MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF CATFIELD PARISH COUNCIL HELD at 7pm ON WEDNESDAY 7th October 2020 via ZOOM.
Attendance: Mr Beckley, Mr Filgate, Mr Harris, Mr Hill, Ms Johnson, Mr Jordan, Mr Read, Mrs Wickens and Dr Bacon in the chair, Mrs Millership and Mrs Grove-Jones (District Councillors), Richard Price (County Councillor), Paul Savage (Broads Society) and four parishioners.
Apologies for Absence: Mrs Walker and Sasha Walton (Mushroom site).
Dr Bacon stated that Mrs Fernee has tendered her resignation from the Parish Council. The clerk will contact NNDC to set in motion the procedures for finding a replacement.
Declaration of Interests: Mr Harris declared an interest in that he is still trying to recover the costs of hedge damage in Fenside from Mr Alston.
Dr Bacon referred to Standing Orders which state that the Parish Council meetings should last no longer than two and a half hours, the last meeting went between three and a half and four hours. The Parish Council needs to do something about this, we need to keep what we have to say brief, not repeat ourselves. The alternative is when two and a half hours is reached the meeting should stop or at least discuss whether or not to stop the meeting at that point. Related to that Mr Beckley sent an email to everyone about the length of the meeting and the minutes. Mr Beckley stated that the email was self-explanatory, Standing Orders do say two and a half hours maximum, we have always achieved that very easily in the past. Mr Beckley quoted two documents regarding minutes from parish council meetings and they both say they should be concise and to the point and he would like to see that. Mr Beckley recognised that others had differing views, it might be worth some debate.
Dr Bacon said that there are all different styles of minute for meetings, everything from almost verbatim record of what was said to a brief summary of decisions made. Dr Bacon recommended before next meeting that councillors could go on the internet and find minutes for one or two other parishes and have a look at how other parishes deal with the issue, then the Parish Council needs to do something about getting minutes that are a lot less then fourteen pages and much more concise forms of minuting.
Public Forum: Mrs Harris (a parishioner) asked if the key to the village hall notice board had been found, various people were going to be asked back in February, it is now six months later and it is still on the agenda which is probably why the meetings take so long. Mrs Harris has a locksmith coming and she suggested that at her expense, to ask him to change the lock, ask for four keys which will be given to the clerk then we do not have to wait another six months for the same question again. Mr Beckley stated that he had spoken to Mrs Gardiner about the issue because she was the one most likely to have the key, she was looking for it and she also said in passing that the notice board was put up to display events for the village hall and it was supposed to have some letters that would slide in, she found Mr Gardiner’s order for those letters but it had not been sent to the manufacturer. Mrs Gardiner said, on behalf of the Village Hall Committee, that they still intended to use that notice board to put village hall functions on it once they had the letters. Mrs Harris asked if it was ever to be used for the minutes, she thought it was to put the minutes up so that parishioners can see more extended minutes which are not in the magazine.
Dr Bacon stated that if the notice board belongs to the village hall committee then it is for the village hall committee to makes decisions about access to it and what goes in it, not for the Parish Council to decide, the Parish Council would need to encourage the Village Hall Management Committee to sort
452 that issue out and the Parish Council can’t overrule them regarding that particular notice board if it is their notice board.
Mr Beckley said that it had been the Parish Council’s intention to use the notice board originally however now someone from VHMC have said they actually do want to use. There are two other notice boards, one at the village hall and one on the corner of New Road. Mr Read gave Mr Beckley the keys for the one at New Road, he put the notice up for this meeting and had a bit of difficulty accessing one side of the board, it needs to slide the inside out to put notices on. Mr Beckley will investigate this. That board could then be used to display the minutes.
Mr Harris stated that his understanding, if he has it right, is that the Parish Council has been looking for the key for six months. Dr Bacon stated that he could not remember but Mrs Harris said it was in the minutes. Mr Harris said his wife had volunteered to solve the problem at their expense by sending the locksmith to put new locks on and the Parish Council can have the keys. Would the Parish Council like Mr and Mrs Harris to take that up or not? Dr Bacon replied that he had not got the authority to say yes or no to that, it is the VHMC. Mr Beckley would contact Mrs Gardiner to see if she would like that to happen on their behalf. Mr Beckley agreed to this and go back to Mr Harris. Mr Harris stated that his wife is trying to solve a problem which has been out there for six months and it can be done this week at their cost, it would be nice to get an answer because otherwise we will be waiting another six months. Dr Bacon agreed.
Mr Edwards (a parishioner) asked when he could expect meetings to return to normal in the village hall. Dr Bacon stated that we do not know. Mr Edwards asked what was the current problem that they cannot be in the village hall. Dr Bacon explained that the VHMC have closed the village hall until early November; when they will decide to do otherwise, we have no idea. Mrs Wickens stated that at present we could not have any more than six people anyway. Mr Edwards asked why not? Mrs Wickens stated that the Government has told us that. Dr Bacon stated that this was discussed in detail last time round about what the pros and cons of the village hall meeting are and what the problems are, that was all overruled by the fact that the VHMC decides whether or not it is open, at the moment it is not open until at least early November so until they open the village hall we can’t have a meeting there whether we want one or not.
Mr Harris stated that the Parish Council agreed to expedite getting wifi into the village hall, has we made any progress on that? This will be discussed under “Village Hall” on the agenda.
Mrs Millership (District Councillor) reported that the works at Wayford Bridge have been put on hold until the spring and then only one lane will be closed at one time, so any lorries going through Catfield will be alleviated for a while. Mrs Millership went on to say that she had meeting with Trend regarding Sutton but they said they had a very good community events days, it was very fruitful this year and the nets on the football pitch are now back up. They were happy with the volunteers that turned out. She attended her first funeral at Catfield church last month during lockdown and Mrs Millership stated how safe it felt and well managed all the people and thanked the Church Wardens.
Mrs Grove-Jones stated that the District Council is working mostly at home, as they are also, the Planning Department is trying to catch up with all the backlog that they have. They are basically up to 80% of their completion which is very good because the national average is about 60%. They have had new planning officers appointed and the building inspection teams are up to full capacity and they have been out since May inspecting sites. There have been very few submissions from Catfield. Mrs Grove-Jones and Mrs Millership attended at virtual meeting with Ms Johnson and Mr Harris regarding to helping the sub-committee with possibly seeing a way forward to try and solve the
453 problems. Mrs Grove-Jones is happy to be contacted if there are any problems. Ms Johnson thanked Mrs Grove-Jones and Mrs Millership for their time.
Mr Price reported that with regard to COVID there had been eighteen more cases in the last week in North Norfolk, 260 cases in total but no fatalities. The number infected has gone from seven to fourteen per hundred thousand of the population. Given the number of people who have visited North Norfolk during the last weeks it shows that we are doing exceptionally well. Sadly, since the requirement to wear face masks has come in hand washing and distancing has lessened, it is still very important to maintain the low rate.
Mr Price sits on the local Health Committee and Scrutiny Committee in the last weeks they have been scrutinising the COVID outbreak at Banham and had a presentation from Dr Louise Smith. They will be scrutinising the recent bad report on the ambulance service.
For the time being County Council meetings are being held remotely at least until the end of the year. Highways department had over one thousand calls during the recent bad weather, eight hundred of the calls related to trees and twelve teams had been deployed.
Dr Bacon proposed that the Agenda items relating to Paul Savage’s presentation on Johnny Crowe Staithe should be covered next.
Broads Society – Paul Savage. Dr Bacon sent round a map showing Johnny Crowe Staithe. Mr Geoff Bishop (a parishioner) had sent an email regarding this matter. Mr Bishop commented about the Broads Authority and the lack of any clearance on the dyke at Crowe’s staithe and also mentioned that about four years ago on the Broads Forum there was a conversation in October 2016 about the Crowe’s Staithe where somebody had written about the staithe and the state it was in, unnavigable, John Packman, Chief Executive of the BA responded to that comment and several things which indicated that the BA would be supportive, if not financially supportive, about doing something to it.
Paul Savage stated that Mr Hill keeps a boat near the top end of the staithe and Mr Savage understood that this is done in order to make sure that the BA does not suggest that the planning use has been abandoned. However, getting in and out is very difficult because probably twenty or thirty years ago there had been a line if trees, they are all now coppice stools so instead of a single trunk there are probably six or seven and many of the stems have grown out towards the light across the boat dyke and that makes it very difficult for anybody to get in and out unless they take pair of loppers. Dr Bacon clarified that this is along the north side of the boat dyke, marked orange on the plan, the narrow strip where the line of trees is growing and obstructing the boat dyke.
Paul Savage stated that there are approximately twenty trees all of which have been coppiced between Mr Hill’s boat and the entrance, it is quite noticeable that the north bank at the entrance has worn away due to a lot of use by passing boats which stop there for the day Mr Savage had been told by Phil Heath who has worked for the BA for many years that twenty-five years ago it used to look as it does on the Ordnance Survey map. Mr Savage suggested that the Parish Council should bear in mind that if it is made obviously feasible for mooring purposes it will be necessary to have a notice to make sure that people realise that it belongs to the Parish Council otherwise it will be colonised probably by squatters quickly.
In between each of the coppiced stool there is a tendency for the top soil to have washed away and it even make the trees appear to be growing out of the bottom of the dyke, they are not actually, if a stick is poked in the water it is only about a foot deep and on this occasion Mr Savage suggests taking the brash, the small twiggy pieces that arise when trees are pruned or cut down, pack them together
454 tightly and pin them in place and that acts as a sieve as the tide comes it in it should collect sediment and the wood will eventually rot. It should be packed down a little higher than the height of the riverbank or the boat dyke bank and then over time it should turn back into top soil and it can be used conveniently to get on and off a boat.
Dr Bacon pointed out that Mr Savage is chairman of Broadsword which is the part of the Broads Society which carries out practical work of mainly tree and scrub clearance along navigable waterways. Paul Savage stated that they have been doing this for about twenty-five years but latterly for insurance reasons, the Broads Society do have insurance, apart from this particular project they have not considered doing anything for anybody other than the BA in recent times but it is the same function. Mr Savage suggested to Dr Packman, when he was asking for people to make suggestions for useful projects, would the authority like to do this work and he declined to get involved obviously because of money but if the Broads Society do the work there is not any financial cost to the BA.
Dr Bacon stated that John Packman does state on the Forum an important point which is as far as the BA is concerned tress along the riverbank or along a navigable waterway are the responsibility of the landowner, that the BA is supportive of keeping them clear but it is not their job. This is where hopefully Broadsword can do the necessary work on behalf of the Parish Council.
Mr Savage stated that the only issue the Parish Council ought to satisfy themselves about is that if this was hundred acres of woodland for example the Forestry Commission should be approached for permission for a licence if you wanted to fell the hundred acres of woodland and they probably would not give the licence. Mr Savage did not think a felling licence is required here, he is not suggesting clear felling, it is more a case of pruning but just to be on the safe side, as suggested in correspondence to Mr Filgate, it would not do any harm to pick up the phone and have a chat with the local office just to run it past them and make sure that they are happy. Other than that there are no licences that are required, the BA does this sort of work but they spend months going through all sorts of paperwork to get Natural England to give permission. For a private landowner on a small scales Mr Savage did not think that is necessary.
Dr Bacon stated that this is clearance of the line of the boat dyke, the top end where the large staithe area is John Packman again said on the Forum that he would not be opposed to the idea of having that staithe completely restored but it would be a very expensive job and one that the BA could not prioritise but he did regard the boat dyke as being part of the public navigation up to at least as far as the staithe.
Mr Savage stated that if the Parish Council could generate some income from charging people to moor then gradually over time that would provide the Parish Council with some resources and some restoration work could be done on the staithe itself from a historical point of view that would be an attractive proposition, but that is in the future.
Mr Harris asked firstly if Mr Savage owned the land what would he do, is there a possibility that this could be converted into an income generator and secondly one of the concerns that has been raised is that the BA would not allow you for planning and other reasons to put in berths in there which could then be let, is there a problem with the BA for doing that?
Mr Savage replied there is always a problem with the BA as mentioned in his email to Mr Filgate earlier, he did not know if people were aware that there was a planning application at the New Cut which was dealt with during the summer in which the landowners had used their part of the New Cut for many years as a permanent mooring site until it became impossible because of the poor condition of the quay heading, not something which applies to the Parish Council because there is no quay heading
455 but the New Cut is retained by quay heading. Eventually the landowners persuaded the Environment Agency, whose responsibility it is, to replace the quay heading because that is an engineering process they have to apply for planning permission, the BA granted it but imposed a condition that it should not be used for mooring purposes which seems to have been done in very bad faith. Subsequently an application was made successfully to remove that condition but even then the head of planning said that in the opinion of the BA there was not planning permission so she was taking away with one hand what had just been granted with the other hand.
Dr Bacon thought that the answer here with the BA on this particular site is that the Parish Council could offer a combination, there could be a mixture of some let moorings and some open twenty-four hour public wild mooring which the BA is always keen to find. If the Parish Council is offering that deal of say fifty/fifty of wild public mooring and private mooring that the Parish Council let out they would probably be happy with that. Certain officers would be happy with that arrangement because they like to increase the amount of public wild mooring available. That is a very popular area for people to pull up for the night. For many years the Parish Council has let moorings so there is a long history of using part of that as moorings that are let out.
Mr Harris said that given that the Parish Council probably could get some moorings in there provided it is handled properly with the BA what would Mr Savage do, would it be economically sensible to consider actually trying to restore this for some form of moorings which could be let. Mr Savage replied yes, but in the process of doing it he would suggest that the Parish Council does not do anything which could be described as building or engineering. The Authority when somebody wants to replace their quay heading, which is often timber faced, they take a very fussy attitude and they ask people to put in a planning application. If you don’t do anything beyond as what Mr Savage would describe as gardening then there is no work which requires planning permission so the only issue then would be is there an established use, as Dr Bacon had just explained there is an established use.
Mr Harris stated his question was slightly different, he understood that Mr Savage was saying that Dr Bacon very helpfully suggested that the Parish Council could probably get over the planning issue. Mr Harris said his question then becomes an economic question is it sensible for the Parish Council to try and use this to generate income both generate income and to generate amenity for parishioners by creating some more berths there whilst also possibly making some more public berths for the Broads which is in all of our interests.
Mr Savage replied that the answer to both questions is undoubtedly yes because especially on the northern Broads moorings are in acutely short supply and where people run mooring basins for commercial reasons they make a lot of money out of it. Mr Savage’s boat is moored at the Adventure Centre and pays for the year about £800, across the other side of the river is Cox’s boatyard where there are more facilities it would not surprise him if the bill would be double that.
Dr Bacon said that this is just in the short-term, in the long-term by getting that dyke cleared the Parish Council is opening up the possibility of restoring the actual staithe end which would open up the possibility of several moorings. Mr Harris stated that this was an added bonus, then surely the question is how does the Parish Council develop an action plan with a business plan in terms of spend x to get y to take this forward. Dr Bacon replied that the first thing is to get Broadsword to clear that bank so that it is navigable and then move from there, as long as the Parish Council does not get involved with quay headings, as long as the parish Council stick to soil bank moorings we will not be running into all the technical and planning problems that go with quay heading etc.
Mr Hill stated if someone could explain what would be the procedure regarding mud in the dyke because the water there particularly as you enter the dyke from the river is very fleet and the boat is
456 normally on the mud. Mr Hill understands, but stands to be corrected, this is classed as contaminated waste. How would we go about increasing the depth of the water which would be fundamentally essential in its current condition. Dr Bacon stated that in a way that would not be the Parish Council’s problem because the boat dyke is part of the public navigation and Dr Packman said as far as he is concerned that is part of the public navigation therefore it is the BA’s duty and problem to deal with the mud, at the moment their excuse is there is no point sending a mud pump in there because there are lot of overhanging trees so once the trees are cleared there is a good case for saying this is public navigation please include it in your program of mud pumping.
Mr Hill also stated that since his boat has been at Johnny Crowe’s Staithe every last thing has been stolen from it and vandalised, everything that is possible to steal has been stolen including the steering wheel. Dr Bacon asked if it was land based or waterborne crime, Mr Hill thought land based.
Mr Harris clearly from what Mr Savage has said the Parish Council should go ahead and clear it but he would like to see, if someone could do this, a business plan in terms of if the Parish Council did this we get four berths or six berths and if so we could perhaps get £600 each this would give an income because it would then scope the project in a way that the Parish Council could then see how attractive it was and therefore we could then see that it develops according to a plan rather than ad hoc. Mr Harris proposed if there is someone who could do that that would be helpful, he would be happy to work with Mr Savage to try and look at the numbers.
Dr Bacon asked in the meantime are councillors happy for Broadsword to go ahead with the clearing. Mr Beckley replied that if Broadsword are happy to do that work on behalf of the Parish Council he would support that.
Dr Bacon stated that Mr Bishop had written to the Parish Council would he like to make a comment. Mr Bishop replied when the BESL did the flood defence improvement on the Broads Authority side, on the How Hill side of that dyke they did take out quite a lot of the silt from Chromes they used to build up the flood defences and the water depth at that stage was round about four feet deep since that happened the reeds have encroached from the BA side across the dyke and it that which is preventing a lot of the ingress because the trees have not grown that fast that is what need taking out to bring the dyke back to the width that it was when the work was done originally. Mr Bishop has photographs. Mr Bishop asked stated that Mr Hill’s boat draws more than one foot so if he can get up and down there so there is depth in the middle but a lot of obstruction is being caused by the reeds.
Dr Bacon stated that if the work starts with the trees which are in the control of the Parish Council we can then start to put pressure on the BA about their aspect of it. Mr Bishop stated that the other benefit from having people moor on there it should cut the crime rate down, if there are people mooring overnight there is more discouragement for thieves to go down and take things.
Mr Beckley said that a decision needs to be made, there is a proposal that Broadsword do the work for the Parish Council. Mr Filgate declared an interest as a member of Broadsword and the Broads Society, Dr Bacon stated that it was not a financial interest, but the interest was noted. Mr Harris stated that clearly there would be a majority to clear it and it would be sensible to do it this winter if we can but Mr Harris is very happy to sit down with Mr Savage to try and scope it as a business plan would that get support as well because Mr Harris thought that would actually give some sort of context to the whole thing, why are we doing this, what could we make out this, he is willing to do that.
Mr Beckley commented that on a point of order, Mr Harris is quite right and Mr Beckley would back him up on that but Mr Beckley had made a proposal that Broadsword should carry out the tree
457 clearance along the boat dyke could we have a seconder and a vote please. Mr Hill seconded the proposal with all in favour.
Mr Harris proposed that he sits down with Mr Savage to scope it to see how much it could produce and how much as a financial proposition. Mr Savage stated he was happy to help on that, he had picked up what Mr Hill was saying about theft and as Mr Bishop said earlier with the idea of the public mooring there being a discouragement because it shows people are about add that to an offer to the BA telling them there are some mooring space which the Parish Council would allow overnight mooring on then they would be very keen on doing that and might even pay a modest rent. Mr Beckley seconded the motion with all in agreement. Dr Bacon stated that Mr Harris would get together with Mr Savage and possibly one or two others if they wish to get involved to discuss a business plan. Mr Hill asked if there was anything the Parish Council could do to help the team with the project. Mr Savage replied that because of the virus numbers are uncertain as to how many can be used and this affects the length of time it is going to take, if anybody wants to join in they would be welcome. Dr Bacon stated that Mr Hill and he could help logistically with regard to land access if needed.
Mr Beckley went on to say that Mr Savage recommended that a notice board should be put up at the end of the dyke saying that the Parish Council own it to save squatters going there, Mr Beckley proposed that this should be done as well, Mr Filgate seconded this with all in agreement.
Dr Bacon thanked Mr Savage for attending.
Minutes of the Previous Meeting: Mr Read had emailed some queries regarding the minutes. On page 439 Mr Read questioned whether it should read “Parish Council” he thought it should be “Parish magazine”. Dr Bacon stated that it is actually Parish Council this is with regard to responding to Mr Rand. Page 443 Mr Read thought that he had said the words “scrap yard” not Mr Harris but it was actually Mr Harris. Page 444 this relates to where a vote was taken about hedge cutting and then Mr Read said that he was not happy about the way that the quotations were handled. Dr Bacon stated that what was written in the minutes does reflect what was said that Mr Read spoke after the vote was taken about the issues that were in the vote. The minutes state Mr Read thought there was confusion about responding to the request for work, Mr Read had disagreed with the vote. Mr Read stated that his point was that it was very biased and he wondered why. Dr Bacon asked if that was an accusation, Mr Reads said no it was his personal view. Mr Read said that at the meeting Dr Bacon stated that it looks as if one person did not understand, Mr Read asked to see a copy of the tender that was sent to both people and also the other person did not understand because they were allowed to change their tender but the first person was not, this does not look very good from a business point of view. Dr Bacon replied that this is reflected in the minutes and that was a conversation after the vote had been taken. Mr Read asked for this to be minuted. Mr Beckley stated that on a point of order we are talking about the minutes and the accuracy of the minutes, it sounds like Mr Read is not saying they are inaccurate he just does not like the way it was done. Mr Read agreed. Mr Beckley stated that the minutes are accurate. Mr Harris stated that may be what Mr Read is saying is the vote was taken on a false premise, were both parties on equal terms. Mr Beckley stated again that the accuracy of the minutes are being discussed whether it was right or wrong at the time is a different issue, if the minutes are accurate and that is what was said we need to deal with anything else as a separate issue. Mr Harris stated that this is a very legalistic approach from Mr Beckley. Dr Bacon stated that we are having a legalistic approach because they are legal minutes and what we are asking is whether what is written is a reasonable account of what was said, if Mr Read disagrees and wants to change some wording he will be listened to. Mr Harris asked if what was recorded was verbatim. Dr Bacon stated
458 that it was not every word because otherwise it would be a lot more pages. Mr Harris said so it is not verbatim, then he has every right to suggest that it wasn’t said.
Mr Read stated that he thought the minutes did not reflect what was actually discussed concerning how each individual was treated in his opinion both of them have good credentials, they do a good standard of work, the way they were both treated is atrocious and that is not clear in the minutes, the wording of it. Dr Bacon suggested that somewhere in the paragraph for example where it says “Mr Read disagreed” we could add “Mr Read thinks that the way the two contractors were treated is atrocious”. Mr Read agreed, he again requested a copy of the tender which was sent to both people. The clerk will do this.
Mr Beckley stated that if this was not said at the meeting and this is a reflection of the minutes of that meeting then no he would not agree to this, it is not a fact whether it was right or wrong at the meeting, the minutes must reflect what was said at the meeting if they do then they should not be changed. Dr Bacon suggested that under Matters Arising Mr Read could then raise the issue saying that the way the contractors were treated was atrocious and it can be minuted from this meeting and the minutes for the September meeting can stay as they are, Ms Johnson agreed, so did Mrs Wickens.
Dr Bacon stated that Mr Harris had also sent queries about the minutes. Page 438 regarding Dr Bacon not remembering that the Parish Council had given some money in 2003 to start the magazine. Dr Bacon stated that he was happy to add in that “he stands corrected he thought the Parish Council had not given a start-up grant to the magazine but apparently they did”.
Page 439, The word “until” will be inserted after the word “letter”. So it would then read “Mr Beckley also stated the Parish Council would not respond to Mr Rand’s letter until after Mr Beckley and Mr Harris had met”. Mr Harris said that is correct because we did respond that is the point he was making.
Page 439, “Ms Johnson stated that it is hoped the magazine would be fair and balanced” Mr Harris suggests that added to that should be “and this comment should be include in the PC letter to Mr Rand”. Dr Bacon has listened to the tape and Ms Johnson did not say that, so it should not be minuted. Mr Harris stated that he did not mind if it was not included but it was included in the letter, that is the point. Dr Bacon replied that it was included in the letter but Ms Johnson did not say those particular words therefore they cannot be added in to the minutes.
Dr Bacon stated that on the same page “Mr Harris thought that it was not fair and balanced “and he did actually say something about dreamer so if Mr Harris wants added in at that point “it was not fair and balanced because it had allowed Mr Rand to be defamed as a dreamer without any right of reply or correction”. Dr Bacon said the words were said so he had no objection to them being included. Mr Harris stated they should clearly be included because that is the point he had been consistently making.
On page 442 “Mr Harris stated that the BA had talked to him” it should say RSPB. In the same paragraph where there is mention of a pond, the word “dug” will be inserted after the word “pond” because Dr Wheeler would not object to a pond but he would object to the digging of a pond in that particular site and circumstance.
Mr Harris stated that he was happy with the alteration but this discussion we have had will mean that we need to talk about how minutes are prepared as Mr Beckley has pointed out because what is necessary for the minutes is to actually record the sense, and the fact that you cut out the point about fair and balance shows that there were not doing that so we will return to that. It alters the meaning of what he said, it sounds as though he was taking a pop at the whole magazine which he was not.
459
Ms Johnson proposed that the minutes should now be accepted, this was seconded by Mrs Wickens with all in agreement.
Matters Arising: Mr Harris stated that there was an action point to get the key for the notice board. Dr Bacon asked Mr Beckley to comment. Mr Beckley said it was an action point, he had spoken to Mrs Gardiner and she said she thought they were on a bunch of keys that Sylvia Daniels had, they have not been discovered yet and Mr Beckley is going to talk to Mrs Gardiner tomorrow to offer Mrs Harris’ kind offer of having new keys cut. Mr Harris thanked Mr Beckley for the clarification.
The police have been in contact regarding the misbehaving children, they visited the parishioners who live in Thorn Road who had made the complaint, they will be doing patrols through the village. This will also cover the boys that were on the bikes that were mentioned by Mrs Filgate at the last meeting.
Mr Beckley asked about the village sign, the clerk could not find anything in the files relating to the sign. Mr Beckley asked the best way forward. Dr Bacon asked if the Parish Council should put a notice on the sign and claim ownership and give people a certain date to claim alternative ownership otherwise the Parish Council would claim ownership. Mr Beckley stated that he understood that the land does not belong to the Parish Council, the clerk thought it belongs to Suffolk Housing. Mr Beckley thought if the Parish Council claims ownership then they also claim liability for it as well, he thought the Parish Council should claim ownership of the sign. Mr Harris agreed there should be some pride in the village. Mr Beckley suggested contacting the landowners asking if they have any objections to the Parish Council having the sign on their property and refurbishing it. Dr Bacon suggested maybe this is something Trend would do as part of their community work. Mr Harris suggested putting something in Catfield News saying that the Parish Council are concerned about the state of the things and are proposing that they will do it up and make it posh because that would then bring out anybody who thinks we are playing with their assets. The clerk will contact Suffolk Housing and write a small piece for the magazine. Dr Bacon stated that Suffolk Housing would have bought the land from the District Council.
Mr Filgate stated that with regard to concerns about the lighting and trees in Limes Road he did look at what house numbers they were but he had not passed them on to the clerk yet.
Correspondence: Nothing to discuss.
Finance Report: The current account has £2450.95, the number 2 account £579.52 and the BPA £24179.18 making a total of £27209.65. The second half of the precept has been received. Two cheques were presented for payment: 101346 for £93 payable to HMRC for Tax. 101347 for £68.78 payable to the clerk for reimbursement of the GDPR payment and two Zoom invoices. The clerk’s salary will be paid by standing order. Mr Harris proposed that these payments be made, this was seconded by Mr Hill with all in agreement.
Village Hall: The clerk stated that the wifi could be discussed here. Mr Harris said he just wants to hear it has been done, we should not spend an enormous amount of time we agreed we should put wifi in and he would like to hear it is done. Mr Harris thought there were no need to discuss it anymore. Ms Johnson replied that this does need discussion because it is necessary to give financial authority. Ms Johnson shared her screen with details of the wifi options. Vodafone is the cheapest option at £415 over two years with unlimited broadband use, this includes a phone line and router. If this option is taken up and order by the end of October there would be £125 credit. Talk Talk are £24 per month.
460 They are all for small business use and the parish Council can claim back VAT. Ms Johnson went through some of the options. It is hoped that by providing wifi to the village hall it will make the hall more attractive for people to rent. It would also be possible to hold hybrid meetings. Dr Bacon thanked Ms Johnson for looking into this and coming up with some options. Dr Bacon asked if the Parish Council is agreeing principle to paying to have the service provided to the village hall which others as well would benefit from. Mr Hill asked if the Parish Council is happy to be saddled with this cost or will it only be for a set term and then terminated, does the village hall committee want this? Dr Bacon replied that it might make the hall more desirable to hire and it would benefit the Parish Council if meetings were held that other people could join in remotely, that was the reasoning behind it. Mr Jordan asked how much the rent is for the village hall, the clerk replied that it is around £144 per annum. Mr Jordan stated that perhaps the VHMC could waive the rent for Catfield Parish Council in return. The clerk confirmed that CVHMC had given permission for the Parish Council to go ahead and install wifi. Mr Beckley stated that the Council would need to draw up an agreement with CVHMC. Mr Beckley asked if we are discussing agreeing to a two-year contract, Ms Johnson said yes but we could agree to a spend up to a certain limit. There were no objections to the principle of going ahead with installing wifi.
Mr Edwards (a parishioner) asked to speak about this as he had good knowledge in this subject. Mr Edwards stated that Talk Talk did not have a very good reputation with regard to customer service, quite often a fault does not get referred to the right department. Mr Edwards strongly recommended to stay away from Talk Talk. He has had very good experience of Vodafone, any problems were resolved quickly. Mr Edwards asked if the village hall has a telephone line connected. Ms Johnson replied that it does not, but the Vodafone quote includes putting a line in she thought. Mr Edwards stated that companies assume they are taking over an existing line and he thought that on the prices quoted they would not make that assumption. Ms Johnson will check, there is a line that used to go just outside the village hall. There is no live line.
Mr Edwards went on to say on the download speeds that are quoted you will note the wording “average speed” or “speeds up to” that is the best case scenario speed which the best person in the village gets. It is best to go for providers who give a guaranteed speed, if they don’t come up with the goods you can cancel the contract. In the centre of the village we should be 30mbps because it is not far from the fibre cabinet. Mr Edwards stated that sometimes a twelve month term only involved a small amount per month additional and he thought the project is based around the COVID problem, the village hall will probably welcome the wifi, does the Parish Council want to be committed to twenty-four months on something, as the Parish Council stands, might not be in need of twelve months from now. Ms Johnson stated that the reason she looked at the twenty-four months was because of the £125 off so that is a substantial amount to offset the charges and also, she strongly believes that every village hall should have wifi.
Mr Edwards thought there would be another £100 to pay for a landline, he offered to take a look. Mr Edwards also offered help if there were any issues once it was installed on a voluntary basis.
Dr Bacon thanked Mr Edwards for his input, it was very useful.
Ms Johnson will speak to Vodafone and then speak to Mr Edwards.
Dr Bacon asked if the Parish Council was happy for Ms Johnson to go ahead in consultation with Mr Edwards. It was agreed. Mr Beckley stated putting a cap on it of twenty-four months possibly twelve. He thought there should be a financial cap as well, Mr Beckley proposed £600 over two years. Mr Edwards stated that these companies have a habit of slowly increasing the price during the course of the term so you will never know the exact cost over twenty-four months. Mr Jordan seconded the
461 motion with all in agreement. It may be possible to get a grant towards the costs, the clerk will speak to Mrs Millership about this. Ms Johnson will find out about the line and email everyone.
Dr Bacon and Mr Hill thanked Ms Johnson and Mr Edwards.
Planning: Planning application for a single storey side extension at 14 Thorn Road, there were no objections.
There will be a consultation regarding the recent White Paper on planning. This will be held via Zoom on 14th and 15th October. Ms Johnson stated that she, Mr Harris and Mr Filgate will join this zoom.
Industrial Estate: An email had been received complaining about the Industrial Estate ( Old Mushroom site) and the overgrown bushes and fencing along the edge of the site. Dr Bacon stated that the Parish Council is already aware of that.
Ms Johnson reported that a meeting took place with Mrs Grove-Jones and Mrs Millership which was quite fruitful and gave some ideas going forward. They talked about writing to the people the Parish Council has had correspondence within the last couple of years, they have put together an outline letter which has not been finished yet. It has been put on hold for a while because they had a letter from Mark Ashwell about the White Paper and also there was some correspondence from James Mann both at NNDC. Mr Mann spoke to the clerk and the sub-committee would like to speak to him so they will contact him to discuss a few things. In Mr Mann’s opinion he wanted the Parish Council to do nothing for the next few months but the sub-committee wondered why that is the case and perhaps they should still continue with their plan of writing to the relevant people at NNDC and putting their points of view forward about the Mushroom Farm. To summarise the letters that have been outlined, there was one to Mr Lyons, thanks to Mr Harris for starting it off and in summary it talks about the correspondence that the Parish Council has had with Nick Westlake in November 2019 and Rob Parkins’ update in August. The have reiterated the fact that the Parish Council did fail to respond as part of the Regulation 18 consultation but now we hope that our current views would not be overlooked especially as this critical time in the planning cycle. They have all got a strong view that the redesignation to residential development of the Mushroom Farm is much to the amenity benefit of the villagers.
Ms Johnson had some bullet points, the site has been derelict for thirty years, that is long enough. No significant commercial development which is currently designated, the owner also believes it is unfeasible to develop because of access limitations etc, housing along the road frontage would much improve the main entry into Catfield, it would make the land remaining more attractive for commercial use at the back. Also, that the Parish Council has been put under pressure from the local community to put housing on that unattractive area and also that the owner wants to build housing on the land for himself and his family with the potential additional properties for rent.
Nick Westlake’s letter had indicated that redesignation is possible where there is no reasonable prospect of an application coming forward for the use of that land for commercial use and so the sub- committee want to stress that point that it is totally unfeasible that area can be used in the future. If you took the area that is left at the front of the Mushroom Farm and think about industry where there could be lots of people employed you would be looking at another Trend or something like that, there is no space to put a functional building like that in there and get a lorry in. If anything it would be small units where there might be one or two people working in each so there would be more people serviced by having houses there for a start. The sub-committee wants to focus on that, that it is not feasible to be used for industrial or commercial and that they want it redesignated.
462 There is a letter to Mr Hems, who is head of NNDC Environmental Health, again to reiterate the state of the site and the fact that it has been derelict for so long and their concerns about its condition and also that Mr Rowson had replied saying he could do nothing about the site under Section 205 but suggested that the Parish Council took it up with Mr Hems and also that they met with Mrs Grove- Jones and Mrs Millership so using that as well as a steer into them to try and get some extra support and requested that they come out and visit again with the sub-committee there accompanying them.
It seems that everybody in the village, the Parish Council in particular, and all parishioners really want to see that place cleaned up. The letters will be put together and send them round so councillors can have their say before they are sent. The sub-committee feel that if they speak to Mr Mann as well and try to get more of a feel of what he is actually after doing and find out more about the employment boundary review that he is involved in doing then they can find out whether there are any other underlying reason why he is trying to get the Parish Council not to do anything in the next few months. They will attend the sessions on the White Paper to find out what they say about it and also there are also events to do with land use that are going on so the sub-committee will probably attend those as well.
The sub-committee have looked back and could see that it is not the first time that it has come up about the re-use of land or the issuing with using land so they are also looking at the other areas that could be found where there could be residential development around Catfield they will review this to see if they can find what are potential sites that could be put forward, some of them may well have been industrial or verging on the industrial site others are farm land that might be being used and also they noted that going back to 2009 in the Parish Council minutes there was a petition and an issue about Lea Road. It appears that the same thing has come back again, with people up in arms about building going on at the bottom of that area. The sub-committee understands that there is a problem with the access etc to the land which could be built on, but an application will come that will need to be considered. It is a matter of trying to make a difference and put forward the Parish Council’s points of view as well so feedback is needed from other people to make sure that it is not just the sub- committee going off on their own campaign for their own ends.
Ms Johnson has spoken to the lady that now owns the Mushroom Site at the front, her father has handed it over to her and she wants to build property there and she asked Ms Johnson to pass a message on to the Parish Council. The lady said she was sorry she would not be able to attend the meeting as she is travelling on business. She asked to inform the Parish Council that the owner of the Mushroom site has put in a formal application to NNDC to personally live there. She has to establish conversion to residential in principal. She wishes to build a low density, high quality custom self-build development in a traditional style. In order to support her in the conversion to residential the lady asks that the Parish Council writes to NNDC in support of residential on the site. Ms Johnson stated that the owners of the land are as keen to have it developed as the Parish Council is.
Dr Bacon thanked Ms Johnson for her report.
Mr Hill asked if the Parish Council had actually taken a vote on this as a Parish Council to support this action? Dr Bacon stated that the Parish Council agreed for a sub-committee to look into the options and anything to do with the Industrial Estate. Mr Harris stated that you need to look at the March meeting to go to that, yes we did.
Mr Hill looked at the March minutes and did not see that a vote had been taken, it was discussed various options and possibilities but Mr Hill did not think a vote was taken. Mr Hill is completely opposed to this and does not think as a Parish Council there had been a vote I support of this. Mr Hill asked for it to be minuted that he is completely opposed to this for many of the reasons he has already
463 relayed and perhaps also it should be considered as he has driven past the site quite a number of times in the past week or two, if you have houses there you will also have vehicles parked on the road and they will provide an obstruction on the inside of a bend, secondly there has been ample evidence in the past of residence and industrial not getting on very well together. The individuals that are there at the moment know very well what they have moved into and there is a bund between them and the industrial. What is proposed is to introduce residential to industrial without any sort of bund or fence between them and Mr Hill thought this would bring about problems in the future. If the Parish Council wishes to support more residential development in Catfield, which he is in favour of, he thought there are far better places than the Mushroom site.
Dr Bacon stated that what was agreed was that the committee would be formed who would look into all the options on that site and one of the options would be that it stays industrial, another option would be complete change to residential and a third option would be a mixture, a line of residential along the front and bund and then the rest of the site remaining industrial. There are various options as to what could be done on the site but no means come down in favour of any particular option at the moment.
Mr Hill asked should this not be something that the Parish Council consults the entire village over and not just pursue as a Parish Council or as a very small number of the Parish Council. Mr Hill felt that that Catfield is fortunate that there is residential area and industrial area and farm land area and cannot see the point in robbing Peter to pay Paul, there is plenty of farmland that could be developed into residential that would make far better sites than the Mushroom site.
Ms Johnson replied that they are looking at those as well.
Dr Bacon stated that at the moment there has been no decision in favour or any particular scheme or idea, it is open that the committee is supposed to be investigating all the options for what could be done on that site and other sites. Ms Johnson stated that includes the clean-up of that site.
Mr Hill stated that all the evidence that has been supplied appears to suggest to him that the sub- committee already has their own ideas as to what would be the best use of that site and everybody is entitled to their opinion but he did not think it had been widely enough consulted on.
Mr Edwards (a parishioner) said that he recalled two things one was the very well attended meetings when there were proposals put forward by Victory Housing to develop at the bottom of Lea Road, the village hall was packed and it was very obvious there was a great deal of opposition to that plan. Mr Edwards recalled the subject of the Mushroom site first came up when people said why would we allow someone to build on a greenfield site when there is a derelict industrial site that has not done anything for thirty years. He did not feel the matter of cars being parked on the road was a problem because a well-designed development would have parking included, off the road. The concept was save the environment by not developing Lea Road, use some derelict, rat-infested, industrial land that has done nothing for thirty years.
Dr Bacon thanked Mr Edwards for his comments but said as far as the comparison of Lea Road with the Mushroom site is concerned regardless of what happen to the Mushroom site Lea Road has been within the development envelope of the parish and one day it will be developed whether we like it or not and regardless of whether anything is built on the Mushroom site, so you cannot say that one is an alternative to the other. The Lea Road site is designated for future development and one day it will happen like it or not. The Mushroom site will not really affect that, it may or may not get developed as well but we cannot say it is one or the other.
464
Mr Harris said that Mr Hill had rightly gone back to what was actually agreed in March and the letter was specifically agreed and was sent. Mr Harris read the letter which asked the District Council to consider a change to the boundary of the area zoned for industrial use so that a line of houses backed by a bund could be built along the road frontage while the rest of the site could remain for industrial use. Mr Harris stated that was what was specifically agreed and that is what was sent to the head of planning at NNDC. That is why what the sub-committee has been doing is entirely in accordance with the brief it got from the Council.
Mr Hill asked if a vote was taken on that. Mr Harris said that the letter was voted on and if it isn’t in the minutes that is what went out. Mr Harris said Mr Hill was not there, he missed two meetings. That letter was agreed and sent out by the clerk.
Mr Hill said in response to Mr Edwards’ point regarding vehicles on the road, he is quite right there will be off road parking but the post van, the dust cart and the delivery drivers will also park on the road and will present obstacles on the road and potentially danger on the road, this was the point Mr Hill was trying to make. Dr Bacon suggested that the details should be left now because these would be thee fine details of a planning application and dealt with at a later stage if something happens there.
Recreation Grounds: The goal posts have been done, they have been painted and there are nets on them as well. Mr Filgate stated that he had thanked Mr Rumsby of Trend for doing the work. Trend also have done the school fencing and also the Sandholes fencing.
Mr Harris stated that his wife wanted to say they have done a very good job and they should be thanked. The clerk will write to Trend to thank them.
An email had been received from a parishioner regarding the playground, she complained about flying ants, wasps and mushrooms. Dr Bacon stated that this is despite the fact that the playground is officially closed although the notice had disappeared. Mr Beckley stated that the notice had disappeared he has since put another notice and put it up, he also put a notice up on the New Road notice board and a notice on the village hall notice board saying that the playground is closed. Mr Beckley had a look at the wasp nest beside the slide and they are not wasps they are actually miner bees, they are solitary bees but they do colonise and they are harmless.
The contractor has been told to go ahead with the work at the playground.
All Saints Church: Dr Bacon reported that the repairs are still ongoing to the churchyard wall, there are some large branches of oak trees that came down in the storm across graves but they did not damage any headstones and they have been cleared up.
Poors Trust: Dr Bacon reported that there was an oak tree on the bank of Catfield Dyke fell across the permissive path walkway that goes round the site and he got John Blackburn from Norfolk Wildlife Trust who was doing some clearing for some of their fallen trees to sort that out. He cut the tree down and winched the stump back into place so that the path is not severely damaged.
An email had been received from Mr Edwards, this email had been circulated to all councillors, regarding the recent appointment of a Trustee to the Poors Trust. Mr Edwards referred to the minutes where Mr Harris stated that the outcome sends an absolutely terrible message. Mr Edwards said he is in agreement with Mr Harris. The minutes indicate that Mr Beckley as a candidate declined to cast a vote an entirely right and proper stance in his opinion. On the other hand Dr Bacon opted to vote for
465 himself, whilst Mr Edwards has no doubt this is likely perfectly admissible within the charity’s constitution it does mean that when one considers Jennifer Harris polled one less vote than Dr Bacon, Dr Bacon effectively voted himself into office. Mr Edwards stated that Jennifer Harris did not have the luxury of giving herself a vote as an outsider, the message this sends out to the parish effectively says however enthusiastic or qualified you may be to lend a hand in village affairs you would be wasting your time so don’t bother. Sadly, that will be the most likely outcome.
Mr Edwards (a parishioner) stated that he picked up on the point that was made on the message, the portrayal at times is that if you are not careful you do portray yourselves almost as a private members club. He knows that anyone involved in council affairs is doing it with the sincerest of intentions and Mr Edwards has every respect for them because they give up a lot of their time. Sooner or later fresh young blood needs to be let in to continue in the same fashion as people have before them. It seems as if Parish Councillors are voting themselves into power and it does not seem very fair, Mr Edwards stated that he did not know how the constitution works with the Council voting for a charity’s trustees.
Dr Bacon replied that on the point on new, young blood Mr Jordan had recently been appointed. Mr Hill replied to Mr Edwards that the process was all done perfectly correctly, the Parish Council was in the extremely fortunate position where there were three very good people and there were only positions for two of them.
Highways: Mr Edwards’ email also covered highways issues, this had been circulated regarding mud, farm vehicles that are regularly discussed. Points Mr Edwards would like to consider are a) should a width and weight limit for certain roads be enforced, b) should enforcement action against those who fail to clean up the road after their operations become routine. Dr Bacon stated that this really is a question for the Highway authority, the Parish Council cannot enforce or implement weight limits and cannot take enforcement action against those who fail to clean up the roads. The Highway Authority can, and all the Parish Council can do it pass the comments on to them.
Mr Harris pointed out that it was not just Mr Edwards writing in. Mr Harris had written in before with a lot of photographic evidence, these had been sent to all councillors, showing exactly what was done.
Dr Bacon stated that the other issue raised by Mr Edwards is the state of the dilapidated barn on Church Road which he feels constitutes a major health and safety hazard to anyone walking, cycling or driving nearby or more importantly to those who work close by. Mr Edwards thought it is only a matter of time before high winds will either bring the entire structure down or worse still launch a piece of corrugated roof into a passer-by with a likely fatal outcome.
Mr Edwards stated that he just wanted to know the Parish Council’s thought on this, if they are not in a position to do anything he will report it to the right people at the District Council, he would not be surprised if the site was condemned.
Mr Bishop (a parishioner) stated that he had written to NNDC a few years ago about because when the planning application went in for the large warehouse that is behind the derelict barn on the plans it said that it was a replacement building and the old building would be demolished. That did not happen. Mr Bishop spoke to NNDC and someone had a look at the building with him, they said that because the demolition of the old building was not put in the conditions it could not be enforced. NNDC agreed it was in a bad state and not very safe there was nothing they could do. If the Parish Council can do something about it Mr Bishop would be very pleased.
Mr Beckley stated that he regularly walks past this building and one day when it was windy the corrugated iron was flapping around. It is in a dangerous condition and it is an accident waiting to
466 happen, he proposed that the Parish Council writes to the owners saying that they are concerned about the state of the building and the safety risk to pedestrians walking past. Mr Jordan agreed with Mr Beckley’s proposal, it is very fair. Mr Read seconded the motion with all in agreement. A letter will be sent to the owner.
Mr Edwards (a parishioner) hoped the letter would state that the locals are concerned about this and it is clearly becoming very dangerous, would the owner please take some action because if they don’t we are convinced it will escalate and it is probably not to his advantage as the owner to allow it to escalate. If NNDC get involved and put a dilapidation order on it, they will put a time limit on it and the owner’s hand will be forced.
Mr Harris stated he hoped everyone had an opportunity to read Mr Edward’s letter and Mr Harris’s email with detailed photos of the equipment used and the damage to the verges etc. Mr Harris reminded councillors that the Parish Council wrote a letter on 10th August to Mr Alston, with copies to Highways and to the police. Mr Harris read the letter out. He stated that we have seen the damage that has been done again by using too wide vehicles, the vehicles which are used will inevitably destroy the verges which is the point that Mr Edwards made and just about every resident in that end of the village will agree. Mr Harris stated that he had monitored the situation and has the evidence, the question is what should be done now?
Mr Beckley stated that there is very little to add because Mr Harris is right that is what we have said and it certainly does seem to be a problem again this year from the evidence that Mr Harris has got from that end of the village. How do we follow that up, another letter to Highways, the farmer concerned, the police?
Mr Harris stated that the first thing is the Parish Council has to conclude whether having monitored what is seen is acceptable or not. He has the evidence; you can still see it if you wish and we have heard from Mr Edwards. Mr Harris stated that Mr Edwards’ neighbours will say the same thing.
Mr Hill asked where was the evidence he had not seen it. Mr Edwards said you look at the verges. Mr Harris said please look at your emails, if we were in the hall you could see the photos, they are pretty illuminating and the other thing that come is the damage to the road is endemic which he thought Mr Edwards also made the same point. The County Council is having to pay for road repairs and Mr Edwards also pointed out that he is damaging his cars which other residents at that end of the village have also made the point, this has been going on and on. We have noted it, we have monitored it, is it acceptable? Mr Harris suggested that it is not.
Dr Bacon waited for ideas of what the Parish Council should do. Mr Harris said, first is it acceptable? Should we be doing something about it?
Mr Read said if you look at the state of the roads it just goes to show they were made for traffic of many, many years ago. Modern machinery had grown and grown in size and in weight and none of these machines as suitable for the roads that we have, that they are trying to use them on. This is only the beginning, next week the sugar beet season starts so it will be round again to like we had last time and like we said before it’s not a question of if it happens it is when it happens and it will happen.
Mr Beckley stated Mr Harris and Mr Read are quite right farm machinery has grown and it is too big for the roads that are available to them, what can we do about it? It’s not in the Parish Council’s gift to do anything.
467 Mr Harris thought first of all people have to just understand the concern which Mr Edwards’ letter says, Mr Harris said he had explained previously the inhabitants of Fenside have written to the MP, written to everybody so this is a fact and it is not changing as Mr Read says. Mr Edwards is just repeating what everybody down there thinks. Mr Harris suggested a letter to Mr Alston again copied to Highways and not the police this time. Mr Harris read out what he wanted the letter to say. “We wrote on 10th August 2020 to advise you that we would be monitoring what happened during the next potato/sugar-beet season. Unfortunately owing to the continued use of too wide vehicles there has again been considerable damage to the verges in Fenside, Hall Road and Lodge Road. We are writing to the Norfolk County Council Highways Department to record our strong concern about this. We would urge you to ensure that either you avoid the roads named by using different access to your fields or that you ensure that the farm vehicles used are suitable for the small size of the named roads.”
Mr Harris stated that different access could be used by going past the riding stables he would not have to use these roads at all. In part he has tried to do that, it is not actually Mr Alston who is using this he contracts out the land, so it is his contractors that is doing this. He could use different access. Mr Harris believed that Mr Shearing’s vehicles tend to be smaller. Mr Harris is saying that the Parish Council should say we have observed, we write again to Norfolk County Council who is the responsible body and say we seriously recommend that you take this to heart and try and either use different access which he could do via the riding stables, go up wood Street Road and then down by the riding stables which he could do and it is a much bigger road and just keep out of Fenside and keep out of Hall Road and out of Lodge Road. He could do that; it is possible to be done. Or use smaller vehicles which is what the lanes were designed for. Mr Harris has had today a tree surgeon, specialist out about what is happening in Lodge Road, outside Mr Edwards’ house and Mr Harris is going to have to protect a tree because it has been undermined there because otherwise it will come down and is a danger issue and he is going to have to protect the hedge there because it has been undermined. This is an issue which is very current and as Mr Read says it is just going to get worse every single time they use this equipment, they can’t turn the bends literally the vehicles are too big and this time unlike on the dreamers circuit we have got photos of them using them, you can see it.
Mr Harris proposed the Parish Council sends the letter; this was seconded by Mr Read. Mr Beckley stated he did not have any objections, he thought it was the right way forward and would like to see the letter before it is sent. There were seven votes in favour and one against. The letter will be sent from the clerk, but Mr Harris will send the wording to her.
Footpaths, Staithe, Sandholes: Dr Bacon reported that a tree came down in the Sandholes in the part that Mr Bird rents, it fell across the path in the Sandholes and Mr Bird cleared it up quickly. Mr Harris stated that there were a lot of trees down, there was a big oak tree that came down on the main footpath which Trevor had cleared up and there were trees down everywhere, we had a very serious time. The main footpath was closed for about two days.
Schools: Ms Johnson reported all pupils have returned to school, one pupil is being home schooled because of COVID anxieties, two pupils are on a six-week gradual timetable to support their wellbeing which has gone really well. They are on track to be in school full time by half term. There are works being done on the mobile which they had almost condemned from being a classroom a few years ago and converted it into a staff room and then used the staff room in the main building for teaching. They have now reverted to having that renovated so it can be used as another classroom and they are hoping to have a class in there after half term.
Any Other Business: Mr Beckley clarified that the clerk would send an article to the magazine about the village sign and also the vacancy on the Parish Council.
468 Date of Next Meeting: The date of the next meeting was set for Wednesday 4th November at 7pm via Zoom.
The meeting closed at 9.35pm.
…………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………. Chairman Date
469