* – 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 R. Moore *
Cllr Mrs L. Sinnott *
Cllr G. Keeler *
Cllr P. Lafferty-Holt *
Cllr M. Long (also District Councillor) *
Cllr I. Hatch *
Cllr A. Hainey *
Cllr M. Payne A

Also in attendance:
Dist. Cllr Mrs J. Pearce A
Cty. Cllr. R Gilbert A
Gill Claydon (Clerk) *
Pete Robinson (Cemetery Manager and Project Officer) *
WPC Jo Pengilly A


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.

  • Cllr Lafferty-Holt declared an interest in the matter relating to the Tree Preservation Order.
  • Cllr Long noted that as a District Councillor sitting on the District Development Management Committee he would not take part in planning decisions apart from giving advice as Tree Warden on trees.
  • Cllr Keeler advised he had a personal interest in the 4147/18/FUL Westowe application.


The owners of 55 Estuary Club were present and explained that they had not wanted to apply for any licence so early when they initially bought their lease option. Unfortunately they had not been given all the paperwork and their lawyers were dealing with such anomalies that meant they must now apply. They advised that they commenced their business with £7 in the bank and this matter had so far cost £5000 of lawyers’ fees. They understood the processes of Town and District Council and had attended purely to show their faces and answer any questions.

Police Report
Nothing received to report.

County and District Councillors Report
Dist Cllr Long noted problems with rubbish collection over the holiday period. Following that a letter from district had been hand delivered to all shops and the staff spoken to about leaving rubbish outside for their private collections. Some shops did not have adequate arrangements to store rubbish but had been advised to be more aware. Town councillors were asked to keep an eye out and if they spotted any problem to go to the District Report It page and report accordingly so that statistics could be built up and the District team could review external contractor systems.

He continued to chase for a schedule of the public rubbish bin emptying cycle and was making sure all bins were mapped and transferred to FCC and that they were doing the job properly. The RNLI 150th celebration and proposed statue in Cross Park Gardens had been granted a long Lease which was approved by District Council. The lease details and planning permission should be in place well before the September deadline. He had met with Dan Field, the Harbour Master, Simon Shortman and others to review Jubilee Pier to ensure safety issues for operation of the ferries. District was also developing a feasibility study for the future restoration of this pier. In the meantime, he had requested assets look at refurbishment of the enclosed seating area of the pier but not carry out such works in summer but wait nearer the winter down time. Regarding the paint markings on Whitestrand, Dan Field had spoken to the contractor who had been asked to remedy the problem and Dan was surprised that this marking paint had not washed off.

Regarding the seating area in Cliff House Gardens he had spoken to assets and engineers had boarded this up due to cracks in the roof deck noted last year. It was propped internally and they had requested a structural engineer to inspect the building and confirm they were satisfied with the block work to date. A design had been pulled together for the roof deck and structural repairs and the earliest this could be done was the second week in September. The structure must be tied back to the main retaining wall incorporating new supports. With regard to the flags at Cliff House Gardens café he was not sure assets had not put something to allow this in the lease so he was checking.

The Rendoc and Grange appeal results were welcomed as District had won so the work by officers must be complimented along with town council input and from others. It was noted that maybe the District Joint Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan was assisting as there was less room for applicants to manoeuvre. The Brewery Quay Appeal had been held the previous Wednesday and the Mayor and Cllr Fice along with others had represented as a unit to put forward the town view. The outcome would be interesting and officers on the District Council side also presented well during proceedings. He was not downhearted, but it was a difficult one to know how it would unfold.

Cllr Fice had sent an email to the District Councillors prior to the meeting on matters that he was going to raise, as requested. Of the three items two had already been dealt with by Dist Cllr Long but the third item Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce had responded to him personally by email and therefore he was concerned this did not bring the matter into a meeting and the public domain. There was a problem on the planning website in relation to Summerleaze which was refused planning permission and subsequently went to Appeal. When anyone looked at that application online it had a different copy uploaded which seemed to be a regular problem with this service and Dist Cllr Long also noted there were often blank pages rather than documents as listed.

Cllr Hatch referred to the rubbish left on the street and stated that surely commercial waste also used seagull bags as otherwise things would be ripped apart. It was noted that commercial rubbish picked up by private companies did not appear to supply seagull bags. Dist Cllr Long knew that Honey Foskett had spoken to external contractors and this matter was being addressed. Dist Cllr Long also raised the question of street sweeping of various steps in town as this had not been done for a few months. It was advised that Buckley Street to Victoria Quay and Union Street had been done so perhaps district operatives were getting there. Others noted areas that had been done and places where rubbish remained for a long period untouched. Cllr Lafferty-Holt noted that rubbish collection was to be discussed later in the meeting but enquired whether his email on 29th May about collections in Whitestrand and the number of bins had revealed any more information. Dist Cllr Long had asked for this information and was advised that when public bins were 80% full, under the new FCC contract, they should be collected. It was noted that unfortunately usually the bins were 150% full before collected. Cllr Lang noted that the Cliff House Gardens toilets were closed so asked could the toilet sign please be removed. The sign stated they were closed over winter and then on the door it advised out of order. There was nothing that said they were permanently closed so most assumed they were reopened. A question was raised whether the RNLI statue was the only one going in and it was advised that there would also be one on Kingsbridge Quay. In relation to the hair braiders clarification was still awaited of what they were entitled to do in the area they had a licence for as this was public land given up to a commercial business.


It was AGREED to co-opt Andrew Hainey and Martin Payne and as Andrew Hainey was present his Declaration of Acceptance of Office was received and he joined the meeting. Both would be provided with the forms for completion of the Register of Interests and Martin Payne would be sent the Declaration of Acceptance of Office.
Cllr Hainey joined the meeting.


The Minutes of the meeting dated 8th May 2019 were amended at item 9 to delete Sandhills Road and insert Church Street before being approved by council and then duly signed by the Mayor as a true and correct record.


The following applications were considered and such observations from town council submitted to District.

  • 1477/19/HHO Householder application for front door, porch and wall insulation Hangar Farm, Beadon Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8JT – Response 21st June. Objection as these changes would not address the size of the porch and would significantly impact the AONB also they would be contrary to SALC ENV6 re locally important views with regard to North Sands valley.
  • 1525/19/VAR Application for variation of condition 2 following grant of planning permission 4266/17/HHO 16 Buckley Street, Salcombe, TQ8 8DD – Response 21st June. No objection.
  • 1539/19/FUL Proposed replacement dwelling Huckleberry, Fortescue Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8AP – Response 5th July. No objection.
  • 1580/19/VAR Variation of condition 5 following grant of householder consent 3587/18/HHO (new detached triple garage/carport with room in roofspace) for revised Arboricultural Report Bridleway House, Moult Hill, Salcombe, TQ8 8LF – Response 28th June. No objection.
  • 1619/19/HHO Householder application for enlargement of previously approved rear facing dormer window (alterations to consent 0151/19/HHO) 17 Grenville Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8BJ – Response 5th July. No objection.
  • 1676/19/HHO Householder application for proposed roof extension and alterations to front, side and rear (Resubmission of 2098/18/HHO) Summerleaze, Drake Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8EG – Response 12th July. Objection as this was still overdevelopment of the site and would be overdominant and although this application proposal removed the deck terrace and opaque glass in the balcony it was not felt to address the size of construction and large removal of earth. This would be overdevelopment of the site and the design was not in keeping with other Drake Road properties and the street scene. A major concern was the loss of light to Myrana and the proposal was felt to be unneighbourly to neighbouring properties as both would visually have a distinct large expanse of wall with windows in them. Concern of overlooking to Myrana from the garden was noted as the upper terrace level included a bridge going across to the garden which was situated at exactly the height of the living accommodation of the neighbouring property. Construction works in that locality, were questioned due to the rocky, instability of the area and access to site was difficult with large vehicles unable to turn around within the road and town council was not sure how the road would cope with such activity. The design was not felt to blend and nor even use the local vernacular of slate and with its pitches was grossly out of keeping. Housing within that type of area and street scene should evolve and not be a revolution with its completely overbearing mass when viewed from Coronation Road and Drake Road. It would also be contrary to SALCB1 relating to design as it did not respect the scale and design of surrounding buildings and on the other side the south elevation was unneighbourly.
  • 1744/19/NMM Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission 1780/18/ARM (additional bedrooms within roof space on plots30, 38, 44 & 45 and provision of conservatories on plots 35, 36, 39 & 42) Land at SX711 394, Adjacent to Malborough Park, Malborough – Response 27th June. No comment was to be sent as this application did not affect Salcombe.

Cllr Lafferty-Holt left the meeting whilst the following matter was discussed.
Ref: 1099873 Parish of Salcombe No. 988 Tree Preservation Order 2019. Location Overcombe, Devon Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8HJ.

  1. Development pressure may lead to tree clearance to allow greater room for construction, leading to readily appreciable and long-term detriment to the public visual amenities of the local and wider visual landscape.
  2. In the interests of preserving the existing and future significant public visual amenity benefits of the subject trees which presently serve to add extensive varied amenity benefits as increasingly prominent sylvan features within the visual landscape setting of the area.
  3. If left unprotected post development pressure may lead to further inappropriate works to prune or fell the subject trees, which would be readily appreciable and highly detrimental to the public visual and further varied amenities as presently contributed.
    Town Council supported the application as Served.

Cllr Keeler left the meeting whilst the following matter was considered.

  • 4147/18/FUL Change of use of annexe from holiday lets to provide full time residential letting accommodation. Weststowe, Lower Batson, Salcombe, TQ8 8NH – No Objection.


The meeting was stood down under Standing Orders whilst questions were raised with the applicants present.
The Mayor questioned if they were removing clause 11 so that no child under the age of 18 would be on the premises why staff would be trained regarding children. It was advised that this was purely a Licence Act necessity. The garden would be used only until 10.30p.m. and the membership rules and regulations adopted in the licence application stated only two guests allowed per member and the owner was happy for this to be included a statement. When questioned on the amount of people allowed in the premises it was advised that the maximum under fire regulation was sixty. There was a Fire Risk Assessment carried out by a fire company from Plymouth, recommended by the Fire Brigade, and they had agreed what was put into the licence. If later, they applied for planning for the upstairs area they would have another assessment and the number could be increased. This would include the restaurant space and toilets and the calculation was done on cubic capacity for members or public which increased the amount of people then allowed in the building. A music licence was not needed as they had only solo artists playing every day. It was questioned how the owners checked how many people were inside the building and they had a door lock count on a screen by the cash till. Apart from this they stated that as a licensee they should know at all times how many were inside just by visibly looking. Guests were given a membership card for the duration of that day so they could take a count of the door and guest cards. Eventually the door would be closed but currently it had been left open to encourage membership. Guest passes would only last one day being stamped and dated.

Further information was provided regarding an application for variation of a premises licence for The Estuary (formerly No 55), 55 Fore Street, Salcombe, TQ8 8JE and after discussion town council APPROVED the application proposals.
The owners of The Estuary left the meeting.


Town Refuse concerns were discussed, and points highlighted as below with some ACTIONS to take;
(a) Public bins – Public bins differed for emptying cycles during the year. Since FCC had been in place it was noted that the road sweeper operatives were not allowed to start their route until 8.00a.m. Previous operatives had commenced at 5. 00a.m so that they had cleared through early and no one knew what mess had been left the night before. This early start should be reinstated. It was noted that others such as holiday home users were placing their rubbish in public bins. On another occasion an operative had been seen at Victoria Quay clearing up litter from a black bag. Within this rubbish a label of delivery for a property was photographed and those who had been present said they would witness this, and this information was sent to the operative’s boss. Nothing had ever been heard back and the operative was questioned but his boss was unwilling to prosecute. Another councillor noted there had been a similar incident with fly tipping on Church Street which also had delivery address and name information, but nothing happened on this case either. There were two issues here the way public bins were being emptied and way they were being used.

The problem regarding timing of bins being emptied had been raised as over the Spring Bank Holiday it had occurred at 8a.m. and 12noon. The first collection used to be 6a.m. followed by other collections to include one at 6-7p.m. This cycle needed to be reinstated as rubbish needed to be removed from the previous night early, then the bins emptied after lunchtime usage and with another in the evening. It was questioned whether District Council were still looking at compression bins. Discussions on Whitestrand having a larger bin seemed to have disappeared. It was locally felt that the large black wheelie bins were a great solution for the short period of time required. The public also needed education as to what to do as some were ignorant of the requirements and holiday homes did not always provide the right bags. Others present felt that there were holidaymakers who could not be bothered. Cllr Long advised that he had asked all holiday homes of their routine and not one company had left bags by public bins as they had commercial collection or District Council and provided seagull bags but it seemed non-agency run properties were not as well covered. A new issue was that AirB&B used properties for guests for two- or three-night stays but did not advise what to do with rubbish. Some people were considerate and felt they had dealt with the problem by putting rubbish next to a public bin but this was still classed as fly tipping and arrows that indicated ‘Do not overfill a public bin’ would help get the message across. Cllr Keeler questioned whether there was there a calculation based on footfall regarding provision of bins. One calculation known was the people that came to Salcombe for Crab Fest but this would not assist for public bin provision. Everyone in town must be encouraged to report problems online so a record of hotspots could be built together with signs being placed on bins that stated if this bin is overflowing do not leave your rubbish. FCC was supposed to clear if a bin was reported at 80% capacity and it should be cleared within 2 hours. It was noted that previously provision of a recycling bin was offered by a sponsor but the previous district councillor never took this offer anywhere and perhaps this could be relooked at.
(b) Commercial waste – District Council had talked to the businesses and explained the problem and commercial collections were being followed up with conversations with contractors. Cllr Long felt the commercial contractor collection should come through earlier but some felt 6p.m. in evening was more suitable. Most shops had no facility for bins. Commercial operatives did not clear up residue waste which was the main litter problem. A return to a permanent roadsweeper should be considered. Town Council were promised last year that they would have a street sweeper 7 days a week during the height of the season. The shops would be watched and Town Council representatives would go and speak to those causing a problem. It was suggested they could all place their rubbish in one place but this was not feasible as there were different commercial collection operators. It was noted that Whitestrand car park sign had a dog waste sticker placed over the wording which was a shame as it looked tatty. Also it was questioned whether commercial waste collectors provided seagull proof bags the same as District.
(c) Holiday home waste – Dist Cllr Long said he would chase up the complaint made by Cllr Moore with regard to reporting a flytipping incident and no follow up. Something could be put on Facebook by District Council advising how to dispose of rubbish but with some staying one or three nights and no collection on their leaving days this was a problem. It was suggested there could be a User Guide for rubbish and a campaign on town council website, Facebook and an article in the Gazette but this would only be seen mainly by locals.

Planning application notices were rubbish and should also be removed. In some cases, there were three notices for one application so why so many. It was suggested to councillors that if they walked past a notice that was out of date, take it down.


The Mayor advised that on the 19th March Mr Niall Rudd under Freedom of Information rules requested a full breakdown of the total money spent with Foot Anstey relating to the Berry, and an update on, in his words, “the total lack of progress”. The clerk responded on the 25th March that a breakdown of legal costs is out with the FOI Act and that the amounts paid were already in the public domain within the Town Council Minutes.

He then asked what the money had been spent on and what had been discussed and the Clerk responded suggesting that he attend a Council Meeting at which time he could raise his concerns with those present. A reasoned explanation was provided regarding advice being privileged. The legal working group instructed town council’s solicitor to respond to Niall Rudd as what he was talking about in terms of legal privilege and public interest test was beyond their scope.

The invoices from Foot Anstey would be sent and as soon as the signed and registered lease was received back from the solicitor it would go up on the website, as it always was going to. At that time a full public announcement would go out, although this entire matter had been reported consistently over the last 2 years at Council meetings and was Minuted. It was still hoped that the new look Council at District would assist town council and reopen the negotiations for a full land transfer of The Berry.

The same request had now come in from Liz Hore (email 31st May) as a member of the newly formed group Salcombe Open Spaces Association, which Niall Rudd was also a member of. She was responded to, invited to attend full council Open Forum and ask their questions, and perhaps explain what SOSA would like to achieve and how it was going to work with the landowners and local authorities.

Following advice, it was AGREED that the course of action would be to provide the detailed breakdown of costs and note that reports were within the Minutes available on the website and the solicitor would be instructed that if he received any further communication on this matter to not reply unless further instructed by Town Council.


Cllr Fice explained that Town Council needed to provide three Feoffees representatives and currently there were himself and Cllr Lang as Cllr Hatch was a Salcombe independent representative. It was AGREED that Caroline Bricknell would be the further representative from town council for the Feoffees.


Since our last Council meeting, we commemorated the 75th anniversary of Salcombe’s allied troops leaving town on the 4th June to join the D-Day Landings. We had a short service led by Father Daniel, at which the Deputy Mayor and she, Dist Cllr Mark Long, Mr Peter Howard and Mr Stan Keiller did the Readings. It was well attended with around 50 people, far more than envisaged, particularly considering the awful weather.

On the 5th June she attended the Planning Appeal Hearing in respect of Brewery Quay at Follaton House along with Cllr Fice, who was there as both Town Councillor and Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group Chairman. District Cllrs Mrs Judy Pearce and Mark Long were also in attendance, as was David Greening, a member of the Salcombe Neighbourhood Steering Group, and a representative from the Gin Distillery. It was a very long day, with the site visit taking place at 5pm, but it would be several weeks before the Inspector submitted his report.

Along with the clerk, she attended the regular Mayors and Clerks Meeting on Monday 10th June at Follaton House. This time it was chaired by the new Leader, Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce, with the new Deputy Leader, Dist Cllr Hilary Bastone also present. It was noted that, for those who did not already know, Helen Dobby for External Services had left to take up a post with the Environment Agency. Steve Mullineux would take on her duties in the interim.

Richard Grant was present to advise that the Joint Local Plan had been adopted in April 2019 and had just finished its 6 weeks challenge period. With three councils in one plan they would now consider Governance, Overview and Review, so a JLP Team had been formed to monitor delivery of the plan and its policies. There was also a Partnership Group with two members from each of the three Local Authorities to advise and inform officers. The JLP sat alongside Devon County hierarchal plans and Neighbourhood Plans. What they needed to ensure was that development came forward for their five year land supply so it could be seen to deliver. Richard advised that this was the first JLP to be adopted first time around, so they were able to apply to Government for infrastructure funding grants. He was the ‘keeper’ of the JLP and its implementation and policies. Tom Jones was overseeing the Thriving Towns and Villages and was Salcombe’s point of contact. There was a third urban fringe team who covered Sherford/Woolwell/Plymouth.

He advised that there was an interactive copy of the plan on the District website, which was searchable by topic area, although it was still a work-in-progress. Town Councils would be given access to provide feedback on this site. District were also producing a Supplementary Planning Document this year which would give further detail on the DEV policies in the Plan. The Kingsbridge Town Clerk asked, when responding to planning applications should they be just offering suggestions and thoughts or quoting JLP Policy? It was advised that quoting the policies would help give weight to comments.

The Ivybridge Town Clerk noted that on two new large mixed development sites only the housing portion was applied for. An adopted plan meant that those developing must show that the needs of the community were also delivered, and the additional issues and provisions must be provided. Dartmouth Town Mayor was not keen on the Health and Wellbeing site proposed at the top of town taking parking away.

Rob Ellis was present to talk about District’s Community Housing Programme. They had received £1.88 million Government funding and they were proposing a rolling programme scheme with discounted prices not shared ownership.

They were using Housing Needs Data and developing predominantly Exception Sites. They were working on 17 houses for Kingsbridge Ropewalk along with other village projects. They proposed mixed rental at 68% of market value so in places such as Salcombe this would still be high! Their expected discount purchase price would be 2 bed £135/140,000 and 3 bed £170,000. Their sites must include some open market housing to cross-subsidise, which would be targeted as those locals wanting to downsize in order to make their project viable. The expectation was a cost of £10,000 per plot of land and they were eligible to apply to Homes England for infrastructure grants (roads, services etc).

The intention was that these properties would be protected in perpetuity through a Section 106 agreement and legal covenant. However, the mortgagors required the ability to reclaim monies if payment defaulted and thus these properties could be sold to achieve this. They were hoping to get the opportunity for the District Council to buy these back firstly.

Dist Cllr Mrs Pearce noted that, even if others had not been, she was surprised at the results of the election. They were a totally new council with a very different outlook. However, the new council and senior management had each looked at their objectives and they appeared to be going in the same direction. From the Executive, she wanted to collaborate more and talk to communities and for this to be a two way process. The perception outside was to always blame the council but it was not always their fault and others now needed to help.

E-contact was a lot cheaper and whilst in some instances face-to-face contact was required, for the mundane chores E-contact meant that people could carry out services when they wanted (eg pay your council tax bill at two in the morning!) and it reduced administrative costs.

District needed to get the message out about wellbeing and prosperity and if they were doing things that there was no benefit afforded to residents, why were they doing them. The Community Investment Strategy was that they wanted to provide jobs and pull in investment, the officers called this Economic Wellbeing! They wanted to support apprenticeships in manual/building work, so if anyone knew of employers willing to take people on please tell District.

With regard to housing they were looking at the fitness of the Housing Association stock and wanted others in the community to flag up bad properties so they could address the problems.

Regarding financial stability there was no money and therefore business rates and second homes were being discussed.

District Council had joined with County on a Declaration of Climate Change and were looking at actions such as District’s carbon footprint. A million miles a year have been saved by allowing home working, so these were the sorts of things they were looking at.

Regarding waste, they were looking at current legislation to see if they could tackle problems and whether a policy change was required with more enforcement. An online report form was requested so that those with information on fly tipping/public bin misuse could be provided. Under the new FCC contract if a litter bin was reported 80% full it should then be emptied within 2 hours. Towns and Parishes needed to report the addresses where refuse was going out too early, ie holiday home agencies and users, businesses, so District could follow up. A Customer Satisfaction Survey would be carried out at the beginning of September by responses from those who had contacted the email customer service over the past year.

Budget accounts closed and figures from this were provided. There was an underspend of £49,000 for 2018/2019, with an £8.9million spend overall.

District did not expect any Revenue Support Grant in September 2019. In fact, they expected a negative from business rates of £300,000. There was an uproar on this from Local Authorities and so implementation of negative payment was delayed to 2019-2020. Therefore, District was budgeting for a deficit of £300,000 plus £200,000 for staffing, contract inflation etc.

There had been a recent report that Local Authorities were squirreling away reserves but this was not true. Their accounts showed an anomaly of £13million for last year but this was regarding the power station but had been rebalanced and their unearmarked reserves held was the lowest recommended. Also the New Homes Bonus was being removed.


Cllr Lafferty-Holt – Noted that the foliage on Bennett Road hill had still not been addressed with regard to growth since it was reported last time.
Cllr Keeler – Noted that the Batson area had poor Broadband and had heard about the House of Lords Select Committee – Future of Seaside Towns paper. He outlined the information and explained that there was a grant that could be given to help people. Cllr Fice noted that Government had a fund to boost struggling towns but was sceptical of the figure provided for the whole country and others felt that the coverage was not too bad.
Cllrs Mrs Sinnott – The Swimming Pool Committee were concerned regarding a possible land grab to the southerly side of the swimming pool area as a neighbour had taken out a hedge and put up a fence. Cllr Hatch said someone was already coming down from County Council to consider the boundaries. This matter would be put to Cty Cllr Gilbert.
Cllr Hatch – The tree that had come down at Batson with all the associated foliage left behind had been taken away Tuesday. On the lane between higher and lower Batson the wall was down and still causing a blockage. The drains in the road in this area were also blocked a little way back and required attention. Pete Robinson had reported this to Highways and County Footpaths. He continued and questioned the commercial sign on a public post at a road junction and whether these were allowed.
Cllr Long – Advised that he and Cllr Hatch had volunteered to assist County Council and with their agreement attended to deal with some trees overhanging on the Beadon estate pavement.
Cllr Fice – Advised that the Neighbourhood Plan referendum was to be held on 25th July. He then outlined what Town Council were allowed to do or infer with regard to publicising the referendum referring to a road map of what was allowed provided by District Planning. Cllr Hatch suggested that the Neighbourhood Plan group should make a hard copy available in places such as the library, TIC, church etc. Cllr Fice had received a lot of complaints about drains again following the recent rain. This matter had been raised frequently by town council with County Council whose view was that a team would come and clear but if they could not do this they would leave the drain not working. Cllr Moore noted he had also been told that if a drain was working downstream and not blocked then the offending ones were left. It was questioned whether Town Council could put money towards such repair works and the town clerk was asked to request an idea of such cost or whether free machinery or something could be provided for others to do the works. Cllr Lang stated that the Fore Street drain was blocked because the District Council mechanical sweeper just pushed debris into the drain which then just built up with silt.
Cllr Lang – Noted a property where the owner had died and whereas previously the hedge was cut regularly now the pavement was so narrow someone could not push a pushchair past. The template letter would be provided so that properties with overgrown vegetation could be letter dropped.
Cllr Mrs Bricknell – Was pleased to advise that a new defibrillator box had been delivered for the unit at the Spar. She had originally requested it but not received one but today an employee at the Spar said they had a box sitting at the shop which had been there for six weeks. Cllr Mrs Bricknell was to ascertain from South West Ambulance how much this would cost to be fitted by their expert. She noted there was also a unit at the Fish Quay that was not working but she was not aware who put it there. She was advised that it was Salcombe Rotary and John Sampson could be contacted. There was also a unit at South Sands. All these needed to be checked with South West Ambulance to ensure that they had been registered and the crews knew they were there. Cllr Mrs Bricknell would deal with this.


  • The Handyman had advised that it would cost £255.50 to repair the vandalism to the Redfern Woods fence and handrail together with the St. Dunstans bench and he had been asked to continue.
  • Following an enquiry as to whether the Town Futures Strategy meeting in Salcombe could be held in the evening Tom Jones had advised that he was currently discussing these meetings with the new council and would revert in due course.
  • Dan Field had provided a digital illustration of how the unit at Batson would look but it was too large to forward by email and so anyone wishing to view it could do so on the Town Clerk’s computer.
  • Scope had approached Town Council for advice of areas where they could approach the landowner to ask if they could place a textile recycling bank for the public to donate clothes. It was noted that Salcombe was already oversubscribed with clothes banks from other charities.
  • A review of the space available in the cemetery had been undertaken and an analysis provided to councillors. If the trend continued town council should have enough space for more than 10 years and if no unforeseen matters occurred, it could last 20 years.
  • Letter received from Ted Sherrell highlighting the launch of his book Secrets from the Council Chamber from his time as a Councillor at Tavistock Town Council.
  • An email from Mr Hobday requested that Town Council discuss ambulance provision in Salcombe and those present agreed that without a 1st Responder the wait would be appalling. It was suggested that this matter was for the MP to write to services and it was requested that an item be on the next agenda to consider provision of all blue light services to this area.


Bank Balances
Current Account £500.00
Deposit Account £370,954.76

Receipts: Nil

Councillors APPROVED Internet payments to:
Adrian Dornom – Handyman works to Bus Shelters, Noticeboards and Cemetery Gates £807.50
SHDC – Maintenance Contract April £998.95
Sandover Associates – Neighbourhood Plan Consultancy £5000.00
Royal British Legion – Wreath for laying at the Civic Ceremony held on 4th June 2019 £15.00


The next meeting would be held on Wednesday 26th June 2019 in the Library at Cliff House, Cliff Road, Salcombe at 6.30p.m.

Meeting Closed: 20.50p.m.

……………………………………………….. 26th June 2019.
Town Mayor.

Download as PDF

Pin It on Pinterest