The Minutes are available for scrutiny in DOCUMENTS. Select Neighburhood Plan from MENU bar >DOCUMENTS >CATEGORY Steering Group Minutes >select file
Posts in category NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
Contains all entries relevant to the Neighbourhood Plan
The latest NP report features in the DOCUMENT section of the NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN.
Click on the NP header > DOCUMENTS > CATEGORIES > REPORTS
Valerie Scott, Chair of Bigbury’s Neighbourhood Planning Group, has asked that her letter to Matt Jones (SHDC, Planning Officer), on the topic of the proposed demolition of Warren Cottage and Bay View Cafe, be made publicly available – as follows. Valerie’s diligence sets a fine example of the standards that we ought to be able to expect from all Development Management staff working for our District Council.
Date: 20 March 2018 at 16:54:46 GMT
I have just looked at the Council’s application website and the ability to comment on line in respect of the new information provided by the applicants seems to be unavailable although I have been advised that further comments can be made. I am therefore sending my further comments to you by email and would advise you that the Bigbury Parish Council have also commissioned a report from JFA Ecology which will be sent to you early next week.
The further comments which I have relate to all three applications 0430/18/PAD, 0406/18/PAD and 0470/18/PAA and in particular to the letter sent by Ashfords dated 27 February 2018 and the Southwest Knotweed Report dated 21 February 2015.
As you will see I am still concerned about the proposed demolition of these buildings prior to the eradication of the Japanese Knotweed. This latest report does not provide any further evidence about the likely extent of Japanese knotweed on the site and without this knowledge demolition should not be allowed. I am particularly surprised that Southwest Knotweed refer only to the Acorn Ecology Report dated August 2015 with no reference to the Environet October 2015 Report which showed the extent of Japanese knotweed to be considerably more extensive. The lack of any reference to this report is also of concern as it is possible that the landowner has not advised Southwest Knotweed of the existence of this later and more detailed report. The applicants have also not submitted or referred to the Environet Report in their earlier submissions and failed to address the issues raised in this report despite the repeated references which have been made to it in our representations.
Please could you place these further representations on your website and ensure that access to the comments box on the application website is made available for other people to be able to make representations. Please acknowledge receipt.
Bigbury Bay Golf Club Ltd Registered No. 6929632 Vat No. 236 1893 93
As you may know, I was asked by our Chairman to continue to maintain the relationship with our landlord since the Bantham Estate was purchased by Nicholas Johnston. Stephen and I have been steadily working toward replacing the highly restrictive lease that would otherwise remain in place until 2030 and includes some very challenging financial obligations.
We are delighted to advise you that Nicholas Johnston has agreed to the basic principles of a joint long term strategy that will help secure the future of our Club. I have explained some key elements below and ask you to please share these as widely as possible to ensure all members and especially potential members understand this positive development.
1) Nicholas Johnston continues to express his great appreciation that our Golf Club is an important part of his Estate. He has again confirmed that he has no desire to use the course for any other reasons. He specifically has no intention to use the course to extend the pheasant shoot, or for building purposes or any activity that would interfere with golf in any way. His ambition is for the Club to remain a prosperous Member owned and run asset, as we are now.
2) We are actively working with the Estate on the details of our joint strategy which includes an entirely new long term lease. We have a shared intention to complete this work over the next few months.
3) We have the Estates assurance that providing the strategy is successfully delivered, all outstanding deferred rent payments will be cancelled.
4) As an interim gesture of his commitment to the Club, Nicholas has also agreed to an additional reduction in our rent payments. This is a generous offer and underpins his support for the Club and the local community, and his ambition for Bigbury Golf Club to remain a vibrant business.
5) The Estate have agreed that a permanent Air Ambulance Landing Site will be created between the carpark and practice bunker. This again demonstrates the Estates view of our Club as an important community asset that they wish to support.
The financial generosity offered to the Club as part of the strategy will need to be balanced by the successful development of a limited and contained residential scheme on the Estate, but outside the Golf Course boundary. The Estate will be progressing this scheme over the next 12 months.
We will be releasing a press announcement jointly with the Estate, building on these key points.
In recent months many of us have been greatly troubled to hear of all sorts of ridiculous rumours circulating about the relationship between our landlord and the Club, none of which have been constructive. We hope that this very clear and positive statement will squash these rumours and demonstrate to all those interested that we continue to build a solid future. Please do your best to immediately correct any negative and unfounded discussion which can only damage our Club.
Richard Adcock and Stephen Price
Flying in the face of local opinion – that of many residents of both Bigbury and Ringmore, of Bigbury Parish Council, of Bigbury’s Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group AND of SHDC – the appeal against the refusal of planning permission for up to 8 houses to be built at StAnn’s Chapel has been allowed. The appellants costs were not allowed, however.
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the residential development of circa 8 dwellings, open space and associated infrastructure with all matters reserved except for means of access (and associated off-site highway works) at Site at Sx 663 471, St Ann’s Chapel, Bigbury, Devon in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 4079/16/OPA, dated 20 December 2016, and the plans submitted with it, and subject to the conditions contained in the attached schedule.
Representations on behalf of Bigbury Parish Council to SHDC, concerning recent applications for demolition of Warren Cottage and Bay View Cafe
Valerie Scott, Chair of the Neighbourhood Planning Group, writes:-
I have been asked by the Chairman of Bigbury Parish Council to send to you the representations of Bigbury Parish Council to the above applications. The Parish Clerk is abroad at the moment and may not be in a position to send these to you until he returns.
I will be putting similar objections on behalf of the Bigbury Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group directly on to the on the websites.
The applications are in three separate parts, covering Warren Cottage, Bigbury Bay Cafe and the two buildings combined. Following the same pattern, the PC’s representations are as follows;-
Furthermore, I will try to prepare an article explaining the position for parishioners to enable them to write in letters of objection. Although there are very limited reasons that SHDC can give to refuse these applications ie relating to method of demolition and satisfactory restoration of the site I believe the presence of Japanese knotweed would be a reason to prevent any demolition until it has been fully eradicated or satisfactorily treated. The fencing to be left around the site following demolition is wholly unnecessary. It is not specified in the Method Report or shown on the post demolition plans. In fact the post demolition plans show specifically state that the existing vegetation and boundaries are to be retained. It is only in the letter from Ashfords Solicitors that the proposal to retain the fencing is mentioned. This is also wholly unacceptable as the fencing could be left in place for many months if not years as there is no planning approval in place for the redevelopment of this site.
There is no reason why people should not object to the principle of losing a heritage asset and an asset of community value (ACV). The site will retain its ACV status even if the Bay Café is demolished and the lawful use of the site remains as part residential/part Class A3 (café/restaurant).