Minutes of Meeting held Tuesday 9th June 2015

Present: Mark Ellis (chairman), Alan Stokes (vice-chairman), Martin Doughty, Sally Robertson, Pat Eagling, Pat Groves, Dilys Price, Janette Pudsey, Ian Watkins, David Bishop, Roger Davies, Antoinette Powell, Alister Walshe

In attendance: Ward Councillor Pauline Crockett, Hazel Philpotts (parish clerk), Antony Vaughan (Neighbourhood
Development Plan Steering Group chair) approx 18 members of the public
Agenda item Action owner Dead line

1 Apologies for absence: received from David Warren and Bernie Green

2 Declarations of interest: recorded in the book

3 Minutes: minutes of meeting held on 13th May 2015 accepted as an accurate record of the meeting proposed by MD second by JP signed by chair.

4. Public participation session: not taken up

5. Planning:

a) Applications update: circulated and noted.
b) Consider and agree response to Planning application 151316 (Pyfinch meadow): the parish council resolved to submit an objection on the following grounds:
1. The site was considered during Burghill PC’s neighbourhood development plan (NDP) assessments and was scored following HC’s recommended scoring mechanism. On a scale of 1 to 4, 1 being a site most suitable for development and 4 being the least, this site was scored 2.57.
2. A high proportion of comments received during the initial consultation phase of the NDP gave the view that smaller developments with a maximum of 10-12 dwellings would be more suitable and acceptable in a rural location.
3. Burghill’s Parish Plan and its subsequent update in 2010 specified that development at ‘Pyfinch Triangle’ should be protected from development (54% of residents responding to a parish wide questionnaire supported this statement).
4. The PC considers the development of this site would form an unacceptable extension to the village harmful to the rural character of a village situated in open countryside.
5. There is considerable concern regarding the capacity of drains to cope with increased demand. The site is known to become waterlogged in wet weather and drainage problems already exist in the village. The PC considers the ongoing discussions with Welsh Water regarding the SUDS and attenuation pond should be completed before a decision is taken on this site, as the question of adoption and maintenance of the system, and adequate protection of the pond from a safety perspective are of considerable importance locally.
6. Road safety was raised by a high proportion of residents attending the parish council meeting held to discuss the application; the site access will be very close to a particularly hazardous crossroads where a number of accidents, collisions and near misses have occurred (there has been a fatality at this crossroads, milkman was killed).
7. Herefordshire Council Unitary Development Plan currently designates this zone around Burghill as open countryside therefore this type of development, and this location in particular is not in keeping with the rural nature of the village and would have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance.
c) Consider and agree response to planning application 151524 land adjacent to Woodfield Farm, Badnage Lane, Tillington: the parish council resolved to submit an objection on the following grounds:
1. Sustainability: the site is not within walking distance from any local services therefore occupants will be completely reliant on car use. This site is therefore unsustainable.
2. Biodiversity would be an issue as the site is within 100 metres of a productive orchard.
3. Access: Badnage Lane is a very narrow single track lane without passing places other than private drives. Access at either end of the lane is very hazardous with limited visibility, at the Tillington Common end there is actually a blind spot where vehicles approaching from the Wormsley direction are completely obscured.
4. The lane is subject to flooding problems at times of bad weather and heavy rain, particularly in the area where the site entrance is proposed.
5. The drainage statement is vague and has insufficient detail. A private system would be an unsuitable option; at best it should be constructed to standards suitable for adoption to avoid possible future pollution issues. There are local concerns regarding drainage as the site adjoins a main water course that feeds several ponds, one of which the PC believes is used for irrigation by Tillington Fruit Farms.
6. The site is in open countryside with an agricultural history. Redundant agricultural buildings do not fall within the definition of brownfield land in the NPPF. Development of this site would not align with the current Unitary Development Plan.
7. Tillington Common has been identified as an area for protection as countryside.

6 Neighbourhood Development Plan

a) Update from Steering Group (NDPSG) outlined by AV. Persimmon Homes have requested a meeting with the PC/NDPSG to discuss potential development sites in the parish, AV, BG, AS, MD to attend and report back to PC.
b) Steering Group’s report on proposed settlement boundaries for Burghill, Tillington and Lower Burlton:
1. resolved to keep Burghill’s settlement boundary as the exiting (proposed by AS seconded by MD).
2. Resolved to set Lower Burlton settlement boundary as proposed on attached map(proposed by AS seconded by ME).
3. Resolved to request opinion of consultants with regard to a settlement boundary for Tillington before bringing back to the PC for a decision, issues around the BAP site to be highlighted (proposed by IW seconded by AP).

7 Date of next meeting: Wednesday 8th July 2015