From our Reporter at the Parish Council Meeting
IN ADDITION TO THE USUAL TWO SUSPECTS in the public gallery were three
representatives from Ashwell to give yet another presentation on the Water
Tower development. They - Simon, Tony and Amanda - entertained the hope that
they would be moved forward from No 8 on the Agenda to the beginning of the
meeting but it was not to be and they witnessed over an hour of exciting
village debate. None had ever attended a parish council meeting before, so I
suppose they left Swaffham Prior that night greatly enriched by the unexpected
experience, or saying "never again".
After the usual formalities Hazel Williams gave her CCC report which was packed with information some of which I cover just in case her busy schedule prevents a CCC report going to the Crier. While much of her news has been covered by the Cambridge Evening News the Crier sometimes gets exclusives, as it is always interesting to hear the forceful comments of our CCC representative. For example Hazel's fury about the £47,000 spent on selecting a new CCC chief executive with an unanimous vote in favour, only for it to be scuppered by Shona Johnstone, Leader of the Council, who phoned the candidate up after the appointment in such a way that he declined to accept the offer. The new Guided Bus is to be clobbered with a £1 million business rate charge which had not been anticipated. Hazel did not say how the oversight occurred or whether there has been a recent change of rules but it seems that business rates will also be applied to the Park and Ride sites. The CCC is now exploring the possibility of making the two forms of transport charitable trusts which would escape business rates. She also broke the bad news that there will be a six month delay in the refurbishment of the Cambridge Public Library because of defects in the original building and the discovery of asbestos.
Geoffrey Woollard now intervened with a question "specifically for Mrs Williams", and asked whether she know that Hurdle Farm in Reach, with its hundred plus acres, had been sold to the National Trust, whether her opinion had been sought, and whether she knew the selling price. Hazel gave a negative to each question. Geoffrey now raised the stakes by saying he understood the price to be around £2,900 an acre which he thought was possibly a modest price. He asked Hazel to find out who valued the property and how it was sold. This Hazel readily agreed to do because she felt embarrassed and angry that she had not been told and consulted. Geoffrey had put all this on paper and he then said/wrote:
"It is probably just coincidence, but the man who used to be in charge of the Cambridgeshire County Council Farms was Mr Jon Megginson, and the man in charge of the National Trust's 'Wicken Vision'is Mr Jon Megginson."
A member asked "Are you saying it's a fix?" "No", said Geoffrey, "I have chosen my words very carefully."
His last paragraph went on:
"I am, of course, concerned at the possibility of there having been some kind of collusion between CCC and the NT to the benefit of the latter and to the disbenefit of the public, the finances of the County Council, and those of Council Tax payers."
It will be a very interesting December PC meeting when we hear the answers. CALC has written to say that if a bus shelter is more than 50% enclosed a 'No Smoking'sign has to appear. Taking into account the floor, the back, the top and the sides a sign will be put up in our bus shelter. Members didn't expect the sign to stay up long and most appeared to feel it was a bit of a nonsense.
Meanwhile Simon, Tony and Amanda were looking increasingly anxious as the time passed and at 8.05 we were only at 5a on the Agenda. Allen Alderson then presented his report in a very unusual way. He seemed to be reading slowly and steadily pages and pages of an official report and when there was a murmer of concern from a member he explained that it was all very complicated and that he had shortened and simplified it immensely. I think few were convinced. Maybe he'll return to his usual style next time. However he did enliven the meeting when he announced that Swaffham Prior was scheduled to have a 26% increase in its travellers. Geoffrey received this news in his usual calm and considered way, and stabbing a finger at our two District and County councillors thundered:- "IF THAT HAPPENS YOU ARE BOTH DEAD MEAT, AND I MEAN DEAD MEAT". Geoffrey still remains a farmer at heart.
After that Amanda became really concerned and was not reassured when I showed her the list of correspondence to be discussed. She gave a wan smile but distinctly paled.
As it happens most of the correspondence had been distributed previous to the meeting and they spent the time admiring the letter from Alex Kirby about "Bee Orchids". All thought it an excellent letter and that he would make a very good PC member. As a vacancy had just occurred Alex's letter was very timely as this was the finger of destiny pointing him the way. Because Alex's letter has a great local significance it is reproduced separately after this report.
At last, at 8.35, we reached item No 8 and Ashwell began their presentation. Having been to all their presentations I have never witnessed a property company so anxious not to offend and to agree to almost all comments in a positive way. They have done everything asked of them, reduced the height of some houses, ensured that no-one overlooks existing houses, and are making a £10,000 grant towards any Mill Hill traffic scheme agreed with the CCC. So they were a bit startled to hear from one member that they had made a mistake by not putting in large windows opening up the view over the fens when at all previous meetings everyone had been binding on about the necessity not to overlook existing houses. Simon was speechless especially when told "I wouldn't buy one of your houses because of that." But he was very gracious and said he had never come across such a positive and constructive group of residents.
David Almond again raised the question of affordable housing and the PC confirmed its determination to provide some if suitable cheap land becomes available. They welcome hearing about any possible suitable sites.
The High Street signs came up again and at the time of the meeting No 2 sign had still not been removed. During the October meeting street names had been discussed and there was a lot of evidence showing whether and when the High Street is the High Street. This was not reported in the Crier nor by the Clerk in her Crier report, but there is an excellent account in the Clerk's full minutes. This again is of great local interest and together with Alex's letter is reproduced at the end of this report.
Much else happened before the meeting ended so read the Clerk's report. It's worth it.
Appendix One - BEE ORCHIDS
Karen King
5 November 2007
Clerk to the Parish Council
Dear Karen
Four years ago I counted seventeen Bee Orchids on the northern (cemetery side)
verge of the B1102 where it by-passes the village. This year I counted only
nine. Next summer I fear there will be even fewer; the reason, in part, will be
because of some insensitive ground clearance work undertaken to the verge and
ditch in October.
Does the Parish Council know why this scalping has been undertaken; who commissioned the work - have they inspected the results; who did it; what has been achieved; how much has it cost the tax payer? Why have large quantities of soil, which is of a different nature and type to our local chalky marl, been spread and compacted onto the ground? Will this imported soil support the specialized soil dwelling fungus on which the Bee Orchid rekies for its existence?
Will the Parish Councillors be able to prevent further damage; indeed, will they be able to instigate a verge improvement plan that will encourage more orchids and native wild flowers? Can the Council save our orchids as well as the Lodes?
Yours sincerely
Appendix Two - WHAT'S IN A NAME
An extract taken from the Clerk's full Minutes of the Swaffham Prior PC Meeting held on 11 October 2007
158(a) High Street Signs & Naming
"G. Woollard introduced a further discussion on Street Signs and Naming following earlier comments by A. Camps to the effect that the South-Western end of the road/ street through the village fronting the Swaffham Prior House Estate 'has always been Swaffham Bulbeck Road'. The discussion was assisted by an 1887 Ordnance Survey large-scale map of the village which showed clearly that the then High Street was central to the village and included what is now called Lower End. The South- Western end of the road/street through the village fronting Swaffham Prior House Estate was not 'labelled'on this 1887 map. Further assistance was provided by copies of two other and older maps that had been obtained from the Cambridge Record Office by a researcher for Mr Michael Marshall of Swaffham Prior House. One of these, dated 1805, showed clearly the South-Western end of the road/street through the village fronting the Swaffham Prior House Estate labelled 'Swaffham Bulbeck Road'. 'High Street'was not labelled at all. The final map, dated 18?? but assumed to be a copy of the Swaffham Prior Enclosure Award Map of 1815, also showed clearly the South-Western end of the road /street through the village fronting Swaffham Prior House Estate labelled 'Swaffham Bulbeck Road'and 'High Street' not labelled at all."
("In the light of this historic evidence"the PC agreed unanimously to ask ECDC to change the current signage and reinstate 'Swaffham Bulbeck Road')