Ropley Parish Council
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ROPLEY PARISH COUNCIL Tuesday 3rd April 2018 at 7.30pm in Ropley Parish Hall MINUTES Those in attendance: Cllr G. Brown (GB) Chair, Derrick Speed (SP) Vice Chair & Jenny Nops, Mrs J. Nops (JN), T. Day (TD), District, Cllr C. Louisson (CL), G. Stogdon (GS), D. Fielden (DF) & Becky French (BF) Clerk to the Parish Council. 1 Apologies for absence J Culverwell (JC), S. Perkins (SP) and J. Parsonson (JP) 2 Declaration of Interest in respect of matters to be discussed. The Chairman declared an interest in item 9, new planning applications: 25454/009 at Hall Place Cottage. 3 Minutes of the Ordinary Parish Council meeting held on 6th March 2018 - to approve the minutes as a true record. It was unanimously resolved that the Minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 6th March 2018 be accepted as an accurate record & were duly signed by the Chair. 4 Matters arising from the minutes - Radian’s plan for sewage treatment replacement at Dunsell’s Close. The Clerk contacted Radian and they confirmed the intended works, currently at the consultation phase. Once this phase has been completed and plans formulated, a planning application will be submitted to East Hampshire District Council. Radian has agreed to send the Clerk the revised plans (after Easter break) prior to the planning application submission and is available to attend the May parish meeting to answer any further questions. CL confirmed that there had been a meeting between Radian and the adjacent landowner and that they had offered Radian part of the land as a drainage area and to include associated machinery. Radian are looking at reconfiguring the pumping station to move this further down Dunsell’s Close and nearer to house number 1, to remove issues associated with power failure. The plans are still being evaluated. Clerk to include on next agenda. Once plans have been updated, the Parish Council will invite a Radian representative to an ordinary meeting. - Street naming of new development at Hale Close – Update (Clerk) The Clerk confirmed with East Hampshire District Council the decision of the last Parish Council meeting, which was to reject the developer’s proposal to name the new development ‘Orchard Gate’. Instead Councilors felt that a continuation of the existing development 24-29 Hale Close, more reflects the layout of site. East Hampshire District Council have indicated that the developer isn’t keen on a continuation of numbering within Hale Close. The developer looked at various options, but after looking through East Hampshire’s District Council’s Street Naming and Numbering Policy, suggested a new road name, based on the below reasoning. • The new road name was suggested as a development with 5 or more properties can have a new road name (Point 5.2.1). • The road name has a local connection, relating to the former use of the site (Point 5.2.4). • The developer would make sure adequate signage is put up at the development site, but also at the junction of Hale Close and Church Street (Point 6 - Street Nameplates). • Royal Mail have been consulted on this site and are happy for a new road name to be used. If a new road name was used the properties would have a different postcode to the properties on Hale Close, thus this would help with locating the properties in the future. • The Council inform various internal and external contacts including the emergency services and sat. nav. companies of the new addresses. There are now 3 options available for naming the new development. These are; - Orchard Gate - An alternative road name suggested by Ropley Parish Council which might have more relevance to the site / Ropley’s local history? - Provide the six properties with house names instead of numbers and address them on to Hale Close. If this option was taken, then choices of house names would come down to the developer / new home owners. Following a discussion, the council members felt that due to the new development being an extension of the existing close, that the most suitable name would be a Hale Close. Providing the new houses with house names and retaining the Hale Close road name, was considered the preferred option. All in favour. Clerk to update East Hampshire District Council. 5 Public participation in accordance with Standing Orders s3 (d – k) - Is the Parish Council intending to comment on the alternative for the new proposed pipeline route through Ropley? The consultation ends on 14th April 2018. Cl confirmed that there are 3 proposed routes through the village, with the proposal closest to the village being the most concerning. There are exhibitions through the area and there is an event scheduled at Ropley on 11th April in the village hall. Ropley Councillors were asked to attend an event and report back to the Council. If there is a need to make comments then an additional meeting would need to be called in time to meet the consultation deadline of 14th April. Councillors were encouraged to look at the online maps, as these provide good detail. - TD sought permission was requested to hold the Pram Race 2018 in May – all Councillors were in favour. - TD highlighted the need for the pavilion to be repainted and enquired about whether such works were VAT rechargeable due to it being ‘repair works’. Clerk to investigate and report back. 6 Review of Standing Orders, Financial Regulations and Risk Assessment – to summarise items of interest to members and to adopt the documents. - The Clerk has identified a number of additions to the document. Clerk to email suggestions to the working group of JN, JP & SP. 7 Recreation ground - Safety Cricket matches netting – Update (DF) The Consultation period for comments on the proposed safety netting ends on 5th April. There may be a delay in East Hampshire District Council’s decision on planning permission, as it has gone to Sport England to comment. They have 21 days to respond from 27 March when they ‘accept’ the application. If Sport England want further details then the 21 days are suspended until answers have been received, therefore an exact timescale of decision is unclear. Contractors have been asked to look at Mid-May at a potential start date for installation. - The Cricket Club have confirmed that they will act as agents for the Parish Council and will monitor the condition of the safety netting. They have also agreed to take the netting down and erect it every season. The Parish Council will own the netting and will provide the appropriate insurance and any maintenance costs. The Parish Council will need to provide an amendment to their contract to reflect these activities. The Parish Council also needs to write to Cricket Club to ask the Cricket Club to formalise this agreement and to ask them to record the instances of stray cricket balls through this season. - Skate Park Update (SP) Clerk has sent an email to the suggested funding company who sent a reply seeking more detail. Clerk waiting for a reply and will provide an update once received. The young parishioners have confirmed that local parents are looking into forming an action group to secure funds and support with the project. - MUGA lighting (GS) Ed Lane, Chair Ropey Tennis Club sends apologies for the meeting. GS has been asked to present their findings to the tenders for MUGA lighting. Over the course of February and March the MUGA lighting tenders with the three preferred suppliers were re-run. The detailed quotes as well as a comparative table are shown in the spreadsheet circulated before the meeting. Based on various interactions with the suppliers and subsequent discussions and reviews of the quotes, Cllrs Fielden and Stogdon and Edward Lane on behalf of the RLTC recommend that the Parish Council proceed to contracts with Luminance Pro. This is based on the following: 1. Luminance Pro are a known supplier • They are the incumbent provider of the Tennis Club lights and the RLTC has had a very positive post-sales experience with them • They were the most consultative throughout the process 2. Luminance Pro have the highest Functional Specification • The specified lighting has the highest Initial illumination levels in the Principle Playing Area (PPA), and Total Playing area (TPA), whilst for the Maintained Illumination level, they are the best in the PPA and less than 4% worse than the cheapest quote. They also have the best uniformity of light for the PPA. • Lowest column height at 6.7 metres. Columns and lamps will be green. 3. Luminance Pro’s Pricing & Warranty • They are neither the most expensive nor the cheapest with the total cost falling within the funds available and budgeted • Highest level of Warranty (5 years on everything) Notes: 1. Upon request from the cricket club, this specification includes wiring to be laid to cater for an LED scoreboard which the cricket club are intending to install at a later date. As such the requested spend above is not entirely related to the MUGA floodlights. However, the wiring for the scoreboard will provide a power supply to that part of the recreation ground which is an asset and it makes economic sense to carry out this work at the same time as the major wiring exercise for the MUGA lights 2. The recommendation is not to use a coin/token operated meter to control the lights, but rather to use an LTA module which integrates the lights to the online booking system. This removes the need to administer and manage a coin/token-based system and makes the whole process completely automated and electronic.