MINUTES OF A
MEETING OF BALCOMBE PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON WEDNESDAY 6th JULY 2005
AT 8.00 PM IN THE URC CHURCH, BRAMBLE HILL, BALCOMBE.
Present: Messrs Graham Gosney, Roland Burke, David
Miners, George Wiginton, & Mesdames Sue Tibbott & Alison Stevenson.
19 members of the public attended. The Chairman opened the floor to named
speakers, prior to commencement of consideration of the agenda item 1533
below.
Mr Norman Hawkins, a resident of the Haywards
Heath Road, firstly addressed the meeting and requested that the following
letter dated June 5th (sic), signed by him, be minuted. This read as follows:
“I
write with respect to potential future housing development in Balcombe and in
particular to a potential site known to all as Glebe Farm and initially
referred to as BA02.
I am
bitterly disappointed with the performance of BPC, in not making a better
effort to bring this potential development to the attention of Balcombe
residents at an early stage.
I
quote from your meeting held on 10/01/05: “BPC would subsequently ensure that
the sites proposed by BPC were subject to village wide consultation. At this stage you were referring to six
sites in Balcombe. Nothing happened.
I
further quote from your submitted report on the six sites to MSDC on
11/02/05:”Additionally I would mention that such opinions will consequently be
tested by village wide consultation that we are planning at an early
opportunity”. Nothing happened.
In
your comments to MSDC regarding the Glebe Farm site, the MSDC proposal of ten
houses could be made much larger, and that this site be ‘progressed’. In the case of expansion of the site and for
access to even minimal development of this site, you have suggested the use of
privately owned land, without even the courtesy of informing all the
landowners.
You
should surely make amends to the residents of Balcombe, by reviewing this
entire situation, in conjunction with the previously promised public
consultation.”
Mr Jim Cooke mentioned that Balcombe was a
village within the High Weald AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) &
that expansion of the village, “almost yearly”, is to its detriment. So it goes on. & if this “steady
expansion” continues there will be no village left.
Mr Ted Laker mentioned that he was the owner
of the “disused nursery” referred to in the MSDC report relating to the Glebe
Farm site. There would be no “steam
rolling” over either him or his neighbours & he indicated that the Parish
Council should “take care”. He
requested that Gary Marsh, the District Councillor for Balcombe, should convey
this message to MSDC.
Mr Gordon Bryant, a resident of Glebe View, spoke for the first
time. He would strongly oppose any
development at Glebe Farm, particularly if there were to be any involvement of
Glebe View in the proposals.
The Chairman drew his attention to the fact that more than the allotted
time for normal public participation was being allowed & that already 30
minutes of meeting time had been given.
Mrs Sue Emery reminded the meeting that there
was a great shortage of social housing in the village. Balcombe was an active village & young
people were unable to afford a property.
If new affordable houses were to be built they had to be put somewhere.
At this stage the Chairman called the meeting
to order as it was becoming increasingly difficult for the public observations
to be accurately recorded by the Clerk in view of cross talking &
increasingly angry outbursts from the public area.
Mr Gordon Bryant spoke for the second time
& asked the Chairman whether the Council “was “listening” to the concerns
being expressed. In reply the Chairman
explained the background relating to the matter & emphasised that in our
view MSDC had not treated the matter correctly. We had received very limited information about their intentions
& we had written to say so.
In a strong manner Mrs Pat Backley accused
the Council of only reacting to the concerns of residents by publishing a
circular on the LDF matter after the concerns expressed at the meeting on 14th
June.
A lady, Jackie, (surname not recorded in view
of the increasing level of noise) claimed not to have received this circular
& asked when the advised public consultation would take place.
Mrs Moore-Williams spoke & expressed her
strong views on the subject of the proposed Glebe Farm development proposal of
MSDC.
Mrs Margaret Laker, confirming the earlier
views of her husband, expressed strong concern about the lack of representation
on the matter from the Parish Council.
Over an increasing noise level the Chairman again emphasised that the
Parish Council was listening to the concerns expressed & that all concerns
etc. should continue to be addressed to MSDC about their proposed scheme.
No declarations made.
Mesdames Gunning &
Illsley, Messrs. Marsh, Williamson & Greenwood.
1545 To
discuss further matters relating to MSDC’s Mid Sussex Local Development
Framework
The Councillors discussed a suggested modus operandi for how far we would take our discussions on the subject at the July meeting. We would need to formulate a detailed reply to the earlier MSDC Consultation.
It was suggested we communicate our general policy & limit detailed comment on the other sites for another occasion, dealing with key points only at present.
One member mentioned that the proposals for the Balcombe site now put forward by MSDC differed from the initial comments from BPC when the site had originally been suggested. Another member opined that we may not fully understand the strength of local feeling & asked when a village consultation would be likely. Finally it was agreed that at the July meeting we would proceed with finalisation for the consultation & also take a clear decision as to whether our strong representation to MSDC about the inadequacy of their handling of the matter should be solely devoted to Glebe Farm or include comment on the other sites.
For representation by 8th July 2005
a). BA/05/01185/FUL – Brookthorpe,
Victoria Road – Window & Conservatory to side. Very pleasing. No
objection.
b). BA/05/010693/FUL – Little
Orchards, Haywards Heath Road – New Highway access Drive on to HH Road. Agreed unfortunate that a degree of
character will be lost from Little Orchards by the creation of the widened
driveway, in particular in respect of the loss of old hedging & a small
picket gate. On the positive side it
was agreed that the proposal would improve the safety of vehicular access to
both properties along a fast section of road.
c). BA/05/00878/FUL – 34 Newlands – Replace existing pre-fabricated garage. Some concern expressed. The garage is si5ted at the very rear of the back garden of the property & accessed over a verge to the rear of the property, via Jobes. The proposal increases the size of the garage & also doubles the width access over the verge. It was considered that the views of the Jobes resident should be sought as many could be affected. Unfortunately the map forming part of the application was rather misleading as since publication many more houses have been built in Jobes.
d). To consider any additional applications received prior to the meeting.
For representation by 22ndh July 2005
BA/05/01332/FUL – Forge Cottage, HH Road. Conversion to a 3 bedroom dwelling + first floor study. Delegated to the Environment Planning Group for consideration & comment at the next regular meeting on 19th July.
There being no further business the meeting
closed at 20.20 hours.
Signed…………………………………………..
Date……………………………………………..
RG/HS