Minutes of the Meeting of Maresfield Parish Council held on

 Tuesday 21 December 2004 in Maresfield Village Hall

Present:  Cllr W King, Cllr J Gutteridge, Cllr K Ogden, Cllr R Tester, Cllr T Sparrow, Cllr R Street, Cllr H Fry, Cllr C Stephens, Cllr S Leaney. CCllr A Reid.

1.            Apologies for absence - Cllr P Tester, Cllr Mrs S Weekes, Cllr G Hardy. DCllr J Hollins, DCllr F Brown, DCllr N Buck, DCllr Mrs S Martin, DCllr Mrs P Kennedy. Clerk: Tony Allen.

2.            Declarations of interest – Cllr King declared a Prejudicial Interest re Melbourne (Public Questions and Item 6.7) by reason of friendship and past professional relationship with the owner/immediate past owner of the property.

3.            Minutes:-

                        3.1            Minutes of the last meeting (16 November 2004) for adoption - Minutes 16 Nov; Approved subject to one amendment at para 8.4 to insert "Authority" after "Police"

                        3.2            Minutes of the Special meeting (8 December 2004) for adoption - Approved, subject to recording that Cllr Street's declaration of an interest in the Hillmead matter as a member of the Friends of Ashdown Forest.

                        3.3            Matters arising from these minutes - Cllr R Tester referred to the need for planning permission for removal and replacement of the hedge between Maresfield Recreation Ground and the field to the South (the Watts's field). He said that this had been investigated and that planning permission is not in fact needed. Cllr King referred to Item 6.8 where it had been resolved to approve the provision of consumable stationery to councillors who used it for council work; he said that the Clerk has been advised by several experienced Clerks that this amounts to a Councillors' Allowance, and that the rules for the latter only permit the payment of cash allowances; and that we had resolved not to pay Councillors' Allowances. Cllr Sparrow said that this deserves further investigation but that for the moment it must be right to follow the Clerk's advice, and accordingly to rescind the resolution, and to refer the matter back to Policy Committee: This was agreed. Cllr King referred to the resignation of Cllr Woodgate and said that he had been advised by the Clerk that the necessary notice had been posted for the required time and no request made for an election; and that accordingly the process for finding a new councillor by co-option would commence in the New Year; he urged all Councillors to think about prospective candidates and to encourage them to stand for co-option, contacting the Clerk so he knows who may be interested. The question was raised, and agreed to be referred to the Clerk (for him to inform all councillors) about the need for candidates to be resident in or close to the Maresfield ward, where the vacancy arises.

[Cllr Fry and Mr D Finch joined the meeting at this point.]

Public Questions - The Chairman adjourned the meeting and handed over the chair to Cllr Ray Tester and left the room.

Mr David Finch asked the Council to support the application being made by himself and Cllr H Fry to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister at the Government Office for the South East.  The application concerned the rescinding of the planning approval for the house at Melbourne, Crowborough Road, Nutley.  He said that apart from the maladministration by Wealden District Council during the process of consideration of the original planning application, the application should have been refused as it contravened DC18 which made it quite clear that, in replacing the existing property at Melbourne, the application grossly exceeded the size and configuration that DC18 allowed.  In addition the house was not placed where planned and also these contraventions were occurring in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which therefore exacerbated the contravention.  He felt that a serious precedent could be set if these contraventions were allowed and therefore he and Cllr Fry were applying to the ODPM to have the application revoked.  He asked the Parish Council, given its rôle to uphold planning guidelines, to support the application to the ODPM.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 2

Councillors asked if the outcome of a revocation would be the demolition of the house and Mr Finch said it would be.  There were no further questions.

Reversion to Parish Council meeting

The Chairman then re-opened the Council meeting.  Cllr Leaney then asked the Chairman if Cllr Fry should declare an interest and leave the meeting.  Cllr Fry felt that it was quite proper for him to remain in the meeting and speak as a councillor.  Cllr Street said that in his opinion, as Cllr Fry was a signatory to the application and a near neighbour to the property in question, he clearly had a direct interest in the subject and should both declare it and leave the meeting.  Cllr Fry then said he felt he would therefore be unable to demonstrate his support for Mr Finch's proposal.  Cllr Ogden proposed that Cllr Fry should be given that opportunity in an open meeting.  Councillors therefore agreed that the Chairman should adjourn the meeting to give Cllr Fry the opportunity to speak.

Reversion to Public Questions

Cllr Fry pointed out that the Planning Committee had agreed to keep a careful watch on development outside the development boundary, which is where this property was situated.  It was essential that the Ashdown Forest should be protected from unlawful development and, as the Planning Committee had agreed, Wealden were at fault in the processing of this application.  While the Planning Committee had supported this and Mr Finch's application to the Ombudsman concerning the maladministration, he could not understand why the Committee had not also agreed to support this further application to the ODPM.  If the Ombudsman, who was due to report in February, were to agree that there had been maladministration it would still leave the property there.  He felt the Parish Council had a duty to do everything in its power to see that this planning application was revoked.  There were no questions to Cllr Fry.

Reversion to Parish Council meeting

The Chairman re-opened the meeting.  Cllr Fry remained but did not speak.  Cllr Ogden explained that the Planning Committee had been frustrated by the mistakes Wealden had made concerning the original and subsequent applications.

Wealden had eventually passed the application in defiance of the Planning Committee's recommendations.  The resultant house was, however, not out of keeping with other local properties. 

While the Committee had agreed to support the application to the Ombudsman, it had not been convinced about the second application (to the ODPM).  Cllr Leaney pointed out that there had been three separate planning applications.  Major errors had been made by Wealden and he had spoken against the application at the relevant Wealden Planning meetings (DCN).  In fact the original approval by DCN had been made on the basis of faulty information and when the Wealden Regulatory Committee reviewed that decision it agreed that, while it was wrong, it could stand as the alternative would subject the Council to a potentially very serious financial loss.  While a minor reduction in size had been agreed, it was nowhere near what was appropriate and indeed the house would not have fitted into the site if the agreed reduction had not been carried out.  The approval was totally contrary to Wealden DC18.  After further considerable discussion where it became clear that councillors were not in agreement with either the proposition to support Mr Finch and Cllr Fry, or to reject their proposal, Cllr Sparrow proposed an adjournment of the discussion until the result of the first application (the maladministration referral to the Ombudsman) when it would become clearer what further action, if any, it would be appropriate for the Council to take.  This was seconded by Cllr Street and the majority of councillors agreed.

The chairman then handed back the Chairmanship to Cllr King.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 3

4.            Reports by and questions to:-

                        4.1            County councillor - DCllr Reid reported on the following:-

4.1.1        The Audit Commission has conducted a Comparative Performance Assessment on the County Council, and gave it a Good rating (in fact only one point short of Excellent).

4.1.2        Budgeting is now under way and Cllr Reid has proposed an increase to Cabinet of 4.5%; he noted that ESCC has received the lowest cash grant from HMG of any County Council.

4.1.3        The South East Plan is subject to consultation; whilst most of the comment seems to be about the numbers of houses intended to be built, he believes that the main issue is the provision of infrastructure.

4.1.4        Councillors asked him

4.1.4.1  about the Waste Plan and Ashdown Business Park; he said that ESCC is waiting for a planning application for the anticipated waste handling station

4.1.4.2  about the East Grinstead Relief Road, noting that we shall look to him for help and support if it becomes likely to proceed.

                        4.2            District councillors - Cllr King read an extract from an e-mail from DCllr Martin, noting that the Ashdown Business Park is about to be reviewed by the Cabinet (so perhaps there is news of a deal with the private developer) and plastics recycling is about to be implemented with bins at rural recycling centres.

[Cllr Reid left the meeting at this point.]

5.            Approval of Budget and Precept for 2005/06:-

5.1               Cllr Street introduced the Budget and Precept proposals from the Finance & Administration Committee. He referred to the "formula" for review of committees' proposals as set out in the minutes of the F&A Committee's 9 December meeting (see item 7). He said that this provides a robust method for analysing bids for budget funds; that it had been applied to all bids and that the only difficulty lay with Traffic & Transport Committee's bid. He said that this bid lacked specificity as to the proposed expenditure, and as to its costing; and that it was not sufficiently clear that the Committee had firm plans for its expenditure. However, F&A Committee understands that Traffic & Transport Committee has only relatively recently been constituted, that it suffered a hiccough when its chairman was ill for a while and that it has effectively not had time to progress its budget to the formula's requirements. Cllr Street added that the work of Traffic & Transport Committee is recognised as being of great importance to parishioners and that it would be wrong to make the desired work impossible for lack of funds. Accordingly, he proposed that the bid from Traffic & Transport Committee be treated as a contingency for the Council, available to be called for by Traffic & Transport Committee if it can satisfactorily complete the formula process. This was agreed

5.2              Cllr Leaney congratulated Cllr Street on an exercise which had clearly been well done, but had a query as to the small amount for consultation – only £500; he anticipated that the work on the Local Development Framework would require consultation and would cost more. Cllr King said that his expectation was that we would consult in writing by piggy backing on Parish Matters, at very low marginal cost; and as to any meetings he referred to the cost of the recent Bonners School show-and-tell event, costing only just over £100. So he thought we could get through the year within the low provision.

5.3              Cllr Street then proposed that the Budget submitted to the meeting be adopted, providing for expenditure of £79,834. This was unanimously agreed.

5.4              Cllr Street then explained the consequences in terms of the Precept; saying that the current year's forecast under-spend is £29,444, i.e. leading to a funding requirement of £50,390; to which needs to be added the required reserves which are proposed at £15,000 (unchanged fro the current year); thus a Precept of £65,390.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 4

He noted that whilst the budget increase is 4.55%, the Precept would increase by 15.73%. The precept was proposed by Cllr Street, seconded by Cllr R Tester and unanimously agreed.

6.            Council bodies actions, minutes and reports by, and questions to, Chairmen - Cllr King introduced the  Committee reports by referring to some changes of chairmanships; first, Traffic & Transport Committee needs a cllr chairman as previously agreed, and Cllr R Tester has agreed to take this on, and indeed had been elected at the previous meeting of that Committee in his absence; Cllr P Tester had agreed to stand as Chairman of Environment & Maintenance Committee to relieve Cllr R Tester of having two chairmanships; likewise Cllr Gutteridge had agreed to stand as Chairman of Civil Protection Committee to relieve Cllr Street from having two chairmanships.

                        6.1            Business Park Development Sub-Committee - Ashdown Business Park Committee; no meeting had been held, but it was noted that at the next meeting it was hoped to have representatives of Onyx Aurora and of Summerthorne Estates present.

            6.2            Civil Protection - Cllr Street said that it had been agreed to bring to this meeting of Council the Committee's plan for emergencies; but that he had attended a recent parishes meeting convened by WDC and that it became clear that our plan does not fit with their model; however, he said that he is not entirely happy with their model, which is drafted in terms of actions conducted by WDC – i.e. is silent as to matters where they take no action. He said that this needs to be reviewed by the Committee. He added that he hopes to arrange a desktop exercise, and WDC wishes to adopt that as an early model for such exercises, and to participate; on which basis they have said they will hep review our plan. Cllr Street said that he hopes, therefore, that our plan can be adopted and finalised within a few weeks.

            6.3            Communications Team - Communications; the Cllrs involved are to meet early in January, but Cllr Leaney said that he has four items lined up for the next issue of Parish Matters.

            6.4            Environment & Maintenance - Environment & Maintenance; no meeting has been held; Cllr King urged Cllrs to report deficiencies in the state and condition of the parish to the Clerk.

            6.5            Finance & Administration

·         Income/Expenditure to Month 8 (paper)

·         Councillor Audits

Cllr Street said that the last month's figures were "healthy" [agreed to mean that we have not spent as much as planned -  we are cash rich]; that Cllr Audits were not healthy, as illnesses had knocked the programme out for several months, and he urged Cllrs to commit to this essential discipline. Agreed that the Clerk be instructed to fix firm dates on a rolling three months basis.

            6.6            Parklands Play Area Sub-Committee - Cllr Gutteridge circulated a written report, and said that it had not been possible to find a date suitable to all members but that a meeting should be held shortly to finalise the proposal for screening the tower from houses in Forest Park. Cllr Street asked if we know that the placing of a screen would be free of financial risk, i.e. would eliminate any claim which owners of houses in Forest Park may have; it was agreed that the Clerk should be asked to advise on this.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 5

            6.7            Planning

·         ‘Melbourne’, Crowborough Road, Nutley – Council to review the Planning Committee’s decision not to support the revocation of the planning permission for this property (see above)

·         Local Development Framework

Cllr Ogden invited questions on the minutes of recent meetings – there were none. He said that a lot of time has recently been taken up with the Local Plan; and that the next effort would be with self-build as a form of Affordable Housing. Cllr Street referred to the list of sites included with the papers fro the meeting and asked their source; Cllr King said that he had been asked to type up the list of sites, being sites which had been identified by the then Planning Committee for review by WDC, and that the list had been presented to WDC at a meeting in December 2003; this was the event which gave rise to the review by Mr S Brigden whose report the Clerk had put before Cllrs at the previous meeting. Cllr Leaney said that the key thing for affordable housing in the parish is for us to understand better how WDC operate the exception policy, and to recognise that the rules allow for most possibilities and do not require that WDC be involved – essentially there is a scheme for planning permission for appropriate sites, and finding such sites is the key to progress. He said that this should be a major part of our Local Development Framework effort.

Cllr King said that the work on the Local Development Framework would revive in January.

            6.8            Policy Committee

·         Supply of consumable stationery supplies to Councillors

No meeting had been held, but, as above, the issue of consumable stationery would go back to the committee. It was agreed that the Clerk should be asked to seek advice from SALC.

6.9            Strategy Sub-Committee - Cllr Sparrow said that website work is progressing and a draft site should be ready to view in January, with the aim of going live in the Spring to tie in with the Quality Council application. He said that two of our villages have produced applicants for Tidy Villages work, and an appeal for this has gone into the village magazine of the third (i.e. Fairwarp), with the project to be handed to the Environment & Maintenance Committee when up and running and wider issues to be explored; that work is to take place concerning the needs of the elderly, with all groups in the Parish concerned with older Parishioners to be contacted regarding needs/wants; that the Youth Bus exercise in Nutley has been a great success because of the expertise of the ESCC team involved in this, and that the exercise is due to be repeated in Maresfield from mid-January. He said that one of the best events he has been to was the Committee's meeting on 14^th December 2004 when Imogen Moore from Uckfield, a member of the Youth Parliament, had explained about Youth Parliaments, working with young people and gave guidance about the proposed Nutley event to follow up on the ‘Youth Bus’ issues.  

            6.10            Traffic & Transport Committee - Cllr Fry explained that the Committee is due to work up detailed plans once the responses to the questionnaire have come in and that it is due to have information from ESCC about the Maresfield by-pass safety proposals which the Committee has considered; and that the possibility of widening the footway at Whitewoods Stores is still on the agenda, the rejection of it by ESCC being rejected (their officers had at4ended with a negative attitude and brief to say it could not be done but not being convincing as to why not.. Cllr Leaney said that he was disappointed by the questionnaire and that some parishioners have found it difficult to understand – Cllr Sparrow said that Cllrs had seen it in draft and had been able to comment before it went out.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 6

7.            Outside bodies’ reports:-

                        7.1            Ford's Green Management Committee – No report or issues raised.

                        7.2            Maresfield Conservation Group – No report or issues raised.

                        7.3            Maresfield Recreation Ground Committee – No report or issues raised.

Councillor Sparrow reported on Items 7.4 to 7.7 and the full text of his report is appended to these minutes:-

                        7.4            Wealden District Association of Local Councils - WDALC has set up a new form of consultation with Sussex Police, and we are to see how this works out in practice; it reflects our own comments on consultation given earlier to the Police Authority.

                        7.5            Action in rural Sussex - AiRS is able to help with Youth work, and possibly next year with Village Plan and rural transport work.

                        7.6            Wealden Local Strategic Partnership - Wealden Local Strategic Partnership is moving to delivery of objectives, and Cllr Sparrow said that he has a series of meetings with the partners shortly to hear what they can deliver, and to agree priorities.

                        7.7            Sussex Association of Local Councils - SALC; a lot has occurred, with new policies on Gypsies and Travellers, work on Safer Neighbourhoods Bill (with powers for PCs in respect of anti social behaviour), and consultation with HMG on Community Development.

8.            Chairman's Report - Cllr King said he had not sent a written report, having not done much except the Local Plan work; he invited questions/concerns but there were none. He said that Christmas cards had been bought from Juliet Murray (local artist) and sent to the County and District Cllrs, to all MPC's important contacts, and to the volunteers who are on our committees and who have helped in other ways; and that this seems to have been well received. He said that the decision on the Hillmead proposal still causes concern to the Nutley Conservation Group, and that this has been referred to the Planning Committee. Cllr Sparrow proposed a vote of thanks to the Chairman for carrying out the Christmas card initiative and this was carried unanimously.

9.            Clerk's Report - The Clerk's report was noted. Cllr Fry noted the reference to the Clerk completing his course "Working with your Council" and wished to congratulate him on this, and on managing to achieve this within the time originally contemplated, surely the result of much hard work. All agreed, and the Chairman was asked to write on behalf of all Cllrs to congratulate the Clerk for this success.

10.            Payments to be made: for approval - The list of payment submitted to the meeting was updated to include a payment to Uckfield Press for Parish Matters and the questionnaire insert – details of the payment were noted. The payments were unanimously approved.

11.       Police issues and relations - Cllr Fry referred to the request we made in September to be involved in preparation of the Policing Plan; that this had been answered with a proposal for a meeting with the local Inspector, held the previous day at which the Inspector had said that it is not for the Police to comment or advise on matters within the Police Authority's remit. Cllr Fry said that we now know from the Police Authority's minutes that the Policing Plan is due for review in January, and that if we are to express our vies we need to act urgently; this was agreed and Cllr Fry was authorised to write on behalf of the Council to say that we wish to be heard as a consultee in the development of the Policing Plan. Cllr Fry said that other points arise from the meeting for review when the note has been agreed, but essentially the Police are well-intentioned, the officers decent people and trying their best but helpless in the face of inadequate funding.

Council Minutes 21 December 2004                                                    Page 7

It was noted from the WDALC letter with the papers for the meeting that we are asked to appoint a Liaison Officer for Police matters; Cllr King proposed that Cllr Fry be so appointed, and Cllr Fry confirmed that he was willing to accept this role; the proposal was agreed unanimously.

12.       Date of next meeting – 18 January 2005 (Fairwarp)

There being no further business, the meeting closed at approx 9.50 pm