Parish Council of Langton Matravers
www.langtonmatravers-pc.org
Minutes of a meeting of Council held in the Village Hall on  Thursday, 8th February 2007 at 7.00pm.
(Present: Cllr. N E Priddle (Chairman) in the Chair; Cllr P E Loudoun, (Vice-Chairman); Cllrs. Mrs V C 			            Murray, S M Murray, J Bradford, P J Bradford).
1.	Apologies were received from Cllr Mrs P M Kwantes, Cllr P White and Cllr. M W J Lovell.
2.	The Meeting was then adjourned for the Public Discussion. There was a large attendance in the 	public gallery, almost all of whom were present to protest against the plan submitted by Raglan 	Housing Association to build affordable houses and flats at the north end of Steppes. The arguments 	put forward included: the dangerous access into the B3069 on the brow of Coombe Hill; the large 	number of vehicles already parked along one side of the Steppes side-road, particularly during non-	working days and hours, which rendered the road virtually a single vehicle-width; the acute danger 	posed by children playing ball-games and roller-skating in the roadway during evenings and at 	weekends.
	Mr C Turner mentioned the necessity for dog-bins.
3.	Matters Arising from the Public Discussion..
	The Meeting was resumed.
	Chairman pointed out that Council had considered the issue of dog-bins, but had ruled them out 	because so many people did not want them in the village centre and in the side-roads there would be 	no-one to empty them.
	As all the other public comments made concerned a plan, Council passed immediately on to Planning 	Matters.
4.	Planning Matters:
	(1) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 2006/1135, submitted by Mr N Gray, 	to erect single-storey side and rear extensions at ‘Roumelia’, Gypshayes.
	(2) Concerning Plan 1135, on the proposition by Cllr J Bradford, it was unanimously agreed that 	“The Parish Council has no objection.”
	(3) There were no comments by the public concerning Plan 2006/1160, submitted by Mr & Mrs A 	Smith and Mr S Smith to erect an agricultural worker’s dwelling at New Barn, Knitson Lane. 
	(4) Concerning Plan 1160, Cllr S M Murray declared a non-pecuniary interest as a friend of the 	applicant. Cllr Mrs Murray said that owners of livestock needed to reside near to their animals, 	particularly in the breeding season. Cllr J Bradford asked where exactly the proposed dwelling would 	be, as the plans failed to show this. He also asked what type of dwelling it would be, as the wording 	of the application did not make it clear if this would be a caravan, a mobile home or a temporary 	bungalow. At this point Mr S 	Smith, who had arrived late, endeavoured to speak, but Chairman ruled 	firmly against allowing this, as at the commencement of the meeting he had explained that anyone 	could speak on any subject during the Public Discussion, but that no member of the public would be 	allowed to speak during the actual debates. On the proposition from the Chair, it was agreed (For 4; 	Against 2; Abstentions 0; Absent 3) that “The Parish Council believes that this application should be 	refused until submission of a more detailed plan showing the exact nature, size and site of the 	proposed dwelling, and until an Agricultural Viability Assessment has been conducted.”
	(5) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 2006/1166, submitted by Mr G Foot, to 	erect an agricultural building on land near The White House in Crack Lane, for sheep and tractor 	storage.
	(6) Concerning Plan 1166, after some discussion during which it was recalled that previously under 	similar circumstances Council had asked for an Agricultural Viability Assessment. On the 	proposition from the Chair, it was unanimously agreed that “The Parish Council is of the opinion that 	an Agricultural Viability Assessment should be made on this holding before any decision is taken 	upon this plan.”
	(7) When Plan 2006/1154 came before Council, Cllrs Mrs V C Murray and S M Murray declared 	prejudicial interest and withdrew from the Council Chamber. The Clerk reported that he had received 	an email and eight letters objecting to the Raglan Plan to erect 4 houses and 4 flats with 4 new 	vehicular accesses on land adjacent to Steppes. As some of the letters were quite lengthy, involving 	two A4 sheets of close typing, Chairman ruled that a synopsis should be given of all the reasons for 	objection. This was then done. The comments included the dangerous access on to the B3069, the 	line of parked vehicles which reduced the road to a single vehicle-width, the ‘bottle-neck’ between 	Nos. 13 and 17, which meant that emergency vehicles would have difficulty, the fact that there was 	no safe way for children to walk into the village centre or to the Play Area in the School Field, and 	the strong local opposition to any extension of this estate. 
	(8) Concerning Plan 2006/1154, on the proposition from the Chair it was 	unanimously agreed that 	“The Parish Council is strongly and unanimously opposed to this application on the grounds of over-	development, totally unsuitable access and in support of the overwhelming local objection to further 	development on this site.” (Cllrs Mrs V C Murray and S M Murray then returned to the Council 	Chamber.)
	(9) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 2007/0015, submitted by Mr Bellis, to 	replace the existing single-storey rear extension with a two-storey rear extension at ‘Sunny Cottage, 	90 High Street. 
	(10) Concerning Plan 15, on the proposition by Cllr J Bradford, it was unanimously agreed that “the 	Parish Council has no objection.”
	(11) Council noted that Statutory Notification of Plans affecting the Conservation Area had been 	received, but that in respect of the extension to The White House in Crack Lane had been received a 	month after the plan had been approved, as no-one had realized that the dwelling lay within the 	Conservation Area.
	(12) Council noted that the plan to replace the rear extension and to make internal alterations and to 	install two side windows at No. 20 High Street had been approved.
	(13) The Clerk reported receipt of an application to reduce one horse-chestnut tree and fell another 	unknown species of tree between ‘Mulberry Cottage’ and ‘Stoney Yarrows’. Council had no 	objection.
	(14) The Clerk reported that a Site Meeting had been arranged for the District Planning Committee at 	the entrance to The Old Malthouse Lane on Thursday February 15th at 9.30 am. It was agreed that, as 	Council’s objection to the Plan for 2 cottages would be read out, there was no necessity to attend.
5.	The Minutes of the last Council Meeting, held on January 11th 2007 were approved nem con and duly 	signed.
6.	Matters Arising from the Minutes:
	(1) Item 6(1). Cllr Loudoun reported that the notices concerning dog-fouling had still not arrived.
	(2) Item 6(2). It was reported that still nothing had been done about the foliage in the road to the east 	of Leat Cottage.
	(3) Item 6(3). Cllr Priddle reported that as the Cemetery lay within the Langton Matravers 	Conservation Area the trees could not be dealt with until the public had been duly notified.
	(4) Item 6(4). Mr Hodd agreed that he had been notified of the Parish Council’s concern by Miss 	Carmichael, but said that the Old Marble Quarry was not high on the National Trust’s list of 	priorities. It was agreed that Mr Hodd should be invited to attend the March Council Meeting.
	(5) Item 6(5). The Chief Executive of PDC had ruled that if Council ordered the play equipment, it 	could pay the bills and reclaim the VAT. The Clerk had notified Mrs Stone of this.
	(6) Item 6(6). The Clerk reported that the notice-case for the Valley Road had been collected. Cllr 	Loudoun reported that it had also been erected. On the proposition from the Chair, a vote of thanks to 	Cllr Loudoun was passed nem con.
	(7) Item 6(7). Some argument arose concerning the thickness of the branches to be lopped and 	concerning safety measures necessary for the person employed to do the work on the oak tree in the 	Council’s Cemetery, so this matter was deferred.
	(8) Item 6(8). A telephone message from Mr Colin Lander of James Smith the Funeral Directors 	intimated that Ms Smith’s father was not related to Mr Bolton, but had merely looked after the grave. 	She did not want her uncle’s inscription added to the existing memorial.  Council therefore ruled that 	his ashes might not be interred in the grave of Mr & Mrs Bolton, as this would infringe the lease-	hold. It was also agreed that the stone should be re-erected. 
	(9) Item 6(9). The Clerk noted that, although the path at Knitson had been referred to as a Bridleway, 	it was in fact a Footpath. The proposed diversion would make it shorter and more commodious to 	users, and these were the only two legal reasons for a diversion. Chairman pointed out that the line of 	the original footpath could not be used as it passed through farm sheds.
	(10) Item 6(10). The Clerk reported that as yet no site meeting date had been suggested from the 	County Officer concerning the flooding of the approach lane into Acton. It was agreed that she should 	be contacted again.
7.	The Clerk’s Report for the period from 4.1.07 to 1.2.07 was received.
8.	Matters Arising from the Clerk’s Report:
	(1) Item 5. The Clerk reported that he had applied immediately for the Rate Relief on the 	Toilets/Office Block.
	(2) Item 7. Council agreed that the burial details did not need to be computerized yet, as the cemetery 	had not yet been operating for fifty years.
	(3) Item 9. It was unanimously agreed that the subscription to the Open Spaces Society should be 	renewed.
	(4) Item 16. The reply to the initial stage of the Diversion of Public Footpath No. 6 (“We see no 	reason to oppose this at the moment, but reserve the right to object at a later stage”) was endorsed.
	(5) Item 22. The Clerk reported that, as Chairman had tried several times to see the Vicar, without 	success, he had visited Mrs Malins and explained to her the current position: that the Council was 	still considering off-street parking.
	(6) Item 30. On the proposition by Cllr J Bradford, it was unanimously agreed that the subscription to 	the National Playing Fields Association should be renewed. 
	(7) Additional Item from the Clerk. The Road Safety Division of DCC had written to say that a SID 	will be installed at Coombe. They asked for a suggested site and the Clerk had suggested the north 	boundary of either ‘Tudor Rose’ Cottage or ‘Mayflower’ Cottage. This was agreed.
9.	Chairman’s Announcements:
	Cllr Priddle said that he thought that the Union Flag presented by the Clerk, which had been stolen 	from the wall of the Council Office, should be replaced. Council agreed.
10.	Financial Matters:
	(1) The following additions to Council funds were noted:
	     £80.00 from Lovell’s Quarries for the Memorial to the late Nelson Bower.
	     £100.00 donation towards maintenance of the Closed Cemeteries.
	(2) The following payments by cheque, already authorized, were noted:
	     £50.00 Grant in Aid of the funds of the Purbeck Branch of the Citizens Advice Bureau.
	     £10.00 to Village Hall for use of the December Council Meeting.
	     £158.63 to Banyards Ltd for work on trees in the Closed Cemeteries.
	     £300.00 to Alan Davis for repairs to 1 memorial and fixing 3 others in the Closed Cemeteries.
	     £75.00 to Alan Davis for fixing the Bolton memorial in Crack Lane Cemetery.
	(3) The purchase of two Accounts Ledgers (for 2007-8 and 2008-9) from Shaw & Son was 			authorized.
11.	Cemetery Matters: Nothing to report.
12.	Affordable Housing: Nothing to report.
13.	Off-Street Parking.
	The Clerk reported receipt of a letter from Cllr Mrs Kwantes objecting to the suggestion that Crack 	Lane might be made a one-way street. There had been no reply as yet from DCC regarding the 	suggested echelon parking at the south end of Crack Lane. It was agreed that ‘Parking in the Village’ 	should be included in the Agenda of the next Council Meeting.
14.	Cemetery Regulations.
	The suggested additions were read out by the Clerk. It was agreed that a debate on these should be 	deferred to the next meeting, when a decision on the diameter of the proposed dowel-rods would be 	made.
15.	The date of the next Council Meeting was confirmed as Thursday March 8th at 7.0 p.m.
16.	There being no further business, the Meeting was adjourned at 9.0 pm.

Signed……………………………….....(Chairman).          Date……………………………….