COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT
* – Attendance; A- Absent; N – No Apologies Received
Cllr Mrs N. Turton – Mayor (in the Chair) *
Cllr. M. Fice *
Cllr Mrs C. Bricknell *
Cllr T. Lang *
Cllr Mrs L. Sinnott *
Cllr K. Baker *
Cllr P. Lafferty-Holt *
Cllr M. Long *
Cllr Mrs Kemp *
Also in attendance:
Dist. Cllr S. Wright A
Dist. Cllr Mrs Pearce *
Cty. Cllr. R Gilbert *
Gill Claydon (Clerk) *
Pete Robinson (Cemetery Manager and Project Officer) *
WPC Jo Pengilly A
Kristen Bounds Kingsbridge Gazette *
1. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members were invited to acknowledge any declarable interests, including the nature and extent of such interests that they may have in any items to be considered at this meeting. None received.
2. OPEN FORUM
Rob Wheeler was in attendance to speak on another’s behalf in relation to the Onslow Road application. There was a loss of view from the public bench as it was currently obscured. He noted the restricted car parking spaces and that the footpath was on the same side of the road where traffic builds up and had the added hazard of access for the bus. It was his belief that the drainage requirements had never been properly investigated. If this site was like Dell Court, there would be significant rock below the top soil so neighbours were worried about drains. The design was out of character and unneighbourly removing views across to Coronation Road as people drove down Onslow Road.
A couple of drawings suggested these proposed properties were to be three floors but in fact they were four as the elevation was split over levels. There was no height reduction as the removal of a basement did not lower it overall. This remained overbearing to those situated below so the previous objections remained. The design and style did not blend with the streetscene as neither did the use of galavanised features. This structure would dominate other roads and the land stability was not confirmed. General points given reflected that most assessments had been from Onslow Road whereas the significant impact would be felt in Knowle Road where the drawings did not show the impact of proposed planting. The image of people on a patio close to the fence illustrated their feet at the height of the fence looking down into the properties below.
Jenny Sprague noted that she lived in Knowle Road and would be most affected by this development. She had several points notably the major overbearing nature of property and its height being within 13 feet of their boundary. The land behind had a 1 in 2 slope and these properties would sit significantly above her property so any proposal would be reliant on them screening otherwise the proposed properties would look straight into their bedroom and dining room so they would have no privacy. There was also an obstruction of light and sunlight. A further concern was such landscaping due to drainage running onto their property as there were natural springs in the area which appeared as and when they want to appear. Stability of the rockface was another point as recently development alongside their property, a garage to the left, had been dug out and during that development the land started to fall away and they had to act quickly. Next door but one to them, 3 Knowle Road, was well under way but the developer had to make the garage shallower as when he dug into the rock face it was not all rock, so they were also concerned about it falling. At Beacon House on Drake Road, which had been, ongoing for some time ‘Celtic Rock’ had been working for 18 months to try to secure the land because the patio and garden were falling away. Thus, they felt extremely vulnerable with regard to this proposal and the properties still being four storey with bottom floor set back but the original height still as proposed.
Martin King and Martin Payne were present as 2 of the 3 applicants for the Onslow Road proposed. Martin King outlined that this was a resubmission with a new proposal as they had been in long debate with the various councils and District, he advised, had been involved for eight years. Originally it was suggested the site could support four units and when they proposed putting in the scheme they decided they would not go for four but three. He further stated that the owners below in Knowle Road had covenants in their title deeds and knew this land was possibly to be used for development. Both had thus carried out planting. The applicants therefore did not feel there was loss of privacy. They had now returned with an application for two properties and believed they were now in a situation where all the objections were unfounded. Mr King continued that this site was not steeper than any other site in Salcombe and there was nothing to suggest that it would subside, and the previous proposal put in was objected to on drainage due to building regulation and not planning policy although there was an AONB objection. District officers it was suggested had agreed that surface water drainage had been dealt with and would pose no detrimental effect on properties below but in fact would be advantageous with the installation of attenuation tanks. Such tanks would only drain into the land when the land could take such drainage. The applicants disputed Mr Wheeler’s assertion and countered that there had been many investigations carried out and Patrick Whymer District Planning cautioned no more should be carried out until other matters had been approved. All third-party consultants had approved there was no loss of light, drainage etc.
It was the applicants belief that the bench seat situated currently for the view had been repositioned into a new position to view down the valley and in fact the only photographic evidence of it historically looking down that valley was from 1975 during a snow storm. Mr King then quoted various points from the Joint Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan indicating that he felt this proposal was in compliance with all policies. At the request of District Council they had moved the proposed building back away from the bottom boundary although there was an ongoing dispute that property owners lower down had taken 11 feet of their land. Salcombe was built on a hill and they were told at pre planning discussions that this was not an issue as such development was so high above surrounding buildings below it would look over them and not into as the requirement was 24 metres between buildings and they had 30 metres. Mr King denied it had ever been a quarry site and there had never been natural springs running. Maybe below where there had been cutting of land taken out it could weep but this was not from springs. In relation to Sustainable Urban Drainage they were not putting anything into the ground for drainage (i.e. soakaway) but installing an attenuation tank so there was no perceived problem. Martin Payne stated he had lived in Salcombe for 61 years and there had been a lot of lies told about this piece of land continuing that no one was entitled to a view in Salcombe and everyone was overlooked. Having discussed their proposed further with a planning consultant they reduced their application from 3 to 2 houses with all surveys necessary carried out. One of the objectors had a second home which was run as a holiday home and had been bought with a covenant in his deeds to state that he would not object to any planning application for houses on the land above. The applicants stated that this property owner had now submitted nineteen planning objections.
District and County Councilors’ Report.
Cty Cllr Gilbert thanked town council for the invitation to the Civic Day which he had thoroughly enjoyed. He was currently a little unsure about progress on the First Responder parking bay as to whether the paint marking on the road had been ordered for the space. Regarding discussions around the Salcombe Swimming Pool centre he was to meet with the Mayor shortly to discuss the County land. On the Beadon trailer problem a letter had been sent but the town clerk would need to follow this up as to where it was through the procedure.
On the Ember Road splay and lines to be installed at this location it had been in existence since 2009 and there were no reported accidents, so highways said there is no justification for such expenditure.
Cllr Fice noted County had received an application to close Fore Street in January but when he and Cty Cllr Gilbert walked around town they noted the fallen drain outside the newsagents and there was talk of including that work in January works. He also noted that there was an all-encompassing procedural email received from County in September with huge number of roads to be repaired from September to February. These included Devon Road, Shadycombe Road and Church Street. Now town council was being told there was no money for Church Street and Cllr Fice wished to understand why it had been on the list and costed previously but now there was not enough money. That said he accepted Shadycombe and Devon Roads were the more important ones but wondered what had taken the expenditure put aside. Cty Cllr Gilbert would look into these points.
Cllrs Mrs Kemp raised the issue of residents parking permits. She believed that the traffic enforcement officer could park in such a reserved space but could not understand why a nurse or care worker could not. Cty Cllr Gilbert responded that an additional review was being undertaken at County and this would address nurses and carers being allowed to park on double yellow lines and other areas. He was quietly positive that such dispensation would be given for these important carers to park close by. Cllr Mrs Kemp continued and wished to know why the traffic enforcement officer should be allowed to park in restricted areas as could they not park in the car park and walk. If a resident needed a space others should not be in them as people paid for permits for these spaces. Cllr Lang noted that the position first requested for the taxi rank was refused because it was deemed dangerous and yet in Shadycombe Road someone clearing leaves and sweeping had a dispensation parking notice stating he could park on double yellow lines, how did contractors manage to get these. Cty Cllr Gilbert felt this was probably the same as builders permits. He would however question where it was permissible for enforcement officers to park.
It was noted that the bollards at Chapel end had been damaged with one knocked off and standing by the refuse bin and the other two badly damaged. Cty Cllr Gilbert requested photographs of this and would this put into an email for the highway officer.
Cllr Long raised an issue close to the new development in Gould Road where Co-op was going into. Developers had been installing kerbs and pavement area right along a large section of Gould Road where narrowed it and the existing double yellow lines were running through it. Had this change been agreed by Devon County as it had reduced the width of the road by 1 to 1.5 metres and considering the large fishing lorries that needed access this was a concern. Again Cty Cllr Gilbert requested that Cllr Long provide him with photographs and he would address this issue.
Cllr Lafferty-Holt noted that the temporary traffic lights that had been there quite often did not change but stayed on red and it was believed the contractor had no permission for these. As it appeared they had been removed it was requested if they returned Cty Cllr Gilbert should be advised.
Motor bikes had been parking in resident spaces but on following this up nothing could be enforced because motor bikes did not have to display permits and could park anywhere. It seemed that Salcombe was the first town that had ever brought a question about motorbikes parking in residents’ areas forward and Cty Cllr Gilbert admitted it was a weakness in the procedure.
Cty Cllr Gilbert left the meeting.
Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce also thanked town council for the civic lunch. She referred to the tree prosecution at Lorima St. Dunstans. She noted it was not the residents who were prosecuted but those that had cut down the trees. It was a significant win because the contractors were prosecuted and fined individually with a maximum fine of £2000 each. There had been a reduction as they pleaded guilty but the fine was over £3000. There was an additional contractor who pleaded not guilty who was being taken to Crown Court but may well change plea. This story would be in the local Gazette to highlight that District Could would pursue such people. It was noted that the fine was not felt commensurate with the problem caused as £3000 was little to pay for a view in Salcombe. District Council needed issues such as these flagged up before work was carried out or completed as it was easier to sort out and deal with from early warning. Residents should remain vigilant.
The Joint Local Plan was now out to final consultation and there was a link to such on the home page of the District Council website. It was important to note this was not opening everything up again for discussion but was only for comment on the major modifications to the plan. Any replies would be sent straight to the inspectors. There were also minor modifications such as sorting out grammar and making points easily understood on which people could comment but these comments were dealt with by officers at District Council. All consultation ended on 3rd December so she hoped the final version would be back with the inspector before Christmas. It was hoped the Inspectors would have started writing the final report so it would come through reasonably early in the New Year. There had been a significant delay as this had been ongoing for 18 months. Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce then explained the new way Government had of calculating the five year housing land supply. Both Plymouth and South Hams had their allocation figures but West Devon did not at present. However once the plan was adopted there could be a figure for the whole area rather than the three authority areas separately.
There was a new regime for rogue landlords where previously if properties were unfit and the landlord did nothing they had to go to court. Now it had become a civil matter and District could just fine offenders and the fines were steep so hopefully were an inducement to put their houses in order. This came in to being with immediate effect. The outsourcing of waste procurement final decision was to be taken at the beginning of December as there was no decision as yet as they had not had final figures back. There was now advertising on the district council website which was bringing in some money so she hoped it was low key enough and not distracting. There was also a new council tax reduction scheme being consulted upon. People on low incomes had to pay a proportion of council tax these days and a percentage had to be worked out individually and the scheme consulted on each year. This was becoming unwieldy and now a more formulaic scheme would come forward and put people in income brackets and give bands to pay. Inevitably with change some would be winners and others losers but not by a significant margin but the consultation button for this was on the District Council front page.
Pay as you enter toilet consultation was coming to a close with the Executive having a report at the beginning of November so she was looking for answers by then but with regard to Salcombe the decisions had already been made. Cllr Fice noted town council had previously asked how the projected income figures were worked out as it was strange that a toilet within the car park in Kingsbridge which was used all year round attracted a third of the income of one in Salcombe that was used mainly in the tourist season. The Town Clerk was requested to email Dist Cllr Wright to remind him he had been requested to respond on this.
The new commercial property strategy had gone through district council and a decision was taken that they could borrow up to £60million from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB). This was for building on land in the District but restricted to District so of benefit to the area of any schemes go ahead. Several schemes which would be looked at would be on land in District ownership and Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce felt they were all good schemes and good for the district so would bring people and money into the area. One detail included in the investment strategy was that certainly no more than £30million would be drawn down before the elections in May but she personally did not feel borrowing would be anywhere near that even by then. In the medium term financial strategy looking forward for five years it was plain there were still significant challenges and it would not be till 5 years when things would start looking stable. Increases in salaries should be more than 1% as they had been stuck for so long but this did put extra burden on district council. District was restricted but what they could put council tax up by but it was becoming increasingly difficult to deliver services on this amount of money.
Cllr Fice questioned the five year land supply that Plymouth and South Hams had but West Devon did not. Assuming they were not allowed to pool figures at present did this mean that the Joint Local Plan failed. Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce responded that no this was until the plan was adopted but once adopted they could opt to have a whole area figure. This is what they would do as together they could maintain a five year land supply. She explained that Plymouth had a huge amount of development going on in the city so less development would be required in South Hams and West Devon. The problem up at Government was that their figures meant no way would they be able to deliver 300,000 properties per year as Office of Statistics stated as they were only providing 240,000. Therefore they would consider the figures and the statistics be organized to achieve!
Cllr Lang asked if District Council was borrowing millions did this mean they were going to do development themselves and if so what expertise did they have. Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce responded that there were a variety of options to include their own land but that they would have partner projects. Cllr Lang was still concerned how they would manage to borrow that money with no experience. She explained that the PWLB been around for over 100 years and that Government lent money on favourable terms and this was ringfenced not the same monies used for service. Local Authorities, much smaller than South Hams District, had larger loans and they had taken advice and this was a suitable figure to borrow.
Cllr Long noted that now they had embarked on this Commercial Property Strategy and was borrowing had District also looked at Council House provision borrowing as the cap had been lifted by Government. Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce explained that this had only been lifted for Councils with Housing Revenue stocks but South Hams District Housing was owned by standalone providers. They could borrow and build 200 properties over a few years without setting up their own Housing Revenue stock. They must build and sell low cost to recoup their money to cover costs continue building but not obtain more and could then reinvest in this problem which allowed an investment of £6million.
Cllr Fice noted on the planning website that a tree for 3164/18 was there but everything uploaded was blank pages. It was advised that the officer should be contacted to advise of this problem.
Cllr Lafferty-Holt advised that on trying to pay council tax on the District website the options were limited. He had bought a house but was living with parents and due to not living anywhere there was no option for this. The site asked – where are you moving from. There was no option to say someone wanted to start from afresh. Therefore a second home owner could not register as they were not moving. Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce felt there was another sort of facility to alert District that a property had been sold. However it was felt this was still a defect in the application form on the site if someone could not advise accordingly and should be reported.
He also mentioned that at Whitestrand toilets he reported on 1st August by email to Dist Cllr Wright that the toilet seat in the 2nd stall of the mens was broken and it still was. The report was 10 days old then. On Friday the previous week within the urinals there was a particularly awful smell, quite sweet, acrid and unpleasant, noted these were waterless urinals. Regarding lighting, at this time of the year probably to do with clocks, at 5.30 to 6p.m. it was quite dull and difficult to see when entering.
This had been a very busy half term with fantastic weather and many visitors were complaining about the inability to park in Salcombe because of the reduction at Creek Car Park. Cllr Fice noted there had been an assurance that District would not cordoned off this section until after half term but it had been and remained empty. Dist Cllr Wright had assured this would not happen again this year. Other examples of visitors parking by the crab shed with no way marked to access where to pay due to fencing were provided. There was only one machine now available for all to pay but situated at the wrong end of the herras fencing. This problem for the last two years needed to be considered and sorted with an agreement for next year in place.
3. CO OPTION
No further applications received this was dispensed with.
The Minutes of the meeting dated 26th September 2018 were duly signed by the Mayor as a true and correct record.
5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS:
The following applications were considered and such observations from town council submitted to District.
• 2940/18/HHO Householder application for renovation of existing workshop studio to create garden room Lanapoule, Raleigh Road, Salcombe TQ8 8AY – No objection.
• 2987/18/HHO Householder application for alterations and extension to dwelling 21 Church Street, Salcombe TQ8 8DH – Objection. This proposal was not felt to compliment the street scene by proposing two dormers as this would unbalance the visual frontage and at the rear was not in keeping with the location and too large. The extension could have a loss of light impact on the neighbouring property, 22.
• 3048/18/LBC Listed building consent for proposed addition of two rear conservation rooflights 6 Victoria Place, Salcombe TQ8 8DB – Objection as this would alter the appearance of the terrace and was felt to interfere with the terms of the listing. It would also be visible from other public areas. Whilst referred to as habitable accommodation it was only accessible by a ladder and this was not felt appropriate.
• 3262/18/FUL Proposed residential development of two detached dwellings on vacant land. Revised scheme submission of refused application for three dwelling ref: 1240/16/FUL Lyndale, Onslow Road, Salcombe TQ8 8AH – Objection as the design and materials were not in keeping with the locality nor did they fit the context of the emerging Neighbourhood Plan notably policy D1 which referred not just to the Conservation Area but all development within the development boundary. The design was felt to be overbearing and there was concern that one property proposed within the plan had a terrace looking out over Onslow Road and thus would create overlooking to those properties. Notably this design brought the proposed properties closer to the road and there was concern that currently the properties down Onslow Road followed a line that was set back. Access onto the highway with the proposed properties being situated close to the road was also more difficult. It was acknowledged that drainage would incorporate attenuation tanks, with the approval of South West Water, but town council highlighted concerns that this site would still over burden water runoff into pipes in this area. A vast amount of money had been expended to remove surface water around the area from sewers although it was accepted that attenuation was to be used and not soakaways. There would be further impact on the AONB and Neighbourhood Plan policy ENV6 highlighted important views, this was not just withstanding the bench view but also views from the other side of Batson Creek and Shadycombe looking up at this location which was identified as a locally important view. Policy T2 of the Neighbourhood Plan also stated that there should be three parking spaces per 3 bedroomed properties which this did not provide and in fact provided restricted car parking with minimal turning. The sight lines shown on the plans meant any car would have to be over the pavement and not within the property and planting would further affect sight lines. Should consideration be given to approve this or any future development in this area, as it was situated so close to the highway and due to the topography, there must be site management plan as it was the busiest access road into Salcombe and town council would wish to see a Construction Environmental plan to cover constructions run off as well as water run-off.
WORK TO TREE PRESERVATION ORDER TREES
• 3130/18/TPO T1: Conifer – fell, obstructing view, Lazylands, road past Southern Mill Farm, Salcombe TQ8 8LN – Objection due to no arboriculture reason for such felling.
• 3164/18/TPO T1: Turkey Oak – reduce single limb touching and damaging the render on by approx. 2 metres, limb at exactly the same height as chimney (approx. 9 metres from ground level), limb is on exactly the same side of T1 as the chimney (West) Lammas Coombe, Main Road, Salcombe TQ8 8JQ – No objection.
WORK TO TREES IN A CONSERVATION AREA
• 3074/18/TCA 3074 T1: Magnolia – crown height reduction by up to 2 metres, remove large limb on West side; T2: Magnolia – No work, 12 Courtenay Street, Salcombe TQ8 8DQ – No objection if lesser works undertaken as 2 metres was felt excessive being 40% of the tree.
• 3446/18/CLE Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for an Existing use of operation – Emergency stabilisation works to substantial existing stone retaining wall at risk of collapse following catastrophic collapse of adjacent section of wall 2 The Sanctuary, Baptist Lane, Salcombe TQ8 8JA – Town Council agreed the statements with regard to the problem and that works requested were required.
Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce remained to hear this decision and then left the meeting and thereafter the tree matters were heard.
6. PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS
It was AGREED to;
a) ratify the handyman works to have the grass area cleared of brambles and removal of waste to prepare for bulb planting at a cost of £275.
b) Purchase 1000 spring daffodil bulbs from Ashridge Nurseries for the verge at Main Road for £115.68.
It was AGREED that no further grit stock should be requested from County at present.
8. JUBILEE GARDENS
This was DEFERRED awaiting further quotes.
9. TOWN MAP
It was AGREED:
a) whether that the town map need updating but to retain the current map with amendments.
b) That the locations for a map would be South Sands, Spar Shop, and North Sands Car Park with the Salcombe Information Centre already covering Shadycombe Car Park, Creek Car Park, and the Park and Ride Whitestrand.
c) That the design and content of any map would include reference to the Spar/P.O and that the Salcombe Information Centre would review the content and put this to town council for consideration.
d) That this would return to town council to review funding once the design and costing had been obtained by the Information Centre.
10. VERMIN CONTROL
It was AGREED to continue vermin control as advised.
11. COUNCIL PARKING SPACE
It was AGREED that the use of the council space was for council visitors and such use would be authorised by a laminated sign provided for the visitor’s windscreen to illustrate such permission.
12. MAYOR’S REPORT
The Mayor advised that on the 12 October she attended a meeting with Father Daniel and others regarding the evening World War 1 memorial service to be held on the 11 November. Plans were moving along nicely.
Town Council had their Civic Service and Lunch on the 14 October where she presented the Citizen of the Year, Peter Tobin, with his commemorative plaque, and honoured Mrs Janet Twining’s 100th birthday. By all accounts it was thoroughly enjoyed by those who attended.
She also attended a meeting on the 16 October with Dist Cllr Wright, Peter Ralph and John Edwards from Rotary, Dan Field, SHDC engineer, and District’s contractor at Whitestrand to discuss the forthcoming Christmas Fest. Three lighting poles were going to be made to match the existing but minus the actual lamps, which would be placed to form a square around the car parking. This would allow lighting to be strung between them for events. Work had been agreed to finish by the 23 November to allow time for Rotary to prepare for their event on the 4 December. The Christmas Tree would go up in its usual place in the car park. Santa’s Grotto would be sited in the area by Captain Morgan’s, and the resurfacing of this space had been put back to next year.
Attending the Batson Master Plan workshop on the 17 October they were were shown District’s architects’ ideas for possible development along Gould Road which showed the creation of a new road and a higher tier of buildings, the possible affordable housing estate, on land off Shadycombe Road and the location of two possible open market houses now apparently sited in a field not previously identified for development higher up off Shadycombe Road. District also outlined their ideas for the redevelopment of the Fish Quay, and reworking of the entrance and parking spaces in Creek Car Park. The point was made quite strongly that proposals of this magnitude should be put to the people of Salcombe for their input sooner rather than later, and not for District to consult only with key stakeholders.
On the 18th the Mayor attended a Devon Home Choice training session at Follaton House. Devon Home Choice was the model adopted by the Councils and Registered Providers operating within Devon to allocate housing through this jointly operated Choice Based Lettings Scheme, covering all 10 Devon Authorities including Plymouth and Torbay, enabling applicants to apply across Devon for vacant properties. District Council coordinated DHC within South Hams and maintained the common housing register for all partners operating within the area. Registered Providers label, advertise and let their properties, had their own allocation policies and would verify applicants’ details to ensure they met their criteria. Salcombe had its own local allocation policy and it was essential that people were registered on the system because a strong local connection trumped many other criteria.
On the 19th Hazel Burkitt invited the Mayor to Beehives Nursery to gain a fuller understanding of what was provided there in terms of outreach work, safeguarding, and so on. The Mayor felt it was an essential facility that was so much more than just a nursery to the families that used it.
13. COUNCILLORS REPORTS
• Cllr Long – Advised that he and Pete Robinson walked around town council areas of tree areas ascertain potential works and planting schemes and would report at the following meeting. He also noted that he was pleased to receive the Netherwood decision notice and its reasoning.
• Cllr Mrs Kemp – Noted the Devon Home Choice training she was attending and wished Cllr Mrs Bricknell to attend also. It had not been possible to register her but at the training only took 45 minutes it was suggested she attend on the day and see if she could be included.
• Cllr Fice – The meeting held at Cliff House with regard to the Batson Plan was felt not to contain much. David Parkes was requested to have a true and open consultation with residents but he responded District would have to do this for a planning application, totally missing the point. Those who attended were worried that the aspirations posed might start to run away as a lot more had happened on the plans from when Cllr Fice had even been briefed at Follaton. The artist’s impression along Gould Road was worrying. Cllr Baker asked who was driving to have the houses built was it just District? Harrison Sutton were involved and they also represented the Smiths who owned some Batson land. Provision of houses was in the JLP as the site was identified along with up by the petrol station. There was an acknowledged need for truly social housing but putting them above employment units was wrong. It was suggested that the grass bank could accommodate some flats but Chris Brook stated a categoric no when posed this socially at the meeting. Cllr Long was intrigued by the time scales as it was stated they would be built by 2020 and 21/22. This was worrying as to how progress was moving along with ‘a lot of chat’ but no real plan being discussed. Assumption was being made and the worst was regarding Beehives – the nursery. It was felt they did need the space and were within a bequeathed/donated building which was much more of a hub for social services than was actually seen. There appeared no sensitivity being given to people involved in creating this plan for Batson. District was still powering on with incorrect ideas. Those attending had been promised that something would come by email for them to respond to, but nothing had been received so far. It was agreed within the meeting that Town Council would respond as a corporate body and not those attending as individuals.
• Cllr Fice – Advised he had met with Nigel Blazby who agreed to be Parade Marshall and Cllr Fice had been through process with him, but he would also sit down with Andrew Arthur to make sure all was understood. Frank Smith advised the cannon was in place. With regard to the Park and Ride he had checked the figures and County did overpay but their spreadsheets were awful. For this year the park and ride had been up in the first quarter but down April, May and June, up again July, August and September but he had not worked out the bottom line yet. The Mayor had enquired whether not charging for parking from the end of October to February would assist parking problems but based on last year figures the town would have lost £2500 as October can be a good month for income. Therefore, this was not an option.
• Cllr Lang – Read the report on Sunnycliffe and although it mentioned the JLP the inspector did not refer to it as much as he had expected. Mentioning the cladding the inspector felt this was done all over the country. Others at the meeting felt this was Government policy and the notes made were acceptable.
• Cllr Mrs Bricknell – Advised that there had been a few incidents of people over stepping others that had been waiting longer for housing and perhaps the Devon Home Choice system needed to be looked at. At Bonfire Hill a resident did bid on one but had told the board she had depression so they altered her banding up making her eligible for a house and this raised concern for provision of substantiated fact to obtain a dwelling. Cllr Mrs Bricknell noted that historically there used to be a district councillor that was consulted regarding any housing allocation but nowadays there was no one locally and this allowed additional facts/points to be included that would have previously been scrutinised. There was concern expressed that no pets were allowed in Chandlers nor Cabourg Close. Whilst Chandlers had a multi entrance that might cause problems this was not felt to be a factor at Cabourg and older people needed pets.
• Devon Communities Resilience Forum to be held all day on 22nd November in Exeter. Confirmed speakers were Richard Clarke – Public Health England – Preparing for and Responding to a Flu Pandemic, Justin Sharples – SWAST (South West Ambulance Service) – Community Defibrillators. Maybe Caroline Bricknell
• Invitation from District Council to attend on Monday 10th December 6.30p.m. at Follaton House for a meeting covering the Devon County 2019/20 budget, District Council budget, commercial property strategy, proposals for public conveniences and the Joint Local Plan progress. Cllr Fice, Cllr Long and Nikki Turton
• Town Council was advised of a thank you note received from Mrs Twining following her attendance at the Civic Lunch in celebration of her 100th birthday.
• Consultation on the amendments to the Joint Local Plan had been circulated and feedback was awaited from town councillors before arranging for them to meet and discuss.
• Footpaths 49 and 50 across from Shadycombe Road to Batson were now fully signed by County Footpaths.
• The AONB Consultation had been sent out and was awaiting views, if any, from town councillors.
Current Account £500.00
Deposit Account £340,169.13
Councillors APPROVED Internet payments in October to:
Cyan – Bench transport to repair £30.00
HMRC – Tax and NI £753.79
NEST – Pensions £146.20
Claydon – Sundries (to include £15 bouquet for Civic Lunch) £25.61
Wages – £1752.11
Foot Anstey – Legal fees £1032.00
SHDC – Maintenance contract September £998.95
15. NEXT MEETING
The next meeting would be held on Wednesday 14th November 2018 in the Library at Cliff House, Cliff Road, Salcombe at 6.30p.m.
Meeting Closed: 21.10p.m.
…………………………………………….. 14th November 2018.