Minutes of a virtual meeting of Shobnall Parish Council

held on Monday 21 September 2020 commencing at 7.00pm

 Present

Councillor Dennis (in the Chair)

Councillors Asghar, Dittmer, Donlon, Hoare, Shilton and Yousaf

In attendance

County Councillor Clarke

Borough Councillors McKiernan and Walker

Mary Danby, Clerk

Public Forum

No members of the public were present at the meeting.

2020-21/59          Apologies

None, all Councillors were present.

2020-21/60          Declarations of interest

None declared.

2020-21/61          Written applications for dispensations under the Localism Act 2011

None were received.

2020-21/62          Updates to Councillors’ Register of Interest Forms

No updates were notified.

2020-21/63          Minutes

Resolved              That the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2020 be approved and signed as a true record.

2020-21/64          Matters arising from the previous meeting

2020-21/57.2      Junction Grange Street/Shobnall Road

Councillors reported that the hedge had been cut back.

2020-21/65          County Councillor’s report

Councillor Clarke reported that:

• The Staffordshire County Council (East Staffordshire) (Prohibition and Restriction of Waiting and Loading and Parking Places) (Consolidation) Order 2018 (Amendment) No. 11/2020 would be in effect from 28 September 2020. The Order introduces No Waiting at Any Time on St Pauls Street West, St Pauls Square and Needwood Street. In response to a councillor’s query, he said that he was not aware of any proposal to make the whole area around St Pauls Square one-way.
• The consultation process is underway to remove double yellow lines on Edwards Street.
• He is working to see double yellow lines removed in the Parish to facilitate more on street parking spaces.
• The drains information has been submitted to the County Council who are trying to catch up on the backlog of outstanding jobs. He is attempting to get the new Cabinet Member to visit the Parish to see the problems first-hand.
• He is working with Bellway and BT to resolve a broadband problem for 95 properties on Bridgewater Road.
• Shobnall Road had been resurfaced. The plan is to stop or slow down HGVs on Shobnall Road – the consultation process had been put on hold due to Covid-19, but this will now be taken forward electronically.
• Mini Mart, Shobnall Road – a TRO had now been put in place which allows people to stop outside the shop for up to 30 mins.
• He had helped by getting the County Council to reinstate school transport for a child with special needs.
• In response to a query from a Councillor, he asked that the details of Planning Application No. P/2020/00857 (Lawns Farm – Reserved Matters) be sent to him.

2020-21/66          Borough Councillors reports

Councillor McKiernan:

• Referred to the Boundary Review, saying that Shobnall Primary School and the Albion public house would not be within the Shobnall if the Review is confirmed as it stands.
• She had had a tour of the Shobnall Leisure Centre and was pleased with the changes that had been made.
• Said that she understood that a mini-enforcement exercise was to take place on 21/22 September in Shobnall.
• Referred to problems with youths gathering, alleged drug dealing on private land at Sawmill Way and that the management company responsible for the area were keen to improve security.
• Stronger Towns Fund: Consultation will take place via two virtual workshops w/c 28 September. She encouraged Councillors to participate in one of the workshops.
• Was aware that the Rangemore Street planning application had been called in.
• Cemetery: She and Councillor Walker had been involved regarding complaints that had been received by ESBC regarding parking of cars, dog fouling, etc which had been discussed at a meeting and things were now in hand.
• Covid-19 updates were being received weekly, but a small group had now been formed and she and Councillor Walker are no longer involved and cannot input regarding Shobnall. A testing centre would be located at the Town Hall from 5/6 October (date to be confirmed).

Councillor Walker:

• As requested, he had written to the Planning Committee Chair regarding the Duke of York planning application but to date no response had been received.
• As requested, he had written to ESBC regarding fly tipping issues in the Ward. A response had been received regarding Vernon Terrace saying that since 2016 this had been cleared 40 times, but it is filling up again. ESBC has written to Landlords asking them to ensure that their tenants take their rubbish away when they vacate properties. ESBC had positioned a CCTV camera at the Terrace but it needs to be repositioned as it did not capture the dumping of rubbish there recently.
• Rangemore Street planning application: He had submitted the call-in notice. ESBC were waiting for Highways comments on the application before a decision would be made on whether the application would go to Committee.
• Stronger Towns Fund: He noted that none of the suggested projects were in Shobnall or inner Burton.

2020-21/67   Financial matters

2020-21/67.1       Schedule of payments

Resolved              That the above payments be approved and that the documents be signed at the next face to face meeting of the council.

2020-21/67.2       Bank reconciliation

                                Resolved              That the above was a true record.

2020-21/67.3       Earmarked Reserves (EMRs) as at 31 August 2020

Resolved              That the information be noted.

 2020-21/68          2020/21 Budget as at 31 August 2020

Resolved              That the Budget report showing receipts and payments as at 31 August 2020 be received and noted.

2020-21/69          Completion of the audit for the year ended 31 March 2020

Councillors were advised that Mazars, the external auditors, have completed their audit for the year ended 31 March 2020 with no matters being raised for the council’s attention. As required by the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015, the Completion Notice and audited Annual Governance and Accountability Return (AGAR) were published on the council’s website on 24 July 2020.

2020-21/70          Shobnall Parish Council website

It was noted that there had been 90 visits to the website in the 30 days to 14 September 2020.

2020-21/71          Planning matters

2020-21/71.1       Planning applications

Resolved              That the following observations be submitted to ESBC:

2020-21/71.2       Resolved              That the following observations submitted to ESBC during the Summer recess be retrospectively approved:                                  

2020-21/73.3       Planning decisions

Resolved              That the notified planning decisions be received and noted.

2020-21/72          Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG): Changes to the current planning system – Consultation on changes to planning policy and regulations

Resolved              That the document be received without comment.

2020-21/73          Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG): Planning for the future – White Paper

Resolved              That the document be received without comment.

2020-21/74          Proposed children’s writing competition (Minute Nos. 2019-20/181.2, 2020-21/006, 028 and 047 refer)

Deferred pending response from the Internal Auditor on his view of the proposed project.

2020-21/75          To receive questions from Councillors

2020-21/75.1       Covid-19

Councillors Yousaf and Hamid expressed their concerns regarding support for the BAME communities and retailers in the Ward.

Resolved              That the County Council be contacted raising the following concerns/issues:

• How much of the Covid-19 funds is being spent on the Shobnall Ward?
• The health needs of the community are not being met, citing difficulty in getting Dr appointments
• Nothing is being done to improve the housing stock, much of which is reported as being damp and in poor repair
• What is being done to address the needs of the disadvantaged?
• How is information being disseminated to people who do not have internet access and those whose first language is not English?
• Improved liaison of Council Officers with retailers is required, e.g. clarification of what the difference is between a small shop and a medium one; the number of customers able to be in stores at a time; clarification of the expectation that retailers should challenge people who are not wearing face masks, etc
• It was noted that the local Shobnall Ward ESBC councillors are no longer involved in the local Covid-19 forum and it is believed to be important that they have the opportunity to have input into measures to deal with the outbreak and support the community.

2020-21/75.2       Unity Park

Councillor Yousaf reported that the Park was littered, weeds growing up under benches and the soil was in poor condition. ESBC Councillor Walker reported that he had spoken to Officers at ESBC and this is now with contractors for the work to be done. He said that he would seek confirmation of the frequency of visits from ESBC.

2020-21/75.3       Planning

Councillor Asghar felt that more information is needed to help councillors to comment on planning applications. Councillor Dennis explained that all the information is sent to all councillors by the Clerk for every application notified by ESBC and he was encouraged to ask the Clerk if he wanted guidance on how to access the information on ESBC’s website.

Agreed  That the SPCA be asked if a Planning training course was due to be run this year.

2020-21/76          Correspondence and Circulars

2020-21/76.1       Staffordshire Parish Councils’ Association (SPCA)

The SPCA’s weekly newsletters have been circulated to all Councillors.

2020-21/76.2       Highways England

The weekly A38 Traffic Management Bulletins have been circulated to all Councillors.

2020-21/77          Exclusion of the press and public

Resolved              That under the Public Bodies (Admissions to Meetings) Act 1960 (Section 2) (and as expended by Section 100 of the Local Government Act 1972), the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information.

2020-21/78          Staffing matter

Resolved              That the Clerk’s salary be increased by 2.75%, backdated to 01 April 2020, as set out in the 2020/21 pay scales agreed by the National Joint Council for Local Government Services (NJC).

2020-21/79          Items for next meeting

No items were raised.

Date of next meeting

Monday 19 October 2020 commencing at 7.00pm via Zoom.

The Meeting closed at 9.03pm

Signed …………………………………………………….

Date ……………………………………………………….

Annex 1

PLANNING APPLICATION P/2020/00857

LAWNS FARM SHOBNALL ROAD, SHOBNALL, BURTON-UPON- TRENT

Comments submitted to ESBC by Cllr Dennis on behalf of the parish council:

• P/2020/00857 Flood Risk Assessment for land in Burton-upon-Trent, Final Report May 2019

From the P/2020/00857 Presentation Layout it appears that Shobnall Brook is covered, (a culvert) not only by the new proposed road into the site from Shobnall Road but for the whole distance at the entrance; it is currently an open brook and not a culvert.

P/2020/00857 Flood Risk Assessment for land in Burton-upon-Trent, Final Report May 2019  Page 37 last paragraph:  “It is recommended that Shobnall Brook and the associated structures are routinely inspected and cleared of obstructions by the relevant riparian owners, as required, to maintain the conveyance capacity of the channel and minimise the risk of localised flooding at the side and elsewhere.”

•  Who will have responsibility for the Shobnall Brook culvert?
• Who will carry out the routine inspection?
• Who will be accountable for any financial implications for Shobnall Brook?
• Will there be appropriate documentation for access to Shobnall brook for maintenance and inspections, for those qualified to do so, when a culvert?
•  Development (i.e. construction of dwellings) within 8m from the Shobnall Brook top of bank should be avoided.  This is to facilitate access to the watercourse for maintenance but also mitigate against residual flooding associated with the watercourse. Does the culvert reduce the effectiveness of the brook? 
• Will the action of making Shobnall Brook a culvert impact properties nearby, during very heavy rain fall, if the culvert is only fed through the ground?

• P/2020/00857 Noise Report the report identifies specifications for glazing and ventilation as open windows will cancel out the increased glazing specification.  (10.3.11 “It should be noted that, in order to meet the internal ambient noise criteria in these areas, the windows will need to remain closed”).  One has to question how green and sustainable these properties are if they have to use mechanical ventilation (page 16 Noise Report) in place of being able to open their windows.

• P/2020/00857 Noise Report The Noise Report identifies the noise levels from the A38 but also from the new road leading from Shobnall Road into the development.  However, the identification of the increased noise from the traffic entering the development via Shobnall Road will also impact those properties and buildings near to the entrance on Shobnall Road.  What noise mitigation is to be put in place for these residents and buildings.

• P/2020/00857 Noise Report 4.2 An additional 3m barrier has been specified in the north west corner of the development.  This is illustrated in Figure 8.  I suggest that this noise barrier is increased to allow a business already in existence to operate without residents complaining, at a future date, of the noise levels from the Albion pub.  This would be in line with item 5.2.3 Noise Report where it is noted “an existing business should not have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result of a development permitted after they were established”.
• The Noise Report concludes in 10.4.4 that even with the barrier installed sound pressure levels from the A38, in gardens, will still exceed tolerance levels.  I appreciate that the site from a development perspective has financial implications, however, would the site be a better development for all residents if those properties which would be impacted the most from the noise of the A38 were not built and the area left as open space with trees.

• P/2020/00857 Boundary Treatments Layout – off road parking provision will need to be an important aspect of this development as most of the houses face a primary or secondary road which runs through the development.  It is noted that this development will link up with the development commenced at Branston Locks and the potential traffic is likely to be very high, that drives through this area.

However, noted in the P 2020 00857 Design Compliance Statement p12 Garden Suburb Detailing table (section 5, of the Development is off Shobnall Road) it is noted under Parking, servicing and refuse that “Parking will be provided both on plot and on street to ensure higher densities can be achieved”.  On street parking is not promoted within the Shobnall Neighbourhood Plan. The number of housing should be reduced to allow for more off-road parking.

• Confirmation will be required that the boundary distance for Shobnall Grange is being met and the noise and fume levels, due to the proximity of the primary route running past, is being mitigated as the Boundary Treatments Layout does not appear to show any planting (green buffers) along the side of the road or around Shobnall Grange.  Item 6 on Conditions for Planning Application -P/2012/01467 refers; item 6 Notwithstanding the submitted information the minimum width of the green buffers separating the following elements shall be as follows:  …….      ” 40m between built development (including the provision of any public highway, or private drive) south of Shobnall Grange and the application site boundary to Shobnall Grange. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to safeguard the character and appearance of the development and its surroundings, and the setting of the adjoining listed building in accordance with East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policy BE1, the East Staffordshire Design Guide and the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Section 7, 12 and Paragraph 17). The boundary and green buffer is, however, noted in P 2020 00857 Design Compliance Statement.

• I would like guidance on whether the imposed green space surrounding Shobnall Grange should count towards the green open space that should be provided within the development.  What restrictions if any will come with the open space surrounding Shobnall Grange e.g. could it be used for playing games, a sports field or a cycle track for example.

• I note the current drive from Shobnall Road to Shobnall Grange is now identified within the boundary of the development (marked in red), however, on the earlier application it was not.  Assuming Shobnall Grange residents are happy with the alternative route through the new development we have no comment to make.

• P/2012/01467 Item 21 No development accessed from Shobnall Road shall take place until details of the footpath links to Shobnall Road and Centrum West have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the buildings in that part of the development shall not be occupied until the works have been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: As recommended by Staffordshire County Council Highways to ensure that pedestrian links from the site are formed in accordance with East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policies BE1 and T1, and the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Paragraph 17, and Section 4). As part of the reserved matters I feel this should include cycle paths.  However, it is noted that the primary and secondary routes through the development do not have a cycle path incorporated within their design.  Is this something that will be looked at and included?

• P/2020/00857 Design Compliance Statement – 5 Road Hierarchy gives the width of roads and footpaths.  The proposed entrance to the development from Shobnall Road breaks a run of pavement that has the potential to cater for a walking bus from a local Nursery, to and from school in the morning and afternoon, as well as for parents to park away from the school in the carpark of the Albion Hotel Pub and walk the rest of the way.  The proposed width of 6.5m is not sufficient to allow a central refuge or pelican crossing for pedestrians to cross the new road safely, near the junction with Shobnall Road, which in time will be a very busy road.  A safe method of crossing this new road should be a priority for this development.

• Assuming the retention of the church (Covid-19 may mean restricted or reduced access for church services) what provision is being provided for the church to be able to cater for weddings and funerals as Shobnall Road will be far busier.  Could parking provision be provided, within the development for the church, to allow safer parking for wedding and funeral cars.

• P/2012/01467 Item 23 Applications for reserved matters for means of access for each phase of built development shall be in accordance with the approved Transportation and Highways Phasing Strategy and shall include (insofar as applicable) details of:- ” Access to the principal roads, including the main estate road ” Street layout and character, including measures to restrain the speeds of vehicles to 20mph ” The route and specification of footpaths and cycle ways ” Parking, including the provision of secure cycle parking facilities for each house Reason: As recommended by Staffordshire County Council Highways in the interests of the safety of the users of the adjoining highway network in accordance with East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policy T1, and the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Paragraph 17, and Section 4).

I feel a more varied design or material in the road layout should be used, as well as the enhancement of the tree lined road, to help maintain the 20 mph speed limit throughout the site; to reduce the need for speed humps.  What designs and layouts are going to be used to prevent speeding through the site and prevent the route from being used as a “rat run” from the A38.

Additional comments submitted by Cllr Hoare

It’s not clear whether an Air Quality assessment has been carried out in connection with the properties which will border the A38 dual carriageway and if so what, if any, action will be taken to deal with any possible harmful effects.

4.1.4      East Staffordshire Water Cycle Study (2013)

This study states regarding wastewater collection and treatment, Branston Locks is expected to have major drainage issues as there are no suitable sewers to the west of the Trent and Mersey Canal that would have the capacity to accommodate 2,750 new dwellings.  It is recommended that the site be pumped northwards towards Shobnall to a sewer with sufficient spare capacity. Due to the scale of the development proposed in this area detailed hydraulic modelling will be required to identify a suitable connection point to minimise downstream capacity improvements. 

Given that this Study was completed 7 years ago are you now able to say whether a sewer has now been identified and if so, what is its maximum capacity, its current capacity and therefore its remaining capacity? What is the anticipated wastewater requirement from this site?

Application Form

The Application Form refers to a network of walking and cycling routes, but these aren’t immediately obvious from any of the maps accompanying this application. Please can you provide a map showing all planned walking and cycling routes, bearing in mind that Sustrans National Cycle Routes 54 and 63 cross the whole of this site from Shobnall Road to Branston Road.

Flood Risk Summary

Is sufficient concern being given to the possibility of surface water flooding given that the Environment Agency (EA) map shows that the eastern part of the site is at high risk of surface water flooding? There are numerous references in other Planning Documents to “rafts” being required to underpin foundations, raised finished floor levels and some properties with little or no infrastructure recommended to be upgraded.