The minutes for the extra-ordinary meeting of the Council held on Monday 5^th June 2006 in the Memorial Hall, Benenden.

Present:        Mr G Reynolds  Mrs C Pitt  Mr R Lake  Mr P Blockley   Mrs J Hagens Mr S Hockney  Mrs D Bailey  Mrs M Kellett  Mr J Clarke

Apologies:    None

Declarations of interest:  None

Cllr Blockley  introduced Bonny Sullivan, Parish Clerk, to the Councillors

Cllr Blockley asked for the motion to hold the meeting in closed session to be considered. Cllr Kellett seconded. All councillors agreed by a show of hands.

Response to meeting with Lynn Nelson on 25^th May 2006

Cllr Blockley gave each councillor a draft of a letter by Cllr Pitt and asked them to discuss each point. (attached)

All sections under ‘both sites’ were agreed

‘site 1’ all sections were agreed. However, Cllr Lake asked whether a traffic survey of car usage by school parents could be done. Cllr Blockley agreed he  thought this had been done by TWBC there was no harm in repeating the exercise.

‘site 8’ – the first 4 points were agreed by the councillors with Cllr Bailey noting that this was a chance to resolve issues in a positive way, eg site 1 would decrease the need for traffic to pass through the village and so lead to no need for traffic calming measures.

Cllr Reynold disagreed with point 5 and that he favoured building on the eastern aspect of Glebe field near present bonfire site.

Cllr Blockley asked for councillors’ opinions re  the letter’s circulation and Cllr Reynolds asked for  Cllr North and Cllr Hall to be included.

All councillors agreed for the letter to be sent out on behalf of the Parish Council.

Cllr Reynolds expressed concern that the ecological survey which should have been completed by the end of April was still not available

Cllr Blockley asked Cllr Hagens and Cllr Clarke to complete a 12 month analysis of BVH usage as soon as possible as TWBC were seeking a response by 12.06.06.

DPD Process

Cllr Bailey expressed concerns regarding the process itemising the following areas. 

a.     That Benenden was being used as a guinea pig for this process, but had gained the impression that the decision of where the site should be had already been made and that the process was to fit around this.

b.     That large national groups such as English Heritage cannot possibly understand the impact on a small local community, but their views seem to have a higher rating

c.     That it was illogical to have a consultation after the site had been decided and report sent to the Inspector.

d.     That the traffic problems should be discussed now, rather than later.

e.     That there had been confusion in the village about the different layouts of site 8 offered at the public meeting, TWBC want to build on Glebe Field with the playing fields on the eastern ridge whilst the governors want the opposite.

f.      That there was a national wish to devolve power to parish councils, that the pc is an elected body representing local opinion and should be listened to.

g.     Implications of Harmsworth Trust.

There was a discussion about whether the comments on the process should be sent now, or to wait until the end of the process.

Cllr Blockley asked Cllr Bailey to draft a letter registering the council’s unhappiness with the process and to circulate it to the councillors by e-mail for agreement.

Discussion about who to send the letter to, with Cllr Reynolds suggesting KCC Planning and TWBC Chief Executive that the council is unhappy with the process and need a firm dialogue at the end of the process. Cllr Lake and Cllr Kellett agreed.

Cllr Clarke pointed out that thee had been only 2 stakeholder meetings since the process had begun.

Cllr Blockley asked for a councillor to attend the public meeting on Thursday re the closure of the Cranbrook Office. Cllr Kellett volunteered.

Cllr Blockley asked all councillors to have e-mail as it helped in communication.

The meeting closed at 9.30pm