News: Councillors discuss ballot arrangements and emails
Chilbolton Parish Council are a step closer to bringing options for housing development in the Village forward to a ballot of residents.
They are investigating the engagement of consultants, and hope to meet their target of a vote taking place during the summer.
Once again though, the issue of Councillor contact with developers reared its head.
Village vote on housing options
A report was made by Cllr Neil Connor on progress toward a Village vote on options for housing within Chilbolton. Three consultants had been approached:
Of these, he said that Action Hampshire appeared to have “capability and approach.”
They proposed both postal and online voting by registered voters. They would also add people registered on housing lists who weren’t currently registered voters in Chilbolton.
They estimated a cost of £3,500 plus VAT. Peter Collis, who is Vice Chair and Secretary of CDC, pointed out that the bulk of these costs was postage and printing.
The meeting agreed that a second quote should be secured, if possible, recognising the timescale of running the ballot during the summer. They agreed an interim £4,000 budget.
Cllr David Hall summarised what are now four options, after TVBC pulled their Local Plan, removing the 65-home option:
- 75 homes, as proposed in James Painter’s planning application
- A community-led 20-home development at Gravel Hill
- A community-led 20-home development at Drove Road
- No community-led development at all
He noted that the Drove Road development would be presented as a smaller 20-home development in line with the numbers for Gravel Hill.
A member of the public asked why there wasn’t the option of 10 homes at each of Gravel Hill and Drove Road.
Cllr Hall said this would mean splitting the affordable homes between two sites.
He added that there would be an update in the September Parish Magazine that would clearly explain the options, including why TVBC’s 65-home allocation had been removed.
CPC response to James Painter’s document
Cllr David Hall said that the Parish Council would be writing to Southern Planning Practice about the report on Gravel Hill that they had sent to CPC and TVBC. The letter would appear in Correspondence at the next Parish Council meeting.
When asked whether they would also be publishing the original SPP report, he replied that it was for James Painter to do that. It was not CPC’s job to repeat the report’s flawed assertions.
He would also be putting a summary of the Parish Council’s rebuttal of the SPP report in the September Parish Magazine.
Planning application at Highfield, Drove Road
The meeting discussed an application for a four-bedroom house, with a one-bedroom annexe, described as a “Self-build replacement dwelling and annexe with garage and storage outbuilding, installation of package treatment plant and construction of vehicular access.”
Cllr Sue Larcombe had prepared a draft response. It said “Whilst the current house sits on a good size plot the design is overbearing and intrusive.”
She also pointed out that “This house is quite obviously much larger than the original and has the potential to be increased from a 4 bedroom to a 5 bedroom or even 6 bedroom house. There would also appear to be potential to create a room over the garage.”
On parking, to comply with the policy 5 of Chilbolton’s Neighbourhood Development Plan (CNDP), the driveway and garage would have to be configured for six cars.
The meeting also discussed the proximity of the site to the Observatory, and the potential for an objection from the Science and Technology Facilities Council.
After discussion, Cllr David Hall summarised the meeting’s views on the application:
- Overbearing and intrusive
- It does not comply with CNDP
- Insufficient parking for its size
- It could be extended in future to six bedrooms
- No sight lines for the exit onto Drove Road
- Removal of a considerable amount of hedging
- Brick wall and sliding gates are out of character
- Possible grounds for an Observatory objection
The Parish Council will be objecting to this planning application.
Cyma House appeal granted
Cllr Hall also reported that the Planning Inspector had granted permission on appeal for Cyma House, formerly known as “Land adjacent to Copyhold” and sited opposite Broxton House on Village Street.
The Parish Council had objected to the Cyma House proposal on the basis that it was too large and would not complement or integrate with surrounding buildings in the Conservation Area. TVBC planners agreed with this view, and refused permission.
In his judgement, the Inspector said that he noted TVBC planners’ concerns about the proposed design. He however, thought it was appropriate and would “complement the existing character and appearance of the [Conservation Area]”.
He also felt that with the proposed landscaping, the house would allow the significance of the surrounding buildings “to be further appreciated, therefore preserving the setting of these listed buildings and non-designated heritage assets.”
Notably though, he found no unreasonable behaviour on the part of TVBC in making its objection, and therefore did not award costs to the developer.
Grant request declined by PCC
Cllr David Hall reported that Chilbolton’s Parochial Church Council had declined CPC’s request for a grant to support community-led housing.
A response from Reverend Kevin Rogers had said that they had turned down the request because as currently no preferred development option has emerged, they felt unable to support one particular site.
Emails from Councillors
Cllr Debbie Collis said that, in her role as administrator, she reviewed Councillor emails.
She noted that Cllr Sue Larcombe had had email exchanges with Mr James Painter.
It has been Parish Council practice that Councillors report any contact with developers or their consultants.
Cllr Larcombe said that it had been in connection with the placement of an advertisement for Mr Painter containing the document he had sent out via the Village Webmaster.
The email had been sent to her in her role, that month, at the Parish Magazine. Mr Painter had missed the deadline for the August edition, but the advert would appear in September.
Cllr Collis then asked Cllr Tony Ewer about an email he had sent to Mr Lawrence Chase, one of Mr Painter’s consultants at Southern Planning Practice, titled “Response to housing matrix”.
Cllr Ewer said “I congratulated him on a very good paper”.
Cllr Collis then said “I sent a Councillor briefing on the 15th of July regarding the Local Plan. You sent that to Andrew Kent.”
Cllr Ewer replied, saying “That was a public document.”
Cllr Collis said “No. It was a Councillor briefing, only made public two days later.”
Reinforcing the Council’s established practice, Cllr David Hall said “Could I ask Councillors to disclose details of all emails.”
Later, during questions from the public, a resident asked how she could make a freedom of information request for all “non-registered” email messages from Parish Councillors, to developers and planning applicants.
She said “Is there anything going on behind the scenes?”
Cllr Hall said she should send her request to the Parish Clerk.
Fire risk arrangements
With the recent fire near HBS very much in their minds Councillors discussed CPC’s fire risk arrangements, which they had discussed at their last meeting, including fire beaters and strongly-worded notices.
Cllr Duncan Revolta reported discussions from CPC’s Open Spaces Committee, which he chairs. On the issue of fire beaters, he said that they would probably need to be padlocked to prevent misuse or theft.
Aside from this impracticality, the committee had also asked whether it was appropriate for CPC to ask visitors to the Village’s open spaces to tackle fires on their own.
It was agreed that CPC would get advice from Hampshire and Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service on the use of fire beaters by the public.
More warning signs would be displayed, with strong wording in the current circumstances, around the Village’s open spaces.
Cllr Neil Connor said that thanks should be sent to the firefighters and farm workers who had helped put out the recent blaze.
Neighbourhood Development Plan
The meeting discussed a cap of six people in the membership of the Neighbourhood Development Plan Working Group.
Cllr Martin Watson said that it was introduced into its terms of reference to make meetings manageable during the recent phase of rewriting.
It was agreed that this cap would be reviewed.
Cllr Hall said with only five members at present, he would be putting out a call for additional members from within the Village, with skills or interests in the area of housing.
Cllr Tony Ewer noted that the work of the Neighbourhood Development Plan group involved effort over a longer term, as the plan is put together.
Summary
Despite being an irregular meeting, scheduled during the summer holiday, the meeting was well-attended with 14 members of the public, TVBC and HCC Councillor David Drew, and all Parish Councillors being there.
It was a constructive session with residents able to express their views and provide helpful suggestions. There was however an air of distrust over Councillors communicating inappropriately with those outside the Parish Council.