SHOTESHAM PARISH COUNCIL DRAFT to be approved at next meeting
Becmead, Shotesham St Mary, NR15 1UJ.Contact 01508550358.. email email@example.com
Minutes of the meeting of Shotesham Parish Council held at the Trinity Hall at 5.00pm on Tuesday 14th of June 2016
In attendance were …,
H Jackson, J Nott, H Walker and parishioner K Munro.
Apologies received and accepted from J Guy, S Dinsdale, M Dyke, M Riches, K Dyke, CC A Thomas and DC F Ellis.
2. The minutes of the 14th of April and 4th of May [both Annual and General Meetings] were agreed and signed.
3. Planning Applications /Section 106 Agreement
The meeting did not agree that the Section 106 Agreement be removed.
There was, nevertheless, support for some of the more onerous conditions in the original agreement to be eased essentially in the Marsh area.
The following points were made in the discussion that led to the above decision not to support the request.
• The meeting had no confidence that any ad hoc conditions could be imposed with a real expectation that they would be honoured. The present, very clear, Section 106 agreement has been breached by the owners and not enforced by the Officers or members of South Norfolk District Council. The last statement [enforcement ref: 2014/8159 ] by the council , in August 2015, did give some encouragement that they may be enforced in the future by stating that … the owners are strongly reminded of their obligations under the S.106 Agreement.
• The Parish Council is very concerned that the highly valued landscape panorama that sweeps down either side of the bec from All Saints Church and along the Common to merge finally into the Tas Valley would be spoiled if the paddock area of Glenview was not constrained by the power of a Section S.106 Agreement.
• The present practice of cutting the grass when the owners feel appropriate is seen as the only easing of the Section 106 that is acceptable.
• The restrictions on buildings etc , trees, shrubs and flower beds should continue to ensure the paddock does not become an unwelcome ‘domestic’ intrusion into the highly valued landscape.
• The marsh area does still require the Section 106 as the dredging etc still needs to go on as per the current agreement which has been accepted by the owners of Glenview. The suggested easing of its conditions re removing spoil and the annual grass and composting them in a carefully sited and constructed composting area is seen as an acceptable easing of one the more onerous conditions of the S.106.. The site and construction should be agreed with officers before those restrictions are lifted. The non-removal of the dredged material and its placing close by is also acceptable.
• The Plant Survey. See Bionomique Review 3.3 Constraints.3.3.1
Two points to note.
i) The survey was done in January when little or no activity takes place thus nothing could be recorded. If a ‘plant survey’ is important it should be repeated now the season is in full swing.
ii) The non-compliance with the conditions set in the current S.106 would have seen any possible plant life not having been encouraged thus little would be there now to be found some 16 years after the beginning of the agreement.
• Natural England ref 186527/9th of June 2016 says ……. ‘We advise LPAs to obtain specialist ecological or other environmental advice when determining the environmental impact of developments ’. Would this be relevant for this application?
4. The Annual Audit
The meeting formally approved the audit.
5. The Queens Birthday Party.
The Chairman and her husband Dr Jackson were congratulated on a very successful Queen’s Birthday Party. The chair emphasised that it was a joint effort with the SVA and the PCC plus the very generous donations of many quite delightful cakes by villagers.
The meeting closed.