South Luffenham Parish Council

Meeting on 23 September 2015 at the Village Hall, South Luffenhamcommencing at 7.00 pm

Agenda

1. Parish Forum 7.00 – 7.15 pm : Robby English and Thomas Ellis to attend and report on the Jubilee Wood project.

2. Attendance

3. Apologies

4. Minutes of the Last Meeting on 8 July 2015

5. Matters Arising :-

a) Application of 20mph Speed Limits CMW(verbal report)

b) LRALC Code for Smaller Authorities CMW/ PB

i) Revised Model Financial Regulations & Standing Orders (previously circulated)

ii) Development of Website(verbal report)

iii) Grant Application for new Computer System & Website(verbal report & paper marked ‘A’)

c) Proposed Natural Environment Committee CMW/ SS

i) Proposed Terms of Reference (verbal report & paper marked ‘B’)

ii) Parish Investigation Project : Synopsis(verbal report & paper marked ‘C’)

d) Community Response Plan : Update JC/ JH(verbal report)

6. Standing Items :-

a) Finance & Budget Review PB(verbal report & paper marked ‘D’ below & spreadsheet circulated with Agenda as a separate item)

b) New Planning Applications PB/ CW/JH(link – planning@rutland.gov.uk) CMW

i) Mr A Rigby – tree work at 5 Back Laneii) Mr A Pearce-Smith tree work at The Old Barn, 2 Angle Laneiii) Mr J Hodgkinson – tree work at 2 The Squareiv) Mr N Seymour – tree work at 6 Back Lanev) Mr K Berridge – further extensions to 2 Gatehouse Lanevi) Mrs P Traylen – tree work at Wymans Barn, 4 Angle Lane

Cont’d..........

c) Highways

i) Pinfold Lane Bank CMW(verbal report and Paper marked ‘E’)

:2:

d) Footpaths

i) Pond Close Registered Footpath & Barriers CMW(verbal report & paper marked ‘F’)

e) Trees

i) Professional Survey : Tree Work Completed JH(verbal report on paper to be circulated at the meeting)

ii) Jubilee Wood Project (G1.24 of the survey) JH(verbal report on paper to be circulated at the meeting)

f) Play Area

i) Inspection of Play Equipment PB(verbal report)

g) Pond Close

i) Confirmation of Work Schedule for TCV Days 2015 CC(verbal report & circulation of copies of the schedule)

ii) Volunteer Assistance : Plymouth Brethren Community CMW(verbal report)

iii) Expert Advice : Species Identification with Jeff Davies SS (verbal report)

iv) Repairs to the Pond Close Dam CMW(verbal report)

h) Village Hall /Pavilion Project CMW

i) Reply Received re Submission for Planning Permission (verbal report & paper marked ‘G’))

ii) Letter to Chief Executive re Village Green Registration & Replyfrom and further correspondence with Director of Places (Planning)(verbal report & paper marked ‘H’)

10. Maintenance of Cemetery / Allotments : Dog Fouling CMW/ PB

(verbal report)

11. Assets Register & Storage of Important Documents CMW/PB(verbal report)

12. Attendance at Parish Forum SS/ JH(verbal report)

13. Correspondence Folder

14. Any Other Business

15. Date of Next Meeting & Closure of Meeting PB

News Items

Dates for following Meetings 2015/ 2016 on Wednesdays commencing 7.00 pm 18 November 2015 20 January 2016 23 March 2016 11 May 2016 Annual Parish Meeting / Parish Council Meeting

Neighbourhood Watch Scheme (Co-ordinator Gemma Harries) Item transferred to Parish Meeting and next report :11 May 2016

Line Crossing : the uneven surface was again reported to Network Rail on 13 Jul 15 :

(ref: 150713-000310). Inspection resulted in plans for works to correct the structure at a time when the road can be closed to traffic.

High Sheriff’s Service : on the occasion of the visit by Her Majesty’s Judge, Mr Justice Haddon- Cave to be held at Oakham Church at 10 am on Tuesday 7 October 2015. All Parish Councillors and Clerk to the Parish invited to attend – to be seated by 9.45 am: dress formal.

Barrowden Branch Surgery has lost its Wednesday Doctor’s Clinic – they would welcome expressions of support from patients to get it re-instated.

Rutland Community Agents provide free, confidential information, advice and assistance about local services for people across Rutland, who are in need of support.

Community Agency Office 01572 756851New agent for South Luffenham Elaine Rootham on 07918 941311 or on

Elaine.rootham@longhurst-group.org.uk

______________________

PAPER ‘A’

LRALC Code for Smaller Authorities

Grant Application for New Computer System

BackgroundThe Transparency Code for smaller authorities operating under a turnover of £25,000 per annum was introduced to take effect at the beginning of the financial year 2015/6.

In compliance with the requirements of the Code, the practices and provisions for South Luffenham Parish Council are under revision, which include the introduction of a new village website to facilitate the promulgation of information and the process of adopting digital methods of reporting and accounting in addition to the extensive use of E-mail.

There is government funding to support local councils in this transition and local councils are able to apply for grants for new computer systems to be used specifically for public service. This will aid small councils whose officers have over recent years extended the use of their private computer systems to include parish business.

ActionIn preparation, quotations for a suitable computer system have been gained as follows :-

PC World £565.77 plus VAT £113.15 = £678.92for laptop, printer/ scanner, Microsoft Office, MCafee security, Cloud back-up, set-up and care and support agreements.

ACR Computers £628.36 plus VAT £125.84 = £754.20for laptop, printer/scanner, Microsoft Office, ESET security, labour, set-up and data transfer. (Options include separate purchase of continued support at £55.00 per 3 hours.)

South Luffenham Village Website costs (set up with assistance from Mr D Cutmore) are as follows :-

1) Set Up using WordPress to host the website £42.00 (Mr D Cutmore)

2) Website maintenance £25.00 per annum

3) Uploading initial documents £45.00 (5hrs x £9.00 per hour)

4) Editing the website to end of financial year £108.00 (£2 per month x £9.00 per hour x 6)

Conclusion The above information has enabled us to complete a grant application form for a total of £628.36 plus £125.84 VAT for the purchase of a system from ACR Computers and the above itemised costs (1-4) – please see Transparency Code Fund application form attached separately.

Recommendation It is recommended that the PC members :-

i) give authorisation to submit the grant application form as above;

ii) note the assistance given by Mr D Cutmore in setting up the website.

Carolyn Welch / Pat Bellamy

PAPER ‘B’Proposed Natural Environment Committee of the Parish Council

Proposed Terms of Reference

Main AimsThe main aims of the Committee are :-

to preserve and enhance the natural environment of the village and parish of South Luffenham for the future;

to discover and record the heritage and current natural environment of the parish which would encompass the geology, landscape and wildlife;

to liaise with the Heritage Warden (Mrs Deborah Frearson) on the archaeological, social and industrial heritage of the parish and the Leicestershire and Rutland County Wildlife Trust and Heritage Officer.

Structure This body shall be a formal Committee of the Parish Council subject to the Code of Conduct adopted in 2014 and the Standing Orders revised and adopted in 2015.

The members shall appoint a Chairman of the Committee at the beginning of each financial year to coincide with appointments in the main Parish Council.

MembershipThe membership of the Natural Environment Committee shall include :-

3 / 4 members of the Parish Council with voting rights in the Committee and the main meetings of the Council; and

co-opted volunteer members from the parish who can vote in the Committee; members of the Parish Council serving as members of the Committee shall include the

appointed Tree Warden; the appointed Heritage Warden shall be invited to become a member and adviser to

the Committee.

MeetingsThe Committee shall hold at least two formal meetings per year, one to take place before the Annual Parish Meeting and Parish Council meeting in May in order to produce an annual report (see below).

The Chairman shall arrange other meetings as required.

ReportingThe Chairman shall report verbally or in writing to the Parish Council meetings as appropriate and prepare a written report of the year’s activity to be included with the formal report of the Parish Council Chairman to the Annual Parish Meeting.

Proposed projects should be reported to the Parish Council and receive agreement prior to going ahead.

FundingAn amount shall be set aside annually in a specific budget for the use of the Committee. Proposed outlay should be checked first with the Clerk to the Parish, who is also the Responsible Financial Officer. Expenditure should never exceed the budget.

For more major projects, funding should be obtained by applications for grant to relevant bodies, such as Trusts and Societies or by village fund raising.

:2:

Other ResourceThe Committee shall gain expert advice and guidance whenever possible and appropriate and, in particular, maintain contact with the Leicestershire & Rutland Wildlife Trust and Heritage Officer and the Rutland Natural History Society.

Green Assets Currently, the main areas which will be subject to the Committee’s attention are the Village Green, Parish Field, Pond Close, Recreation Ground, Jubilee Wood and Fosse river.

Scope of ActivityTo fulfil the above aim, the members of the Natural Environment Committee will be involved in the following :-

surveying and making a full record of the geology, landscape and wildlife of South Luffenham parish, creating a focal point and resource of local knowledge and activity;

reviewing the green assets and environment of the parish in order to identify measures for preservation and enhancement;

undertaking appropriate research to support project proposals; gaining external expert advice regarding geology and the flora and fauna of the

area; liaising with bodies which hold responsibility for important features such as the Welland

Rivers Trust for the Fosse river; forming plans to make appropriate improvements to the natural environment of the

village; securing funds for works by village fund raising or by making applications for grants to

bodies, such as the Cory Environmental Trust and the Woodland Trust; publishing information about the Committee’s work and concerns in the Village

newsletter and on the website; recruiting further volunteer help from the village by personal approach and through the

newsletter and website; prior to any practical work, conducting basic risk assessments and incorporating

appropriate and reasonable measures for health and safety; organising and carrying out the project work; reporting to the Parish Council and Annual Parish Meetings as above.

Carolyn Welch

__________________

PAPER ‘C’Proposed Natural Environment Committee of the Parish Council

Parish Investigation Project : Synopsis of the Community Heritage Initiative Information Pack

Aims: to discover and record local heritage;

to preserve areas of special interest for the enjoyment of others eg Pond Close;

to put together a record of stories and memories about our village, together with photographs/ paintings;

to conserve important local issues for the future generations to look back on;

** The project can develop over time and grants may be available to fund materials / training workshops.

The project can begin on a small scale by studying just one aspect of our heritage and then encompass other areas. If there is interest from residents in two or three different fields then sub-groups can be set up to investigate particular aspects of the initiative which can then be brought together as a whole.

Note: The findings of the initiative could be displayed at certain times in a small area of the Church or village Hall.

There are 6 general areas within the Initiative, any of which could be a starting point

Natural Heritage - local distinctive landscape features (Pond close - wildlife etc)

Geological Heritage - distinctive features shaped by previous ages (rocks, fossils, local building materials, walls, hills etc.)

Archaeological Heritage - field systems, lost village sites, burial mounds, crop marks.

Industrial Heritage - quarries, pits, mills, chimneys, trails, railway lines

Built Heritage - monuments, barns, pumps, wells, signposts, village greens, walks, pub signs.

Customs and Traditions - historical and cultural associations with the area such as stories, poems, traditions, events, famous people. Stories of how people lived and worked, such as place names, field names etc.

Natural Heritage would seem to be a good starting point with identification of species of flora and fauna and wildlife in Pond Close with photographic and written evidence. We could prepare a scrap book and/or paintings/sketches of the area to show the development and changes through the seasons.

OR

Built/Industrial Heritage – might be considered in liaison with Heritage Warden Mrs D Frearson. Subjects could include the following :-

Old Mill, the Windmill, old Railway line, station barns. Photographs past and present of the Old Mill? When it was a pub / private house.Photographic collage of what can still be seen down the old railway line?Converted barns - what was originally housed in them? The old cattle yard just beyond the station before and since the alterations.Old house names could be investigated and changes of use of properties eg. Pubs; The Old Schoolhouse, Pubs,

:2:

Any of the areas of study can be recorder by photos, written word, video, painting, embroidery, collage, map making. We could eventually have a page on our village website!

This venture could ultimately lead to becoming involved in safeguarding our local heritage by:

the production of a whole South Luffenham Parish Record establishment of a Community Wildlife/Countryside Project establishment of a Village Trail (we may already have one of these?) setting up a community museum.

There are several avenues open for information, advice and guidance for natural environment projects including the Leicestershire and Rutland Wildlife Trust and the Heritage Officer and the Rutland Natural History Society.

NB The Community Heritage Initiative funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund has now ceased.

Sue Sewell

PAPER ‘D’

Finance & Budget Review

Budget Review Spreadsheet circulated with Agenda as separate Item

Retrospective Approval of Payments

Date Cheque Nos 100...

Payee Item Amount (£)

Budget Head

06/07/15 906 Clerk’s salary Jul/Aug/Sep 375.00 Clerk907 Cheque destroyed

14/07/15 908 M. Seymour Tree work 150.00 Trees14/07/15 909 RCC Bollard 249.66 Contingency20/07/15 910 Grant Thornton Audit fee 120.00 Audit24/07/15 911 Litter Picker Jul/Aug/Sep 60.00 Litter Picker24/07/15 912 Cemetery Keeper Jul/Aug/Sep 275.00 Cemetery Keeper24/07/15 913 RCC Fee - Planning

Application1,347.50 Contingency

09/08/15 914 Cory Environmental Mowing – 10/06-07/07/15

493.20 Mowing

28/08/15 915 C. Welch 2 x 70ltr barkchippings

11.98 Trees

07/09/15 916 M. Waik Allotments - strimming

10.00 Mowing

08/09/15 917 Cory Environmental Mowing – 22/07-19/08/15

529.20 Mowing

Monies In

Date Amount (£)

Received from Item

10/07/15 61.00 Mr Morris Flat Stone13/07/15 80.00 Dorman Headstone27/07/15 1,347.50 Village Hall Trustees Reimbursement of fee - Planning Application

PAPER ‘E’

Pinfold Lane Bank :

Reply Received from RCC Director of Places D Brown

Below is an extract of a reply to the E-mail received from D Brown on 10 Sep 15 :-.

“Thank you, Dave, for the information below. So, this means that, with the bank having been surveyed by RCC and found to be ‘secure’, the remaining difficulty with this stretch of Pinfold Lane (ie the trees etc) has to be resolved by the affected residents in the area, through this government agency. It is up to them to complain and seek a solution. I can now report on that to the forthcoming Parish Council meeting to see if they consider the way forward is to write to the residents passing on the information. Could I mention, while we are on the subject of Pinfold Lane, that the hedges at the top are overgrowing to the highway. I think that these are the responsibility of the residents, Mr and Mrs J. Collins at 9 Stamford Road and Mr D Lindsell, Ratcliffe Lodge, Stamford Road. Am I right in thinking that RCC has a routine procedure to write to residents to ask them to cut back overgrowth from the highways? If so, we would be grateful for you to do so.

Best regards, Carolyn”

____________“Carolyn,

I apologise that this has taken so long. The advice from our solicitors is as follow:

I understand the trees are not impacting on the Highway so there is nothing we can do as Highway Authority.

There is a Government Scheme that deals with disputes over “High Hedges” which includes two or more trees forming a hedge which must be over 2 meters in height. Please find the link to the Government Advice sheet on the procedure to be followed.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9411/highhedgescomplaining.pdf

There are a number of steps the residents have to take before they can apply to the Council (Having Paid a fee) to determine whether the trees have an adverse effect on Neighbours property and, if so, the Council can issue a notice requiring the owner of the trees to carry out works to reduce the impact on neighbours.

Regards,Dave

Dave Brown | Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport)Rutland County CouncilCatmose, Oakham, Rutland LE15 6HP”

PAPER ‘F’Pond Close Registered Footpath & Barriers

BackgroundAt the meeting on 8 Jul 15, the item (7di) concerning the removal of the barriers and the installation of a bollard at The Square end of Church Lane was dismissed as finalised.

Cllr Cockburn raised the issue of (likewise) removing the existing barriers to the footpath through Pond Close and it was decided that the matter should be researched and a report on the feasibility of doing so and whether a community consultation was necessary should be brought to this meeting on 23 Sep 15.

Action Since this registered footpath (E280) falls within the responsibility of Rutland County Council, contact was again made with Stuart Crook, Rights of Way Officer, who found on inspection that the barriers were not in compliance with current regulations for access (ie 1200 mm in all directions).

Copy of E-mail sent to Stuart Crook 23 Jul 15 :-

“Good morning, Stuart, Thank you very much for your continuing consideration of this issue. The barriers do pose problems of navigation (in varying degrees) for people who are disabled and using walking frames, wheel chairs or motorised chairs. As it is a registered footpath, I think I am right in saying that Rutland County Council is responsible for maintenance and some better arrangement would also allow for the use of the street cleaning machinery as in Church Lane - whereas in recent years volunteers taking part in the maintenance of the actual conservation area have had to spend al lot of time cleaning and clearing the surface of this well-used path, which is obviously missed by the County contractors. I am concerned that Church Lane is still not receiving sufficient attention with the use of the machinery to clear the growth of moss and weeds – could you point me in the right direction to report this, please. In contrast to Church Lane, however, the Pond Close barriers are essential to ensure safety of pedestrians as the footpath opens out onto two through roads. Looking forward to hearing your conclusions, Best regards, Carolyn”

The following is an extract from E-mail dated 27 Jul 15 received in reply :-

“Broadly speaking the County Council, as Highway Authority, is automatically responsible for maintaining all public rights of way that existed prior to 1959. However structures, such as stiles, are usually owned / maintained by the relevant landowner (being for their benefit) and are rarely the responsibility of the Highway Authority.

Adjustment of the barriers can be added to our forward programme but is not considered a priority. Essentially what this means is that we are unlikely to undertake the work until we’re approaching the end of the financial year (subject to there being enough funds left in the budget).Regards, Stuart Crook”

The officer was prepared to consider removal to facilitate better access for people using disability vehicles and equipment and for street cleaning machinery..

However, the footpath opens at either end onto two through routes, one of which can be busy with traffic, and there is a case for installing new barriers with the correct access distances to promote safety - especially of children.

Cont’d.....

:2:

Despite the fact that the Parish Council would retain responsibility for the barriers and the cost of removing and/or replacing them, in response to the issues reported to him, Mr Crook put forward the offer that :-

the cost of removal and installation (approx £250 per set of barriers) could be borne by Rutland County Council if a low priority was accepted in the schedule of works for 2015/6;

a choice could be made between the two designs shown on the schematic drawing –please see separately attached document.

ConclusionIn view of the above offer of assistance from Rutland County Council, removal of the existing barriers and replacement with new in compliance with current regulations would be feasible with no outlay from the parish funds, if the low priority was accepted.

It is suggested that this would entail no substantial alteration in the village environment, and therefore no community consultation would be necessary.

RecommendationIt is recommended that the Parish Council members consider and make a decision on the following points :-

a) whether or not to change the existing arrangement in the light of the above information;

b) the necessity to remove / replace the lower barrier, which offers a wider space for access, but which is in need of maintenance and repair;

c) the necessity to replace the barrier/s for safety reasons;

d) which design is preferred; please see schematic drawing attached as a separate document;

e) acceptance of the County Council’s offer to complete the works on a low priority in the schedule for 2015/6 with no outlay from the parish funds;

f) whether or not a community consultation would be appropriate.

Carolyn Welch

PAPER ‘G’Village Hall / Pavilion Project

Reply Received re Submission for Planning Permission

PAPER ‘H’Village Hall /Pavilion Project

Letter to Chief Executive re Village Green Registration4 Barrowden Lane,South LuffenhamRutland LE15 8NH

Ms Helen BriggsChief ExecutiveRutland County CouncilCatmoseOakhamRutland LE15 6HP

30 July 2015Dear Ms Briggs,

Re : South Luffenham Pavilion/ Hall Project

I refer to the above project to build a new sports and community centre to replace the existing village hall in South Luffenham and draw your attention to the attached summary which provides further information.

After some four years of completing all the necessary background work, including full community consultations, we have reached the point of applying to Rutland County Council for planning permission.

The proposed site for the new building is the Recreation Ground, which is owned by the Parish Council on behalf of the village, being the subject of an Inclosure Award 1882 in ‘compensation’ for the loss of Luffenham Heath Common, which is now the golf course. Our recent application to the Land Registry to register ownership of all the land, Recreation Ground and adjacent fields which were once allotments, has been successfully completed.

On advice, a full application to the Planning Inspectorate was made to gain consent to works on common land. However, the PI decision was that the application could not be ‘entertained’ under Section 38 of the Commons Act 2006 because the Recreation Ground was later registered as village green VG 24 in a Commons Registration 1973 and this supersedes its commons derivation.

Under legislation which applies to land classified as a village green, our case can be argued on the basis that the proposed building does not constitute an offence - it does not ‘injure’ the Ground and can only lead to its ‘better enjoyment’. It includes provision for indoor and outdoor recreational activities in line with its designation and supports a greater usage of the facility than has been the case for some years. It does seem that many Recreation Grounds have pavilions built on them - we have a small, very old and derelict one on ours.

As we submit the design plans for permission to build, the matter of achieving any recognised ‘dispensation’ in respect of the village green registration remains unresolved. RCC officers have stated that this has to be dealt with as a separate issue to the planning process. Could I therefore ask for the County Council’s considered position regarding the legality of the proposed building works.

Yours sincerely,Carolyn WelchChairmanSouth Luffenham Parish Council(acting as adviser to the VH Trustees for the purposes of the project)

Ref:cmwLetterHBriggsreVGlegislation280715.doc

PAPER’H’ (Cont’d)

Reply from RCC Director for Places D Brown to above letter to RCC Chief Executive Helen Briggs

PAPER’H’ (Cont’d)

Further E-mail Correspondence with RCC Director for Places D Brown

“Carolyn,

[.....................................................................]

Regarding damage to the village green, I personally think it is very unlikely that the Council would take the view that the proposal damages the green, however this would be a decision for Members should a complaint be made.

Regards,

Dave

Dave Brown | Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport)Rutland County CouncilCatmose, Oakham, Rutland LE15 6HPt: 01572 758461 | f: 01572 772395e: dbrown@rutland.gov.ukwww.rutland.gov.uk”

____________________

On 10 Sep 2015, at 12:44, Mike Welch <poco.chips@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

“Thank you, Dave, for the information below. Thank you also for your reply to my letter regarding the Recreation Ground, in which I was not sufficiently clear in my request. I have pondered over this for a few days since the point is fine. Of course, I am aware that RCC could not and would not give a legal dispensation for the building and we are all aware, I think, of the law which applies to village greens. So I was not asking for that type of legal advice. My point is that RCC would have a view of what is proposed vis a vis the exercise of its authority as official custodian of the land designated as village greens. It would be helpful to know what that is ie. on the two major issues - does the proposed building ‘injure’ the Recreation Ground in your view and is it counterproductive to ‘better enjoyment’ of a Ground designated for recreational activity in your view? However, I think it may be best to see what comes of our planning application and take it from there. In all, thanks as always for your assistance, Best regards, Carolyn Copied to Ward Councillor, Clerk and Vice Chairman for information”

_______________________________________________