Jackson Ng at Strategic Sites Committee, 24 September 2026

On Cringdon. Councillor Jackson, Erland for Beaconsfield. Covering for Councillor David Moore.

Through the Chairman, thank you for coming today. I'm always a big fan of hearing from local councillors, war members. Hypothetically speaking, you obviously know the area well. Which of the two options or which options would you think would be better for residents if the committee were minor to approve? And secondly, what extra conditions would you seek for your residents to make a development more perfect? That's technically not a clarification, Councillor Irwin, but we'll let it ride for the moment. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. Councillor, you talked about schools and you questioned whether it's needed. Now, my understanding is the local plan requires it, the previous one. The council's infrastructure have identified the need and the educational authority does not object. So what figures are you relying on and are you essentially asking us to set aside what the local plan or what the authorities are saying? I'd like to have more clarification on that. You also talked about schools nearby having capacity. What schools? How many places? And how long more? Thank you. Thank you, sir.

I think that when High Wycombe or Wycombe District Council did the Local Plan, it also took into consideration potentially children coming from outside of the district, for example across from Cookham. And is your assumption based on no students coming across from the other borough? I think it has been pointed out there is clearly a wall between Buckinghamshire and...

Thank you, Chairman. I'm not sure whether this is a question for the applicant or a technical question, but maybe the applicant can shed some light on it as well. My understanding is Spade Oak is council land in Little Marlow, about two miles, a mile and a half west, closer to Berlin Beaches. Now, the appropriate assessment depends on it being actually open, being in use, not merely just permitted. Now, if these works slip at Spade Oak, I mean, the question to the applicant is, will they accept a ban on the occupation on this site, or are they asking that the section 106D allows them to occupy some other SANG or proceed on payment only? I think that's a technical question, Councillor. I think I know the answer, but I'll let the officers obviously give the answers. I'll let Faye as the officer explain what happens in reality. So that we have assurances that the SANG will be up and running before the...

Councillor Jackson Ng. Actually, Chairman, my question has been answered. Thank you. Okay, moving on to Councillor...

Sadly, Cookham Bridge and Ferry Lane. I've just been spending some time reading up on the Maidenhead Windsor Local Plan and I've been on Cookham Parish Council's website. So the first point I want to make is that I raised earlier about students coming across from the other local authority coming across to Buckinghamshire to study. Maidenhead's local plan acknowledges that. So I think they accept that their students coming over to our part of the county to study. But what's really interesting is that Cookham Parish Council raises issues and concerns about Ferry Lane and Cookham Bridge. But they've also criticised, it appears, their own local authority for not, would appear, paying too much attention to it. But I also noticed that our own cabinet member in dealing with the draft local plan has been approached for comments in public press about whether this will be a pinch point in traffic. And he has assured the press and the public that this wasn't the case. I seem to find there's quite a lot of conflicting accounts of this traffic on Cookham Bridge and Ferry Lane. Personally, I go to the garden tenter in Bonning quite a lot. And I can see why residents are very concerned. So I'm getting mixed messages. So what I'm really interested in hearing from Tim is really is when we have developments that borderline in this instance, or for example in Marlow, other local authorities or in other parts of the county, do we expect to hear back from the local authority, the local planning authority? Do we engage with the parish councils, in this case Cookham Parish Council? And how much weight does that come into effect? So for example, in this case, they've made no comments, so we accept that there is no opposition. That's the position we've taken. But is this a one -off piece, or have they just not, over the last few years, not engaged at all? I'm trying to get a bigger picture of what the engagement piece is from the parish council opposite the river and the local authority as well. Thank you. Thank you. I mean, from a... From the line., Give them takie assuntoこんにちは

Follow up, if I could, Chairman. Let's reverse this. If there was a development of similar size happening in Cookham, would we as a local authority, if we were concerned, engage? Or do we just simply keep quiet because we had nothing to say, we had no objections? What would our position be? I'm just trying to understand what the borough, the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, what their thinking is. I think maybe it's to do with the potential mitigation.

Thank you. Thank you.

Councillor Smith's point of view, I'm intrigued as well because you have a development in front of this committee with presumably whichever application you go for, whichever route you go for, you have the same number of predicted number of cars. So how does using one create more sound than the other from your perspective? In layman terms, which I very much am in terms of...

Essentially you're saying that if Princes Road was the main access point, more people would use that road, whereas if Bridgestone Drive was used as the main road, less people would drive through it? Yes. And that's based on what logic or scientific finding? It's the submitted evidence. I'm sorry, I can't answer that. Direct question.

Councillor Huxley, do we want to bring Tim or Faye just to give a bit more clarity to make sure we don't go down to rebel? Yeah, I'll just try and clarify.

On one hand we're thinking about impact on residents and traffic flows. I'm debating whether there is a cost element as to why one is preferred over the other or not. Potentially. There's not a cost element for the Council.

I'll direct that question to the applicant. Is there a cost element of a proposal A versus proposal B?

Essentially I'm turning around says are you using a Bridgestone Lane? Is that a preferred option because it costs the applicant less money but might impact the residents more? I think there is a cost saving.

Thank you, Chairman. I'll just sort of recollect my thoughts on this. I understand the way we've done it is that we've gone straight to the application we've just passed because we felt that it was more sound and better for the residents and in line with the local plan. We're now being told, actually, we should go along with Office's recommendation this time around for this one because we've approved that one. And then there was no impact on Breachstone Lane or Drive or whichever it is. My view is, if I can come back in. I mean, I haven't been, I wasn't on a site visit, but I've driven down that road because a friend of ours used to live around there. And I live myself on a small, narrow road with a cul -de -sac exactly like this. And for my experience is that whilst, in theory, you could get traffic through, my personal experience says to me that this is going to be havoc for the residents. As such, my mind is that I'll be minded to oppose this. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. Roberts, followed by Councillor Huxley. Yeah.