The meeting was opened promptly at 7:30, with Cllr. Cox in the chair. Apologies were received from Cllr. Bowering, all other councillors being present.

The minutes of the last monthly meeting were approved, with one matter arising: the Clerk, who had researched the matter of the quorum, as requested last month, reported that the official quorum was three councillors. However, additional to that there had been a resolution made by the Councillors themselves that a minimum of five councillors should consider any planning applications. It seemed that this had been the cause of the confusion as to whether the quorum was three or five. Thus, the meeting that had originally caused this issue to be raised did in fact have a quorum.

The minutes of the (supplementary) planning meeting held on 26th August were approved as a true record. Matters arising from these minutes: two letters had been received about the planning application for Iona, one from the ‘residents of Longreave Lane’, one from an individual resident, both expressing opposition to the additional windows the application was requesting, and that from the residents also pointing out that the original planning consent specified that no additional windows were allowed and that the building is already not complying with the terms of the original consent. However, before discussion got underway, the Chairman asked DDDC Cllr. Mrs Crowther to update the meeting with the latest news from the PPPB. It appears that the PPPB are not at all happy with the building as it is and are aware of the non-compliance. At a site meeting, agreement had been reached with the builder that he would submit a further planning application to cover the changes from the original consent. The issue was to be discussed at the next meeting of the PPPB planning committee, but it was believed that planning officers were recommending that an enforcement order be issued. As a result of all this, the planning application for the additional windows was in abeyance. It was resolved that the Parish Council would write to the PPPB and express concern about the quality of the stonework and opposition to the additional windows. A further letter had been received, concerning the other planning issue considered at the additional meeting, the Business Park. Whilst not opposing the construction of additional units, the letter expressed concern that further portions of the Park were to be given over to residential use. The Council agreed with these sentiments.

Three planning approvals were noted, for Stone Cottage, Sunny Bank; The Coach House, Main Street and The Farm, Main Street. A letter of thanks from the resident of Stone Cottage had been received, thanking the Council for their support.

Under finance, the balances were noted as £1,000 in the current and £9.306.36 in the deposit account. Six payments were approved, totalling £3,356.11, the largest being £2,317.50 for walling work on the new green. Last year’s accounts had been audited by the Council’s new internal auditor, and these were presented for the Council’s approval. The only issue raised was regarding the Council’s insurance, which covered two mowers and a strimmer. No one knew where these were now, they had not been seen for years, and so it was resolved to ask the Clerk to inform the insurance company that these were no longer to be covered. The accounts were then approved.

Landscaping/Allotments: To open on this issue, the Chairman read out a letter he proposed be submitted to Under The Edge for publication. [See separate article, Ed] This set out the facts behind the conception of the green and the Council’s intentions and aspirations for it. The Council agreed the letter be sent. There had still been no written confirmation from WREN that a grant towards the new green will be made available, but they had continued to assure verbally that it would be. The PDNPA grant had been confirmed, the amount is unknown. Cllr. Mrs Gregory reported back with quotes for new benches and other hardware for the new green. As ever, these had proved to be more expensive than thought, but she had ‘shopped about’ and found the best deal at a local supplier. As the items are not actually required yet, no further action was taken this month. The talk about benches moved on to their locations: Cllr. Finney said that he felt that benches that commemorate people whom had made notable contributions to village life should always be on the main village green. However, other Councillors pointed out that the policy in the past had been that if a bench were offered, it was placed in the next available location. If the policy were otherwise, it would mean benches having to be moved about. In the context of the West Green, this would result in having mismatched benches. Eventually it was decided the policy would remain as it was and so presumably the next three, new benches would go on West Green.

The Clerk reported that he had asked five contractors for quotes for cutting back the shrubs in Feemouth Yard, but only one had replied. It was suggested that the PDNPA be contacted to see if they could either do the work or recommend someone, and it was resolved to do this and consider the matter again next month.

A letter had been received from Mr Wilkie about the allotments and West Green, the main query being about a communal composting centre. The Parish Council was bemused to hear about this, as they had no knowledge of such a thing being proposed or planned. A reply was to be sent to Mr Wilkie to this effect.

Maintenance: The new ‘no dogs’ signs for the recreation ground have now been ordered. The broken bin on the recreation ground has been replaced. Damage to the walls along the footpath side of the recreation ground had been noted and it was resolved to ask a local contractor to repair this before it got any worse. A formal quotation for the new climbing frame has been received, following a site visit. This had increased by £1,710 from the original quote, the exact reason for which was not apparent, but possibly due to additional work required for groundwork. It was resolved to write to the company and ask for a more detailed explanation of the quote, and to investigate whether the funders of the project would be prepared to pay a bit more, if in fact the extra had to be paid. The Council then considered the performance of the recreation ground grass-cutting contractors; when the ground was last inspected (a few weeks ago now) the grass was almost six inches long. At the time, the cricket season was still underway and obviously, such long grass is not conducive to playing. The Council felt that the performance of the contractors was not acceptable - the contract specified a cut weekly during the growing season and if the grass could grow to six inches, plainly this was not being done. The contractors had bid against others on these specifications and if they didn’t then stick to the contract, it made a mockery of the whole process. The Council resolved to write to the contractors (again) and express their deep concern, and also to take up an offer by the cricket team to monitor the cutting schedule closely. Also regarding sports facilities, a letter had been received from the Tennis Club drawing the Council’s attention to the poor state of the tennis court surface and asking whether the Council would be willing to resurface the courts. The Council accepted they had a responsibility for this, but could not afford to do anything this year. The court would be inspected and the matter discussed in more detail later. Related to both the previous two issues, Cllr. Finney said he felt that the Council had rather let the village’s sports organisations down in recent years and suggested that a sub-committee be formed to forge closer links with the organisations so that the Council could be more immediately aware of any issues. This idea was not taken any further.

The Clerk had written to DCC about the footpath behind Harrow House and Main Street footpath. An acknowledgement had been received but no actual answer, thus this matter was held over until next meeting. Repairs to the bus shelter had been done and the seat opposite had been removed for renovation.

The next item on the agenda was traffic calming, a follow-up to a letter received from a resident last month complaining about cars speeding and driving on the pavement on Main Street. A short note from Mr Raynor was read out, suggesting that visibility on Main Street would be improved if cards parked on the other side of the road. However, last month the Council had written to PC Lowe about this matter, but no reply has yet been received, so it was thought not worth discussing the matter until the Police’s opinion was known.

A verbal complaint about heavy vehicles from Slinters (working on Longstone Edge) using Moor Road had been received, but the Council believed this was only because they were running to a job in the village, so no action was to be taken.

A reply had finally been received from the PPPB about Glebe Court, although it didn’t have much to say. The Council again briefly discussed the matter and decided that although it appeared that the terms of the original planning consent may be being breached and they did wish the matter pursued, they were not in possession of all the facts yet. It was resolved to write to the PPPB and ask for a copy of the original planning consent and if, in the light of this, it was still felt that the consent was not being adhered to the Council would write to the PPPB and formally ask them to look into it, as it was not in the PC’s remit to take action in the matter.

Cllr Askew reported that the state of the bottle bank was much improved. It is now being emptied weekly and if full, he is phoning for a collection. A letter has been received from Great Longstone Playgroup informing the Council that the group is to change its name (to Pre-school) and asking if the Council would have any objections to them erecting a sign in front of the building. The Council voted to agree to the new sign.

There have been 24 items of correspondence received; only a few were considered individually. A leaflet about the DCC’s Young Achiever Award scheme has been received; after some discussion it was decided to ask UTE to publish the details so all age groups could be reached. A lengthy document about the Freedom of Information Act has been received informing the Council that it has to have an agreed policy for making information available to the public. The Clerk, who had read the document, said that he felt the matter was too complex to discuss at this meeting, and suggested that the document be circulated to all councillors for perusal, and then a special meeting be arranged just to deal with this issue. This was agreed.

The next monthly meeting is on 16th October, at 7:30.

Chris Raynor