*Minutes of the Annual Parish Meeting 2008 (Unapproved)
Held in the Church Hall, Sidlesham on Wednesday 28 May 2008 at 7:00 p.m.
Councillors present: Mr Adrian Harland (Chairman), Mr Colin Field (Vice-chairman), Mrs Patricia Tull, Mrs Debbie Kennedy, Mrs Elizabeth Smart, Mrs Diana Pound, Mrs Carole Ranjbar, Mr Dudley Pound.
Also present: Thirty-seven Sidlesham Electors, Mr Alan Chaplin (County Councillor) and Mr John Paul (Parish Clerk)
Mr Adrian Harland as Chairman of the Parish Council opened the proceedings and welcomed all present to the meeting.
1. Minutes of the Annual Parish Meeting held on Wednesday 23 May 2007
These were proposed by Dame Jeni Trimble, seconded by Mrs Kennedy and agreed by those present as being a true record to be signed by the Chairman.
2. Parish Council report of the past year by Mr Harland.
The area, which takes up the majority of the Parish Council meetings, is Planning. During the past twelve months we met on 16 occasions, and considered 53 applications, 2 more than the previous year. An average of just over one per week, for a parish of this size is quite substantial, and represents about 11% of the total housing stock. 6 of these applications have yet to be decided by Chichester District Planning, and 4, where we raised an objection, were withdrawn before a formal decision was reached. Of the remaining 43, we raised no objection to 32 that were permitted, we objected to 4 that were refused, 2 to which we had no objection were refused but subsequently permitted after the adverse comments we had made were dealt with. We objected to 5 applications that were permitted, although 2 of these incorporated amendments we had cited as our reason for refusal. In the case of a third, a telephone mast, we did seek for it to be positioned elsewhere altogether, but it was at least moved further away from the original position sought. You can see therefore that for the most part our decisions accord with the planning authorities, but that will not stop us raising objections as appropriate where we think an application is not right for the parish.
Allied to Planning are Enforcement Matters. I have lost touch with the number of cases we raised during the past 12 months, but they were numerous. Some have resulted in retrospective planning applications, some were covered by older planning consents, and others were covered by permitted development powers. But there are still a number that are outstanding, some of which have been ruled against by the CDC, but are subject to an appeal to the Government Inspectors. We continue to follow up outstanding cases, but we are in the hands of the District Council Enforcement Team so far as speed to resolution is concerned.
All members of the Council can sit on the Planning Committee. The Council meets formally every 2 months, when all remaining business is conducted. This covers the ever-present concern over traffic matters on all of the parish’s roads, footpaths both alongside the roads and across fields etc, the parish amenities such as seats and bus shelters, the upkeep of the parish open spaces, such as the Paddock Straight, and ponds. We also review the parish finances, receive reports from various other bodies on which members of the council sit, amongst which are the Manhood Peninsular Forum, the Manhood Parishes Road Safety Group, the Manhood Peninsular Steering Group (sea defences), and the Pagham Harbour Nature Reserve Board.
Amenities and Assets Working Group
This group of councillors is tasked with looking after the various public areas and assets. Dudley Pound has acted as chairman, and I wish to record our thanks to him for the work he has done, not just with the paperwork, but with Florence Pond in particular. He and a working party of parishioners including Norman Robson, Bob Simpson, Brian Howard and his son, (with apologies to any others who helped whom I have not mentioned) have done a wonderful job in clearing the brambles etc around the pond, and as you will all be able to see the area has been opened up. The pond is full of life including at least one sizeable goldfish, and is regularly visited by kingfishers. The seat at the top end has been jet-washed, so anyone can spend a little time just sitting there, soaking up the pond scenario. My thanks also to the Frys who continue to cut the grass around the seat. The working group carried out a full inventory of the parish assets, and a number of improvements are in hand to effect repairs etc, some with the aid of grants from the WSCC and/or the CDC.
The Finance Working Group meets to draw up and recommend the precept for the next financial year. I do not wish to go into any detail, as the figures covering parish income and expenditures are covered by the accounts that are published on the parish notice boards.
Roads Matters
During the last 12 months, the Manhood Parishes Road Safety Group has been formed. Originally this was a group within Earnley, but it has now been widened to include all parishes on the Manhood, and Oving. As well as covering road safety in general, the group has been endeavouring to put in place a joint venture with our own pressure group STAG, who have obtained a grant towards the purchase of a SID (Speed Indicator Device) on the basis that the SID is shared with parishes on the Manhood Peninsular. However this can only be positioned where agreed by the police, and would have to be manned at all times. As yet the police and the highway authorities have yet to agree all the ground rules, and it can only go ahead if other parishes agree to share the total cost. The project does seem to be running into some difficulty, as many of the parishes do not seem to be supportive. A similar situation has arisen at Funtington where again a lack of co-operation from the Bourne parishes is again putting the scheme in jeopardy.
STAG continue to chip away at the authorities, and the Parish Council remains supportive of their aim ie “to curb traffic excesses”.
Children’s Playground & Parish Hall
As indicated at last year’s meeting, the council again looked at the question of a playground within the parish. A request for ideas was made in the Sidlesham Parishioner, but with little response. A working party reviewed the position, and was unable to make any firm recommendations to build a new playground. Besides the question of cost, there is also some difficulty in finding a suitable site. Clearly this remains high on the wish list of parishioners as demonstrated by the responses to the consultation letter. The way forward may be to form a working party of interested parishioners with council involvement to see what can be done. The Council will discuss the matter at our July meeting.
Likewise the question of a parish hall could be dealt with in a similar way, and although the projects could share a similar site, it may be best to keep the two separate. A new parish hall would cost in the region of at least £500,000, and would, I suggest have to be aided by substantial grants. In this respect, Funtington have put together a scheme, for which planning permission was granted, but their application for lottery funds was rejected. Their building costs are calculated to be £1,500,000! However they expect to raise about half this sum by selling off the plot of land on which the existing hall is sited. Our parish owns the Recreation Ground, but it is extremely unlikely that a sale would be allowed by the authorities bearing in mind the covenants placed on it. Raising the total sum required would be a very major project, and could probably only happen after many years of fund raising – meantime the cost would continue to escalate with inflation. But again a fresh set of brains and enthusiasm might unlock a solution……….
Parish Plan
The newly elected council revisited this subject last November, and a meeting with a CDC officer took place in December. It transpired that a parish plan did not form part of the planning process, which took some members of the council aback. It was decided that as the production of such a plan would take a great deal of time, and as also costs were no longer supported by grants, it was not appropriate to go ahead with such a scheme at the present time. Incidentally, in case you are thinking that the councillors are just plain lazy, such plans are on the whole executed by non-councillors with Parish Council overview!
One of the items required by a parish plan is a full consultation with parishioners. The council therefore decided as an interim measure to invite the parish by way of a consultation letter to give its views on the present standing of the parish. 40 people responded resulting in the 61 items on the list you have been handed this evening. You will have the opportunity to debate these subjects after the refreshment break, and the council will then take them forward to formulate plans and responses over the next few months.
I would like to pass on my thanks to all of your councillors for the time and effort they have put in over the last 12 months dealing with a whole host of other matters in addition to those I have highlighted. A special thank you to our clerk, John Paul, without whose hard work the parish could not operate. John is also responsible for keeping our website up to date – the address is sidlesham.org.uk.
Lastly our thanks in advance to the ladies of the WI for the refreshments you will enjoy during the interval
3. Presentation by Samantha Tate on the proposed new Visitor Centre for Pagham Harbour Nature Reserve.
Samantha introduced herself as the project manager for the proposed development and also introduced two colleagues, Charlotte Murray of the Environment Agency and ………of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
The proposals were at a very early stage of what was expected to be a long project. The project was a partnership of WSCC, EA and RSPB, all of whom ST worked for.
The vision of the project was that a study centre was required to facilitate monitoring of the effects of climate change, including sea level rise, on wild life at the reserve.
The current centre was not up to task. It is very small, old, cold and very cramped for staff and students. The proposed new centre would enable quality studies to take place.
Around Pagham Harbour many sites were assessed and the conclusion was that Sidlesham Ferry was the preferred location. The existing facilities are at the Ferry but very close to the road (B2145) at a distance from the harbour. The whole area there is a landfill site with attendant problems of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions from the substrate. Gas monitoring apparatus was installed. More detailed investigations are planned for 2008. The idea is to have a new building much closer, preferably overlooking the harbour. The preferred location to date is north of the drainage ‘channel’ in the angle of in filled land north west of the tramway and the footpath to the harbour from the existing buildings. This is probably the highest location and at least risk from flooding. So far people and traffic assessments indicate 150,000 visitors per year. This would increase. A consultation document will be published on 4 August 2008, responses to be in by October 2008 leading to recommendations being published in late 2008/ early 2009. Designs and plans (and costs) to be produced by 2009/2010. Fundraising would then start.
The aim would be to facilitate connection to the site for cyclists, invalids, pushchairs etc. Also to support the local community by the use of the buildings as meeting rooms in the evenings.
Questions and discussion from the floor raised several points.
An additional meeting room in the parish would be useful although the proposed site is on the parish boundary.
Doubts were raised on the validity of the 150,000 visitors, as large numbers of people are never seen at the harbour in Sidlesham. Answer that largest numbers of people visiting are mainly in Pagham; why not have the new facility there not in Sidlesham as a new facility will increase traffic on the B2145 and people to the area? Answer that visitors to the reserve in Pagham come mainly for the beach not wildlife. The new facility is for education purposes etc.
The harbour is a local, not a national nature reserve. Advertising and attracting tourists was not part of the set-up plan agreed to by local people.
Concern was expressed about a building overlooking the harbour along one of the few ‘wild’ paths in the area. Also night use would require lights where currently there are none.
A vehicular access road would be necessary across the land and a bridge across the channel plus car park area, why not replace the current buildings at the same location?
In Sidlesham development is restricted due to flood risk, would this proposal be exempt? EA representative said it would not be exempt; any proposal would be examined for risk and restrictions / requirements imposed.
Mr Harland thanked Samantha for the presentation and the interested discussion it stimulated.
4. Refreshment break.
5. Open forum on topics of Parish interest raised in the consultation letter of early April delivered to all 500 households in Sidlesham CP. A collated copy of all 61 topics received in 40 replies was handed to all present at the meeting and is attached to these minutes. Approximately twenty attendees at the meeting had responded.
Mr Harland invited discussion on any topic.
§ Mr Bailey raised topic 18, the future of School House. Some of the current school governors wished to re-visit the possible use of the house by the school rather than demolition and development of the site. Mr Harland informed the meeting that since 2003 many meetings had taken place with the Governors, the Headmaster, the Parish Council and WSCC. The latest information was that WSCC Education Department had declared the house surplus to requirements. Delays occurred due to access difficulties. Mrs Kennedy on behalf of her husband (a school Governor) responded that WSCC Highways had accepted proposals for access to a rented or affordable housing project. Mr Harland informed the meeting that he and the Vice-Chairman were invited by WSCC to attend a meeting with all concerned parties on 4 April.
§ Mr Harrison raised topic 27, restriction of lorry size on local roads. The consensus of opinion was that EU law defined lorry size. Little could be done except ‘access only’ restrictions on by-lanes.
§ Mrs Martin raised topic 34 (speed limits on B2145 too varied). Many agreed but the meeting was reminded that the current array of speed limits was developed by the WSCC road safety group in response to requests for restrictions. The majority of the road did not meet the national criteria for 30mph.
§ Discussion of topic 36 (30mph or less over whole of the Manhood Peninsula) concluded it was probably not possible although repeat requests could be made. Policing of a slow limit would be very difficult.
§ Mr Caldwell raised topic 13 (support of Social Justice with reference to coastal defence). The particular issue being compensation for property loss if Councils responsible for defences allowed properties and land to be lost to the sea. Mr Harland informed the meeting that the local MP Andrew Tyrie was leading an inter-party committee on this topic and frequently reported to the Manhood Group. Mrs Tull stated that Social Justice was not enshrined in law therefore all efforts to achieve the aims should be supported.
§ The Pagham to East Head Draft Coastal Defence Strategy paper was due for publication
29 May 2009.
§ Mr Pound raised the parish Recreation Ground as a general topic, (see 57, 49, 59), stating that a tidy-up was much needed. The football club as tenants and users of the Ground had legal responsibility for the tidiness and cleanliness. It was agreed that liaison with them was needed to ensure the attractiveness of this public open green space.
The previous discussions led on to topics 50 and 56 (Church Hall improvements and a New (village) hall). These topics were referred to in the Chairman’s report above. Dame Jeni Trimble suggested the Parochial Church Council and the Parish Council should develop a combined ‘Hall Strategy’; this was agreed.
§ Mr Dowling raised topic 20 (Local Development Framework, LDF). He considered progress reporting was poor following the refusal of the Government Inspector to accept the District Council’ Paper. Open discussion concluded that as CDC had been forced to start again the timescale was very prolonged and there was nothing yet to report.
A reluctance to raise further topics brought the Meeting to a conclusion. Mr Harland thanked everyone for attending and taking part. He stated that discussion of the topics raised in the consultation would be discussed at subsequent Parish Council meetings.
Mr Harland closed the Sidlesham Annual Parish Meeting at 9.00 pm.
CONSULTATION LETTER REPLIES AND TOPICS
Letters were delivered to all 500 household in the parish, 40 replies were received (8%)
Featured in numbers of replies
PARISH ENVIRONMENT
B2145 make into an environmental corridor 1
Dead elms need cutting down 1
Eyesores need control eg tyre clinic 2
Hedgerows, encourage more planting 1
Litter clearing and village tidiness 4
Manhood Lane, cut grass more often. 1
Pond maintenance budget 1
Seats along roads eg Paddock Straight 1
Shotford, control mosquitoes 1
Social Justice leadership on sea defences 5
Village plan 1
Signs, no A-boards or other advertisements for businesses 1
HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT
Affordable housing 3
Industrial units, no more 2
School House, future 1
Food production, not bricks and mortar 1
LDF Plan (progress?) 1
HIGHWAYS
Bypass from Selsey to A27 3
Crossing on B2145 near Manhood Lane / Keynor Lane & Anchor 2
Development control to keep traffic down on back-roads 1
Double yellow lines at the school 1
Dyers Corner off road car park. 1
Highleigh road makings 1
Lorry size weight restriction 2
Manhood Lane, increase parking. 1
Pot hole mend on roads 1
Shotford enlarge lay-by for safe parking. 2
Shotford, double yellow lines, park in recreation ground. 2
Speed camera on B2145 2
Speed limit in Rookery Lane 1
Speed limits on B2145 too varied 1
Speed reduction in Highleigh & Keynor Lane 3
Speed to be 30mph (or less) all of Manhood peninsula 2
Speed, reduce traffic speed 2
Street lighting 1
Traffic calming scheme on B2145 1
FOOTWAYS & CYCLEWAYS
Cycle route extension to Selsey & others & more signs 7
Hedge cutting along footways & roadsides 6
Re-surface all footways 1
TRANSPORT, RECREATION & AMENITIES
Allotments 1
Annual village ball amd other community events 2
Barn dance 1
Bus service improve in Highleigh 3
Bus shelter Lockgate/Boxham 1
Businesses list 1
Children’s play area, Manhood Lane / Church Hall 11
Church Hall improvements 1
Cricket ground and club 1
Drop-in centre on some days eg hall or football club 1
Encourage Sidlesham festival 1
Farmers Market 1
Football club, help it to be more attractive 2
Hall, construct a new one somewhere 5
Recreation ground. Make more obvious it belongs to Parish not football club 1
Sailing association be formed to use licences 1
Tennis court at Recreation Ground 1
Good neighbour awards scheme 1
Police Station open 24 hours on Manhood Peninsula 1