held on Monday February 5th 2007
Present; Stuart Campbell, Chairman Mary Stanhope, Hugh Delap, Pam Cobb, Rowena Wood, Richard Blamey and Stephanie Jenkins, Clerk. Two members of the public were also present.1 Apologies for absence ; Ray Benfield, Betty Harris and Gitte Dawson.
2 Chairman’s Comments
SC stated that, following January’s lengthy meeting, he felt it important that Councillors realised that it was imperative to conduct meetings with the minimum of side discussions and without interruptions. Councillors agreed.
3 Minutes and Action Points
The Minutes of the meeting of January 8th were agreed to be an accurate record.
Conservation Links between B&NES and West Wilts Planners; the Chairman had queried the existence of these with Jessica Hunnisett. She stated that there are no formal processes. She could pursue minor issues on a personal contact level, but major issues would probably be taken to Regional level.
Website Planning Details; until a satisfactory updating link can be provided to the B&NES’ Planning website, the Clerk felt that it would be better to provide the public with individual planning reference numbers and suggest they access the B&NES’ Planning site independently. She noted that information is duplicated on the Village News Page and Councillors agreed that it would be preferable to use just the one, clearly indicated site. She is to follow this matter up with Dan Towner.
Community Involvement Statement; SC confirmed that he had sent in a response on behalf of the Parish Council.
4 Planning Matters
Village Pump Area; ongoing.Alterations to Applications; RW is to liaise with Gitte Dawson about the way in which it seems that quite important details can be altered after an application has been commented on by the Parish. This happens by negotiation between the applicant and Planning Department without referring back to interested parties. This was seen to be a cause for concern, particularly when listed buildings or those within the Conservation area are involved.Hayes Cottage (adjacent); change of use of derelict farm buildings and new vehicular access. Councillors were concerned over two issues; the first was the fact that only one neighbour had been notified. The Clerk was asked to inform Limpley Stoke’s Parish Clerk as properties directly opposite fall within their Parish boundary. The second concern was the creation of another vehicular access onto a road which already has traffic problems. It was felt that, as a safety factor, Highways should be involved in any scheme which was accepted.Conservation Area Consultation Analysis; Councillors had received the final draft document in which a number of points made by the Parish Council had been incorporated. SC had taken up the issue of including the Park Corner area with Jessica Hunnisett who argued that the job of the appraisal had been to re-assess the existing Conservation areas. She stated that Park Corner will be considered at a later date, but that the Parish Council could, with the property owners’ permission, recommend buildings for a forthcoming list of “Locally Important Buildings”.SC is to ask about the number of copies of the final document that will be produced and Councillors agreed that he could offer a contribution (up to £250) if enough copies could be provided to deliver one to each household in the village. It was suggested that Jessica Hunnisett be asked to speak at the Annual Parish Meeting in April. SC agreed to write a formal letter of appreciation of the quality of the Appraisal Document to Tony Crouch at B&NES.5 Freshford Mill
The Clerk had received an email from Mr Desmond of Ypres Rose stating that the purchase of the site had not yet been finalised and thanking the Parish Council for its vigilance over site security.
PC stated that she felt that the Parish Council should be proposing mitigation measures on noise levels and numbers of vehicles visiting the site as work could start very quickly once the completion of purchase had taken place.
The Chairman agreed, but felt that this could only be done after completion of purchase
RW felt that it would be politic to re-visit the extensive list of conditions placed upon the application to highlight those which might be at risk of being ignored. She agreed to contact Gitte Dawson to ask who would be dealing with the development from B&NES and what would happen if conditions were seen to be ignored.6 Parish Plan
HD reported that the Steering Group had met twice in January: once as a committee and again with the leaders of most of the working groups. A public meeting is planned for late Spring when the working groups will present their findings and recommendations and invite comment or endorsement. By then the timescale for the completion of the Parish Plan and the possible need for additional funding should be clear.
7 Village ShopOngoing. The Freshford Shop Committee is active and remains optimistic that shopping can be maintained in Freshford.
8 Affordable Housing
HD reported that most of the proposed sites within the Housing Development Boundary have been explored and are either unavailable (from owners’ standpoint) or unacceptable (to the Planners). The owners of Site 5 (behind the Old House) have indicated that it might possibly be available in a few years time. Also, a plot owned by them on the High Street could be for sale. Councillors noted that this plot has twice had planning applications refused, the second time at appeal and so is unlikely to be acceptable to the Planning Department for affordable housing. It is also likely to be too expensive.
The possibility of having affordable housing on the Post Office site had also been discussed and ruled out, as being too complicated and expensive.
Gary Ward (B&NES Housing Development) had contacted West Wilts about the possible site adjacent to Church Lane (in Limoley Stoke Parish). West Wilts Housing Needs exercise is underway and the enabling officer will keep in touch with B&NES. Gary’s view is that the site in question would be too far from the centre of Limpley Stoke to be viable for their plans, but his hope is that they might support any application made by Freshford in the future.
HD felt that it would soon be necessary to take proposals for the “B” category sites, such as Park Corner, to the Planners.
B&NES’ Planning have now allocated an officer, Tim Guymer, to deal specially with Rural Exception sites.
9 Footpaths, Walls and Trees
Cemetery Matters; see Finance section
Allotments; MS was asked to obtain clarification of the leasing arrangements of the land behind the Glebe and to see if any portions of this were likely to be available as allotments. SC is to include a piece in the next Bulletin asking any residents with a genuine interest in working an allotment to register their names with the Clerk. He was asked to make it clear that, at the moment, there is no land and to suggest that any community-minded landowner might feel moved to provide some for rent.
Cotswold Wardens’ Seat. No obvious site has come to mind.
Limpley Crest Footpath;. MS had followed up complaints and found that the footpath was very muddy and the hedge overgrown. She has arranged for B&NES’ Footpath Officer to inspect and ask the landowners to take action.
Tree Works; notification had been received that pruning etc would take place in the gardens of Rose Lawn and Studio Cottage.
10 Highways and RailwaysTraffic Appraisal Project; as instructed at January’s meeting, RJB had contacted Hamilton- Baillie Associates. Paula Spivach had visited the village and had been informed of the traffic-related problems (including parking, traffic speed, safety, school access and rat-running). She had been asked to design solutions using the company’s shared-space strategy. RJB reported that the first step for the Parish Council to take would be to commission a report which would include a set of designs for sections of road and an exploration of parking allocations. This would need a budget of £3K + VAT which would also cover a further site visit and a public meeting to present the scheme.
The Chairman asked Councillors for their individual views on whether this money should be spent.
HD felt that the Parish Council should take this step. It would provide a holistic approach to the very real problems facing the village which it would be wrong not to explore. He felt that it would be important to include B&NES’ Highways in discussions.
RW agreed with him. It would be money well spent.
RJB stated that the Hamilton-Baillie approach was impressively clear on issues and would rely on minimal signage. They would liaise with the Local Authority over the recommended schemes.
PC felt that it would be an improvement on the unsightly way in which traffic is currently managed in the village.
MS was similarly in favour, but wondered if there would be any prospect of funding any of the solutions proposed in a Hamilton-Baillie report.
SC felt that the Council would be negligent not to commission the report. Problems had been building up over the last thirty years and the report would give an option to do what needs to be done.
Station Flowerbeds/ Planting; RW had provided Councillors with a break-down of the costs of the reduced planting scheme at the station in advance of the meeting. She displayed a plan of the planting and Councillors discussed the details. It was agreed to authorise the work, provided that the costs of just over £3K are a final amount. Councillors also felt that the idea of a mosaic within the central circle on the platform was not one which they would pursue. RW was asked to contact Melanie Everard accordingly.
Noticeboard; RW presented the first draft of the map with apologies from Phil Affleck for the delay.
Rosemary Lane; PC reported that surface water on the lower end of the lane was proving a hazard. A blocked underground drain was the initial problem but potholes have been scoured out by the surface water. RJB is to ask Highways to clear the drain and fill in the potholes.Problems with SatNav; SC reported problems with large vehicles getting stuck on Rosemary Lane. He felt that signposts were needed at the top of the lane and also at the bottom indicating the bridge 3 ton limit as well as limited access. RJB to liaise with Highways.11 Correspondence
B&NES, Chairman’s Office; Invitation to Annual Civic Reception
B&NES Electoral Services; notification of election dates.
B&NES Planning Services; Acknowledgement of representations made on the Statement of Community Involvement.
Heart of Wessex Rail Partnership; Annual Progress Report.
Community Action; Newsletter.
B&NES Community Safety and Drugs Project; Strategic Assessment.
B&NES; Heritage Events Leaflets.
The Allotments Regeneration Initiative; Newsletter.
B&NES / South Glos/ Bristol/ N Somerset; Poster and Newsletter “ Waste in the West of England.
Avon and Somerset Constabulary; Letter from PCSO Support Officer, explaining the new system and giving contact details.
ALCA; Newletters, Legal Briefing on Amendments to the Model code of Conduct, The Commons Act and the Draft Freedom of Information Document.
12Finance
Payments needing to be made
Ian Croker. Street Cleaning , £189.37
CPRE, Annual Sub, £27
Shaw and Sons, Parish Councillor’s Guide and Clerk’s Guide (updated versions)£26.2
Income
B&NES, Street Cleaning Funding, £272.2
Precept 2007-08
Councillors had been given an opportunity to study the Precept forecast, prepared by the Chairman and the Clerk, before the meeting. This document was closely discussed and it was agreed that the Parish Council finances, including Reserves were in a healthy state. There had been a large increase in the cost of electricity, but, apart from that, figures were within budget. It was agreed to set a Precept of £11235 fro 2007-08 and to fund the Traffic Survey project (section 10) from Reserves. The Clerk is to pass the Precept Request on to B&NESWork in the Cemetery
Alan Duck and the Clerk had had a meeting to look at the possible costs involved in
- Cutting down and removing the large fir tree beside the first house in The Glebe.
- Trimming the overgrown hedge alongside the same house and garden
- Dealing with a large branch (storm damage) at the bottom of the cemetery
These, together, will cost approx. £360.
· Replacing the section of coping fallen from the wall at the bottom end of the cemetery, on Freshford Lane. This will need dowelling to hold it securely in place and the adjoining section also needs attention.
Cost for this will be £100.
Councillors agreed to authorise this work. The Clerk is to contact Alan Duck.
Whilst inspecting the wall it became clear that it will require more attention in the fairly near future.
Other Repairs
The Clerk told Councillors that a pane of glass in the noticeboard had been broken. It was suggested that the replacement should be acrylic rather than glass. One fixing on the back of the board also needed attention. She was instructed to deal with this work. The Clerk also reported that the top section of the handrail alongside Patrick Bowden’s footpath had collapsed. Councillors wondered whether RB might be able to repair this.13 May Election
So far, no candidates have come forward. SC is to give the matter publicity in the next Bulletin. RJB agreed to make further contact with the Editor of the Chronicle.14 Date of Next Meeting
Monday March 5th.