Langham Parish Council
Minutes of the Meeting held on 4th October 2017
1 Attendance
Cllr. E. Schofield Chairman
Cllr. B. Durlacher
Cllr. A. Ellis
Cllr. A. Stacey
Cllr. M. Bottwood
Cllr. F. Hobbs
Cllr. P. Dawson
Borough Councillor N. Chapman
Also present were Councillors Valerie Banwell and Cheryl Damon from Boxted Parish Council, Mick Barlow, Chris Graves and Bob Schofield, Langham Residents, and David Winter, Clerk to the Council.
2 Apologies for Absence
There were no absences.
3 Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest at this point. Any applicable declarations of interest would be made before the appropriate item.
4 Minutes of the Meeting held on 6th September 2017
Cllr Stacey proposed and Cllr. Dawson seconded the motion that these were an accurate record of the meeting. This was accepted unanimously and Cllr Schofield signed them.
5 Matters Arising from the Minutes
6.2 of 05/10/16 / At the Pond Corner junction the clerk will check the planning permission to see if it is obvious whether or not the holly bushes should be cleared from the footway. / Cllr. Stacey / Councillor Stacey will see if the Public Rights of Way department of ECC can comment on this.6 Residents Questions
6.1 Memorial Bench
John Smith has about £400 to put towards a memorial bench for his late daughter-in-law. Estimates received have been much higher than this. Further estimates are awaited. The Clerk will tell John Smith. Action: David Winter
6.2 Perry Lane Dog Fouling
Following a complaint from a Perry Lane resident about dog fouling, an article had been inserted in the Newsletter. Another resident of Perry Lane had commented that Perry Lane was one of the least affected roads in Langham.
6.3 Hornestreet Field
The Chairman declared an interest in Hornestreet Field and was not able to comment on this item. John Helliwell had responded to Cllr. Bottwood with a list of facts without referring to either previous correspondence or the issues of drainage which were affecting The Oaks and which could end up as the Council’s responsibility. Cllr. Bottwood will circulate a draft communication. Action: Cllr. Bottwood
7 Reports to the Council
7.1 PLANNING
INITIAL COMMENT
Cllr Ellis had had seen comments in the Gazette suggesting that the Government had requested an extra 125 dwellings to be built in Colchester every year throughout the next planning period. Cllr Chapman confirmed this was true.
DECISIONS
171934: Nightingale Farm - Garden Studio Extension. APPROVE CONDITIONAL
APPLICATIONS AND PARISH COUNCIL RESPONSES
LANGHAM PC RESPONSE TO OAK VIEW APPLICATION 172118
As a preamble, we presume that this application will be considered on the basis of the current adopted Local Plan, without reference to the draft emerging Local Plan 2017-2033.
The Parish Council registers its strong objection to this application, both as a Council and as owners of the neighbouring Recreation Ground, for the following reasons:
1. In their representation to Colchester Borough Council (CBC) at the Issues and Options stage of the draft Local Plan, the Environment Agency (EA) states that “development must not occur until it has been demonstrated that there is adequate waste water treatment and sewerage infrastructure capacity in the catchment”. This is supported by their objection to application no. 170997, which has received conditional approval, for the construction of 36 dwellings at Boxted, waste water for which would be treated at Langham WRP. This conditional approval prevents development from occurring prior to a detailed waste water strategy relevant to Anglian Water being submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. Also, according to the AECOM Water Cycle Study commissioned by CBC (December 2016) the *WRP at Langham is currently working at 47% over its maximum capacity, which is equivalent to 133 dwellings. It also states "however housing trajectory information provided by Colchester Borough Council to inform this WCS indicates that no growth is planned within the *WRC catchment until 2022". The addition of 36 dwellings at Boxted would increase the above figure to 169 dwellings. The addition of three dwellings in Langham and a further 80 dwellings from the current CBC allocation in the draft Local Plan increases this figure to 269, a figure which would simply overwhelm the current treatment facilities. In support EA cites paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) CBC Policy ENV1 from the Core Strategy adopted version 2009. It should be noted that EA is a national regulatory body, whereas Anglian Water is a local commercial organisation.
2. Local knowledge asserts that the proposed development would exacerbate the band of flooding which occurs after heavy rain from the west of the Recreation Ground, crossing the proposed building site to the junction with Moor Road. School Road also suffers regular surface water flooding. In the last two years properties in Moor Road have also suffered serious water and sewage ingress as a result of heavy rain. These events all demonstrate the inadequacies of the current surface water drainage systems.
3. For the above and other reasons, this application is considered to be both premature and opportunistic.
4. Among the recommendations of the Langham Village Design Statement (VDS), adopted by CBC and therefore a material consideration, it states that “new housing development should be sympathetic in scale, design and materials to surrounding buildings” also that “any new development should make provision for sufficient off-street parking”. Also, as the neighbouring properties are listed this is a particularly relevant consideration.
5. The growth of Langham has occurred through ribbon development, without back-fill.
The photograph in Planning Statement 5.7 claiming to show evidence of dwellings behind the building line actually shows a) two poly-tunnels, a barn and a stable, b) a house in Moor Road which is slightly behind the building line which was built many years ago to replace an earlier building on that site, c) Whitehouse Close in High Street which contains sheltered bungalows for the over 55s. There is no Settlement Boundary in that part of the village and the development was approved by all the authorities. Thus the photograph shows no evidence of residential back-fill. If the draft Local Plan 2017-2033 is approved and development takes place there will be estate development in School Road to the east of the clear boundary formed by the Recreation Ground.
6. This application which seeks back-fill to the west of the Recreation Ground would, if approved, set a dangerous precedent, leading to the proliferation of applications for the demolition and re-development of many other properties in School Road, Moor Road and other parts of the village, especially those with a large curtilage. The attached aerial photographs from Google Earth and from the late 1950’s show no evidence of back-fill and the growth of the village through ribbon development.
7. Two historic Listed Buildings, thatched 15th-16th century properties, are located immediately to the west of the proposed development and the proximity of the proposed dwellings would have a very negative impact on them and on the character of the immediate area, affecting the visual amenity of “Bakers” in particular. (These Listed Buildings are located to the west of the proposed development, not the east as stated in 2.1 of the Planning Statement.)
8. Planning Statement 5.6 omits to mention that the neighbouring plots all contain single dwellings whereas the present applications proposes two dwellings on the same plot width. As also mentioned above, this would be out of character with the existing street scene and would lead to the view that new dwellings have been inserted into a plot with too small a frontage.
9. The bungalow described in Planning Statement 5.6 is described as “sprawling” and “non-conforming”. It is a fully modernised and immaculate high-quality bungalow, and in character with other quality properties and bungalows in School Road, Moor Road and other parts of the village. Its height adds to the existing street scene and the visual amenity of the area. It is also part of the ever decreasing housing stock of single storey properties which can be available for down-sizing for residents from the numerous large modern detached dwellings already in the village.
10. Planning Statement 5.10 argues that the site is “capable of accommodating three dwellings along with at least two parking spaces”. We consider that this may not comply with current regulations for off-site parking and this would lead to parking on a narrow and at times extremely congested road, which at this point is barely wide enough for cars passing in each direction. Any Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV’s) or larger vehicles would have to move to the footway.
11. CBC planning authority will be aware of the numerous representations in the draft Local Plan made by the Highways Agency, the Parish Council, residents and others concerning the inadequacy of School Road in coping with current traffic levels. It contains three schools, an industrial site, a retail community shop, community centre and recreation ground, in addition to the various dwellings located the length of the road. Congestion from parking at school pick-up and drop-off times, movements by Heavy Goods Vehicles to and from the industrial site and parking on the road night and day, all make the capacity of School Road virtually unsustainable.
12. In terms of design the proposed dwellings are very close to the highway when compared to other modern properties in the vicinity.
13. Part of the plot’s curtilagecontains a piece of woodland to the rear of this proposed development, in the ownership of the applicants, which, according to the Land Registry, represents approximately 60% of the land in their ownership. No information is given as to how this woodland will be accessed or as to its future use.
14. We would question as to why this application has recently been submitted and was not put forward as a potential site in the draft Local Plan, which currently has an allocation of 80 dwellings for Langham.
*NB Please note that we assume WRC and WRP to be one and the same facility.
7.2 ROADS AND TRANSPORT
· The request to the Local Highways Panel for chevrons at Runkins Corner has been supported by Boxted Parish Council meeting. However, it can take 2 years to get Highways work done. Cllr. Anne Brown may be able to speed this up, especially as recently she was first on the scene following an accident. Robin Gooding has complained about fly tipping in this area. This should be harder to do with the chevrons there.
· The Dedham exchange should now be wired for Broadband. The Ardleigh exchange is already. The council were unanimously happy to go into press about this.
· Lee Clarke the caretaker at the Oaks is worried about the possibility of flooding here. There has been no jetting done yet and Cllr. Bottwood will contact Cllr. Browne about this.
7.3 RECREATION GROUND
Cllr Durlacher reported
· The preparation for bonfire night was well under way apart from the problem with St John Ambulance not being able to attend.
· Two new marquees have been purchased and have arrived.
· The playing field has won an award to be presented on 19th October. Contact Cllr. Durlacher to arrange transport to go there.
7.4 HOUSING
· There is a problem in Whitehouse Close regarding service charges. Cllr Hobbs will draft a letter to Genesis Housing to go from the Council.
· There was a vacancy in one of Colne Valley’s homes at Spencer’s Piece. Cllr Hobbs helped the new tenant to use their local connection in their housing application to ensure their very close ties to the village were known about.
· Cllr Hobbs had helped a couple in private rented accommodation who had been given six months’ notice to quit.
=policy)
7.5 COMMUNITY COUNCIL
· There is a trustee meeting on 5th October, but reports indicated satisfactory progress.
7.6 FOOTPATHS
· An appeal against the proposed footpath near Mr. Ravest’s garden has been submitted for Tuesday 17th April 2018.
· Cllr Durlacher is to check with Anne Tolhurst whether her family owns the island against which Stratford Lock is situated. Action: Cllr. Durlacher
7.7 GENERAL PURPOSES
· Cllr Dawson has asked the Zone 4 wardens if they are allowed to remove rubbish from the Airfield entrance. He will ask if they can remove a fridge from a field entrance along Park Lane next to Cllr. Bottwood’s house.
· Cllrs Dawson and Hobbs have been trying to promote the Parish Council and the Annual Meeting within the village. They have come across the Langham Locals website, and with the unanimous approval of the Council, they have agreed to use this site as a means of conveying local information.
7.8 BOROUGH COUNCILLOR
· Cllr Chapman has met the new owner of the office block at Lodge Lane (Josh Warren) with the North East Essex Parking Partnership to see if any ideas for clearing the parking under the A12 could be suggested. It was unfortunately not a productive meeting and they have agreed to leave the parking situation as it is for now. He felt the new owner would appreciate meeting someone from the Council, and Cllr Bottwood will do this.