DP Reply to parishioners

Questions For Parish Council Meeting on 17th March 2022

1. Panning Applications P/2021/01502 & P/2021/01504

1.1 Could the Parish Councillors please clarify the process by which these applications were considered given that the minutes of the meeting held on 20th January 2022 state that this application was “reviewed between meetings?”

The closing date for comments on the Home Farm application was the 13th January 2022, (the PC meeting was scheduled for 20th January) which is why the application was sent out to Cllrs ahead of the meeting date, i.e.: ‘reviewed between meetings’. This is standard procedure.

1.2 Given the complexity and quantity of documentation associated with these applications did the councillors, at any time post 20/1/22, reconvene to discuss the matter as a group? If so when did this occur and who attended?

As the Cllrs did not have any objections to the application, there would be no need to do this. If this had been the case this would have been recorded in the minutes.

The application was presented in detail at an open forum in Dunstall Church Hall on 23rd September 2021 to which all villagers were invited, at which we were able to discuss the application in detail with the Planning Consultant. Following this no adverse comments were received by the Council before the original closing date of 13th January 2022.

1.3 The minutes of the meeting held on 20th January 2022 state that “Cllrs had no problems with the application, however discussed that it should be considered in conjunction with a speed limit through the village” This would appear to indicate that a decision had already been reached by the councillors prior the end of the meeting is this correct? and if so, what was the purpose of the between meetings review?

Although the application was reviewed between meetings, it must be on the agenda so it can be formally recorded. The comment regarding the speed limit was in conjunction with the long standing issue around speeding vehicles through the village and the reluctance of SCC Highways to address this. No decision was made at the meeting , as sated before the statuary time for comments ended on 13th January.

1.4 Given the volume of adverse comments by parishioners, neighbouring villages, and parish councils, are the councillors still of the same opinion that there is “no problem” with this application?

No representations or adverse comments were notified to the Council before the revised closing date of 8th March 2022.

1.5 In the minutes of the meeting held on 20th January 2022 the councillors felt that a speed limit through the village would be necessary could they please explain why this was felt necessary, what would be the limit/s and where would it/they be applied?

Please refer to the answer at 1.3 above, the PC have been trying for years to obtain a speed limit both on the C18 ( Forest Road ) and through the village. As you will be aware the C18 now has a 50mph limit and the PC are now concentrating on the road through the village.

1.6 Regarding the speed limit has the council submitted comments on this matter on the planning applications?

No, as referred to in 1.3 and 1.5 above this is a separate issue. However as it is standard practice for the LA to carry out traffic reports in connection with commercial applications, it was pertinent to mention this.

1.7 The minutes of meeting held on 20th January 2022 states “no objections raised”. Could the councillors please clarify what exactly is meant by this because there are objections?

This refers to the PC, which had no objections, and is separate to objections that may be raised by individuals.

1.8 Why did the councillors not consider it necessary to convene an extraordinary meeting to gather the opinions, views, and comments of residents once the formal detailed applications had been received?

As the Council received no objections from any parishioners nor a request for such a meeting, until now

2. Parish Council Business.

2.1 It now seems common practice and good governance for Parish Councils to share information and communicate to its residents by following a model publication scheme (ico.org.uk) and publishing via the internet please see the following link http://www.tatenhillrangemoreparishcouncil.gov.uk/. This would ensure the parish council shares agendas, minutes, and other matters quickly and easily. Can the council share the reason Dunstall has yet to adopt this process? In addition, can assurances be given that dates of future meetings, copies of agendas, minutes and the like will be published more widely and in a timely manner?

3. Yellow lines.

The minutes of 20th January refer to Yellow Lines. A number of residents have no recollection of this and were not consulted. Could the Councillors please explain:

3.1 What this refers to?
3.2 Who was consulted and when?
3.3 What where the options referred to?
3.4 When and where is it scheduled to happen?

The Dunstall parish boundary extends down to the A38 and incorporates Lichfield Road, it is this road which is referred to regarding the yellow lines and all residents along this road were consulted regarding the yellow lines. Again this is an ongoing issues, which the PC have been trying to resolve for some time.

4. Gifting of The Well

The minutes of 20th January refer to the gifting of The Well. A number of residents have asked for an explanation of what this means.

The well is in the ownership of Mr Clarke as part of the estate from when Lions Head Cottage was rented. Mr Clarke has generously offered to gift the well to the village.

5. Refuse Bin

There has been a bin missing from Dunstall Hill for 5 years despite residents asking for this to be replaced. Is there an update on this issue?

Although the PC are not aware of an recent request from residents. Dunstall PC have requested a new bin from the LA on several occasions, and been assured it would be replaced, but later were told there were no plans to do so.