To receive a presentation from Rutland County Council, the Ministry of Defence, and RegenCo.

To receive representation from the St George’s Barracks Advisory Group.

A representation and presentation was received from Mr Paul Cummings, representative of the St George’s Barracks Advisory Group. Both of which would be attached to the minutes.

A presentation was received from Rutland County Council, the Ministry of Defence, and RegenCo. The presentation would be attached to the minutes.

During discussion, the following points were noted:

      i.        The criteria for the minimum of 1500 houses was established by the Government, it was accepted as the minimum number that could support the sustainability of a community.  Before a decision could be made on the exact number of houses further studies needed to be undertaken, including viability assessments (the cost of sales had to exceed the cost of development) and sustainability assessments a combination of all factors would be taken into account before a decision was made.

    ii.        The Crichel Down Rules were being considered by the MOD and that process was almost complete.

   iii.        The design of houses to be developed would come later down the line, the project was still in the early stages and it would be some time before a detailed planning application would come forward.

   iv.        Any Community Infrastructure Levy would be calculated in accordance with the rules and an estimated figure would be included within viability assessments.

    v.        One of the requirements to bid for the Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF) was an explanation regarding what would be done if the bid was unsuccessful or if less funding was received. If the bid was unsuccessful it would slow down development.

   vi.        The development of a new GP surgery was questioned in light of problems in relation to a national shortage of GP’s. Mr Pearce responded that work was being done with the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and representatives from the health sector to look for ways to get optimum provision of health professionals working in the sector, this could include a variety of practitioners not just GPs. Mrs Briggs noted that social care professionals were being considered as well as health and GPs.

  vii.        It was noted that the jump from a minimum of 1500 houses to 2700 was almost a 100% increase, there was not enough detail to criticise or praise the master plan. More facts and figures were needed to know exactly where the Council was in terms of the development and to enable Council to make an informed decision. Mrs Briggs confirmed that the detail would come towards the end of the year, the Master Plan was evolving and therefore details became available in stages as work on each part of the project progressed and completed.

viii.        Mr Bennett noted that if the Council had not engaged and there was not a Memorandum of Understanding between RCC and the MOD, the MOD would have sought allocation in the local plan and taken forward a master plan of their own. By working with the Council, a sustainable development could be created.

   ix.        Miss Waller noted that whilst she was on the board that made the decision to agree the MoU, she had only just joined the board and did not feel in a position to challenge.

    x.        Regarding bus transport, conversations had been had with bus companies and it was noted that buses were most viable when running from one main terminal to another, passing through areas where users would be travelling in either direction. It was key to get buses moving between two large populations via the St George’s development.