MINUTES OF THE

Minutes of Little Bealings Parish Council meeting held at the Angela Cobbold Memorial Hall at 8.45pm on Monday 10 March 2008

Present: Mrs F Evans, Mr K Beaumont, Mr P Carr, Dr C Rowe, Mrs J Shaw, Miss D Williams and Mrs M Wilson

In attendance: Mrs C Ramsden, Clerk to the Council

Actions by Councillors

Apologies and Declarations of Interest

None.

Minutes of the Meetings held on 14 January and 1 February 2008

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 January were amended and then signed as a true record of the meeting. The minutes of the meeting held on 1 February were signed as a true record of the meeting.

Matters arising from the Minutes

Minute Books

The Parish Council Minute Books for 1965-1984 and 1985-1994, together with the accounts for 1989-1996 had been deposited at Suffolk Record Office (Deposit number 14553 (EG156). It was noted that the Office already held the Minute Books for 1894-1949 and 1949-1965. Receipt and payment account books for 1902-1938, 1938-1961 and 1961-1972 were also held, as were Councillors’ declarations of acceptance of office for 1895-1937 and 1940-1955. It was RESOLVED that:

other relevant records, eg Councillors’ declarations of office, would be deposited.

Sand Bins

The Clerk confirmed that there was sand in all three bins.

Communication – Website

See item 9 below

Police Matters

PC Wheddon had sent a written report which would be circulated to Councillors.

5 Highways

A1214 and Traffic Management

The second meeting with Kesgrave Town Council, SCC, the police and other local parishes on 4 February had been attended by Mr Carr and the Clerk. The minutes had been circulated to Councilllors. It was RESOLVED that:

Dr Rowe and Mrs Shaw would attend the third meeting on 16 April.

It was noted that updated traffic statistics for the A1214 and surrounding area showed an increase of 3% in the traffic on the A1214 since the opening of the Martlesham Park and Ride, while traffic on Martlesham/Playford Road had increased by 33%.

The County Council had advised that it intended to re-surface Martlesham Road during July 2008. It was RESOLVED to:

· request that the existing rippleprint be replaced with a more effective surface

· confirm that the 30mph roundel should be retained

· support the provision of white lining around substantial trees after the resurfacing is complete

Footway from Village Hall to All Saints Church

The PCC had contacted the Council to express its concern about damage to the steep bank by the side of the road between the Church entrance and Holly Lane, caused by children sliding down the bank. This was the result of the Village Hall being used for parking by parents of children at Bealings School, who then walked along the road and through the Churchyard. Road safety was also a concern.

SCC had also contacted the Council, following a meeting of their School Travel Plan Adviser and Traffic Management Engineer with the School on the same matter. SCC had asked if the Council would make a formal request for a footway to be assessed for funding.

It was RESOLVED that:

the Council would write to SCC formally requesting that the suggested footway be assessed for funding

Footpath to Great Bealings

It was noted that, although works had not been completed by SCC, the route was in use. The verge opposite had been cleared but was not level enough for walking. There had been one report of a child running out into the road at the Little Bealings end of the path. It was RESOLVED:

· to ask SCC to finish the works on the verge

· to ask SCC to consider installing a barrier at the Little Bealings end of the path

The landowner had agreed to a formal opening of the path, and would prefer a Saturday in May for this. It was noted that the opening ceremony for the Playing Field was arranged for 2pm on Monday, 5 May, a bank holiday. It was RESOLVED:

to ask the landowner and others if they could attend an opening on 5 May, before the Playing Field opening and, if not, to make arrangements for an opening on Saturday, 10 May

Countryside Access Community Scheme

It was noted that SCC had not obtained external funding for this new scheme and would be deciding how it would be organised once internal budgets for 2008/09 were finalised.

Footpath Maintenance

It was noted that:

· SCC had advised that they had inspected FP No 18 and considered the request for a boardwalk. As boardwalks were expensive and usually installed where land was boggy they did not consider it the appropriate solution for this muddy route. However, if the surface of the route was not adequately reinstated after ploughing they would address this if so requested.

· SCC had requested the owners of the hedge adjacent to FP No 10 to cut it.

· Damage to the surface of FP1A through the Churchyard as a result of increased use had been reported to SCC at the request of the PCC for advice on how it could be repaired and better maintained

Mrs Cook, as Footpath Warden, had spoken to SCC about the need for improvement to the wet and muddy surface of FP No 2 to the east of the footbridge where the land was boggy. SCC had advised that hoggin or a boardwalk could be considered if the PC requested it. It was RESOLVED:

to request SCC to improve the route by the addition of hoggin.

Link from FP No 4 Martlesham to Martlesham Road

Martlesham Parish Council had asked the PC to consider whether it would support a footpath link being created between FP No 4 Martlesham and Martlesham Road by the bridge by the A12. This would improve safety for walkers who currently had to cross the A12 carriageway via FP No 3 Martlesham. It was noted that SCC supported the idea and was considering whether a link could be provided mainly on highway land. The road bridge parapets would need to be modified and this was being pursued by SCC. It was RESOLVED:

to support the provision of the link, as suggested by SCC.

Waymarking

It was noted that:

· SCC would be surveying the Fynn Valley promoted path to replace faded signs in the Spring

· Martlesham Parish Council was keen to improve signing on FP No 9 as it led to FP No 6 Martlesham and had been asked by the Clerk to liaise with SCC on this.

CR, JS

Planning

Applications

C07/2275: Tresco, Sandy Lane - Retention of Conservatory: It was noted that SCDC had granted permission for this development.

C08/0094: Colonels Farm, Playford Road – Erection of a Shallow Pitch Cattle Building: It was noted that SCDC had advised that it did not require details to be submitted for approval and the development could be carried out.

C07/1195/OUT: Grove Farm, The Street – Construction of Industrial and Commercial Units: It was noted that this application had been withdrawn.

C08/0387: Grove Farm, The Street – Use of Land for the Construction of B1 Industrial and Commercial Units (revised scheme): The presentation by the developer at the Annual Parish Meeting and the subsequent discussion was noted. It was RESOLVED that:

as the revised application did not show any significantly less adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area than the previous one, the Council remained of the view that the development was totally unacceptable adversely impacting on the character and appearance of the area, as follows:

· highway safety was of major concern, specifically:

· at the junction of the access road to the site and The Street visibility is poor (not ‘excellent’ as stated)

· there is no room for the proposed chicane along the access road

· use of the access road as proposed would impact adversely on the two adjoining properties at the junction with The Street

· previous use of the site by agricultural vehicles resulted in repeated damage to the bank of the property opposite and diminished its visibility splay

· the development would exacerbate existing road safety issues in The Street and on other roads in the parish, where the speed and volume of traffic and lack of footways already cause great concern and are the subject of current discussion with the County Council and adjoining parishes

· the site is within an SLA and the development would materially detract from the quality of the landscape, specifically:

· the design, especially the height of the buildings, would adversely impact on the setting

· the development would be visible from properties in Richards Drive, Michaels Mount and Sandy Lane and from the Public Footpath

· there is insufficient space for the development to be properly hidden by landscaping as stated

· the development would generate noise pollution for local residents

· the development would not bring any benefit to the village. Units at Mallard House are not fully occupied and demand for this development is unproven

· there is no main sewer in the area for the disposal of foul sewage as stated

Policy

SCDC LDF

Mrs Shaw had attended a workshop run by the Suffolk Preservation Society and SALC to consider the LDF Core Strategy Further Issues and Options Consultation: Potential Directions for Strategic Housing Growth – East of Ipswich and Felixtowe/Walton and Trimley Village. It was noted that, while no houses were proposed in Little Bealings, proposed houses at Kesgrave, Martlesham and Rushmere St Andrew may have an impact on the village, perhaps increasing traffic. It was RESOLVED that Mrs Shaw would reply to the consultation on-line and advise SCDC that:

· the Council was only in favour of development on brownfield sites, not use of new greenfield sites

· the strategy showed inadequate infrastructure to support the proposed increase in housing

Ipswich LDF

Mrs Shaw reported on the consultation on the Ipswich LDF, some details of which she had circulated to Councillors. The Ipswich LDF was further on in the process than the SCDC LDF and the consultation contained more detail. It was RESOLVED that:

· there was merit in responding to many of the issues in the consultation with the Council’s views

· the Council did not agree that a Northern Bypass would solve Star Lane traffic congestion

· Mrs Shaw would reply to the consultation on-line

Finance

Income and Expenditure

The VAT refund for 2007/08 had been received: £54.34p.

Suffolk Preservation Society had been paid £35 for Mrs Shaw’s attendance at the LDF Training Workshop on 10 March

A cheque was signed as follows:

Hire of Village Hall Committee Room for Council meetings during 2007/08: £66.50p

Walks Leaflet

Miss Williams reported that all four walks and the text revision had been completed. The Chairman had produced a map. It was RESOLVED that:

· Playford Village Hall would be added to the map

· The map and text would be tried out by walkers who did not know the routes

· SCC would be asked to check the text and map to ensure the routes shown were public rights of way

· SCC would be asked about funding for the production of the leaflet

Communication

Noticeboards

It was noted that Beacon Lane residents were concerned about the style of the Council noticeboard to be installed and therefore wished to retain ownership of it. However, there was concern that this would mean the board was not covered by the Council’s insurance. It was RESOLVED that:

· Beacon Lane residents should be advised that there was no intention to install an ‘urban’ noticeboard. However, if they wished to supply the noticeboard this was acceptable. It should, however, be either sold or gifted to the Council in order that the Council’s insurance applied.

Information had been received from the statutory undertakers in respect of their plant at the Playford Road location and was passed to Mr Beaumont. It was RESOLVED that:

· Mr Beaumont would install the Playford Road noticeboard, accommodating the statutory undertakers equipment as necessary

· Mr Beaumont would liaise with Mr Ball over the removal of the Hall Road crossroads noticeboard.

Website

The Council considered a paper (08/01) which outlined Dr Rowe’s concerns that the matter of the Council’s liability for the content of its website had not been satisfactorily resolved at the last meeting. It was RESOLVED that, as SALC had advised that the proposed disclaimer was excellent,:

the webmaster would add the following to the Council’s website:

“We publish information provided by local organizations on our website. We also link to other local websites. We are not responsible for the content or privacy policies of these sites, nor the way in which information about their users is treated. In particular, unless expressly stated, we are not agents for these groups or websites nor are we authorized to make representations on their behalf.”

Matters Arising from Circulated Items

Circulations 2008/1 and 2008/2 had been returned to the Clerk. It was RESOLVED:

not to respond to The Standards Board offer of emailed Bulletins.

Correspondence

It was noted that the following had been received:

Suffolk ACRE membership application for 2008/09. It was RESOLVED:

· to join Suffolk ACRE for 2008/09 at a cost of £25 and to review the advantages of membership in one year’s time and to request paper copies of briefings and updates

· Suffolk ACRE online survey of rural services. It was noted that this had been completed by the Clerk

· Suffolk Primary Care Trust: Rural Dispensing Regulations It was noted that the parish was proposed to retain its controlled (rural) classification

· Suffolk ACRE Skills 4 Tomorrow Project information and poster. The poster had been displayed.

· Ipswich Fringe Parishes Chairmen’s Meeting re Ipswich’s Expansionist Dreams: This meeting was confirmed for 23 April and would be attended by the Chairman

· Suffolk ACRE: Warning about Rave Bookings for Village Halls. It was noted that this information had been passed to the Village Hall Booking Secretary

It was RESOLVED that:

the following correspondence be circulated to Councillors:

· Enjoy England: Celebrate St George’s Day brochure

· Clerks & Councils Direct for March 2008

· East of England Regional Assembly: Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation in the East of England

· SALC Suffolk Coastal Area Committee minutes for 19 November and Agenda for 10 March meeting (cancelled and to be rearranged)

Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Council would be the Annual Parish Council Meeting on 12 May

There being no further business to discuss the meeting closed at 10.35pm.