Parish Council of Langton Matravers
www.langtonmatravers-pc.org
Minutes of a meeting of Council held in the Village Hall on  Thursday, 11th January 2007 at 7.00 pm
(Present: Cllr N E Priddle (Chairman) in the Chair; Cllr Mrs V C Murray, Cllr Mrs P M Kwantes, and Cllrs J 		Bradford, P White, P J Bradford, S Murray and M W J Lovell.)
1.	Apologies for absence were received from Cllr P Loudon (Vice-Chairman).
2.	Public Discussion Period.
	There was a large number of parishioners in the public gallery, most of whom were concerned about 	the Ragland Housing Association’s Outline Plan for the north end of Steppes. Chairman explained 	that this would not be considered by the Council at the current meeting, but at the next Council 	Meeting on February 8th. However, he would, of course, allow the discussion on the subject.
	At this point Cllrs Mrs V C Murray and S M Murray declared a prejudicial interest and left the 	Council Chamber.
	Mrs C Crabb referred to the lack of consultation with residents of Steppes.
	Mr Meadows referred to the danger of any additional traffic in the side-road called Steppes, as there 	were many cars parked along one side, and many children played in the road.
	Mr Burt and Mrs Bell also spoke of the danger of more traffic being generated by another 8 	dwellings.
	Mr Burt and his son referred to the lack of a play area in Steppes. Chairman explained that Raglan 	had included an unsuitable piece of land in their former scheme. Mr Burt said that goal posts and a 	basket-ball net would solve the problem for the adolescents, rather than other play equipment.
	Mr M Murray and Mr A Dunn declared interest, as members of the family owning the land, but spoke 	of the need for housing so that local couples did not have to leave the village, and so that those who 	had already had to leave might be allowed to return.
	Chairman explained that the development plan which had been received, was an Outline Plan only.
	He advised members of the public to write letters of objection to the District Council Planning 	Officer, with a copy to the Clerk to the Parish Council. He said that their attendance and submissions 	at the February Council Meeting would also be welcome.
	Mr Merrick spoke against the plan submitted by the Old Malthouse Ltd  for two dwellings in The 	Old Malthouse Lane. He spoke of the Highways Authority’s plan to make the access into the High 	Street more safe, and said that in his opinion it would do the opposite and cause much greater 	congestion.
2.	Matters Arising from the Public Discussion:
	Chairman ruled that the Old Malthouse Plan would be coming up as the second item on the next 	matter on the agenda, so should be left until then.
3.	Planning Matters:
	(1) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 1028.
	(2) Council’s comment on Plan 1028, submitted by Mr & Mrs Wootton of Tom’s Field Camp Site for 	relief from Condition 1 of Planning Consent 6/83/27, so that the residential caravan could be 	occupied throughout the year, on the proposition by Cllr White was that “The Parish Council is 	opposed to any relaxation of Condition 1 of the Planning Consent 6/83/27”. (For 5; Abstentions 3; 	Absent 1).
	(3) There had been two stated comments in the public discussion and one letter against Plan 1018, 	submitted by The Old 	Malthouse School Ltd. To erect two detached cottages with garages and 	modify existing access on land in The Old Malthouse Lane, and make alterations to the junction of 	Malthouse Lane with the High Street.
	(4) On the proposition from the Chair, it was agreed (For 6; Against 1; Abstention 1; Absent 1) that 	the submitted comment should be the same as that submitted previously, which was that
	“The Parish Council objects to this plan on grounds of over-development of the site and that the 	proposed dwellings are unsympathetic to the surroundings.”
	(5) There were no comments from the public on Plan 1109.
	(6) Council’s comment on Plan 1109, submitted by Mr G Foot, to erect conservatory and single-	storey extension to “White House”, Crack Lane, on the proposition from the Chair, was “The Parish 	Council has no objection”. (For 7; Abstention 1; Absent 1)
	(7) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 1095.
	(8) Council’s comment on Plan 1095, submitted by Mr & Mrs Curtis, to erect conservatory at the side 	of ’Hazel Meadow’, North Leaze, on the proposition by Mrs V C Murray, was “The Parish Council 	has no objection.” (For 7; Abstention 1; Absent 1).
	(9) There were no comments from the public concerning Plan 1104.
	(10) Council’s comment on Plan 1104, submitted by Mr T Haysom for variation of conditions 1 and 3 	to Planning Consent 2005/1104, on the proposition from the Chair, was that “The Parish Council has 	no objection.” (For 7: Abstention 1: Absent 1).
	(11) On the proposition from the Chair, the same comment, with the same voting, was applied to the 	Dorset County Council’s similar plan, to allow operations to continue at Turnpike Quarry for a 	further 3 years and to be allowed to dig at a depth of 18 metres.
	(12) There were no planning decisions to report.
5.	The Minutes of the Council Meeting held on December 14th 2006, having been distributed to 	members prior to the meeting, on the proposition from the Chair, were confirmed nem con and duly 	signed.
6.	Matters Arising from the Minutes:	
	(1) Item 6(3). As Cllr Loudoun was absent, it was not known if the Anti Dog Fouling notices had 	arrived yet.
	(2) Item 6(5). It was reported that so far nothing had been done to remove the foliage growing out of 	the road just east of ‘Leat Cottage‘. Cllr. Lovell said that he would mention the matter again.
	(3) Item 6(8). After some discussion it was agreed that one tree and two stems should be felled by 	Banyard Ltd at the expense of the Old Cemeteries Maintenance Fund, amounting to £158.63 if the 	cheque were paid at the time when the work was done.
	(4) Item 6(1`2). The Clerk reported that he had not heard from Mr Hodd. It was agreed that a letter 	should be sent to him, asking if Miss Louise Carmichael had referred Council’s complaint to him? 
	(5) Item 6(13). The Clerk explained that the Preschool argued that the order for the new Play 	Equipment had not yet been placed, but that if the Council placed the order, it would be Council’s 	initiative, and then it could pay the bill and reclaim the VAT. Cllr Lovell (County Councillor and 	District Councillor) said he thought this was correct, but he had asked the Chief Executive of PDC to 	enquire as to the legality of this, but he had not yet had the response. It was generally agreed that if 	this response were positive, that Council should go ahead with the order.
	(6) Item 6(14). The Clerk reminded Council that the notice-case for the Valley Road was still 	awaiting collection.
	(7) Item 6(15). It was agreed that members should look at the two oak trees bordering Crack Lane 	Cemetery and that a decision should be made at the February Council Meeting as to whether or not 	the branches should be cut off up to a height of three metres from the ground.
	(8) Item 11(1). The Clerk reported on a telephone message from a Deborah Smith who wanted 	permission to inter her uncle’s ashes in Mr Bolton’s plot and to put a flat memorial. As this was one 	of the very dangerous memorials which had been taken down and was being stabilized at Council’s 	expense, the Clerk suggested to her that a cheaper plan would be to add her uncle’s inscription to the 	memorial, have no flat stone, and that she might then make a contribution to the £75 paid by Council 	to stabilize the memorial. Her rep[ly was awaited.
	(9) Item 14. Cllr Mrs Kwantes, Parish Rights-of-Way Liaison Officer, reported that the case of the 	bridleway at Knitson Farm had not yet been processed, but that the Parish Council would be the first 	to be informed.
	(10). Item 15. The Clerk reported that the officer i/c flooding at DCC had been assigned to the Acton 	approach lane complaint, and that she would be telephoning to make an appointment for a site 	meeting. Meanwhile Cllr Priddle’s previous plan to solve the problem had been resurrected.
7.	The Clerk’s Report for the period from 8.12.06 to 5.1.07 was received.
8.	Matters Arising from the Clerk’s Report:
	(1) Item 7. No Councillor was interested in attending the meeting at Wareham on how to implement 	the matters of concern expressed in the Parish Plan.
	(2) Item 10. On the proposition from the Chair it was unanimously agreed to give a £50.00 Grant in 	Aid to the Purbeck branch of the Citizens Advice Bureau.
	(3) Item 12. No-one wished to read the two large Reports on Community Care.
	(4) Item 20. The Clerk reported that, after consultation with the Chairman, he had advised A R Harris 	& Son to send the bill concerning the Timson Cottages to whoever had ordered the work.
	(5) Item 23. The Clerk reported that the fee for the erection of a monument had now been paid by 	Lovell’s Quarries, with an apology for the oversight.
	(6) The Clerk asked Council for a ruling on the pole carrying the Bus Stop Sign at the north end of 	Durnford Drove. The decision was that it should remain in its present position, so that it would not be 	damaged in future, and so that it would complete the ‘staggered’ plan (north, then south side) of these 	signs throughout the village.
9.	Chairman’s Announcements: None.
10.	Financial Matters:
	(1) The following additions to Council funds were noted:
	     £370.00 from James Smith for Plot C16 & Burial of the late Sharon Ardern.
	     £20.00 donation towards funds for maintenance of the Closed Cemeteries.
	(2) The following payments by cheque, already authorized, were noted:
	     £15.00 to Village Hall for November Council Meeting and Meeting on Speeding.
	     £106.53 to S.E. for current at the Toilets/Office Block.
	(3) The following payment by Direct Debit was noted:
	     £67.00 to PDC for January Rates on Toilets/Office Block.
11.	Cemetery Matters:
	(1) Council’s Cemetery:
	Members were asked to examine the two overhanging Oak trees before the February Meeting.
	(2) Closed Cemeteries:
	Cllr J Bradford asked if attention could be paid to the Brown Memorial Cross in the ’Circle’, which 	was leaning badly and was not attached to its plinth?
12.	Affordable Housing:
	It was agreed that this should be deferred to the next Council Meeting, by which time members would 	have viewed the outline Raglan proposal for housing at Steppes.
13.	Off-Street Parking.
	(1) Cllr J Bradford proposed that the County Council should be asked if echelon parking at the top 	end of Crack Lane, say a 75 yards stretch northwards from the Plastic Bottle Bank, might be feasible.
	(2) Cllr Lovell suggested car parking at the south end of Twoleas meadow, so that owners would be 	able to walk into the village via Cemetery Walk.
	Members were asked to consider these proposals ready for a Paper on the subject of Car Parking.
14.	Cemetery Regulations:
	Each Member had been provided with a copy of the current Regulations. 
	After some discussion as to the necessity of adding several new Regulations, it was decided to defer 	this matter to the February Meeting.
15.	The date of the next Council Meeting was confirmed as Thursday February 8th at 7.0 pm.

There being no further business, the Meeting was adjourned at 9.0 p.m.