Craster Parish Council

COMMUNITY TRUST
PARISH COUNCIL

Agendas & Minutes
Accounts

Minutes of NWL CPO Public Meeting

Thursday 30th October 2008 Village Hall 7.15pm

 Present

Acting Chairperson: District Councillor Carol Grey.
Clerk: Helen Brewis.
Parish Council Members: Joyce Shaw, Elizabeth Pearson, Michael Craster, Michael Gibbs & Joan Angus.
Craster Community Dev. Trust: Mr P Howard

Both Michael Craster & DC Carol Grey declared a personal & prejudicial interest and all present agreed that they could take part & remain in the Meeting but would be unable to vote.

Michael Craster thanked everyone for attending the Meeting at such short notice and had spoken at length to Alan Punton yesterday.

The situation following the vote on Tuesday is that the CCDT resolved to continue with its objection to the NWL draft CPO. Andrew Pinny has advised the Trust that GF White would be quite prepared to act on their behalf as a separate body to the PC. This action however could be expected to impact the PC’s case, especially as the Trust, as tenants, actually have the use of the land and therefore more to be compensated. Hugh has confirmed this, which places a substantially different aspect on the situation, which could have been expected to have affected the PC vote had the councillors been aware of them at the time.

Michael Craster has spoken to Tony Farrell, the ADC solicitor, to determine the validity of the proposed action. Mr Farrell believes that the seriousness of the issue for the community could justify tonight’s Meeting & re-vote.

The CCDT considers that both Hedley Young & Hugh Fell indicated that the issuing of a draft CPO was a means of bringing everyone to the table, and that it was expected that all parties would object as a way of establishing their opening positions. It was anticipated that these would then be negotiated away rather than go to Inquiry. The Trust wants to participate in that process.

Elizabeth Pearson would like the playpark to remain for the village use & feels that Hugh Fell is the very best person to deal with the NWL draft CPO.

Michael Gibbs agrees that had this information been available at Tuesday nights Meeting it would have raised different issues.

His main concerns are that of three possible outcomes, two could be unfavourable:-

• We get what we want, but it is not clear what that would be, beyond what has already been offered to us.

• NWL offer what we want, but other objections result in NWL having to change its plans to something the village would not like – a different route for example.

• NWL do not meet our requests and we have either to withdraw our objection and accept the compulsory purchase of the football field or else to incur the costs of going to the inquiry with an uncertain outcome – possibly having to go to the Land Tribunal for compensation.

However although we were told NWL’s £10,000 and £200 per week offer still stands, it is unlikely we could complete the legal formalities of accepting, before the 12 November deadline for objections. The Parish Council has now therefore little option but to object.

Mr Howard explained how the CCDT priorities are for the desired sewerage scheme and for something more concrete towards the restitution of the playpark which NWL have omitted from their draft CPO.

Are we in favour of putting in an objection to the draft CPO?

 For: 4

Against: 1

Abstain: 1

(Two votes were cast by letter & email.)