Present:: GENERAL MEETING - MINUTES
Bowburn & Parkhill Community Partnership - Charity Number 1112151
Tuesday 18 September 2007. From 6.30pm to 8.30pm
K Barber (from 7pm), W Bates, M Bell, J Blackburn, J Blakey, C Brown, K Calvert, S Colquhoun,
R Cowen, P Dawe, N Dixon, A Gregory, B Gregory, K Haigh, J Kane, R Millerchip, S Raine, Maggie Robinson,
Maureen Robinson, A Shutt, M Syer, S Thompson, R Walsh, R Walworth, S Walworth, A Wilson
In Attendance: J Anson, G Marsden, M Ridley, I Hunter Smart
1. Apologies for absence: K Griffiths, G Marsden, S Millerchip, A Richardson, S Robinson, G Stoker, D Whittaker
2. Police: No report this month.
3. Masterplan Updates – CDO and Project Leaders
(i) Highways: No update. Next meeting Tuesday 2 October 6.30pm in Lawson Rd Centre.
(ii) Parkhill: Ongoing.
(iii) Heritage Room: No progress.
(iv) Community and Youth Centres: At the last meeting the immediate priorities were discussed at length.
There is a threat of no major funding unless both buildings are demolished to make way for a single structure. The
Centres decided to recommend that minor works for which funding was already in place should proceed and if
remedial work is needed then the decision should be to carry out the work immediately.
(v) Church: Fundraising is ongoing.
(vi) Environment: There is to be a Public Meeting in the Community Centre on 10 October from 2.00pm to 8.00pm
to consult on the Durham Road project through the URRI.
(vii) Unadopted Roads: Fundraising is ongoing. J Richardson is to discuss the situation at the next Highways
meeting.
(viii) Park Project: JA read out the official planning reasons for the withdrawal of the planning application for
Bowburn Park as follows:
“Although no determination of the application was made, it is worth noting that the principle of the development was
welcomed by officers, and the numbers of objections to the scheme was relatively low.
However, the Environment Agency had outstanding concerns which were principally whether the surface water would be
disposed of into a public sewer or nearby watercourse, and beyond that if it was proposed to drain to the nearby
watercourse, further information about flows and surface finishes in terms of permeability was required. If the
Environment Agency objects to an application, this holds considerable weight in accordance with the advice set out in
Planning Policy Statement 25; Development and Flood Risk, and the precautionary approach which it advocates. This
was therefore a key reason for the withdrawal of the application.
The second reason for the withdrawal was largely in relation to landscaping. This has implications for the levels across
the play area part of the site and how each of the various games areas would relate to one another, the impacts in terms
of tree loss and other minor details in terms of the general landscaping and finish of the scheme of all which are
collectively important.
The application was therefore withdrawn in order that the above issues could be addressed with a view to a resubmission
without a fee in the next 12 months.”
It was said that there was extreme disappointment in the fact that City Council did not make every effort to aid the
plans through the planning process.
JA: Agreed it was a setback but there was now more time to secure further funding.
It was also said that the meeting for the Park on 10 September should not have been cancelled as, contrary to the
opinions of the Park Working Group, there are a number of new points to be addressed at this stage.
A member noted that the drainage concerns were a delay not a technical problem.
However a member had pointed out the need for a drains survey, in the early days of the Park project, and had
been told that any competent engineer would deal with this.
JA: Felt that it would still have been a problem to get the contractors and funding in place.
A member said that there could have been a decision, and planning permission could have been given with
provisos.
It was said that £50K of funding had been lost and there would have been good publicity for the Park from the
People’s Millions TV Programme.
Another member felt that there was a need for a plan of action.
1JA: Felt that, if the People’s Millions had been successful, it was unrealistic to expect the Bowls area to start in
March as it is one of the final stages.
JA: On a positive note the Local Network Fund had awarded £7000 and this would be spent on equipment, and the
Biffaward application will be ready for March 2008.
(ix) Centenary – Bowburn School: There was a very productive first meeting where an outline programme of
celebrations was planned for the academic year 2008/09. Next meeting; Monday 8 October 4pm in the Infants
School.
4. Minutes of last General meeting – 21 August 2007: The minutes were proposed by J Blakey and seconded by
R Cowen as a true record and the meeting agreed them unanimously.
Matters arising: Item 5-Correspondence; the Secretary of State has deferred the decision on calling in the planning
application for Tail upon End Lane site until further notice.
5. Report on the Trustees’ meeting of 4 September 2007: Jan Blakey agreed to replace Mike and accompany
Paul on the Walkabout. However she would prefer Mike to continue representing the Partnership on the
Regeneration Working group meetings. Comments on the area around Philip Avenue and Centenary Park can be
given to Paul and Jan.
The local City Councillor reminded the meeting that the Councillors are also a point of contact for comments.
The Chair advised MR and GM, the City Councillors, that in future the Walkabouts would be on Tuesdays from 1pm
If, after checking legal implications, the City is able to transfer the remaining monies from the Community Chest into
the Partnership’s account, the trustees would agree to this offer.
6. Correspondence:
> Letter from GO-NE stating, “The rules for publicity of planning applications are set out in Planning Circular 15/92.
It is up to the City of Durham Council to reach its own view on this issue in the light of Circular 15/92 and case law”.
Email informing that the City is consulting on two ‘Preferred Option’ reports, one on Heritage (including
Conservation areas) and the other on general development control policies (including Environment, Employment,
Transport …). The closing date for comments is 28/09/07. The website is www.durhamcity.gov.uk/Pid/855. The
documents can be viewed in most Leisure Centres, District Libraries and the Help desk at County Hall.
> Letter from B Spears writing, with reference to the Partnership’s comments on the Bowburn & Parkhill Masterplan,
that “Halsall Lloyd Partnership make it quite clear that they are extremely disappointed by the content of the
Partnership letter and the factual inaccuracies contained within it. The implication that there have been covert
additions to the report is insulting and completely inaccurate”.
BS therefore insists that the Partnership letter is formally withdrawn in light of the inaccuracies and tone.
A member felt that there were legitimate concerns over Figure 5 in the Executive Summary of the Masterplan. For
instance there is no mention of it in the text of the original Masterplan and there are faults on the map and the key is
not complete or accurate. On the other hand the Partnership and the City are broadly on the same side and there
was nothing to be gained by getting into an argument. It was hoped that the two parties would work together to
move the masterplan forward.
A member felt that Fig. 5 should be clarified at the earliest possible moment.
A member thought there was justification in the doubts of the Partnership because of the none availability of plans,
the changes were not pointed out and the situation was not handled well. Figure 5 is faulty and when this is clarified
and explained in the Masterplan Document it will make both the Executive Summary and the Masterplan clear.
JA pointed out that the Masterplan and Fig 5 had been discussed at the Regeneration meeting and she thought that
plans should be taken forward.
There had been assurances at the Working Regeneration Meeting that there were no plans for development in
Marlene Avenue and Dallymore Drive as long as there is a demand for the bungalows; it was a potential further
development area only. Originally there had been no plans for these areas because the reduced amount of SHIP
money only covered Philip Avenue and Horton Crescent.
A member recalled that the original plans for the development did not cross into Bede Terrace. These recent
changes did not seem fair but we do need to move on.
A member suggested that if the Partnership’s letter suggested deceit on the part of the City Council following the
Regeneration meeting then the Partnership should accept there was no deceit, but agenda this matter for the
trustees’ meeting.
There were no objections to this suggestion.
> Letter to B Spears inviting him to the October meeting, and agreeing to the City transferring the Community Chest
monies into the Partnership account, if this is possible.
27. Items of Any Other Business:
Register title of issue for item 13: There was concern about noise from the motorway.
8. Treasurer’s Report and Quiz Results: There were no transactions for August so the accounts remain the
same.
The results of the Food and Drink quiz were as follows: 1st F Falques, 2nd P Burnett, 3rd J Gray. The quiz made a
profit of £100.00.
9. Community Chest: There was one new application from the BVC to buy and install a pair of rails, one on either
side of the Bowburn War Memorial, to which wreaths can be attached.
This was a re-application but the rails were of a stronger quality than in the previous application.
Funding of £146.00 was requested and was granted without any objection.
10. Constitution – Ratify changes to Items G2, P2, Q 1, 2 With reference to Item E2:
The changes to the constitution were put to the meeting and as there were no objections they were carried
unanimously.
11. Reports and matters arising:
> Regeneration Working Group/Walkabout – plus questions for next meeting:
The Walkabout is on Tuesday 25 September at 1.00pm.
The Regeneration Working Group meeting is on Thursday 27 September at 10am in Bowburn Community Centre.
PD had asked Haslam Homes to remove flammable materials from their compound in Philip Avenue before the
bonfire season started.
A member had noticed heavy gear is still being taken through the village and not just onto the site.
A member felt that there was a need for priority signs at the junction of Philip Avenue and Robert Terrace.
A member was concerned about the volume of traffic coming through the village and suggestions were put forward
for a weight limit of 7.5 ton, or a speed visor off the motorway roundabout at Durham Road West.
It was asked if the planning application would be withdrawn for Tail-upon-End Lane site because of the need for
drainage surveys.
> Cape Public Enquiry: Await progress in November.
> Tail-upon-End Lane Site: Await progress in the near future.
> Parish Council: A report on the minutes from 20 June were presented to members as follows:
Development Proposals at OQ – Mr. Young of Tarmac had been invited to the next meeting to give an update;
Notices were being made by RWT Fabrications Kelloe regarding Ball Games in the Door Step Green, and to keep
the gates shut in the Cemetery;
Dry stone walling – Parish Councillors were invited to a presentation at St Paul’s Churchyard with a buffet to follow
for those volunteers who had completed the course;
The recent flooding in Bowburn caused by an overflowing culvert was discussed. The Clerk is to write to the WA
regarding an investigation;
Members have made a declaration of finances and other interests, which have been returned to the Monitoring
Officer;
The miners’ coal wagon still needs a second estimate from Lumsden and Carroll;
It is hoped that owners of all footpaths will be sorted soon and all footpaths and bridleways will be rectified ASAP;
A second quotation is awaited for the garage site and Clls. Syer and Raine proposed and seconded a motion to
apply to the Community Chest for a grant;
Old grave stones that need attention will have to be repaired at a cost of £780+ if no relations can be found.
> Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS): There is no update for the Tursdale proposals.
> Noticeboard: Still awaiting word from Mr. D Wilcox for permission to put a noticeboard next to the library.
> Quarry Liaison Committee: No Progress. There is a delay in getting the presentation ready.
GM reported that the unpleasant smell over Cassop and Kelloe was caused by hen manure.
> LSP: No report.
> 12 Villages Representative: The AGM is in October at Bearpark Community House. It is hoped to rent this building
to hold meetings for a peppercorn rent in future.
312. Group Noticeboard:
> Banner: The Heritage Day displaying 30 banners aged from 1890 to 2007 very successful. There were over 400
visitors who gave very positive feedback.
The banner was displayed at New Herrington Memorial Day, and will also be going to Houghton.
> BVC: Interchange 44 will be ready for distribution at the end of the week. The AGM is on 20 September at
6.00pm.
> Football Teams: The club is going for Community status. Numbers of registered players were presented and a
need to interest teenage players from Bowburn was expressed. There was also concern over an unpleasant
incident at a football training session. It was pointed out that the City Wardens do not work at weekends and it was
suggested that K Davis be contacted.
It was agreed to point out to the City Council that the present pitch would not last 3 years before it was re-laid.
> History: There is a meeting on Thursday, 20 September.
> Website: No report.
> Xmas Event: The Xmas dance is on 7 December
13. Any Other Business:
It was asked if the Environment group would enquire if the motorway could be resurfaced with the new ‘quiet’
tarmac where it passed the village.
The group agreed to do this.
A member said it would be cheaper to get an acoustic fence.
14. Date and Time of Meetings: General Meetings are held on the third Tuesday of each month.
Next meeting is on 16 October 2007 at 6.30pm
4