Minutes of Meetings

OPEN FORUM: Mr Gerry Knight of 131 Broomhill spoke of Appn No. 03/40983. He said this was the fourth application this year and whilst he had not objected to the first plans to extend the house, he thinks a new detached 3 bed property on this site is over-development. John Bowley of Cookham Dean Cricket Club spoke about Appn No. 03/41026. The proposed telecoms mast will be less than 100 yards from the Cricket Pavilion which an after school club use on a daily basis. He fears that if the mast is approved parents may take their children away from the club and this would have severe financial repercussions. Sue Teasdale from Cookham Dean also spoke against the mast. She said that the 3g third generation mobile actually needs far more masts than the normal mobile phone. She also mentioned that Vodafone were looking in the area at other sites including Long Lane at Lower Mount Farm and suggested mast-sharing. Mrs Noyes-Court asked if there was a limit for the numbers of masts to be allowed in the area and how for how many years can Telecoms companies keep applying. The Chairman said that the questions could not be answered and each application must be dealt with on its own merit.

Cllr Coker then spoke about the dangers of not having masts in the Cookham area. He said that there was more energy in the handset than in the mast and the signal becomes much greater if the phone has to work harder to locate a signal. Jacqueline Davies of Huntsman Cottage queried Government guidelines and said that mast-sharing would be preferable to lots of masts. Cllr Prichard said that the more you “piggy-back” the higher the masts will get. He also said that RBWM’s policy was to not have any masts on schools or public buildings. Mr Richard Campin asked why this policy was in place. He did not receive a clear answer but one idea was that more votes would be won with this policy! Sue Teasdale then asked why Hutchison had not contacted Vodafone to try to mast-share. Richard Campin closed the Open Forum by stating that because he had only that day received notification of the amended plans for Appn No: 03/40986, he had had no chance to look at them before the Parish Council Meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllr Alan Hay who is representing the Parish Council at a Cookham Twinning Meeting. Apologies were also received from Cllrs S. Fairlie, M.Innes, M. Brar and D. Ricardo.

Cllr G. Harris declared a prejudicial interest in Appn No: 03/41026. He left the room for this part of the meeting.

03/40983	Erection of a 3 bedroom detached house & garage. 1, BROOMHILL, Cookham Rise. Mr B Knight.	OBJECTION
	Cookham Parish Council noted that this is the fourth planning application for this property this year. The view was that the same objections remain. Over-development of the site contrary to policy DG1, H11 & H12 in the Local Plan. Voting: IN FAVOUR = UNANIMOUS.
03/41026	The installation of a radio base station comprising a 14m slim line lattice mast with three antennas 1x 300mm dish, equipment cabin & enclosed compound (Telecom Dev. Telecom Determination 56 days). LOWER MOUNT FARM, Land adj Kennel Lane, Long Lane, Cookham Rise. Hutchison 3G.	OBJECTION
	Cookham Parish Council OBJECT to this application because it is in the Green Belt and there has been strong residents’ objections. It is the policy of Cookham Parish Council to approve mast-sharing wherever possible. VOTE: IN FAVOUR = 7, AGAINST = 2.
03/40984	Construction of single storey front extension to include garage & car port. SINFONIA, Maidenhead Road, Cookham Rise. Mr. & Mrs G Slocombe.	OBJECTION
	Cookham Parish Council OBJECT, as a matter of policy, to any development in the Flood Plain – Policy F1. Cllr Stretton used to live near by and stated that their house was flooded. Cllr Wellman asked for a named vote: IN FAVOUR = 5 (Cllrs M. Coker; R. Arthur, A. Prichard, G. Harris, J. Stretton) AGAINST = 5 (Cllrs S. Garrard, P. Brockwell, R. Piercey, H.J. Woodbridge and M. Wellman.) The Chairman used his casting vote to carry the motion.
03/40998	Erection of three car garage with store following demolition of outbuildings. HARWOOD MOUNT, Spring Lane, Cookham Dean. Mr. C Lewis.	NO OBJECTION

03/40834	Erection of 2 x 3- bed semi-detached houses. LAND BETWEEN 12 & 13 CANNONDOWN COTTAGES. Maidenhead Road, Cookham Rise.
03/40836	Erection of 2 x 3- bed semi-detached houses. LAND BETWEEN 8 & 9 CANNONDOWN COTTAGES, Maidenhead Road, Cookham Rise.
	Amended plans show new driveway layout, shared entrance & vision splays. Both application were considered by the RBWM Development Control Panel on 12/11/03 with a recommendation to approve Both applications subject to the completion of a legal agreement.
03/40986	Erection of new stable block following demolition of existing, and creation of a horse ménage. HARDINGS FARM, Hardings Green, Cookham Dean.
	Amended plan to show revised location for new stables & riding arena.

PLANNING DECISIONS

02/39627	Storage container to southern side of building. MOOR HALL, The Moor, Cookham.	PERMITTED
03/40701	Demolition of existing house & outbuildings & construction of detached house enlarged driveway & vehicle hardstanding. TUDOR COTTAGE, Grubwood Lane, Cookham Dean.	PERMITTED
03/40831	Construction of single storey rear extension. 32, BURNT OAK, Cookham Rise.	PERMITTED
03/40867	Single storey side/front extension. 15, WESTWOOD GREEN, Cookham Rise.	PERMITTED
03/40915	Consent to prune a row of Lime trees to give 1.5 metre clearance from roof of village hall. THE ORCHARD, Church Road, Cookham Dean.	NO OBJECTION

Cllr Prichard asked for a decision on whether Cookham Parish Council wanted to take delivery of sand bags on behalf of residents. The yard between the Parish Office and Cookham Rise School was suggested as a good place to store them. Cllr Prichard estimated that the village would need between 4-500 and they would be stored on pallets. Cllr Brockwell suggested that Moor Hall in Cookham Village may be a more suitable place. Cllr H.J. Woodbridge proposed that we accept 500 sand bags providing a suitable site could be found for storage. This was seconded by Cllr Garrard.

Cllr Coker said that when using a handset the RF energy being received at the body would be far greater from the nearby handset than from the distant base station, given that the Automatic Gain Control feature of the handset would increase the transmit power until it could get a reply from the nearest base station, a few milliwatts near the head is potentially able to affect you more than tens of watts a few kilometres away.

Antennas are able to be co-sited (ie. The mast is shared) due to the fact that when the signal is vertically polarised there is a blind spot immediately below the antenna so there is no cross modulation this is also the reason given for the safety zone underneath and the ability to site these in built-up areas.