Present: Harvie Steele (Chairman), Neil Longson (Vice Chairman), Estelle Warriner, Celia Rayner, Paul Royce, Jonathan Trees and Roger Watts.

Also in attendance: Tony Thomas (Clerk to the Council)

The Chairman opened the meeting and welcomed everyone.

Michael Jackson (Meeting), Pietro di Marino (Business Commitment) and Dennis Tyler

It was pointed out by Paul Royce that it was Estelle Warriner who mentioned the pavement in point 7.i); the Clerk said he would amend the minutes. Subject to this amendment the minutes were approved as an accurate record of the previous meeting, held on 6^th September 2005. The Chairman signed the minutes.

i) Willets Farm – Enforcement Notice issued on 19^th August, effective 26^th September. An appeal has been lodged in respect of the mobile home on the site which it is claimed has been occupied for over 10 years as a residence, and therefore should not be part of the enforcement action. The enforcement notice is suspended until the appeal is heard, probably at a public enquiry following written submissions on the basis of the appeal from the applicant and the reply from HDC to those submissions. HDC have documents and statements disputing the 10-year period. The legal department of HDC are to be asked whether the rest of the notice can be enforced for which no appeal has been raised.

A letter has been received from Mr D.R.Carpenter, a Broadford Bridge Road resident who enclosed a copy of a letter he has written to West Sussex Economic Partnership. They (WSEP) have written to Horsham District Council planning department in support of the application to erect new commercial buildings on the site. Mr Carpenter believes the support of the WSEP is flawed for the following reasons:

1) The site is not a commercial property; the current illegal use as such is the subject of an enforcement notice from HDC,

2) It has not taken account of the 104,000 sq ft of commercial property vacant within a ten-mile radius,

3) The site has no public transport nearby and therefore would lead to increased traffic into a rural area, against all government guidelines,

4) The loss of commercial property to residential development supports the view that there is no justifiable need for further commercial development in this area; otherwise councils would not give planning permission.

ii) Queens Head – Licensing Application – The application was withdrawn at the last minute and the current license still applies. Thanks received from Terry Allen for Estelle who went to speak on behalf of the Parish Council; the protesters were appreciative of the support.

iii) Museum – Through a meeting of the Ashington History Society, Maureen Tulley has met Jeremy Knight from Horsham Museum who has indicated he would be delighted to offer some assistance with the museum exhibits and he is willing to meet with us to discuss what is needed. Suitable dates from the committee are required.

iv) Web Site – Now up and running thanks to Jonathan, needs updating with current information, which will take place shortly.

DC/05/2089 - Miss R McKean, Little Farm, Old House Lane, Coolham

Single-storey extension and double garage

DC/05/2090 - Mr And Mrs Woolf, Brook End, Monkmead Copse

Conservatory and plant room (amendment to previous approved DC/04/2174)

DC/05/2109 - Mr B Kitteridge, Combers, Lordings Lane

Erection of 1 dwelling (Outline)

Parish Council – Objection This is a front garden development, similar to that refused in April. The size and shape of the plot would not permit a dwelling compatible with existing developments in the area and would therefore set an unwelcome precedent.

DC/05/2125 - Mr And Mrs Ansell, Harbolets, Harbolets Road, West Chiltington

2-Storey extension with cellar, single-storey extension and conservatory

DC/05/2175 - Mr I France, 27 Holly Close, West Chiltington

First-floor side extension

Parish Council – No objection – but the members thought the roof shape to look overbearing and a revised plan should be sought.

DC/05/2199 - Mr Fuller, Gentle Harry’s Farm, Mill Road, West Chiltington

Conservatory

DC/05/2201 - Mr Fuller, Gentle Harry’s Farm, Mill Road, West Chiltington

DC/05/2233 - Mr And Mrs Trees, The Doubles, Lordings Lane, West Chiltington

Single-storey side extension and detached carport

Jonathan Trees outlined to members the application and answered some questions and then left the room whilst the application was discussed.

DC/05/2239 - Mr And Mrs C F Phelan, Oaklea, Harborough Gorse, West Chiltington

Surgery to one Oak tree

Parish Council – Objection – The members thought the surgery proposed was too drastic and could well result in the death of the tree. The Clerk would speak to Will Jones the Tree Specialist at HDC to obtain his views.

DC/05/2242 - Mr And Mrs A R Davis, Fernwood Cottage, Crossways, West Chiltington

Erection of 1 dwelling and garage (Approval of Reserved Matters)

DC/05/2255 - Mr And Mrs Downes, Leaflands, The Common, West Chiltington

Retention of 2 metre high fence

Parish Council – Objection - The fence is too prominent in the street scene and although planted in front with leylandii type conifers this will do nothing to improve the situation. A hedge of beech or similar natural trees would still give the privacy sought by the owners without being visually unattractive. If the fence was painted green it would blend in better with the environment than the current chestnut stain.

DC/05/2261 - Mr R Goswell, Little Birches, Silver Wood, West Chiltington

Single-storey rear extension

DC/05/1516 - Mr AJ. White, Pinelands, Nyetimber Copse - Renewal of unimplemented planning permission (WC/69/00) for a 2-storey and first floor extension

District Council decision: PERMITTED – Materials and finishes to match existing and windows at first floor level in the south east elevation to be glazed with obscured glass.

DC/05/1701 Millwood Designer Homes, Panners West Chiltington Road - Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 3 dwellings, garages and access.

Parish Council – No objection. Approved by a majority vote 4:3.

District Council decision: REFUSED – The development by virtue of its scale, design and siting would adversely affect the character of the area. No overriding need at present to release further land for development, particularly where the development fails to make the most efficient use of the land and where the proposal is not of a high standard of design and layout. The development makes no contribution towards improvements to transport infrastructure and community facilities.

DC/05/1819 - Mr And Mrs Johnson, Tankards, Westward Lane - Erection of double carport building and construction of vehicular access onto Monkmead Lane

District Council decision: PERMITTED – Visibility splays must be provided in accordance with plans and kept clear.

DC/05/1879 - Mr And Mrs Fairmaner, Westerlyn, Roundabout Lane - Single storey rear and 2 storey side extensions

District Council decision: PERMITTED - Obscured glass to be used in the northern elevation.

DC/05/1896 Mr And Mrs S. Rout, Timberdown, Harborough Drive - 2-Storey side and rear extension

Parish Council – No objection – but would like conditions attached about using obscured glass in windows facing Woodlands, and that any foundation work should take account of and protect tree roots to avoid damage.

District Council decision: PERMITTED –. Obscured glass to be used in the west elevation over looking Woodlands, and all trees, shrubs and hedges identified on a plan and any that dies or become damaged during construction to be replaced.

DC/05/0742– Mr Clarke, Cedar Barn, Coneyhurst Farm, West Chiltington Lane, Coneyhurst – shed

Parish Council – No objection.

District Council decision – REFUSED – by virtue of its size, siting and appearance, the proposed building would adversely affect the rural character of the area, contrary to Local Plan policies.

DC/05/1071- Mr & Mrs Rymer, land east of Conifers, The Common - erection of a dwelling

Parish Council - objections. Outline application DC/04/1220, allowed on appeal, refers specifically to a 2 bedroom retirement chalet bungalow. What is now proposed is a 3-bedroom chalet bungalow, with a conservatory not shown on the outline application. The position of the building is shown further east on the plot, closer to the boundary with the neighbouring property, and further north towards the road. The plans show a house with a steeply pitched roof, which is too large for the site, and which will appear cramped and out of keeping with neighbouring development. The steeply pitched roof will make the house an intrusive and incongruous feature of the street scene, detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality.

Any new house on the site should be built precisely in accordance with the appeal decision.

Parish Council - strong objections, for the same reasons that earlier applications have been considered unacceptable. This proposal is for frontland development, and contrary to Local Plan policy WC1 and the Village Design Statement. This area of West Chiltington Common is characterised by large houses standing back from the road in generous plots. The new house will stand well forward of the existing building line; the plot is small, out of keeping with other plot sizes in the vicinity, with the result that any new house will appear cramped on the site, and out of keeping; there will inevitably be loss of trees and vegetation at the site, to the detriment of the character and amenities of the area. The creation of a new vehicular access where visibility in Common Hill is already poor will increase the chances of traffic accidents; the Parish has insufficient local facilities and amenities to serve yet another new development; and permitting the application will create a precedent which, when followed, will destroy the character and amenities of this pleasant semi-rural area. The District Council's reasons for refusing application WC/42/93, and the Inspector's reasons for dismissing the subsequent appeal, continue to apply. The Parish Council asks that the application be referred to Committee for decision.

District Council decision – REFUSED – Undesirable intensification, out of keeping and incompatible with existing development in the locality.

DC/04/1044 – Saxon Estates, Greenways, Lordings Lane – Demolition of existing dwelling, garages and ancillary buildings and erection of 3 dwellings with garages.

It was agreed that the Parish Council would object to the application for the same reasons that earlier applications were considered unacceptable. The proposal is out of character and out of keeping for the area. The proposed plots, at a third of an acre, are smaller than surrounding plots and out of keeping. Despite changes in design from the previous application, the proposed new houses will introduce an incongruous element of urbanisation to the street scene. Given the topography of Lordings Lane and the proposed ridge heights of the properties, the new houses would be an obtrusive feature in the landscape, and will be detrimental to neighbours' amenities and to the visual amenities of the locality.

Lordings Lane is a narrow private road, inadequate to take the heavy traffic using the road during construction, and the numerous additional car journeys made by occupants of the new houses. Both the eastern and western junctions of Lordings Lane with the County road network (at Haglands Lane and Smock Alley/Roundabout Lane) have inadequate sightlines, and any growth in traffic will exacerbate the existing road safety hazards.

The proposal is contrary to the Village Design Statement (VDS). Because of its rural character and inadequacy to take additional traffic, the VDS specifically identifies Lordings Lane as an area where additional development should not take place. The views of the Inspector, in dismissing an appeal against refusal of the previous application, continue to apply.

If, despite objections, the Planning Authority were minded to grant the application, the Parish Council would not object to the erection of single-storey dwellings at the site.

District Council decision – REFUSED – by reason of its scale, design and siting, would be out of keeping with character of area, and therefore contrary to Local Plan Policies and Village Design Statement. Also contrary to Government guidance PPG3 – no overriding need at present to release further land for development, particularly where the development is not of a high standard of design and layout.

Appeal Lodged – Public Inquiry to be held on Tuesday 1^st November 2005.

i) TPO – Land west of Gentle Harry’s Farm, Mill Road – came into force on 27^th September 2005 for six months until confirmed.

ii) Street Naming and numbering – details of names of houses in Wychacre development now received from HDC.

iii) Have your say in local policing – meeting arranged for Tuesday 11^th October at 7.30 in Pulborough Village Hall, details available from the Clerk.

iv) County Local Committees – Budget Consultation 2006/07 and beyond – Have your say in how funds are allocated. The members looked at the priorities listed and agreed they were not their priorities and questioned the value of the exercise.

v) WSCC, District-level housing distribution – consultation on behalf of SEERA, Leaflets summarising the consultation, and including a questionnaire for parish councils.

vi) Dolly Posts, East Street – Following complaints from residents County Highways are now considering to put black posts in place rather than black & white. They are requesting a contribution from the Parish Council. Estelle pointed out that no budget exists for this. The members thought the extra cost could not be justified.

vii) HALC – Annual meeting on 19^th October in Billingshurst Village Hall, and regular meeting on 26^th October in Henfield Village Hall. The Clerk was asked to send apologies, as no one was able to attend.

viii) Sports Association Meeting – Now holidays are over suitable dates are to be sought from council members and given to the association for agreement.

ix) Toddler Playground, Church Meadow – HDC are still holding the grant of £11250 for us, if the money is not to be spent before the 31^st March we must request them to carry it over into 2006. HDC were to be asked to carry the grant forward in the event that orders could not be placed prior to end of March.

x) Visitor Information Board, Haglands Lane Car Park – HDC no longer wish to maintain the board and asks if the Parish Council wish to take it over? The council thought the current notice boards were sufficient and the Clerk was asked to reply.

xi) Funding Fair – Details have been received of the timetable of the fair on 17^th October, anyone interested talk to the Clerk.

xii) WC Neighbourhood Watch – Meeting 1^st November in St Mary’s Church Hall, details from the Clerk.

7. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

i) Queens Head License Application - The Clerk mentioned that the objections of the Parish Council were not recorded on the papers circulated with the application, which could give the impression that they approved the extensions sought. The Parish Council was firmly behind the residents in their objections.

ii) Roger Watts mentioned the blocked drains in the Sinnocks and Broadford Bridge Road leading to flooding, and the Clerk was asked to speak to County Highways to arrange for them to be cleared prior to the winter.

iii) Harvie Steele mentioned that he had received a complaint about hedges in the Juggs Lane blocking the footpath; the Clerk would speak to HDC/ Saxon Weald to arrange for the work to be carried out.

There being no further business the Chairman thanked everyone for attending and closed the meeting at 9.30 pm.