* – Attendance; A- Absent; N – No Apologies Received

Cllr. M. Fice – Mayor (in the Chair) *
Cllr Mrs C. Bricknell *
Cllr T. Lang *
Cllr R. Whitfield *
Cllr Mrs L. Sinnott *
Cllr K. Baker *
Cllr Mrs N. Turton *
Cllr P. Lafferty-Holt *
Cllr M. Long *

Also in attendance:
Dist. Cllr S. Wright *
Dist. Cllr Mrs Pearce A
Cty. Cllr. R Gilbert A
Gill Claydon (Clerk) *
Pete Robinson (Cemetery Manager and Project Officer) *
WPC Jo Pengilly N
PCSO P. O’Dwyer N
Kristen Bounds – Kingsbridge Gazette *


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.


David Lake was in attendance to represent the people of Batson and advised he had been working with Nigel Mortimer over the last year to address a problem with regard to the reed growth. He explained that the reeds were cut in the autumn, with permission from Nigel Mortimer and the various agencies, to control their growth. The objective was to control and allow other plants to establish themselves. He went on to note that some twenty years ago the foreshore was relatively clear with a variety of species but it started to grow differently due to a different species which had now largely taken over. From scientific information he had been provided with his viewpoint was that the species was a thug and by cutting them they could control the growth. The first cut was carried out in October and had cleared the bed from that they observed that the ground level was very high being some 2-3 feet above the old ground bed. He referred to a report he had compiled which had been forwarded to town councillors. The residents requested permission to scrape the foreshore to encourage growth of other types of plant. Further works would require funding and they could raise some money but depending on whether Natural England allowed further works this would be a significant project. He advised that with the reeds the view from creek end had disappeared and as the Neighbourhood Plan had made a special feature about the view down creek and view back to Batson village which was disappearing they wished to tackle this. Batson residents felt it was better to control the area and have other grasses and salt marsh species growing within it for more a diverse environment for birds and plants. They were still exploring alternatives but all partners must work out how to do this. He had not made these comments in isolation, was not a scientist, but having spoken to other residents concluded he was on brief for Batson.

Nigel Mortimer noted this outline and that the scientists referred to in this brief had been considering America with these comments where these species were intrusive but these reeds at Batson were native to England and were not seen as aggressive and thus did not need control. This Estuary sat in an SSSI and Marine Nature Reserve and was managed by the Estuaries Partnership with English Nature providing the final decision on advice. One feature was the saltmarshes around the estuary but at Batson there were too many nutrients going in and too much fresh water. He explained that the plants needed salt but this was conditional upon the flooding of such by salt waters. If the area flooded all the time what would be produced was seaweed. At Batson there was a lot of salt water coming in with areas either side the stream so this was not just a freshwater issue. A wish for more diversity of plants and wildlife for the community so that these grew lower was acknowledged. Unfortunately, this was a lovely green space next to this environmentally sensitive area so the reeds spoilt the view.

He had been approached by the local community to consider what could be done and had proposed a management plan to discourage growth of reedbed and allow more classic saltmarsh plants to move back in. However, with the accretion of land it was more likely to encourage more terrestrial plants.

The draft agreement permitted cuts to benefit this saltmarsh of twice per annum, once in early winter to allow a view and one in early spring to supress growth of the reed bed. Alas due to the inclement weather this year the reed bed was later growing. Now the area was within the nesting bird season and they could not complete a second cut but he had asked Natural England if they could permit a cut to observe such result from a second cut. Cutting collection had to be by hand with no vehicles and this work must have buy in from the whole community and with them accepting liability for these works. There was no guarantee of success and there might be other ideas and it would not grant a setting of future rights for such works, this was a trial.

Nigel continued with before and after cut pictures. He observed some open some ruts/flooding which might be where freshwater was accessing. With the entire reed it was masking how high the marsh had become and this pilot had allowed the community to look at the levels. It had always been a presumption that the reedbed had trapped silt but this was not so as natural accretion at the top was a natural process. Historic pictures taken before there was a village green and sea walls showed that in 1984 the pipes were visible from road drains and there was reed bed and a build-up of sediment. Therefore in 36 years there had only been 30 metres of growth so it was advancing but was nothing to be scared about. Trialling the cutting was accepted and with ‘money no object’ this could include scraping to re-establish a salt marsh. But even if done this was done it could move back in the same way.

The Mayor concluded that the cutting was only really to keep the reed down and no one knew what would happen with a second cut. If it was cut again it could weaken the reed but would not get rid of it and it was not the root system that was affecting the other plants. Nigel Mortimer advised that this reed did release a chemical that might be affecting other species but this was just nature. Cutting could be a cheaper option to improve the area but David Lake asserted that 30 metres of growing over this period was probably misleading as this reed was not present till later. He suggested growth was over a 20 year period and thus pictures illustrated it had doubled in size in 10 years. In its current position with current water supplies Mr Lake felt it had a dominant position and was getting higher. The bed height was already above mean high water so smaller plants were necessary. The Mayor noted that from this session town council had been informed but had not asked to do anything. Just that there would be two trial cuts but in the meantime residents would look for funding to scrape the area. Nigel Mortirmer agreed that this would allow the area to reduce down to a level to enable tides salting but this project would require a huge amount of investment.

The two pictures provided were 33 years apart from early 1960s picture to an identical location in 1984. This entire problem appeared to happen in the last few years and not before. The majority of the head of the creek would always flood with most tides so the sediment blocked the pipes. The Mayor asked if this change could be a result of the recent dredging of the estuary and was advised that probably made things worse but was not to be blamed.

If the area was scraped or dredged it would require a Marine Licence, transport and disposal. The only way that this project would be allowed would be if a proper scientific study was carried out to monitor and inform others in this situation. This pilot was only in its first year and the second cut had not so far been possible due to the inclement weather conditions. Michael Westby was also present and he felt it was unfortunate that to date the costs had fallen to the Batson group. All these works should have been at public expense and not fall on them. He then cited the 1984 to 2018 ex-Mayor Michael Bowman who was also on Devon County Council who had employed diggers from the public purse to remove the reeds. Thereafter Mr Westby had four points. He felt the dredging had contributed to the silt, the newly installed dump road permissive footpath had no view when it arrived at Batson and, the area needed to be cleared of rubbish for visitors and noted that trees planted by residents had been removed to allow dingy parking which was not acceptable. The management of the newly installed footpath needed to be improved.
All the Batson residents and Nigel Mortimer left the meeting.

Nick Philbedge attended again to further raise concern with regard to scaffolding along Fore Street as unfortunately he had not realised how much more scaffolding was to be erected along the street. Recently there had been a wedding and they had wanted to walk along the street as they had chosen Salcombe for their venue but Nick felt the town was letting them down with the scaffolding not being controlled. They should be able to restrict some of it or split the installations up time wise. It was all over the adjacent pavement, on the road, plastic all around it and the general look was cutting off the hand that fed Salcombe as it was now a builders’ town. He felt that there was not enough representation at County to represent the people of Salcombe on this matter.

The Mayor advised that Devon County Council stated that they would not consult Town Council on scaffolding licences. A meeting between town council and Cty Cllr Gilbert along with Adam Keay the Highway Officer and meant they were under no illusions that Town Council were displeased and were hoping that they would be reticent on issuing further licences. It was noted that there were 8 sets of scaffolding at the bottom of Salcombe during the last week and those present accepted that people had to do works. Cllr Mrs Sinnott asked if the embargo period could be extended to include June to October but those present acknowledged that some works must be carried out in the dry weather period.

Cllr Lafferty-Holt highlighted ‘The Salcombe’ works with only 1 or 2 people actually working on the scaffolding and that the licence had over run. It was suggested that with less contractors over a longer period it was cheaper to carry out work like this but not considerate of this tourist destination. The Mayor advised that Devon County had stated during the walk around that they would not extend this licence. Cllr Long advised that the initial licence should have expired on 13th April and it was his understanding that no extension had been provided but the contractors believed it ran up to 4th May. This matter should be raised with Devon County again due to the current quantity and positioning of scaffolding down in the town main street. This was felt to be wrong and needed better control with Town Council requiring to be consulted on major parts of the town. The scaffolding above the Cuba shop was not being worked on at all but was in situ. Cllr Lang suggested that Health & Safety laws had made scaffolding preferable rather than ladders.

Simon Shortman noted that the scaffolding at The Salcombe was supposed to be taken down on the Friday before the forthcoming bank holiday which would mean that the delivery trucks for that weekend would have problems whilst the scaffolding was coming down. He was operating his ferry from Whitestrand as the steps were not sheeted and double boarded but when this removal happened he would return to the Ferry Steps. He provided some names and phone numbers for the scaffolding company and asked if a schedule could be obtained of the breakdown rota for the scaffolding. The Licence only applied to Ferry Steps so if this was taken down by the 4th May it might alleviate the problems. Any other removal works should be scheduled away from the Bank Holiday weekend. The concern was that the company could start taking down before the weekend and be ongoing all over that time. Visitors often arrived on the Friday for holidays and this together with the scaffolding above Cuba would prove a problem. Simon Shortman had approached the foreman to ask if they could finish and get out but the decorators were there for half a day and thereafter for the following four days no one was there. Of further concern was that the Crab Fest weekend was over the Bank Holiday so it would affect the town by this too.

Stephen Alcock advised he had lived in Bonaventure Road for 26 years. He referred to the Neighbourhood Plan pre- submission draft 2018 Executive Summary. Although he had never held any formal position on the committee he hhad contributed to the process when possible. He firstly recognised the huge amount of work put in and that most of the content was good but was concerned with the principal residence policy – page 64. He felt that it was flawed and far more complex than the headline suggested. Town Council had publicly supported the plan and went on to explain his concern and noted those councillors and committee that he had expressed this to. He further stated that people around town were unaware of this policy as were the estate agents.

The Mayor advised that this was not the forum for these points as all comments were to be considered by the Neighbourhood Plan group. The summary was sent out to every postal address so if people were not aware of it then they did not read it. All were invited to the open sessions but the total number of people who attended was 23. The Mayor felt that the entire plan was important and the draft had elicited over 200 responses with many different comments or objections raised. These were for the Neighbourhood plan group to look at, investigate and consider whether to amend or not from the number and nature of comments received. The process of the plan had been explained and this principle residence was one of the policies that 65% of response requested to be included.

The committee were following a process laid down by Government for production of such a plan. Cllr Long noted the impassioned point Mr Alcock was raising and suggested this needed to be across within the responses which would be reviewed by District Council as it was currently a draft.
All remaining members of the public left the meeting.

Police Report –None


District Cllr Wright noted previous comments with regard to the usage of Whitestrand and advised that the section Captain Morgans used was space that would be made available for people to book from 1st October to 31st March. On 31st September Captain Morgans must remove all tables and chairs. The Mayor asked if he could confirm that the planning application had been amended accordingly and he responded that the planning officer had been asked to include a stipulation for a period of time when the area would be used.

Cllr Lang enquired about usage and it was suggested that the xmas tree could go on this area. Cllr Lafferty-Holt noted that such additional usage could be from 1st October and that his premises along with Bojangles would keep going till 31st October. Did he as a retailer have a right to object to such uses (i.e. gazebos etc) and would he be informed and his concerns heard. Dist Cllr Wright promised that he personally would ensure that both premises were consulted.

The Mayor enquired if these would be one off or permanent applications for the remainder of the year period and Dist Cllr Wright advised that District wished one offs to attract locals and visitors into the town.

With regard to universal credits all the systems were changing and there would only be one system online and no other form to obtain such. For the South Hams area this would come into effect on 6th September and these were going to be huge changes. Therefore, councilors had been trained to assist people with online forms and District was training locality officers to also do this. If anyone heard of anyone struggling he urged everyone to let District know and they would send people out to assist.

The Salcombe clean up meeting appeared to have been positive and Honey Foskett had all the schedules out. The Mayor noted that the recent Whitestrand bin relocation replacing 4 bins with two bigger ones had only shown one on the map. This would be half the current four bin capacity so could the siting of the second bin be confirmed. The current one was hidden tucked in by wall behind the advertising hoardings so visitors would not know where it was but this location would be reviewed as to suitability depending on the feedback as to the location of the second one.

Cliff House café was going to be open for Spring Bank Holiday. Cllr Whitfield had previously raised issues about enforcement and hair braiders and after this robust discussion District was going to employ more enforcement officers and they were to be briefed to enforce parking and ensure that the hair braiders did not hang their wares out around the car park. Enforcement did arrive the next day following the robust discussion and ticketed 4 cars.

The Mayor questioned the parking bays at Batson as he was surprised that within a Conservation Area the bays had been completely surfaced with white lines etc needing no planning application. Dist Cllr Wright did not know that planning was required but others felt that this had been a rural unmade up area which was completely surfaced and urbanized. The surface had gone from permeable to impermeable and thus there would be more run off and no vehicles had since been parking there. Also, there were traffic cones with a laminated piece of paper stating ‘you cannot park here’! Cllr Lang noted that historically people used to park and walk their dogs and those disabled liked to have a flat walk and now they could not do this. This was a short-sighted leap in to earn money. All that District Council was requested to do was stop trailers and camper vans. Town Council suggested how this could be achieved but by time they were asked letters had already been sent out offering the spaces. The way this had been handled was not to achieve the best outcome as it was not just the people of Batson who used that area. It was noted that within his presentation earlier in this meeting Nigel Mortimer noted this was a lovely green to visit but people could not now visit because there was nowhere to park.

Cllr Mrs Sinnott noted that at Whitestrand District had removed one of the damaged boards where there was an Information Centre noticeboard but had not replaced it. The Information Centre had new information board but nowhere to stick it so she asked if this could be addressed as soon as possible. Cllr Lafferty-Holt asked about the toilets and a recent media article regarding payment. If District tendered this service out would they still clean and maintain the toilets or was the tender just for machines. Dist Cllr Wright replied that the tender was to buy the equipment and District would still clean. Figures were mentioned but he explained that these figures were at odds with the correct ones which meant there would be a saving of £16,000 in the first year and £36,000 the next. This would not prevent District from trying to obtain contributions from other businesses as well towards the running. At the Executive meeting the following day District would confirm the procurement process to put pay on entry on the toilets. Cllr Lafferty-Holt advised that there were 43 businesses in town of which 9 had no facilities within their premises so staff had to use Whitestrand toilets and 5 used their limited area for storage. At 20p a time x (say) 3 this would cost £365 per year to allow each member of staff to go to the toilet. This was a further tax on local businesses added to which were the people working on the water. His concern for himself and others was that suddenly it was going to cost them a lot of money per year to be hygienic even just to wash his hands. Also this was to affect all public toilets within Salcombe with none being left free. Dist Cllr Wright stated that at the moment this was not a sustainable service they could continue to provide so District had to do something. Cllr Lafferty-Hold asked if there could be a code on the door for local businesses to be able to use as they wished as they were not going to mistreat such a service. Dist Cllr Wright felt there was a way something could be done and he would raise this issue at the Executive meeting so businesses could contribute for free access. If coin operated this was now a cashless society so people would not carry coins further causing concern for this change. Baby changing facilities were limited and if those using were expected to pay something it needed to be a reasonable standard. In the ladies’ toilets there were no bins and a lot of sanitary products were left within toilet cubicles. It was suggested that when entering the Salcombe Harbour those visiting automatically got free access so this was a tax to residents. However Harbour dues would pay towards such access. The neighbouring pubs would also get overrun by people just coming into use facilities. Dist Cllr Wright advised that they could not afford this provision because Government had taken the money away.

Regarding people going cashless District was considering implementing a card which could be pre-loaded with cash and used for the ferry, toilets parking machines etc but for this they needed wifi and many car parks did not have it. It was further asked why Kingsbridge had one set of public toilets free and Salcombe did not. Cllr Long asked how many towns would have all their toilets as pay on entry and why was Salcombe being singled out? Dist Cllr Wright did not know but knew that Totnes were all charged for and Dartmouth had been all pay on entry for some time.


No applications having been received this was DEFERRED.


The Minutes of the meeting dated 11th April 2018 were considered wherein it was noted that the reference to Croft Road should have been Gould Road before being APPROVED by council and then duly signed by the Mayor as a true and correct record.


The following applications were considered under delegation and such observations from town council submitted to District before this meeting.
• 0245/18/HHO READVERTISEMENT (Revised drawings showing reduced area of rear deck) Householder application for proposed replacement balustrade to existing terrace to provide increased amenity and replacement/new decking to rear garden Tree Tops, Bonfire Hill, Salcombe TQ8 8EE – Objection the proposed terrace on the garage roof was extended to the boundary and could be stood on looking back towards the property and thus should include a privacy screen along the whole length of the terrace above the garage. Such elevated decking would allow overlooking to adjacent properties and thus be intrusive to neighbours.
• 0336/18/HHO READVERTISEMENT (Revised Plans Received) Householder application to increase height of dwelling, to incorporate first-floor and loft space, and construction of ancillary building (home office) to rear Lamorna, Onslow Road, Salcombe TQ8 8AH – Objection to the main building rear extension which would remove light amenity from the neighbouring properties.
• 1013/18/LBC Listed building consent for re-roofing of building, replacing slates and flat roof Flat 3, Rockside, Cliff Road, Salcombe TQ8 8JQ – No objection but town council would request a condition with regard to the times when works would be carried out to set this outside the peak tourism season.
• 1018/18/HHO New two storey front extension to dwelling with balcony over Anchorage, Bonaventure Road, Salcombe TQ8 8BG – No objection.
• 1070/18/HHO Householder application for alterations and general refurbishment of existing detached property including a hip to gable roof alteration, reconfigured fenestration, extension to external balcony and decking area Longridge, Bonfire Hill, Salcombe TQ8 8EE – No objection.
• 1173/18/FUL New boat house in curtilage of the listed house Snapes Manor, Lower Batson, Salcombe TQ8 8NP – Objection. This property held a dominant and prominent position set in front of a listed building. The amount of glass included in the sail loft frontage along with additional roof lights in what was termed a storage area was not felt to be in keeping or necessary for the proposed usage. None of the illustrations offered for consideration were illustrated set in front of a Listed Building in such a prominent position which this property sits. Most comparisons were detached whereas this proposal added to the bulk of the current building and therefore was felt to be located in the wrong position. If permitted any usage should be conditioned to only used be for a sail loft and a landscaping policy included to reinstate the area above the foreshore to keep how it currently looks. The windows and doors are proposed to be aluminium composites and it was felt this should preferably be green oak considering the location.
• 1174/18/LBC Listed Building Consent for new boat house in curtilage of the listed house Snapes Manor, Lower Batson, Salcombe TQ8 8NP – Objection as 1173/18/FUL in view of the listed status.
Dist Cllr Wright left the meeting.


The quotes were considered and it was AGREED to appoint Andy Mann as a Quantity Surveyor to cost the remit of this project for a surveyor’s fee of £892 (zero rated VAT).


Wood and foliage not belonging to town council or their contractors had been dumped/fly tipped on town council ground at The Berry and it was AGREED to seek quotes for the removal of the wood favouring the material to be chipped and used on the paths.


Following the unsuccessful contract works the previous year the areas around town which required weed spraying had been identified and agreed with District for application twice per annum up to a cost of £773.87 plus VAT and it was AGREED to approve this contract to start immediately.


Town Council DISAGREED with providing a set of guidelines for those who wished to busk as they were unenforceable and to date this had not been a nuisance and town council looked to local control of such activities.


The Mayor advised that he and the Deputy Mayor attended Salcombe School following their letter in relation to the Plastic Clever project and this was a very successful and most enjoyable day. The children were interested and involved and they had a good discussion.

He continued that the meeting with he attended with Cllrs Mrs Turton, Long and the town clerk with Adam Keay and Cty Cllr Gilbert was most unsatisfactory. The gulley had been reported by town council but as County only reviewed them every three years and not yearly now outstanding problems were not addressed. If a whole road of gullies were blocked it was questioned how did the maintenance team address this but the response was that a few blocked gullies was not a highways defect!

On scaffolding County had no need to consult with Town Council and no intention of doing so. The high season/work embargo was July and August with no intention of extending this period. Those present for this meeting attended a site meeting at The Salcombe but this never addressed the point that there was no plastic sheeting and boarding on the steps area.

Regarding the ‘A’ board and paraphernalia around town on footpaths and highways this was not perceived a problem by County and it was suggested that Town Council write to businesses. This had of course been done many times with no success.

The Mayor and Deputy Mayor continued along to Shadycombe Road to review the road surface. On walking up Gould Road it was noted that it was very wide and had double yellow lines alongside the pavement and suggested by the County officer that it could be used as a loading bay or perhaps time limited parking. Regarding resurfacing Shadycombe Road and Devon Road had been on the County list of roads to be resurfaced for two years but nothing had happened as yet due to funding and priority.

At Redfern Woods along Knowle Road the pavement edge was damaged and County would put this into the lists to edge with blocks and resurface. A discussion about speeding on Main Road took place and the officer said he would attend with his speed gun to consider whether further action should be taken.

During the taxi rank discussion, it was explained that Town Council did not understand County highway’s problem of not siting it at Clifton Place. The officer advised that the yellow lines were there for a purpose and this was to enable access. Town Council representatives agreed but explained that there was not a problem until later in the day when if it was a rank the drivers must remain with their cabs and could move to assist access. Currently most of the time during the height of season there would be cars parked irrespective of the yellow lines. Cty Cllr Gilbert supported the idea so it was proposed and the officer accepted if this was the wish it could be included at the next HATOC meeting.

The Mayor has this very day attended a ‘Permission in Principle’ workshop at Follaton House. He had believed it was proposed within the emerging National Planning Policy Framework which was still under consultation but it was not. Part was in fact already in force and part was to come into force on 1st June 2018 from a separate Government initiative. There were two types with the first not being a problem. This related to brown field sites and all local planning authorities had to complete a brown field register by 31st December 2017 and this was compulsory. As an optional item planning authorities could then consider any brown field sites for ‘permission in principle’ but this would be done purely by the planning authority knowing the need for surveys on bats et al. This would be costly for the authority.

The second ‘Permission in Principle’ regulation was coming into force on 1st June 2018. It was housing led so the majority of sites had to be for housing and was implemented by the applicant. It can be on green field land and only applied to any development that required fewer than 10 units. All that an applicant had to do was produce s a form which no one as yet had seen, as everyone was awaiting this from Government, with a site map (red line) and fee. All assumed the form would require the applicant to state what they intended to put on the land, but might not. No plans, elevations nor studies at this stage were required. Government wanted to reduce the time on this quick application so it went from 8 weeks to 5 weeks for decision. Current delegated authority at the local planning authority would probably not apply so it must go to full planning committee. The consultation period reduced from 21 days to 14 days but applications would also come to Town Council for consultation but this would be a burden considering the tight time limits. The planning authority had to decide a maximum number of units on the area proposed and a minimum considering the scale. Anyone could make an application without the owner of the land having any knowledge of the application.

The Planning Authority must decide to grant or refuse but they must have the planning reasons to refuse. To establish parameters if someone wanted to build 6 – 9 houses then the Planning Authority could refuse if a site could only take 4 houses. They could not apply any conditions or section 106s to this part of the principle but could include notes that they would anticipate this would be subject to a section 106 agreement. The Planning Authority must notify town council of the decision made. Permission in principle lasts for 3 years and if refused can be appealed as normal. The Planning Authority still had to consider the National Planning Policy Framework, local plan and Neighbourhood Plans when arriving at a decision on Planning in Principle. Once granted, if someone then wanted to develop the land, they did not have to go to full planning they simply applied for technical consent which did follow a normal planning application route except with a reduced decision time to 5 weeks for minor applications. If the technical consent gets refused this did not affect the Planning in Principle so the applicant could keep trying. Also, it was possible to have more than one Planning in Principle on one site. This would not mean that an applicant could stack the units 9 + 9 + 9 but that they could have three Planning in Principle permission that give a choice of building 3, 5 or 9 properties on the site.

Any environmental impact sites and habitat regulations must still be considered at the second stage. Once Planning in Principle was approved it would go onto the planning register. The person providing the training was an independent consultant from a Planning Authority and worked for the Planning Service and the information she presented came as a shock to everyone present, including planning officers at South Hams. She advised that Government felt that the majority of planning in the UK was regulated by four major builders and this new process was meant to be a way for smaller developers to do achieve planning through an easier route. The Mayor suggested this might work in a built up area but it was again a ‘one size fits all’ and did not work in an area such as Salcombe. Whether publicised or not developers would soon learn of it and due to tight time scales planning officers would have to prioritise this principle over ordinary planning applications.

The Mayor would the following Tuesday attend and give a speech at the inshore lifeboat naming ceremony. He also noted that he had received an email from a business noting that town council were doing nothing about the scaffolding and he had responded advising of what had been done and how town council were reliant on County Highways.


Cllr Lafferty-Holt – Noted that along Gould Road and Shadycombe Road alongside the car park the shrubbery was over the pavement making it inaccessible especially with a pushchair. Town Clerk to advise District maintenance. At Courtney Park two random chains on the swing structure were hanging there and could be dangerous and should be reported to District. Building works at Underdecks beneath Cliff Road had a lot of run off going into the water and it looked like mud in the estuary.

Cllr Mrs Bricknell – Advised that the defibrillator box was still flooded but no visit had as yet taken place due to the shop manager being off sick and thus not able to discuss relocation. The shop had new owners who advised they would repair the pipe so it would not cause a problem to the defibrillator but the lady who was now deputy manager had tried to contact them but was not having any luck. It was asked if the unit should be taken off the usage lists but it was not felt that the defibrillator was at fault. The Mayor proposed that the unit should be moved along the wall as he was worried the overflowing pipe problem would reoccur. Cllr Mrs Bricknell would continue to chase and report back with a decision at the next meeting.

She advised that she had been approached by people in Camperdown Road requesting residents parking. This had been discussed at the previous meeting and town council did not feel that residents parking worked and were thus not supportive of this. Cllr Mrs Bricknell was going to ask volunteers for the Batson telephone box if they would assist her to renovate the telephone box at Onslow Road.


• Met with Cllr Gilbert and Adam Keay to discuss the highway problems regarding scaffolding, highway drains and road repairs. Reported further in councillors reports above.
• Email received from Rob Sekula advising of monies within a capital budget to be put to play areas on the understanding that projects would be moved on in priority if the town or parish agreed to take transfer of such town assets. Use of this fund along with section 106 monies was suggested and views sought from town council. The town clerk was asked to set up a meeting with Dist Cllrs Wright and Mrs Pearce along with Rob Sekula and the town council Open Spaces working group.
• Application for use of Cliff House Gardens for the SERC Pilot Gig Regatta on 10th June from 11.30a.m. to 6p.m received. All in favour.
• South Hams Special Area of Conservation Greater Horseshoe Bats Supplementary Planning Document was out for consultation until 30th May 2018. The areas this covered did not reach Salcombe and therefore no response was required.
• Email forwarded from Cty Cllr Gilbert advising of a pilot project in Broadhembury Parish where the parish had been granted access to view and update the highways drainage asset using an on-line mapping application was proposed to be extended to other communities. Cllr Whitfield would be put forward for this pilot.
• Matthew Radford, Station Manager with Devon & Somerset Fire & Rescue Service (DSFRS) had asked to attend a town council meeting and it had been arranged that he would attend as the speaker for the Annual Town Meeting on 9th May.


The End of Year March 2018 accounts had been completed and would be handed over to the internal auditor. He would be requested to also consider the payments from grants funds in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan.

Bank Balances
Current Account £500.00
Deposit Account £345,816.37
Receipts: Bonfire Hill £970.00

Councillors APPROVED Internet payments to:
Greenspace – Oil noticeboards £385.78 WITHHELD pending clearance of the oil drips on the wall.
M.J. Building – Jubilee Gardens roadside wall rebuild £5000.00
Play Inspection Company – Jubilee Gardens inspection £60.00
SHDC – Bonfire Hill bin £4.65
Foot Anstey – Legal fees £655.80
HMRC – Tax and Insurance £746.38
NEST – Pension £145.26
Wages – £1743.32
BUYology – Folders and Wallets £3.57

Cheques: None


The next town council meeting would be the Annual Full Council to be held on Wednesday 9th May 2018 in the Library at Cliff House, Cliff Road, Salcombe at 6.30p.m.

Meeting Closed: 9.30p.m.

……………………………………………….. 9th May 2018.
Town Mayor.

Download as PDF

Pin It on Pinterest