HIGHCLERE PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of a meeting held at Highclere Village Hall on Tuesday 25 September 2001

Present

Councillor Mrs S Roberts, Chairman

Councillor I Davidson

Councillor J Pearson

Councillor R East

Councillor T Farmer

Also Present

Mr I Worth, Mr and Mrs Messom, and Ms Maria Morgan

129/01 To consider change of use, to residential development, for the following sites, as part of the Local Plan Review.

1. H101 Mount Common, Tubbs Lane/Panting Lane, Highclere

2. H102 Land adjoining Pitt Cottage, Mount Road, Highclere

3. H103 Land adjoining Fridays, Andover Road, Highclere

4. H104 Former Fawcetts Garage Site, Andover Road, Highclere

5. H105 Land adjoining Crowshott Lodge, Westridge, Highclere

6. H106 Land North of Mount Road

7. PW101 Great Pen Wood, East of Penwood Heights, Penwood

8. PW102 Pen Hill Plantation , West of Penwood Heights, Penwood

The Council agreed it's response to each of the above sites and these are appended to the minutes.

130/01 To consider change of use to commercial development for the following site, as part of the local plan review

9. WH03 Andover Road opposite The Woodpecker, Washwater

There was a brief adjournment to allow parishioners present to address the Council

The Council then agreed its response, which is appended to the minutes.

131/01 Other considerations

The Clerk was asked to draw attention to the following, when submitting the responses:

• The identification numbers given to Highclere sites are being misread. They appear to have one alpha and three numeric references, instead of two alpha and two numeric references.
• Re: PW02. Several residents have advised this Council that when they bought their houses, they were obliged to agree not to object to any application to develop this land that adjoins their properties. This was understood to be illegal.

131/01 Other considerations continued:

• Re: WH03. An armed police guard frequently patrols the Wash Water Road outside the Woodpecker Pub, and there might be a security problem here
• If this parish only had one proposed site, there would be a large response from the parishioners. As we have so many (9) sites, the Council is aware that parishioners will only respond to the sites closest to their own homes. There will therefore be an artificially diluted response to individual sites than would be the case if only one was promoted.

The Chairman recognised the hard work undertaken by the Parish Society in preparing and distributing an information leaflet to all parishioners. She proposed that if the Council was approached, it should agree to provide funding towards a portion of the costs. This was unanimously agreed.

THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS THE MEETING THEN ADJOURNED