18 Jul 2006 - PARISH COUNCIL
DRAFT MINUTES: SHENINGTON WITH ALKERTON PARISH COUNCIL
The Parish Council met in the Village Hall on Wednesday 12th July 2006.
Present: Mr K Hainsworth (Chairman), Mr T Dowdeswell (Vice Chairman), Mr K Adams, Ms M Coles, Ms G Crabb, Mr S Mitchell, Ms J Walters
Apologies: (Mr I Young, Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator)
In attendance: PS D Hibbert, Mr J Alcock, Mr C M H Gibson (the Clerk)
1. Chairman?s Opening Remarks
1.1 KH welcomed members of the public, PS D Hibbert and Mr J Alcock to the meeting, and noted that it was the first meeting for JW.
2. Declarations of Interest
2.1 MC declared an interest in a restrictive covenant, if any existed, on the School land preventing it being use as a play area for children of the village, and a prejudicial interest in one of the potential development sites mentioned in the Cherwell district Site Allocations Plan.
(Action: Clerk to update register)
3. Local Policing
3.1 PS Dave Hibbert (the Rural Sergeant for Banbury) explained his background to the Parish Council, and explained the principles of neighbourhood policing, which will be introduced over the next year (by October 2007). There will be a Neighbourhood Action Group (NAG) covering the area (29 parish councils) with local representatives who provide the top 3 priorities for the police to tackle locally. Meetings are likely to be approximately every 6 weeks. Hopefully, 2 Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) will be provided, in addition to local police resources.
3.2 KH invited questions. One member of the audience asked whether this impacted on the local neighbourhood watch systems. PS Hibbert noted that these should compliment each other.
3.3 KH asked who was driving the neighbourhood policing initiative and asked if it had the full support of Chief Constables. PS Hibbert stated that this is a Central Government initiative, and noted that Chief Constables were not unanimously in agreement.
3.4 The target manpower would be 1PC and 2 PCSOs for North Banbury. PS Hibbert believed that good PCSOs were valuable to him, and provided examples of information and action by PCSOs that led to arrests.
3.5 KH thanked PS Hibbert for his presentation and agreed to report back to PS Hibbert on arrangements for representation on the NAG.
4. Rural Housing
4.1 Mr J Alcock introduced the ORCC charity, and explained his role as an independent advisor on affordable housing.
4.2 He explained why there might be a need for social housing, what it actually means and how it might be progressed.
4.3 A copy of the PowerPoint Presentation is available from the Clerk.
4.4 Additional points of interest:
· There are already 3x3 bedroom houses and 4x1 bedroom bungalows in housing association ownership in Shenington/Alkerton.
· Rural exception sites allow development when it would not normally be allowed. The land owner would typically receive £3000 per acre if sold for agricultural land, plus £5000 per house if sold as a Rural exception site. You could build 12-14 homes on one acre.
· All rural exception houses are built be Leadbitters.
4.5 SM asked how shared owners could upgrade. Mr J Alcock explained that there is sometimes potential to convert loft space to make a 3rd bedroom.
4.6 KH asked why CDC decided the occupancy. Mr J Alcock noted that the S106 document stipulated what criteria that CDC used, i.e. they had to be allocated to people who had local connections in the first instance. Where there were insufficient candidates with local links registered with CDC, they could be allocated to anyone on the CDC housing, list although households from the surrounding parishes may be considered first. Mr J Alcock believed that it was important to note that CDC was effectively independent, and to some extent information was protected by the Data Protection Act. No figures were available for the proportion of young or old people awarded social housing, but it was based on local need.
4.7 S106 agreements prohibit right to buy, but allow shared ownership with between 25% to 80% owned by the occupier (though shared ownership is rare, as most people who qualify for such housing can only afford to rent). Re-sales are controlled through the District Council in line with the S106 criteria. If no-one who qualifies for the housing can afford the price of the part owned share, then the housing association will repurchase it.
4.8 Rural exception sites can not be used for sites where private development occurs. However, affordable houses can be build on private developments, on the first let they may be let to local people, but subsequent lets would be to anyone on the council social housing list, and consequently Mr J Alcock believed that it would be very difficult to satisfy local needs by this method.
4.9 KH thanked Mr Alcock for his presentation.
5. First Open Forum
5.1 KH noted that the PC has received a letter from Mr & Mrs Kendell which he treated as it arising in the open forum, thus:-:
Stonepit
5.2 SM noted that para 2 referred to The Chairman?s comments that land owned by SAPC should be disposed of to a local farmer. SM suggested that the PC should first try and see if it was possible to rent out the land, and only if this was not possible should sale be considered.
5.3 TD explained that PCs sat as trustees and therefore held a fiduciary duty, and could not dispose of land lightly. TD was of the view that professional guidance was necessary if the disposal option was to be followed to seek the benefit of professional indemnity insurance.
5.4 TD also believe that, if sold, it should be subject to a restricted covenant or coverage agreement to ensure that the PC benefits from any uplift un value.
5.5 It was noted that the Clerk had spoken with CDC who corroborated the points that TD had made.
5.6 KH noted that the previous PC decided against using it as an aerial site, and had assumed that this was not an option when he commenced negotiatiosn with a local farmer. KH has contacted Fischer German, land agents who regularly deal with land used as sites for aerials and transmitters. There is a demand for aerial/transmitter sites, with current technology, the aerials are smaller and aesthetically more acceptable than first generation sites. The minimum rent is likely to be £4000 p.a. (for single user), and potentially more for multi-user.
5.7 TD cautioned against being overly optimistic as it was typically mobile pone companies who approach land owners rather than the other way round.
5.8 One member of the public believed that a company had approached the local church to sit an aerial in the village, and agreed to pass on the contact details of the agent to the Chairman/Clerk.
5.9 It was agreed that the aerial/transmitter option should be explored further without committing the PC to anything at this stage.
Action: KH
5.10 GC suggested that the appointment of a land agent should go out to tender if the PC wished to pursue this. This was agreed.
5.11 TD noted that it was common for the transmitter owner to pay reasonable agents costs.
Finance and Accounts
5.12 Dr Anson expressed confidence in TD?s ability to mange the finance portfolio.
5.13 One member of the public wanted to ensure that villagers were informed about expenditure as things progressed, rather than solely in the minutes after the event.
Portfolios
5.14 KH is not yet convinced of the benefits of the portfolio system, but no decision has been made. The Chairman would like George Reynolds to be invited to the next meeting to provide advice to new members, and the issue will be up for discussion at the next PC meeting.
Action: Clerk
5.15 KH thanked Mr & Mrs Kendell for their letter and asked if they were satisfied with this response to their letter, which they were.
Traffic Speed in Stocking Lane
5.16 The speed of traffic is increasing and even the School Governors have been observed to drive to fast up Stocking Lane. The issue is getting worse as greater out of hours use of the school is occurring.
5.17 GC noted that some village parents did not believe that it was safe to let their children walk to school because of the high traffic speeds in the village.
5.18 One member of the public believed that some of the speeding traffic was for the surgery.
5.19 It was agreed that the Parish Council write to the surgery and school to ask them to remind drivers to drive slowly on Stocking Lane, and that the PC will consider promoting an amendment to the speed limit & Speed bumps if it is not satisfactory resolved in a community minded and responsible manner.
Action: Clerk
5.20 KH invited members of the public to record the numbers of offending vehicles and report then to the Parish Council..
Longacre Planning
5.21 One member of the public asked whether any check been made to ensure that the PC letter regarding the outline planning application for Longacre was properly taken into account.
5.22 It was noted that this development would make the aforementioned traffic situation worse.
5.23 Cllr Webb believed that SAPC should have had a letter back addressing the incorrect points. It was agreed that SAPC would provide Cllr Webb with a copy of its letter for him to pursue a response.
Action: Clerk
5.24 It was noted that the planning submission stated that the lime trees would not be affected. It was agreed that TPO should be sought, referring to the assurances given in the application.
Action: Clerk
Bus Timetable
5.25 One member of the public noted that there was still no bus timetable in the bus stop, and provided one for the SAPC to put up. He asked if there was a policy on advertising in the bus shelter. The Parish Council was not aware of such a policy, but agreed that villagers were entitled to remove out of date notices or notices not related to the village as they wished.
Road from Alkerton Barn to Shutford
5.26 The road from Alkerton Barn to Shutford needs attention.
Site Allocations Development Plan Document
5.27 KH raised the issue of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
5.28 MC declared an interest in this matter, but stated that she was unaware of how the parcel of land in which she had declared an interest got into the site allocation plan document.
5.29 It was noted that the old development plan was thrown out for environment reasons, and this has lead to the need for the new Site Allocations Development Plan Document. People who were previously refused permission can now put in applications to develop anything, and these have to be considered. Comments need to be in by 25th August 2006 to CDC.
5.30 It was agreed that substantive discussion of this should be taken under planning (section 13.2 below).
6. Approval of Accounts
6.1 TD explained the process for the approval of the statutory accounts.
6.2 Paper copies and electronic of the financial accounts and supporting statements for the 2004/5 financial year were made available.
6.3 The Chairman read the statement of the internal audit for the year 2005-06 and thanked Dr C Anson for undertaking the internal audit of the accounts.
6.4 BDO Stoy Haywood will audit the accounts on 26th August 2005.
6.5 The 2004/5 accounts were unanimously approved by the PC, and will be submitted to the auditors together with the Annual Return.
Action: Clerk
6.6 The Annual Return for the year ended 31 March 2006 was discussed, and sections 1, 2 and 4 were duly completed and agreed. Each of the statements in Section 2 ? Statement of assurance were considered and approved individually by the Parish Council.
Action: Clerk
Exercise of Electors Rights
6.7 The Clerk noted that Electors have the rights to inspect the accounts from 24th July 2006 to 18th August 2006. They will be available for inspection at TD?s house by prior arrangement. A copy will also be displayed on the parish notice board.
Action: Clerk & TD
7. Minutes of the previous meeting held 10th May 2006
7.1 Item 2.1 should read ?answer, if requested?.
7.2 In 7.2 MC stated the previous council would only answer questions raised at a subsequent meeting, rather than in the open session in which they were raised.
7.3 KH noted that under item 10, the matter is still in abeyance.
7.4 GC noted that Ms Ramsey and Mr Wright had assisted with the planning portfolio.
7.5 There was some discussion of minute 12.6, it was agreed that it should read ?Ms G Crabb questioned the Chairman?s Election literature?.
7.6 With the above amendment(s) the minutes were duly agreed.
8. Actions from the previous meeting held on 10th May 2006
8.1 Thank you letters have been produced. The Clerk has been unable to trace a current address for Mr P Kopp & Mr J Thompson.
8.2 Parish Councillors have completed their statements of registerable interests.
8.3 Bank mandate forms have been obtained by the Clerk.
8.4 The Rural Housing enabler was invited to the meeting (see above).
8.5 A response has been received regarding the Jitty. It was agreed that the current lack of progress was totally unacceptable. Following discussion of the various options, it was agreed that the Clerk should raise a formal complaint about maladministration, to the Parliamentary Ombudsman if necessary, and cc George Reynolds, to expedite matters.
Action: Clerk
8.6 Details of Parish Council meetings continued to be provided to the Shenington Green.
8.7 Open forums were included on the agenda near the top and near the bottom of the agenda.
8.8 Items from minute 12.9 were included on the agenda.
8.9 KA is producing a paper on communications.
Action: KA
8.10 The Clerk did contact CDC about constraints on disposal. CDC would not normally provide advice on these matters and suggested that SAPC sought its own legal advice.
8.11 The Chairman and Clerk will set up arrangements for regular weekly or fortnightly meetings.
Action: KH & Clerk
8.12 No VAT reclaim has yet been pursued.
Action: TD & Clerk
9. Financial Report
Current Financial Position
9.1 The bank statement showed a current balance of £5975.25
9.2 Cheques required signature for the following amounts:
BT £38.04
Hire of the Village Hall £15.00
Clerk?s Salary £423.66
9.3 The Clerk reported that the chequebook that had been missing for over a year has been cancelled, and a new one ordered.
10. The Stone Pit
10.1 The Chairman promised to show the stone pit to interested members.
Action: KH
11. Other agenda items agreed at the previous meetings
Highways (excluding verges)
11.1 MC asked if there should be a weight restriction in the village, restricting access above the weight limit for access only.
11.2 The Chairman noted that the issue of lorries entering the village looking for Sugarswell was being dealt with wherever possible by the Nunneleys. He also noted that the Kart Club were also good at preventing their members from driving through the village.
11.3 KA suggested that highways be invited to the November meeting.
Action: Clerk
Road Safety
11.4 The Chairman asked GC to summarise what has been proposed and rejected in the past. CG stated that the PC previously went down the rout of red patches with ?30? which has not proved effective. She noted that there were also yellow zig-zags outside the hall and old school. She understood that highways would remove the zig-zags outside the old school once it was converted to a dwelling house.
11.5 Various possibilities for improving safety were discussed.
Children?s Facilities
11.6 The Clerk noted that CDC had asked if SAPC were going to send a representative to the Countryside Forum. In addition there is a questionnaire that needs to be completed to enable CDC to identify how much lottery finding, if any, SAPC will require for the provision of village play facilities for children.
11.7 MC has spoken to Hornton re their play area, and questioned whether there were now too many rules and regulations relating to play areas to make it attractive. It has taken Hornton 5 years to develop their play area, and high standard equipment tends to be expensive.
11.8 GC noted that the proximity to the tip would give us access to landfill tax money to fund exactly this sort of project.
11.9 SM asked if the school had been approached. Apparently there is a restrictive covenant preventing the use of school land for this purpose. SM asked if this could be revised.
11.10 MC declared an interest in any such restrictive covenant, if it existed.
11.11 GC noted that the discussion with Tim Whatton of CDC regarding the development plan issues and options paper that Mr Whatton suggested that the lack of play areas in Shenington meant that SAPC should write formally notifying CDC that we do not have any recreation facilities for children. This was agreed.
Action: GC
11.12 It was agreed that GC should produce a formal proposal for the Parish Council to consider.
Action: GC
12. Matters Arising not referred to later on the Agenda
Circulation Bundles
12.1 KH asked if the Clerk could simply advise what information exists so that Parish Councillors can request information. The Clerk noted that the front sheet of each Circulation Bundle contained a full list of the enclosed documents, relevant date, the source or each document and highlights any urgent items. TD advised that it was necessary for PCs to actually go through each bundle.
12.2 MC noted that it was difficult to comment on planning applications without seeing the plans. Full details of planning applications are available on the CDC website. GC agreed to circulate details.
Action: GC
12.3 It was agreed that the Clerk and KH should discuss this further.
Action: KH & Clerk
Kart Club
12.4 The Kart Club has written asking if SAPC would like to meet to discuss the 2007 timetable. The Chairman agreed to liaise with the Kart Club.
Action: KH
13. Reports of Working Groups
Planning
13.1 Ms G Crabb noted that Windwhistle has put in a re-submission, which has been granted with conditions, and an improved roofline.
Planning - Site Allocations Development Plan Document
13.2 MC declared a prejudicial interest in the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (and left the room, in line with the relevant protocols).
(Action: Clerk to update register)
13.3 The Cherwell Local Development Framework: Banbury & North Cherwell Site Allocations Development Plan Document issues and Options Paper was discussed.
13.4 GC noted that members wishing to view the document on line should contact Astrid Blackburn on 01995 227 970 to get a username and password.
13.5 It was agreed that there should be another meeting solely on this on Wednesday 9th August 2006.
13.6 In response to a suggestion from the floor that the village should be consulted, KH noted that the village had already made clear its views on one of the possible development sites. He reiterated his commitment to consult the village on important issues.
14. Second Open Forum
14.1 The Shenington Village Hall Charitable Trust requires SAPC to nominate a trustee. It was agreed that GC would continue in this role.
Action: GC
15. Other Business
15.1 The TD and all present wished KH well with is imminent operation.
16. Date of Next Meeting
16.1 A Special Parish Council meeting will be arranged to discuss Issues and Options Paper- Banbury & North Cherwell Site Allocation Development Plan on Wednesday 9th August 2006 at 8:00 pm in the Village Hall. [SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED TO WEDNESDAY JULY 16 AT 8PM]
Action: Clerk
16.2 The next ordinary Parish Council meeting will be held on Wednesday 13th September 2006 in the Village Hall at 8:00pm.
16.3 The meeting closed at twenty five minutes to midnight (23:35).
The Parish Council met in the Village Hall on Wednesday 12th July 2006.
Present: Mr K Hainsworth (Chairman), Mr T Dowdeswell (Vice Chairman), Mr K Adams, Ms M Coles, Ms G Crabb, Mr S Mitchell, Ms J Walters
Apologies: (Mr I Young, Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator)
In attendance: PS D Hibbert, Mr J Alcock, Mr C M H Gibson (the Clerk)
1. Chairman?s Opening Remarks
1.1 KH welcomed members of the public, PS D Hibbert and Mr J Alcock to the meeting, and noted that it was the first meeting for JW.
2. Declarations of Interest
2.1 MC declared an interest in a restrictive covenant, if any existed, on the School land preventing it being use as a play area for children of the village, and a prejudicial interest in one of the potential development sites mentioned in the Cherwell district Site Allocations Plan.
(Action: Clerk to update register)
3. Local Policing
3.1 PS Dave Hibbert (the Rural Sergeant for Banbury) explained his background to the Parish Council, and explained the principles of neighbourhood policing, which will be introduced over the next year (by October 2007). There will be a Neighbourhood Action Group (NAG) covering the area (29 parish councils) with local representatives who provide the top 3 priorities for the police to tackle locally. Meetings are likely to be approximately every 6 weeks. Hopefully, 2 Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) will be provided, in addition to local police resources.
3.2 KH invited questions. One member of the audience asked whether this impacted on the local neighbourhood watch systems. PS Hibbert noted that these should compliment each other.
3.3 KH asked who was driving the neighbourhood policing initiative and asked if it had the full support of Chief Constables. PS Hibbert stated that this is a Central Government initiative, and noted that Chief Constables were not unanimously in agreement.
3.4 The target manpower would be 1PC and 2 PCSOs for North Banbury. PS Hibbert believed that good PCSOs were valuable to him, and provided examples of information and action by PCSOs that led to arrests.
3.5 KH thanked PS Hibbert for his presentation and agreed to report back to PS Hibbert on arrangements for representation on the NAG.
4. Rural Housing
4.1 Mr J Alcock introduced the ORCC charity, and explained his role as an independent advisor on affordable housing.
4.2 He explained why there might be a need for social housing, what it actually means and how it might be progressed.
4.3 A copy of the PowerPoint Presentation is available from the Clerk.
4.4 Additional points of interest:
· There are already 3x3 bedroom houses and 4x1 bedroom bungalows in housing association ownership in Shenington/Alkerton.
· Rural exception sites allow development when it would not normally be allowed. The land owner would typically receive £3000 per acre if sold for agricultural land, plus £5000 per house if sold as a Rural exception site. You could build 12-14 homes on one acre.
· All rural exception houses are built be Leadbitters.
4.5 SM asked how shared owners could upgrade. Mr J Alcock explained that there is sometimes potential to convert loft space to make a 3rd bedroom.
4.6 KH asked why CDC decided the occupancy. Mr J Alcock noted that the S106 document stipulated what criteria that CDC used, i.e. they had to be allocated to people who had local connections in the first instance. Where there were insufficient candidates with local links registered with CDC, they could be allocated to anyone on the CDC housing, list although households from the surrounding parishes may be considered first. Mr J Alcock believed that it was important to note that CDC was effectively independent, and to some extent information was protected by the Data Protection Act. No figures were available for the proportion of young or old people awarded social housing, but it was based on local need.
4.7 S106 agreements prohibit right to buy, but allow shared ownership with between 25% to 80% owned by the occupier (though shared ownership is rare, as most people who qualify for such housing can only afford to rent). Re-sales are controlled through the District Council in line with the S106 criteria. If no-one who qualifies for the housing can afford the price of the part owned share, then the housing association will repurchase it.
4.8 Rural exception sites can not be used for sites where private development occurs. However, affordable houses can be build on private developments, on the first let they may be let to local people, but subsequent lets would be to anyone on the council social housing list, and consequently Mr J Alcock believed that it would be very difficult to satisfy local needs by this method.
4.9 KH thanked Mr Alcock for his presentation.
5. First Open Forum
5.1 KH noted that the PC has received a letter from Mr & Mrs Kendell which he treated as it arising in the open forum, thus:-:
Stonepit
5.2 SM noted that para 2 referred to The Chairman?s comments that land owned by SAPC should be disposed of to a local farmer. SM suggested that the PC should first try and see if it was possible to rent out the land, and only if this was not possible should sale be considered.
5.3 TD explained that PCs sat as trustees and therefore held a fiduciary duty, and could not dispose of land lightly. TD was of the view that professional guidance was necessary if the disposal option was to be followed to seek the benefit of professional indemnity insurance.
5.4 TD also believe that, if sold, it should be subject to a restricted covenant or coverage agreement to ensure that the PC benefits from any uplift un value.
5.5 It was noted that the Clerk had spoken with CDC who corroborated the points that TD had made.
5.6 KH noted that the previous PC decided against using it as an aerial site, and had assumed that this was not an option when he commenced negotiatiosn with a local farmer. KH has contacted Fischer German, land agents who regularly deal with land used as sites for aerials and transmitters. There is a demand for aerial/transmitter sites, with current technology, the aerials are smaller and aesthetically more acceptable than first generation sites. The minimum rent is likely to be £4000 p.a. (for single user), and potentially more for multi-user.
5.7 TD cautioned against being overly optimistic as it was typically mobile pone companies who approach land owners rather than the other way round.
5.8 One member of the public believed that a company had approached the local church to sit an aerial in the village, and agreed to pass on the contact details of the agent to the Chairman/Clerk.
5.9 It was agreed that the aerial/transmitter option should be explored further without committing the PC to anything at this stage.
Action: KH
5.10 GC suggested that the appointment of a land agent should go out to tender if the PC wished to pursue this. This was agreed.
5.11 TD noted that it was common for the transmitter owner to pay reasonable agents costs.
Finance and Accounts
5.12 Dr Anson expressed confidence in TD?s ability to mange the finance portfolio.
5.13 One member of the public wanted to ensure that villagers were informed about expenditure as things progressed, rather than solely in the minutes after the event.
Portfolios
5.14 KH is not yet convinced of the benefits of the portfolio system, but no decision has been made. The Chairman would like George Reynolds to be invited to the next meeting to provide advice to new members, and the issue will be up for discussion at the next PC meeting.
Action: Clerk
5.15 KH thanked Mr & Mrs Kendell for their letter and asked if they were satisfied with this response to their letter, which they were.
Traffic Speed in Stocking Lane
5.16 The speed of traffic is increasing and even the School Governors have been observed to drive to fast up Stocking Lane. The issue is getting worse as greater out of hours use of the school is occurring.
5.17 GC noted that some village parents did not believe that it was safe to let their children walk to school because of the high traffic speeds in the village.
5.18 One member of the public believed that some of the speeding traffic was for the surgery.
5.19 It was agreed that the Parish Council write to the surgery and school to ask them to remind drivers to drive slowly on Stocking Lane, and that the PC will consider promoting an amendment to the speed limit & Speed bumps if it is not satisfactory resolved in a community minded and responsible manner.
Action: Clerk
5.20 KH invited members of the public to record the numbers of offending vehicles and report then to the Parish Council..
Longacre Planning
5.21 One member of the public asked whether any check been made to ensure that the PC letter regarding the outline planning application for Longacre was properly taken into account.
5.22 It was noted that this development would make the aforementioned traffic situation worse.
5.23 Cllr Webb believed that SAPC should have had a letter back addressing the incorrect points. It was agreed that SAPC would provide Cllr Webb with a copy of its letter for him to pursue a response.
Action: Clerk
5.24 It was noted that the planning submission stated that the lime trees would not be affected. It was agreed that TPO should be sought, referring to the assurances given in the application.
Action: Clerk
Bus Timetable
5.25 One member of the public noted that there was still no bus timetable in the bus stop, and provided one for the SAPC to put up. He asked if there was a policy on advertising in the bus shelter. The Parish Council was not aware of such a policy, but agreed that villagers were entitled to remove out of date notices or notices not related to the village as they wished.
Road from Alkerton Barn to Shutford
5.26 The road from Alkerton Barn to Shutford needs attention.
Site Allocations Development Plan Document
5.27 KH raised the issue of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
5.28 MC declared an interest in this matter, but stated that she was unaware of how the parcel of land in which she had declared an interest got into the site allocation plan document.
5.29 It was noted that the old development plan was thrown out for environment reasons, and this has lead to the need for the new Site Allocations Development Plan Document. People who were previously refused permission can now put in applications to develop anything, and these have to be considered. Comments need to be in by 25th August 2006 to CDC.
5.30 It was agreed that substantive discussion of this should be taken under planning (section 13.2 below).
6. Approval of Accounts
6.1 TD explained the process for the approval of the statutory accounts.
6.2 Paper copies and electronic of the financial accounts and supporting statements for the 2004/5 financial year were made available.
6.3 The Chairman read the statement of the internal audit for the year 2005-06 and thanked Dr C Anson for undertaking the internal audit of the accounts.
6.4 BDO Stoy Haywood will audit the accounts on 26th August 2005.
6.5 The 2004/5 accounts were unanimously approved by the PC, and will be submitted to the auditors together with the Annual Return.
Action: Clerk
6.6 The Annual Return for the year ended 31 March 2006 was discussed, and sections 1, 2 and 4 were duly completed and agreed. Each of the statements in Section 2 ? Statement of assurance were considered and approved individually by the Parish Council.
Action: Clerk
Exercise of Electors Rights
6.7 The Clerk noted that Electors have the rights to inspect the accounts from 24th July 2006 to 18th August 2006. They will be available for inspection at TD?s house by prior arrangement. A copy will also be displayed on the parish notice board.
Action: Clerk & TD
7. Minutes of the previous meeting held 10th May 2006
7.1 Item 2.1 should read ?answer, if requested?.
7.2 In 7.2 MC stated the previous council would only answer questions raised at a subsequent meeting, rather than in the open session in which they were raised.
7.3 KH noted that under item 10, the matter is still in abeyance.
7.4 GC noted that Ms Ramsey and Mr Wright had assisted with the planning portfolio.
7.5 There was some discussion of minute 12.6, it was agreed that it should read ?Ms G Crabb questioned the Chairman?s Election literature?.
7.6 With the above amendment(s) the minutes were duly agreed.
8. Actions from the previous meeting held on 10th May 2006
8.1 Thank you letters have been produced. The Clerk has been unable to trace a current address for Mr P Kopp & Mr J Thompson.
8.2 Parish Councillors have completed their statements of registerable interests.
8.3 Bank mandate forms have been obtained by the Clerk.
8.4 The Rural Housing enabler was invited to the meeting (see above).
8.5 A response has been received regarding the Jitty. It was agreed that the current lack of progress was totally unacceptable. Following discussion of the various options, it was agreed that the Clerk should raise a formal complaint about maladministration, to the Parliamentary Ombudsman if necessary, and cc George Reynolds, to expedite matters.
Action: Clerk
8.6 Details of Parish Council meetings continued to be provided to the Shenington Green.
8.7 Open forums were included on the agenda near the top and near the bottom of the agenda.
8.8 Items from minute 12.9 were included on the agenda.
8.9 KA is producing a paper on communications.
Action: KA
8.10 The Clerk did contact CDC about constraints on disposal. CDC would not normally provide advice on these matters and suggested that SAPC sought its own legal advice.
8.11 The Chairman and Clerk will set up arrangements for regular weekly or fortnightly meetings.
Action: KH & Clerk
8.12 No VAT reclaim has yet been pursued.
Action: TD & Clerk
9. Financial Report
Current Financial Position
9.1 The bank statement showed a current balance of £5975.25
9.2 Cheques required signature for the following amounts:
BT £38.04
Hire of the Village Hall £15.00
Clerk?s Salary £423.66
9.3 The Clerk reported that the chequebook that had been missing for over a year has been cancelled, and a new one ordered.
10. The Stone Pit
10.1 The Chairman promised to show the stone pit to interested members.
Action: KH
11. Other agenda items agreed at the previous meetings
Highways (excluding verges)
11.1 MC asked if there should be a weight restriction in the village, restricting access above the weight limit for access only.
11.2 The Chairman noted that the issue of lorries entering the village looking for Sugarswell was being dealt with wherever possible by the Nunneleys. He also noted that the Kart Club were also good at preventing their members from driving through the village.
11.3 KA suggested that highways be invited to the November meeting.
Action: Clerk
Road Safety
11.4 The Chairman asked GC to summarise what has been proposed and rejected in the past. CG stated that the PC previously went down the rout of red patches with ?30? which has not proved effective. She noted that there were also yellow zig-zags outside the hall and old school. She understood that highways would remove the zig-zags outside the old school once it was converted to a dwelling house.
11.5 Various possibilities for improving safety were discussed.
Children?s Facilities
11.6 The Clerk noted that CDC had asked if SAPC were going to send a representative to the Countryside Forum. In addition there is a questionnaire that needs to be completed to enable CDC to identify how much lottery finding, if any, SAPC will require for the provision of village play facilities for children.
11.7 MC has spoken to Hornton re their play area, and questioned whether there were now too many rules and regulations relating to play areas to make it attractive. It has taken Hornton 5 years to develop their play area, and high standard equipment tends to be expensive.
11.8 GC noted that the proximity to the tip would give us access to landfill tax money to fund exactly this sort of project.
11.9 SM asked if the school had been approached. Apparently there is a restrictive covenant preventing the use of school land for this purpose. SM asked if this could be revised.
11.10 MC declared an interest in any such restrictive covenant, if it existed.
11.11 GC noted that the discussion with Tim Whatton of CDC regarding the development plan issues and options paper that Mr Whatton suggested that the lack of play areas in Shenington meant that SAPC should write formally notifying CDC that we do not have any recreation facilities for children. This was agreed.
Action: GC
11.12 It was agreed that GC should produce a formal proposal for the Parish Council to consider.
Action: GC
12. Matters Arising not referred to later on the Agenda
Circulation Bundles
12.1 KH asked if the Clerk could simply advise what information exists so that Parish Councillors can request information. The Clerk noted that the front sheet of each Circulation Bundle contained a full list of the enclosed documents, relevant date, the source or each document and highlights any urgent items. TD advised that it was necessary for PCs to actually go through each bundle.
12.2 MC noted that it was difficult to comment on planning applications without seeing the plans. Full details of planning applications are available on the CDC website. GC agreed to circulate details.
Action: GC
12.3 It was agreed that the Clerk and KH should discuss this further.
Action: KH & Clerk
Kart Club
12.4 The Kart Club has written asking if SAPC would like to meet to discuss the 2007 timetable. The Chairman agreed to liaise with the Kart Club.
Action: KH
13. Reports of Working Groups
Planning
13.1 Ms G Crabb noted that Windwhistle has put in a re-submission, which has been granted with conditions, and an improved roofline.
Planning - Site Allocations Development Plan Document
13.2 MC declared a prejudicial interest in the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (and left the room, in line with the relevant protocols).
(Action: Clerk to update register)
13.3 The Cherwell Local Development Framework: Banbury & North Cherwell Site Allocations Development Plan Document issues and Options Paper was discussed.
13.4 GC noted that members wishing to view the document on line should contact Astrid Blackburn on 01995 227 970 to get a username and password.
13.5 It was agreed that there should be another meeting solely on this on Wednesday 9th August 2006.
13.6 In response to a suggestion from the floor that the village should be consulted, KH noted that the village had already made clear its views on one of the possible development sites. He reiterated his commitment to consult the village on important issues.
14. Second Open Forum
14.1 The Shenington Village Hall Charitable Trust requires SAPC to nominate a trustee. It was agreed that GC would continue in this role.
Action: GC
15. Other Business
15.1 The TD and all present wished KH well with is imminent operation.
16. Date of Next Meeting
16.1 A Special Parish Council meeting will be arranged to discuss Issues and Options Paper- Banbury & North Cherwell Site Allocation Development Plan on Wednesday 9th August 2006 at 8:00 pm in the Village Hall. [SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED TO WEDNESDAY JULY 16 AT 8PM]
Action: Clerk
16.2 The next ordinary Parish Council meeting will be held on Wednesday 13th September 2006 in the Village Hall at 8:00pm.
16.3 The meeting closed at twenty five minutes to midnight (23:35).