've heard, Halesbury Town Council said
they want these connexions to live with ASAP.
So I'm very happy to support this very important piece
of infrastructure.
Thank you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:04:07
Any other members wanting to add to the debate?
I know Council Drayton actually did call on the site visit.
And it was an interesting, because again, trying to actually locate, because when the
speaker talked about laybys, we were struggling to find anywhere to be in part of the cars,
let alone actually.
So we had to walk a few, a way away to go and actually get back to the roundabout, if
that makes sense.
So yes, the current one I think has had its time, if that makes sense.
But yes, so certainly from my perspective, I think the briefing was really important,
because again, it's really technical.
I think the site visit was really, really informative.
And like the other members, I would like to thank the officers for all the detailed hard work,
working with the developers.
One of the things I would probably suggest you might want to consider,
because what we do with the Arlo Bridge, is overnight working is quite acceptable,
and if it means you can reduce down the construction period time and the disruption,
then certainly consider that as being part of that process.
I'm sure you'll talk that through your highways, our highways team in that respect, but certainly from my perspective
having seen what we do at Marlow Bridge, it's massively reducing down the construction time by doing continuous working
on site if that makes sense.
So certainly I'm fully supported because again, I think we've done that piece there.
I think Councillor Roberts' point is very valid in as much that there could well be scenarios that it doesn't necessarily do what we expect it to do.
and obviously obviously your Chairman, and my Vice -Chairman will be very much
mindful of that working with the officers there for there needs to be any
tweaks. We'll obviously explain to the members if there are any tweaks, what
tweaks are and why they've had to come forward but it could well be hatchings
and or something different we don't know until we see it live and in situ in
hopefully 1st of January 2027. So turning to the recommendation and I think I had
a proposer as in Councillor Feeley and I think I had Councillor Waters as the seconder.
I think that was how I relate it.
So you still happy to propose Councillor Feeley and Councillor Waters happy to second?
Happy to second. Okay.
Right. Okay. Therefore I now invite members to vote on the officer recommendation.
Obviously with the clarifications and the updates we've had in the pack as well.
So, can I ask all members, yeah, somebody to, yeah, that's fine.
Okay, so I'd like to ask all members to vote in favour of the motion if they'd like to raise their hands, please.
That's unanimous.
Okay, fantastic.
Okay. So that meets the sponsor agenda item five.

5 Date of Next Meeting

I'd like to thank all the members for coming today.
Potentially we may have a longer meeting on the 19th,
and we may again potentially have a longer meeting
on the 30th.
There are a number of different applications coming forward
to us, and depending on how they play out and arrest,
depends on, so just a flag, we've got one on the 19th
and one on the 30th and about four applications
that could either be in that one,
1930th or one in April.
So depending on how it all plays out,
it might be one on each meeting
or it might be two on each meeting,
it might be three on each, we don't know.
There's so many different ones coming at different stages
for different reasons, so just to flag them as a,
I know we did say that if we could try
and get two or three done in one go,
then we would try and get the many done
through as quickly as we could.
So just flag whatever and it could well be,
for those next three meetings,
they may be whole day ones,
but purely because of the number of different ones
have got coming through, including potentially three motorway service areas.
Okay, so that will be the 19th of March is the next meeting 2026 at 10 a .m. and I
think I have the meeting closed. Thank you.