KIRBY HILL & DISTRICT PARISH COUNCIL
(Incorporating:
Kirby Hill, Milby,Thornton Bridge, Humberton and Ellenthorpe)
A
meeting of the above Parish Council was held on 12th November 2007
in the Coronation Hall, Milby, in accordance with the Local Government Act
1972, due notice having been given. The
meeting opened at 7.00 pm.
Present: Cllrs. Smailes [Chairman], Helliwell, Lister, McKenzie, Merson,
Parr, Renfrew, Widdows, Clerk- M. Rae
Visiting
Speakers: 7.15pm Jo Buffey, Yorks Rural Community Council SEE item 7a
7.35pm
Mr Chris Jarvis (RPS Planning), Mr Richard Ogden, Mr Neil Griffin
(Robertsons Design Group) SEE
item 7h
1. Apologies:
CCllr J Watson, DCllr N Wilson,
Cllr Wilkinson
2. Code of Conduct:
None expressed at start of meeting.
Cllr Lister, who was not present at the start of the meeting,
subsequently expressed interest in item 8f when Cllr Widdows asked the Chairman
to refer back to this agenda item.
3. Minutes of
the previous meeting on 10th September 2007 had been copied and distributed prior to the meeting. They were accepted as
a true record and duly signed.
4. Finance/Accounts
a.
current
balance in hand £4,462
b.
Rent
of room £5.50 to pay
c.
Grass
Cutting – Aidan Foster £240.00 to pay (2nd half year payment)
d.
Mazars
Audit invoice £58.75 to pay
e.
Royal
British Legion -Cllrs agreed to pay
a donation of £30.00 for poppy wreath
5. CORRESPONDENCE
a.
HBC Dept Community Services - Talks on Recycling
It was agreed that Mrs Rankin should be invited to
give the 30min presentation at the next Annual Parish Meeting in April
2008. Clerk to check room availability
and Mrs Rankin’s availability in week commencing 14 April and fix meeting date
accordingly.
ACTION
CLERK
b.
HBC Notes of Group 2 Parish Consultation Meeting 2 Oct The Clerk had received
one copy of the notes and
passed them round the meeting. Cllr Renfrew had attended the
consultation meeting and reported that much of the
discussion had a common thread relating to NYCC’s failed bid for unitary
status.
c. HBC Dept Resources – Parish Estimates 2008/9
Cllrs discussed the parish precept, currently (2007/80)
£4,400pa. The Clerk reported that
most expenditure and income in 2008/9 was expected to be the
same, with only small
inflationary increases
for grass cutting and other smaller bills.
Discussion also included
the
matter of whether or not to contibute annually or at all to Langthorpe’s
maintenance
of the
Leeminng Lane Play Area. It was agreed to do nothing on this at present since
no
formal
request had actually be made by Langthorpe PC for a contribution from KHPC.
Cllr
McKenzie proposed that the precept remain at £4,400 and this was seconded by
Cllr
Parr. Clerk to prepare estimates
for HBC and submit precept application.
ACTION CLERK
d. NYCCllr
Watson – a) Schools performance b) personal budget
CCllr Watson had include a
table showing performance of secondary schools in the
Harrogate District.
Boroughbridge High School’s performance had increased from 41% to
46%
in number of pupils gaining 5 or more
GCSE’s at C grade and above (inc English
and
Maths).
CCllr
Watson had also indicated that there was still money left in his small
‘personal’
budget to support local
projects. The Clerk had already
responded and applied for a grant
from NYCC, through this budget,
for one of the village signs for Thornton Bridge.
Indications were that this bid was successful although official
confirmation was awaited.
e. HBC –
Village Road Safety Schemes
Bids for grants from this
scheme were due in by 1 December. The
Clerk had previously
ascertained that funding for the Thornton Bridge village signs might be
possible through
this
scheme and Councillors agreed that this should be pursued. ACTION CLERK
f.
Standards Board – New Code of Conduct
The
council at its last meeting had resolved to opt into clause 12(2) of the
code,
concerning prejudicial interests and the right to speak. Latest
information was that this
was
only valid for councils that had Standing Orders regulating their
procedures,
particularly relating to members of the public speaking at meetings
[since 12(2) aimed to
give
councillors with prejudicial interests similar rights at meetings to those
enjoyed by
members
of the public]. The Clerk informed the meeting that most parish councils
had
standing orders governing their procedures. Cllr McKenzie proposed and
Cllr Merson
seconded that the Clerk should produce a draft set of standing orders
for discussion at the
next
meeting. ACTION CLERK
6. CLERK’S/COUNCILLORS’
REPORTS
a.
Police Liaison: Nothing to report in Cllr
Wilkinson’s absence. [ Cllrs all wished Richard Wilkinson a good and speedy
recovery following his recent accident on the farm.]
b.
Joint Parish Council The Clerk
reported that the next meeting was on 13 December.
Cllrs McKenzie and Helliwell would be able to
attend. The matter of the Milby Waste
site application would be an important item on the agenda.
c.
Commuted Sums – Yore Vision project The Clerk reported on progress regarding the
proposed waymarked circular
walk, taking in Langthorpe, Milby and Kirby Hill and
explained the funding situation.
The interpretation board for the walk would be sited in
the
picnic area by the river in Langthorpe and most of its circa £1700 funding had
been
secured, some of it through Langthorpe’s commuted sums at HBC. The Clerk
informed
Cllrs
that KHPC still had around £300 in the Leisure/Amenity category of commuted
sums,
due to be spent by May 2008, and wondered if Cllrs might consider allocating
this
to
the project. Cllr Merson proposed and
Cllr McKenzie seconded that the clerk should
pursue this with HBC and YoreVision. ACTION CLERK
7. ONGOING/OTHER MATTERS
a.
Village Design Statement/Parish Pan
(Talk scheduled for 7.00pm at start of mereting)
Jo Buffey’s talk on Parish
Plans was taken between items 5b and 5c on the agenda since she arrived 15
minutes later than scheduled. She
outlined the difference between Parish Plans and Village Design Statements, the
latter being more planning/development oriented but no longer being as readily
endorsed by HBC as supplementary planning guidance as they once were. Parish Plans cover a much wider range of
community aspects and are generally not produced by the parish council but by a
steering group from the community, normally however including at least one
member of the parish council. The
impetus to start a plan will generally come from the parish council and
finalised plans can be of enormous
value to the council. Funding is
available through various grants for the production of parish plans and parish
councils themselves frequently contribute some funding. The production of Parish Plans is being
strongly supported by Central Government and to date there are completed plans in 150 North Yorks parishes.
Next steps, should KHPC wish to proceed, would
involve the parish council in ‘setting the ball rolling’ by facilitating the
formation of a steering group. It was
agreed that the best way to take this forward would be through the Annual
Parish Meeting in April.
b.
Parking/speeding Leeming Lane Clerk reported than Ken Major of NYCC Highways
was proposing to have the
30mph signs installed at the same time as moving the Church
Lane
and Millings Lane signs farther east (see 7d)
c.
B6265 Layby Revised quote still awaited from Ken Major. Clerk had chased this and
also forwarded a resident’s complaint to CCllr Watson who had emailed a reply
to effect that he would again pursue
this with NYCC.
d.
Kirby Hill Church Lane 30mph sign - Ken
Major had informed clerk that he still
awaited police approval for
moving the 30mph sign farther east along Church Lane.
e.
Kirby Hill B6265/A168 roundabout
Clerk
had received a request from new owners of
Crown Inn, Roecliffe to
sponsor this roundabout following mistaken information from
NYCC that responsibility for
this was with KHPC. Clerk had responded
that the
responsibility for this
roundabout, and for arranging sponsorship, still lay with NYCC.
Cllr Merson, who remains
opposed to sponsorship signs on this roundabout, wondered
why the Parish Council had
no power to prevent them and questioned the fact that
sponsors did not need planning permission. The Clerk explained that since the
roundabout was not, by its express wish, the parish council’s responsibility
then the parish council could not prevent sponsorship arrangements.The Clerk
will seek further clarification on the planning aspects.
ACTION CLERK
f.
Helperby Road speeding – Burton Cottages Ken Major had contacted the clerk to say
he would arrange for a
colleague to organise a site meeting with members of the parish
council.
g. Thornton Bridge Village
signs – see
5d and 5e above
h. Milby NYCC Waste site - MILBY WASTE TRANSFER SITE
APPLICATION
(Presentation scheduled for 7.30 and taken at 7.35
between agenda items 5b and 5c)
The presentation by Messrs Jarvis, Ogden and Griffin had been arranged only hours earlier at their request. Until then the Parish Council had had no knowledge of this impending planning application. The issue of a possible waste site at Milby was a published agenda item because of the NYCC Minerals &Waste Strategy consultation and a letter dated 17 October from CCllr J Watson indicating that, following the summer round of consultations, the Milby site was still on the list of possible sites for waste transfer operations. On the same day as the meeting – 12 November – NYCC’s latest Minerals/Waste Report was being published, confirming Cllr Watson’s information.
Mr Jarvis showed councillors the plans shortly to be
submitted as a planning application to NYCC for a waste transfer/recycling site
on land owned by Mr Ogden in Milby. It
was proposed that the site would handle 100,000 tonnes annually of industrial
and commercial waste – not municipal waste.
Estimated traffic flows would be 67 movements in and out of the site
daily. Inward vehicles would be mostly
15 ton and outward would be larger articulated carriers. Recycling of inert waste would take place on
the site, under cover. This would mostly involve crushing of rubble etc. Non
inert waste would be sorted into recycling categories before being removed from
the site. In effect, 100,000 tonnes of
waste would pass through the site annually, meaning 100,000 tons inwards and
100,000 tonnes outwards. At the eastern
end of the site the rubble awaiting recycling/crushing would be stored in a
mound. No clear indication of the height of such a mound was given.
The Clerk had that same day received information
from the NYCC website about the results of the latest consultation, following
which the Milby site was still listed as one of NYCC’s preferred sites. This information, the
latest update on NYCC’s Waste Strategy
‘Site Allocations-Preferred Options’, suggested a maximum
of 20,000 tonnes throughput per annum for this site. When this was put to Mr Jarvis he merely said he was aware of
this fact.
The Chairman thanked Mr Jarvis and colleagues for
allowing the parish council to have advance notice and detailed information
about the impending planning application and for the opportunity for
councillors to ask questions and discuss the plans.
The Clerk informed the meeting that the Parish
Council had until 24 December to comment on the NYCC Site Allocations
document. A special meeting would be
called to discuss this along with the specific Ogden planning application when
that was received.
The Joint Parish Councils would discuss their
response at their meeting on 13 December.
8. PLANNING
a.
Crown Estate Thornton Bridge 6.36.6.B.FUL
05/01597/FUL
Refurb.
& Extension to 1 dwellg & conv agric buildgs to form 3
dwellgs. Erec grage block inc 2
dble garages 1 det dble garage
with new
pack treatment plant & altered veh access
GRANTED
incl 106
agreement for affordable dwellings
b.
Preston – Rosedene, Leeming Lane, Milby 6.57.60.A.FUL
07/03679/FUL
Erec of 2 storey side extension GRANTED
c. Coronation
Hall – 6.57.36.C.FUL 07/04147/FUL
Erec. of
single storey extension GRANTED
d. Rigby 3 Market Hill Milby 6.57.46.B.FUL 07/04226/FUL
Erec. of
single storey side extension GRANTED
e. Barley 10 Market Hill Milby 6.57.52.A.FUL 07/04552/FUL
Erec. of
single storey rear extension GRANTED
f.
Lister Farms
Grange Farm Milby 6.57.19.E.FULMAJ
07/04493/FULMAJ
Erec of
detached agric. Building Parish
Council had no
Objections Planning decision
awaited
g. Stonebridge
Construction Grantham Barn Milby
6.57.30.C.FUL 07/04630/FUL
REVISED
scheme. Conv of barn to 2 flats REFUSED
The meeting closed at 9.50pm
Next meeting 14
January 2008 7.00pm
Martin Rae
Clerk
13 November
SIGNED……………………………………………………….………DATE……………………