Meeting Agenda:
Open Spaces
| Meeting Date: | Monday 13 Feb 2023 |
|---|---|
| Time: | 19:30 |
| Councillors | Jon Aldridge, Angela Baker Chairwoman, Alan Damodaran, Vic Jennings, Alan Layland, Nick Lloyd, Stuart McGregor Vice-Chairman, Angela Read, Steve Taylor, Bob Todd. |
| Committee: | Open Spaces |
| Venue: | Rickards Hall. 72a High Street Edenbridge, TN8 5AR Kent |
| Notes: | |
| Summary: | EOY Review |
Agenda
Minutes
Including any interests not already registered.
Members of the public, and Members with prejudicial interests on items on the Agenda, may make representations, answer, ask questions and give evidence at this meeting in respect of items on the Agenda. (This is the only opportunity for the public to make a contribution during the meeting.) Both public and Members are limited to three minutes each to speak, and the total time allocated for public questions shall not exceed 15 minutes unless directed by the Chairman o f the meeting.
The comparisons report for the end of January is attached, giving the position two months from the end of the current financial year.
| Open Spaces Financial Budget Comparison to Jan 2023 |
The Head Groundsman noted that one of the willows on the edge of Stangrove pond had split and part was leaning against a neighbouring tree. It would require climbing work to remove the damaged stems, therefore not within the scope of the groundstaff. In consultation with the committee chairman a costing of £600 plus VAT was accepted, for the work to dismantle and remove the fallen stems, and tidy the wound as possible. This was being programmed as soon as possible.
The company which supplies, installs, and maintains the High Street hanging baskets display, and removes at the end of season, has confirmed its price for this year at £5,524.50, which is just under the budget allowed. This is an increase of £2.50 per basket. In consultation with the committee chairman, the cost has been accepted in order to progress the order for this year. If the growing season proceeds smoothly, the display should be in place by the late May Bank Holiday.
The large pane of glass smashed in the bus shelter on Main Road opposite the Swan was damaged again in November. The Clerk approved a further replacement pane of clear toughened glass at a cost of £215 plus VAT from the Vandalism budget. Over the weekend 17/18 December a second pane of glass was damaged, leaving only one intact at that stage. A further replacement was ordered at £215 plus VAT, and the incidents reported to the police as criminal damage. A nearby resident has observed that the damage appears to coincide with special events at the nearby pub.
Members are asked to ratify the above decisions, and consider what further action to take regarding the bus shelter on Main Road.
The Clerk and Deputy met with the new owner of the property previously known as Tanyard House (now called Tanyard Cottage) and have been able to agree a figure of £70 to pay for water that has been used to top-up the adjacent Mill Leat feature. The quantity of water added to the Mill Leat varies with the seasons and the weather, as the amount of rainfall contribution varies from month to month. A sub-meter records the usage, and a reading has been taken from which to go forward.
As not all the water recorded on the main meter entering the building goes out through the sewage system, on behalf of the owner an application for Non-return to Sewer Allowance has been made – awaiting response. A similar application was submitted back in 2014, but became redundant (without resolution) when the property was sold and began a long period of renovation and alteration work, during which groundstaff were not able to access utilities. Members will be advised of the eventual outcome.
- Tree and hedge pruning all sites
- Weed and moss treatment
- Weeding and flower bed maintenance
- Maintaining planters through town, including Doggetts barn. and beds in Cemetery
- Pitch over marking and maintenance
The winter tree inspection has now been completed, and a programmes of works set for the grounds team to carry out. One item that cannot be completed in house has been reported for further investigation.
The winter headstone check has now been completed, with any issues raised reported to the Deputy Town Clerk for action. Periodically the team has been bringing in benches from the Cemetery for renovations and painting.
The winter pitch decompaction that was postponed due to poor ground conditions is now scheduled to take place at the end of February. We spent some time filling in the worst of the pot holes in the car park at Mowshurst. This will help with driveability in the short term.
The Land Rover has recently had its service and MOT. The gang mowers have been sent for a service and re grind. They still seem to be working well with regular in-house maintenance.
The team installed a new bin at the play park in the Recreation Ground. This appears to be being used, and has had an affect on the amount of litter in the area. There was over the last weekend in January a wave of graffiti spread across Stangrove Park: on the playground equipment, the games area, park furniture and bins. The team took some time alongside the community warden removing most of it. The incidence has been reported to the police as criminal damage.
Two items of equipment are due for replacement on the Asset Register in next financial year. One is the back-pack blower priced at £480 plus VAT, the other is a dimple pitch marker which has been repaired but is failing, priced at £588 plus VAT. The budget for the forthcoming year is £3,470.
Do members approve these purchases?
It would be useful if the groundstaff could carry out small welding repair tasks in-house, rather than out-source. A training course in arc welding is available at a cost of £425 (this could cover all four of the team).
Do members approve this training expenditure?
There is a query as to whether maintaining water levels in the Mill Leat has been affected by natural evaporation, or whether the structure (built in 2007) has developed a slow leak. It is difficult to assess. We have approached the original constructor who has commented that the feature was built to be robust and withstand a degree of ground movement. The “stream” channel setts were laid into a layer of bitumen on top of a concrete raft, and the two pipes running up and down either side of the channel are of thick blue “water main” material.
The company would be able to visit and visually inspect the structure (dry weather and clean empty Leat required), and carry out a pressure test to establish whether there is a problem. This has been pencilled in for possible early Spring, the weather being unlikely to co-operate before then. The cost for this investigation would be £800 plus VAT.
Do members wish to approve this inspection, or continue to monitor?
The burial report is as follows and updates the record of Cemetery activity:
November 2022 - One ashes interment
December 2022 - One ashes interment
January 2023 - Two burials
The Clerk and Finance Officer in December attended a training on SLCC Cemetery safety and memorials, the presentation link was also made available to councillors for them to review the Burial Board responsibilities. The groundstaff have also watched the webinar as refresher training.
The 2022 Diocesan Quinquenniel (five-yearly) report on the condition of the parish church and the Churchyard identified the need for repair to a short section of the stone wall between Cemetery 1 and the Churchyard, damaged by weathering. The groundstaff have been able to retrieve much of the dislodged material, and costings have been sought for repair. One company has quoted at £400
plus VAT, (plus a further £400 if a further small hole is addressed along with some repointing where necessary) – another quote is awaited. Do members approve up to £800 for the works?
Churchyard/Market Yard car park wall
The report also noted the north (Market Yard) boundary wall required patch pointing near the top, and has open joints to parts of the brick coping. The Churchwardens have advised that neither of these items would require a Faculty from the Diocese.
No mention was made of the alignment of the north wall, which had been raised by the previous Quinquenniel inspection. The results of a survey at that time prompted the council in 2018 to instigate the process for repointing, and proposed rebuild of a section at the western end of the wall. This involved obtaining a Faculty from the Diocese, and planning consent for Listed Building alterations. For a variety of reasons (including the Covid Pandemic in 2020) the works did not progress after the SDC planning consent was finally granted in October 2019. Both consents have now expired, but funding remains ear-marked for the works (£16,000).
Full Council last month was asked how members wished to proceed, and resolved that Open Spaces committee should consider the way forward. Indicative costing has been sought for the patch- pointing (both sides, plus coping) at £2,850 plus VAT. Do members approve up to £2,850 for the repointing work? Would members like a costing for an updated survey?
Following the repointing repairs, do members support monitoring by the groundstaff with a monthly visual inspection, and an annual professional inspection (cost to be confirmed)?
Edenbridge Allotment Garden Association (EAGA) at Forge Croft site have sent plot holders reminders about the plot rents becoming due by 1st April, and the correct process if they are giving up their plots. A number have given notice that they are resigning their Tenancies. Recent Council promotion has attracted some new interest and plot-holders.
A letter was sent from the Clerk in November to all tenants regarding plot conditions. There still remains an issue with a tenant over the condition of their plot and inappropriate storage of non- allotment materials, which the Clerk is working with EAGA to resolve.
The last free Bulky Waste Collection date of this financial year was scheduled for Saturday 21st January, with the collection vehicle calling at four locations, beginning with Church Street, then moving to Skeynes Road, followed by Park View Close, and finally Fircroft Way. Sevenoaks DC advised in early January that the cost had increased to £480 plus VAT, due to additional staff member required to be present for health and safety reasons.
There was some difficulty with the volume of waste at the first collection point, which necessitated
a second vehicle being sent out, and caused delays of the allocated timings at the subsequent locations. Those using the service left their items and did not wait for the collection vehicle.
The cost per collection date in the next financial year being £480, and the budget allocation for this service was £1,300, therefore the number of collections would need to be reduced to three in the year. Do members wish to offer the collections once a term – during April, September, and January – or do members want to keep the quarterly schedule and approve budget overspend of £620?
The additional litter bin for the older children’s section of the playground was ordered and installed outside that end of the fenced area. The replacement gates for the playground were delivered mid last month (Jan) and will be installed shortly.
Further funding to complete this project was approved by the CIL board at its meeting 21 November, and the licence for the work from Kent Highways was amended to reflect the required change of column position, and the project completion dates. The works were completed in the week after New Year. UK Power Networks have paid the partial refund of £1,700 for trenching works not required.
The County Councillor undertook to follow up committee’s request for response from Highways regarding a suggestion for alternative location for the proposed shelter. She eventually received a detailed reply mid November, which was circulated to councillors, stating that there was no suitable alternative location suitable along the stretch of lane to locate a bus shelter which met the legal criteria for accessibility. Do members confirm this project is not currently viable, and to return the CIL allocated funding?
A contractor who could take on the repair to the abutments in the river bank beside the Retention Dam has now been located, and visited the site last week. They have commented this element of the works needs to be addressed to protect the banks, and thus the dam and bridge structure. (See confidential paper) It would involve requesting access from land-owners on either bank, for the necessary machinery, and also siting of welfare facilities for the crew.
A budget estimate up to £40,000 has been provided, detailing the works required. They would also provide a cost for a repair option for the bridge, rather than replacement. This could take the project total up to £60,00, or more. The Council does not have funding for this project in the coming financial year, or in its maintenance plans.
Do members wish to close the bridge meanwhile, as it serves a limited section of town, and there is another bridge a little further along Church Street?
| Confidential Annex Omitted from Papers. |
| Confidential Annex Omitted from Papers. |
The three donated trees were planted at the rear of Blossoms Park on the western side of the cricket pitch, after extensive scrub clearance work carried out by the groundstaff to the rear of the cricket nets. The Rotary Club have provided their memorial plaque for installation. The Cricket Club and a local family will be doing so for the other two trees.
Following disappointing damage to another Jubilee Tree, this time at the Lingfield Road Recreation Ground, do members wish to replace this Tulip Tree, at a cost of £50 from the vandalism budget?
Complaints continue about non-users of the park occupying the small number of parking spaces.
Letters sent to neighbouring properties produced some improvement for a while, but the problem returned. Notices placed on vehicles occupying spaces frequently and over night (the latter is not permitted under existing and draft Byelaws) have not resolved the issue. There is no residential parking allocated.
There are also problems with the increase in hirings of the Cricket Club pavilion and vehicles parking on the car park extension the Club installed as part of their planning permission. The original parking facilities at the park were originally designed to support summer activities. Some vehicles now have encroached onto the grass, making ruts in the winter wet weather conditions. The Clerk authorised notices asking users not to park on the grass area, at a cost of £219 plus VAT. The use of this area is exacerbated by hirers and park users being unable to use the concrete area. Do members wish to investigate other action, such as clamping for regular offenders and overnight parkers?
The head groundsman further reported the growing deterioration of the parking extension area at Blossoms Park. Even the central section of the route across to the two lines of parking on the supported surface was severely churned mud, in addition to the deep ruts in the grass either side previously reported (see attached picture).
The surface is not sufficiently robust to withstand the current volume of pavilion hirers’ traffic in winter conditions. It has been suggested that the gate through to the extension be closed, to
prevent further damage, and/or a vehicle getting stuck in the churned ground. The club is considering what action to take, as the current situation is not sustainable.
Do members wish to advise the Cricket Club in excessive wet weather there should be no parking, or leave with them to arrange as currently?
| Blossoms Park carpark mud |
The schedule of works recommended from the periodic external tree inspection report (approved at July meeting) has been carried out. The Cricket Club has subsequently requested further reduction to a long limb of an oak tree which extends over the nets at Blossoms Park. It was not identified for work in the external survey last year, and the Council’s tree surgeon has commented that the limb does not appear to have any visible faults or cause for concern. Should members wish to remove the limb, he has costed the work at £275 plus VAT, a previous smaller reduction having cost £175 plus VAT (option 1).
Given the location of the tree near the nets, as an alternative he adds: should you wish to reduce the crown of the whole tree to mitigate any future failure, we would suggest a reduction shortening higher and lateral spread by 2-3m to suitable growth points to shape, at £850 plus VAT. (option 2)
Do members support option 1 or option 2?
Following the absence of further quotes for the autumn hedge-cutting work at Blossoms Park, the Recreation Ground, Mowshurst, and Forge Croft allotments, (reported last meeting) in consultation with the committee chairman the existing contractor has been commissioned at a cost of £1,895 plus VAT. There will be a delay until ground conditions improve for access.
The head groundsman confirmed the need for the usual post-summer skate ramps riding surface maintenance. Six whole sheet equivalents were replaced by the constructor at a cost of £1,692 plus VAT in consultation with the committee chairman, the work was completed in the week before Christmas. Do members endorse the above decisions?
Annual service in November of the Mill Leat water pump, and the Sports Pavilion sewage pump revealed no problem with the former, but a major problem with the latter. The connection between the high-level floats and the control panel had failed, so the auto-activation of the pump did not take place, and it appeared that someone had silenced the alarm sounder without reporting the issue. The service engineer was able to operate the control only on manual to activate the pump and empty the sewage pit. With sports and social events scheduled, urgent resolution of the issue was required.
The age of the control panel inside the Pavilion meant components for it were now obsolete. A quote was provided to supply and install a modern panel, which would include an audible alarm sounder, and an LED display strip highlighting the fault code number. This identifies the nature of the problem and what action is required. A thorough empty and jet-out of the sewage pit by tanker was also recommended, to protect the heavy duty sewage pump for the future, also replacement of the guide rails for raising and lowering the pump. There was £2,091 available in the budget for any work required to the pumps after the initial cost of service visits at £175 each. The committee chairman approved a total of £1,793.75 plus VAT to include the tanker visit, replacement of the pump guide rails, chain and shackle, and the provision and installation of the new control panel in the Pavilion. This was achieved by the end of the month. Do members ratify the action taken to resolve the issue?
The 10-year plan budget included funding for replacement water tank valves as necessary at Swan Lane site. A plot-holder reported an issue with a permanently-running water inlet on one of the tanks, although this did not seem to fill up and cut-off. There appeared to be no tank leak, and no obvious damp area on the ground, but the valve unit was damaged, and so it was replaced at £84.30 plus VAT. But the failure to reach filled level continued, and the inlet was tied up to prevent
refill. A hole underneath the tank became apparent, and a replacement tank was ordered at £220.81 plus VAT. This has been installed ready for the new growing season.
The notice board at the front of Blossoms Park is due for replacement, and the local Youth Workers have asked if they could have space to display information relevant to many of the users of the skate ramp. If the current single-window design is replaced by a two-door design, the Town Council’s information could be displayed in one half, and the “youth” information in the other side.
Do members wish to accommodate this request? – if so there are options below:
A two-bay oak board, six x A4 posters on both halves, from the company which supplied the free- standing wooden notice boards in Stangrove Park, Market Yard, and wall-mounted on the end of The Crown in the High Street, would now cost £1,914 plus VAT, plus delivery (see attached) when all the various “finish” options are added on to the basic board price (header style, “glazing” material, internal pin-board material, access locks, wood finish, recycled plastic mounting posts)
The local woodworker who has produced bespoke wooden display boards previously for the Council has costed a larger version of the two-door locking oak notice board in Marsh Green. This also would give display space equivalent to six x A4 posters (three high by two wide) on each side, at £869. The specification includes all of the same elements as the above commercial design, but also oak posts, and no delivery cost, as it can be collected locally from the workshop.
Do members wish the local craftsman to create the new noticeboard, or seek further supplier options?
The budget for the next phase of this rolling programme is £25,000. The Council’s streetlighting contractor has been asked to recommend which of the remaining older metal columns to include in this phase, with a fully costed proposal. This has been received as follows:
| Column No. | Road | UKPN Disconnect/Reconnect | Reinstate | Traffic Management | UKPN Total | Streetlights |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 81 | Hilders Lane | £ - | £ - | £ - | £ - | £ 740.00 |
| 82 | Hilders Lane | £ - | £ - | £ - | £ - | £ 740.00 |
| 241 | Swan Lane | £ 865.00 | £ 168.00 | £ 1,164.00 | £ 2,197.00 | £ 1,350.00 |
| 244 | Victoria Road | £ 865.00 | £ 168.00 | £ 173.00 | £ 1,206.00 | £ 1,350.00 |
| 137 | Mill Hill | £ 998.00 | £ 354.00 | £ 438.67 | £ 1,790.67 | £ 1,350.00 |
| 138 | Mill Hill | £ 998.00 | £ 354.00 | £ 438.67 | £ 1,790.67 | £ 1,350.00 |
| 139 | Mill Hill | £ 998.00 | £ 354.00 | £ 438.67 | £ 1,790.67 | £ 1,350.00 |
| £ 8,775.01 | £ 8,230.00 |
Column 137 is actually inside the grounds of the entrance to Edenbridge Hospital, not on Mill Hill itself. Given the future changes at the hospital site, do members still wish to replace the column at this time? Column 139 was hit by a lorry in an accident in December, and was removed by KCC Streetlighting as an emergency, with UKPN also called out to make safe. (The garden wall of the adjacent property also was knocked down, and a telegraph pole broken.) Kent is charging the Town Council £1,724 plus VAT for the attendance, which was called out by the fire service. We have both fire and police incident references, and an insurance claim is in progress.
The total for the seven lights as above is £12,252 plus VAT, but we understand there would be some saving on the cost of col. 139 as it is already disconnected and removed. This would leave £12,000 available from the budget allocated for this next phase. Approximately half of the Council’s lights are now LED lanterns, and there is a suggestion that Council should consider swapping to LED lanterns for all its lights, being more energy efficient, and the comparative costs and savings are being investigated.
The Council has 251 street lights. There are 64 outstanding for replacement. Of the 251 columns 81 have LED lanterns. Excluding those remaining on the replacement programme, 106 require LED fitting. To replace a lantern with SL8 LED lantern costs £350 each. The £12,000 remaining in budget would allow 34 upgrades to LED.
At November Open Spaces meeting members resolved (Item 7.5) to move the £2,832 remaining in the 2022/23 replacement budget into Open Spaces reserves, towards the next phase of replacements. This sum would allow a further eight upgrades. Do members wish to proceed with upgrading 42 columns to LED lights?
The draft Byelaws approved at last the meeting were sent to the Byelaws Team at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities at the beginning of December for comments/approval.
A response is awaited.
The existing and proposed byelaws do not permit flying of model aircraft, which Members considered as a requested activity at last meeting. Following the committee decision, a Risk Assessment has been received (circulated), and evidence of individual insurance from the person who submitted the request on behalf of the group of residents who were members of the British Model Flying Association. They are not able to produce group insurance that members requested as there is no formal group, just a small number of enthusiasts. If permission was granted this could produce difficulties in monitoring and ensuring anyone flying was a member of the group and had current insurance.
Council’s insurers have highlighted the Drone and Model Aircraft Code produced by the
Civil Aircraft Authority, which covers legal heights, distances from people and no-fly areas. This includes flying no closer to people than 50m horizontal distance (but not other people who are involved in the activity) nor over people gathered in groups. It also includes keeping 150m away from residential, recreational, commercial, and industrial areas. The Recreation Ground being a sports facility/park recreational area, would be included.
Based on this information, and there is no formal group able to provide adequate insurance and controls, the officers’ recommendation is not to permit this activity. Do members support this recommendation?
Members will be aware that the dog “byelaws” sit with the District Council, but wished to consider the possibility of requiring all dogs to be on leads at Council open spaces and to consult the local community. Consultation detail has not yet been drafted, and it is recommended this is progressed once the new Council is in place.
December Council refused permission to the resident requesting a gate access onto the Recreation Ground from a Coomb Field property, and the applicant has confirmed that they will not use the gate, and that it would be permanently screwed shut. Should there be evidence that the gate is being used for access onto Council land then this would be followed up.
Recently it was noted that the property was being advertised for sale, stating there was rear access onto the Recreation Ground. The Clerk contacted the estate agent and the property owner to request removal of this item from the property description. Both agreed to do so immediately. The owner was reminded that he had undertaken that the “access” would be removed from his fence should the property be sold.
The current and proposed byelaws provide for no climbing or removal of any barrier or structure provided for laying out the ground. Do members wish to consider the possibility of introducing a boundary line barrier of some kind on the Recreation Ground side of the housing estate boundary?
Cllr Aldridge has provided the following summary on behalf of the Working Group: The Working Group explored two CCTV options for the Recreation Ground during summer/autumn 2022:
1) A CCTV system of cameras connected to local storage (in the pavilion). This would not be monitored in real-time, but would have capacity to store several weeks of recordings under usual operation. Recordings could be remotely accessed (subject to an internet connection being available).
2) A CCTV System connected to the SDC Control Room. This would be recorded 24/7 and proactively monitored by the SDC control room. A video stream can be fed from this system to a responding Kent Police vehicle.
Option 1 – Locally hosted cameras.
A local company provided a quote for a self-monitored system comprising: Two maneuverable (PTZ) cameras, mounted on separate 4-meter columns.
A controller to be mounted in the pavilion. This would provide storage for video. Installation cost for the above £6,850.93. It was envisaged one camera would be mounted at the corner of the west car-park where it meets the entrance drive, and the other adjacent to the building. This would give good coverage of the west side of the Rec. The storage controller would store several weeks of footage. Cameras would be configured to pan across a defined area and dwell on movement they detect. If internet access were available, recordings could be remotely accessed. Ongoing costs would be maintenance and potentially an internet connection to allow remote access. A conversation with the pavilion tenant would be required to discuss space, power and access for the equipment.
Option 2- SDC Hosted Option
A quote has been received via SDC’s contractor for the SDC-to-site cable installation and annual fees.
Installation of a cable to the west car park was quoted at £22,500.
Installation via the east car park was £10,500.
Price-aside, the west route would be preferred.
A fee of £100/month would be charged for the data connection.
An annual monitoring fee would be charged by SDC of £1000/camera. Due to the magnitude of these costs, SDC’s contractor has not been followed-up for a further quote for the camera equipment and installation. The cost of these is likely to be similar to the DAS total.
Cost Summary:
| 1 – Self-Hosted | 2 – SDC Hosted | |
|---|---|---|
| Installation | £ 6,850.93 | From £15,000 to £30,000 depending on exact location & number of cameras. |
| Annual Costs (excludes maintenance / vandalism) | £ 0 to £400 (internet connection) | £ 2,200 for 1 camera; increases by £1,000 per additional camera. |
Observations:
While the SDC route clearly offers a better system – one that could proactively interfere with antisocial behavior as it occurs (either by the CCTV operators autonomously spotting the activity, or by responding to a real-time request from the police) – the lack of flexibility in how it could be provisioned on this site leads to eye-watering installation costs as well as significant annual costs.
The lower cost of the self-hosted option is attractive – and merely installing a system would likely have a deterrent effect. However, consideration should be given to how effective it would be at preventing or responding to antisocial behavior in practice.
A likely scenario is that a complaint would be received by the Council about behavior the previous evening/weekend. A suitably qualified member of staff would need to review stored footage from around the time identified in the complaint, and decide whether there is sufficient quality video depicting the offending behavior to warrant forwarding to the police for their further action. This could be a time-consuming activity, with a limited likelihood of the police taking further action.
NB. This does not appear to include surveying for utilities connections, establishing WiFi connection, and does not cover any costs for CCTV for security at the Cemetery Depot or Doggetts Barn buildings, which were part of the initial considerations at Council.
Members previously decided that they would like to run another local gardening competition, and the budget allocated for this activity` is £1,000. Do member agree for officers to make preparations and advertise this event, with a working group nominated at the June meeting to nominate councillor judges?
Do members consider any items from this meeting should be the subject of a News Release?