CRICH PARISH COUNCIL Glebe Field Centre, Glebe Field Close, Crich Derbyshire DE4 5EU Tel: 01773 853928 E-mail: clerk@crich-pc.gov.uk

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF CRICH PARISH COUNCIL HELD IN CRICH GLEBE FIELD CENTRE, ON MONDAY 3RD SEPTEMBER 2018 AT 7.30PM 1811/18 Present: Cllrs: M Lane (Chair), D Anstead, S Bateman, M Baugh, J Brown, C Collison, J

James, K Smith, V Thorpe, R Walsh, P Yorke In attendance: DCC Cllr D Taylor, AVBC Cllr G Gee, C Jennings - Parish Clerk

Also present: Six members of the public 1812/18 TO NOTE ABSENCE

Cllr V Broom, (apologies), DCC Cllr T Ainsworth (apologies), PCSO Wragg Resolved: Absence was noted.

1813/18 VARIATION OF ORDER OF BUSINESS

It was not considered necessary to vary the order of business.

1814/18 DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS a) To enable Members to declare the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary

Interest they have in subsequent agenda items, in accordance with the Parish Council’s Code of Conduct. Interests that become apparent at a later stage in the proceedings may be declared at that time.

b) To receive and approve requests for dispensation from members on matters in which they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest. Personal (not Pecuniary) Interests declared: Cllr C Collison declared a personal interest in planning and listed building applications refs AVA/2018/0582 and AVA/2018/0583, arising from close associations with objectors to the scheme. Cllrs D Anstead declared a personal interest in planning and listed building applications AVA/2018/0582 and AVA/2018/0583, arising from personal association with parties involved. Cllr J Brown declared a personal interest in planning applications TRE/2018/0303, as this was his property, and AVA/2018/0629, as this was a neighbouring property. Cllrs K Smith and R Walsh declared a personal interest in planning application AVA/2018/0792, arising from employment/volunteering. Cllr M Lane declared a personal interest in planning application AVA/2018/0321 and Agenda Item 19 in respect of Glebe Field Centre, arising from her role on Crich Glebe Field Trust Management Committee. Cllr V Thorpe declared a personal interest in planning application AVA/2018/0321 and Agenda Item 19 in respect of Glebe Field Centre, arising from her role as Glebe Field Trust Management Trustee. Cllr Baugh declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 11b, as this was a neighbouring property.

1815/18 CO-OPTION FOR WHATSTANDWELL WARD VACANT SEAT

a) Delegated Cllrs met with a prospective new Councillor on 22nd August 2018, and recommended his co-option. The vote was unanimous Resolved: Mr Jordan James was co-opted to fill the vacant seat for Whatstandwell Ward.

b) Cllr Jordan James signed the Election Compact for Crich Parish Council, joined the Council at the table, and was welcomed by the Chair.

1816/18 PUBLIC SPEAKING

a) A period of 15 minutes will be made available for members of the public and members of the Council to comment on any matter. Speaking is limited to 3 minutes per person and is at the discretion of the Chair. Speaking: A resident advised that there had been sightings of drug dealing in a local layby, the Police were aware. Cllrs Anstead and Collison left the room. Four residents made complaints relating to planning applications AVA/2018/0582 and AVA/2018/0583, Wakebridge Farm proposed development. The comments related to a number of elements including, but not limited to; size of development, size of accommodation, size of car park, traffic volumes, noise, type of farming, farming methods/ experimental farming, animal numbers, lack of business plans, type of business, lack of experience. The Chair explained that the Parish Council was only a consultee with regard to Planning, and had submitted a balanced response to the two applications. The reinstatement of a farm and local employment supported elements of revitalisation as contained in Crich Neighbourhood Plan, which would hopefully be voted in on Thursday 6th September. However, the Council had also raised concerns with other aspects seeking clarification and safeguards be included; with regard to location of the site which was within Derwent Valley Mills Heritage Site Buffer Zone, public footpath safety, the introduction of two timber framed works cabins, and insufficient information to demonstrate the reasonable residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers. Comments relating to type of farming or methods were not relevant to the planning application.

b) If the Police Liaison Officer, a County or District Councillor is in attendance, they will be

given the opportunity to raise any relevant matter.

AVBC Gee spoke about the Wakebridge Farm planning application. He had asked the Chair of Planning, Cllr N Bull, to call-in the planning application for decision by the Planning Board, but as his request had been a couple of days late it seemed was not accepted and it looks like it would be delegated to Officers. However, other residents had also complained and one had referred the applications to the Secretary of State for Environmental and Rural Affairs, National Planning Casework Unit. It was suggested that the residents who were concerned could request a meeting with AVBC Planning Officers. If the applications were called-in, the residents would also be able to attend that meeting, but this was looking unlikely. After considerable further discussion it was Resolved: to write to the Chair of Planning, Cllr Norman Bull, to support Cllr Gee’s request to call-in Planning Applications AVA/2018/0582 and AVA/2018/0583, Wakebridge Farm. On the grounds that the applications were made during the holiday season and local residents therefore felt there had been inadequate consultation time, there is considerable local concern about the plans, and the applications are very controversial. Cllr Gee went on to provide updates on other planning applications. AVBC Thorpe provided an update of planning applications she was involved with. She has called-in planning application no AVA/2018/0629, Allen Lane. DCC Cllr Taylor chairs DCC’s Health Scrutiny Panel, and on 10th September 2018, at 2.00pm, the Panel is meeting representatives from Southern Derbyshire NHS Commissioning Group (CCG) to challenge the proposed £90M cuts to health services. Cllrs Anstead and Collison re-joined the meeting.

1817/18 CHAIR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Chair advised she had: ▪ Exchanged e-mails thanking Severn Trent for their consultative approach to the reservoir

project and how pleased everyone concerned had been. ▪ Attended a Standards and Appeals meeting on 4th July.

▪ Arranged for Crich Area Community News to publish the AVBC leaflet regarding dog waste in their last issue.

▪ Joined the rest of the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group Members at Crich Fete, at a stall to promote the Plan and encourage voting. All this hard work had obviously had to be repeated when the first Referendum had been cancelled by AVBC.

1818/18 MINUTES

a) Resolved: To approve the minutes of the Parish Council Meeting held on Monday 2nd July 2018.

b) Resolved: To accept the report of the Finance Committee Meeting held on Monday 23rd July 2018, including payments and receipts, and bank reconciliation

1819/18 PLANNING

a) Resolved: That the Parish Council representations on planning applications submitted to AVBC since the last Full Council Parish Meeting be endorsed. The planning application comments made at this meeting be submitted to AVBC. Representations attached. .

b) Amber Valley planning portal Resolved: To write to AVBC Planning Manager, Sarah Brookes, to advise that the current trial of not displaying the Parish Council’s comments to Planning Applications is detrimental to open and transparent decision making. Local residents have complained about the inability to view Council comments, and as a public body we would like our comments to be publicly accessible. The Council would also like to see the reinstatement of resident’s comments, with personal details redacted to comply with GDPR, so it is able to gauge local feeling towards planning applications.

FINANCE 1820/18 a) Payments and receipts

Resolved: That payment of the attached accounts in the sums of August £4,991.10 and September £4,777.64, and receipt of the sums of July £1,606.00 and August £1,188.00 be formally approved.

1821/18 b) Finance Terms of Reference

To ensure quarterly meetings are not inquorate Resolved: To amend Finance Terms of Reference Point 2 quorum number from ‘four’ to ‘three’. To be circulated as separate document.

1822/18 c) Notice of conclusion of Audit 2018 Audit Return for year ended 31st March 2018, sections 1-3 and notice circulated.

REPORTS 1823/18 CRICH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The referendum is due to take place on 6th September 2018. The count is being attended by Cllrs Lane, Collison, Walsh and Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group member Claire Parkinson.

RECREATION GROUND 1824/18 a) PLACE project

Cllr Yorke advised that the new waste bins have been installed. One had already had to be repaired as someone had tried to dislodge it. The Trade Waste bin is also in place. Cllr Yorke continues to receive positive comments from users. The PLACE Project group are wanting to put in more benches, with one going in tomorrow and another being installed next month. Plans are also being made for the next stage of the development for a ‘Quiet Area’ with horse shoe seating. Consideration is also being given to a local sculpture. Permission for all additional works previously approved by Council.

1825/18 b) Damaged wall

2 Holly Bank Court, bordering the Recreation Ground. This matter has been referred to the Council’s Insurers.

Resolved – To contact the Council’s Insurers to enquire whether a claim is being pursued, and if not when they will close the matter.

BURIAL GROUND 1826/18 a) Work is being undertaken to cultivate the land to the right-hand side of the Burial Ground.

It has been cut, stone removal is taking place, and any levelling/additional seeding will be undertaken as well as additional cuts into the Autumn. Grasstrack believe the area will then be of a similar condition to the rest of the Burial Ground and consecration can be looked into. Grasstrack are arranging to install short wooden posts to identify the gas pipe/no-dig area. On-going cutting of the area will need to be added to the annual maintenance contract, as well as an occasional cut to the bottom ‘extension’ area.

1827/18 b) Easement

Chair has not had an opportunity to move the easement consent forward, but will do so when able.

1828/18 TRADE WASTE BINS – RECREATION GROUND AND BURIAL GROUND

Necessary works have been undertaken to install fixings, chains and locks in the Recreation Ground and the Burial Ground. An order for Trade Waste bins, as agreed by Council, was placed with AVBC Trade Waste. The bins were delivered on 22nd August 2018. Use will be monitored.

1829/18 JUBILEE GROUND – PICNIC BENCH

A bench was sourced, ordered and delivered at a cost of £117.29. The bench is presently being installed by Mr Creed.

1830/18 GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION (GDPR)

The Clerk has carried out more work on the Parish Council’s Data Audit, and will continue to develop the log on a monthly basis.

MATTERS FOR DECISION 1831/18 RECREATION GROUND – ASH TREE

AVBC Tree Officer report had been circulated. Resolved: ▪ Clerk to complete the application form for tree work and seek permission from AVBC to

carry out the felling of the tree and treatment of the trunk. ▪ Clerk to obtain a quote for the: Felling and removal of the ash tree. Retention of the stump.

Treating of the remaining stump with herbicide to ensure no future growth with glyphosate through the use of eco-plugs. (Additional quotes only necessary if work is in excess of £250).

▪ Clerk to place an order for the work, when permission has been given. ▪ The Council to pay for the work, as recommended by AVBC Tree Officer. ▪ Clerk to contact the residents to inform them of the Council’s decision and nature of work to

be carried out. 1832/18 BURIAL GROUND – REMOVAL OF EXCESS SPOIL/SOIL

A report regarding the removal of excess spoil/soil after grave digging, and advice from DALC had been circulated. Council considered the options and Resolved: To contact all known Funeral Directors and Grave Diggers on record again, and reiterate the message that it is no longer acceptable for those responsible for digging graves to dump excess spoil anywhere in Crich Burial Ground – this includes the area down the side and to the bottom of the Burial Ground – both of which are to become part of the main Burial Ground. The grave digger will be expected to:

▪ Backfill the grave to a suitable level in a sensitive and respectful manner ▪ Leave the grave turfed and tidy ▪ Remove all extra spoil When making arrangement for grave digging, Funeral Directors must ensure the person undertaking the work adheres to these rules.

1833/18 ALLOTMENTS

A report regarding the request for the provision of strimmer for use by an Allotment Volunteer

was circulated.

Resolved

▪ To purchase a petrol strimmer DS3000D machine, split shaft type of professional quality,

engine assembly and brush cutter attachment, a metal petrol safety can, and relevant PPE

equipment (for two operators) at a cost of around £350 plus VAT, from Twigg, Matlock.

▪ To enable the equipment to be used within Insurers guidelines, a competence check of the

allotment volunteer and a risk assessment to be carried out.

▪ The strimmer to be kept in the Glebe Centre basement and to be booked in/out. Log to be

developed to enable record keeping.

1834/18 DEFIBRILLATOR REPORT A ‘work in progress’ report by Cllr Yorke and the Clerk was circulated. The Clerk is due to meet East Midlands Ambulance Service (EMAS) in three weeks. Further information will be available after this. As this meeting took some time to organise, the timescales shown in the report are no longer valid. The location for a defibrillator in Crich was discussed, with either the Glebe Field Centre or the phone box in the Market Place being considered the best options. Some Members felt the Market Place offered an easier location to find during an emergency situation, whilst others felt the Glebe Field Centre had a higher footfall. It was therefore necessary to put the two locations to the vote, with the phone box in the Market Place being agreed. It followed that the phone box at Fritchley should be the location for the second defibrillator, if BT agree to decommission the phone. The suggested location for Whatstandwell is located in a World Heritage Site, and as such will be more highly regulated. Resolved – the locations of the defibrillators were agreed in principle as: ▪ Crich – telephone box in Market Square ▪ Fritchley – telephone box Fritchley Green ▪ Whatstandwell – Family Tree, retaining wall to front of building, behind Council notice

board The locations depend on the Clerk submitting relevant applications, obtaining appropriate permissions, entering into agreements and contracts, the completion of other necessary documentation, and payments to Bodies including: EMAS, AVBC, BT, Distribution Network Operator (DNO), and any other relevant party. The Clerk was given approval to do this. Chair to inform Crich Junior School that the Council is unable to install a defibrillator on School premises, due to the contract signed agreeing the machines will be publicly accessible, and that they cannot be donated to another Body.

1835/18 BULLYING AND HARRASSMENT POLICY

Resolved: Council adopted the new Bullying and Harassment policy. To be circulated as separate document.

1836/18 CORRESPONDENCE

a) Derbyshire Association of Local Councils – Circular no 10/2018. b) Derbyshire Association of Local Councils – Circular no 11/2018.

Noted: “6. Continued Precept capping deferral recommend

Following extensive engagement from NALC, in 2018-19 the Government decided to defer for three

years the setting of referendum principles for local councils, with the current proposal being the

second year of the ‘three-year deal.”

c) Modern Slavery newsletter d) Safer Amber Valley News e) Derbys Care Service poster and press release f) Amber Valley and Erewash Walking Festival – Autumn Footprints booklet, copy for each

Councillor available at the meeting g) Police youth engagement press release h) Letter from Alfreton resident – Woodside

i) Letter from Crich resident – Wakebridge Farm j) Letter from Wakebridge resident – Wakebridge Farm k) Letter from Crich resident – Wakebridge Farm Resolved: Correspondence was noted.

1837/18 NEXT MEETINGS

Parish Council Meeting – Monday 1st October 2018 – 7.30pm Glebe Field Centre, Crich Finance Committee Meeting – Monday 22nd October 2018 – 10.00am Glebe Field Centre, Crich

The meeting closed at 9.43pm

JULY 2018 Planning responses below submitted 24th July 2018 - after circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement of said response. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS – COUNCIL’S COMMENTS TO AVBC Ref: AVA/2018/0623 Proposal: Two storey extension, porch, re-roof and insertion of roof lights, removal of render and creation of an access and hardstanding. Location: Byard Cottage, Chapel Street, Fritchley, Derbys. DE56 2FR Response: No objection subject to the case officer negotiating an amendment so as to reduce the area of

hardstanding and to minimise the loss of boundary wall as both the garden area and boundary wall make an

important contribution to the significance of the Fritchley Conservation Area.

Ref: AVA/2018/0628 Proposal: Proposed summer house Location: 5 Greenfields, Fritchley, Derbys. DE56 2FP Response: No objection so long as this is not in addition to the proposal approved on 22 May 2018 reference

AVA/2018/0366

Ref: AVA/2018/0582 Proposal: Redevelopment of Wakebridge Farm to form a sheep dairy enterprise with associated creamery, hotel, bar and restaurant and the siting of two timber framed cabins to house agricultural workers for a period of three years. Location: Wakebridge Farm, Wakebridge, Derbys. DE4 5HD Ref: AVA/2018/0583 Proposal: Listed building consent for the redevelopment of Wakebridge Farm to form a sheep dairy enterprise with associated creamery, hotel, bar and restaurant. Location: Wakebridge Farm, Wakebridge, Derbys. DE4 5HD Response: Applications AVA/2018/0582 and AVA/2018/0583

Timing of determination

Several policies of the emerging Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan are relevant to the determination of the planning

application not least Policies NP3, NP4, NP6, NP9, NP10, NP11, NP12 and NP14 and aspects of the

Neighbourhood Plan are relevant to the determination of the Listed Building Consent application. Paragraph 216 of

the National Planning Policy Framework states decision makers may give weight (unless other material

considerations indicate otherwise) to relevant policies in emerging plans according to:

● the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that

may be given);

● the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved

objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and

● the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework (the

closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the

Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).

An error of AVBC has led to delay in the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan potentially becoming part of the

Development Plan. The current applications should not be determined in the context of a different Development

Plan regime than would otherwise have been the case if the error had not been made. Determination of the

applications should be delayed accordingly.

The Proposals

Crich Parish Council supports redevelopment of Wakebridge Farm in principle and considers that appropriate

proposals for the principal land uses envisaged could, subject to amendment, clarification, and safeguards included

in suitable conditions, be acceptable. Certain aspects of the proposals are welcomed in particular the conversion of

redundant farm buildings where they are in accordance with the criteria forming part of Policy NP6 of the Crich

Parish Neighbourhood Plan.

The current proposals are however not appropriate in all respects in particular regarding landscape implications,

residential amenity, and pedestrian safety. It is recommended amendments to the proposals are negotiated with

the applicants. The applications are in other respects not sufficiently detailed to provide assurance that the

proposals are acceptable and further submissions should be sought in respect of these.

The Parish Council considers that further details should be sought; amendments to the scheme made; and

necessary conditions specified before any permission should be granted. Concerns of the Parish Council are:

1. The application site lies within the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site Buffer Zone which forms the

immediate setting of the WHS. The Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site (DVMWHS) is an international

designation of the highest significance. Insufficient detail has been provided to demonstrate avoidance of

harm to the Outstanding Universal Value of the DVMWHS. The information currently provided is insufficient

to be able to assess the full impact of the proposed development on the heritage asset affected and

therefore fails to meet the requirements of paragraph 128 of the NPPF. It is recommended that further

information is provided to address this important issue including verified photomontages/images of an

appropriate quality from agreed viewpoints. We do not believe AVBC can adequately judge the impact of

this development on the basis of the information provided.

2. Insufficient information has been provided to describe the measures to be taken to direct pedestrians

travelling to and from Crich to utilise the footpath via Crich Stand in the interests of highway safety.

3. The introduction of two timber framed cabins to house agricultural workers has not been sufficiently

justified.

4. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate the reasonable residential amenity of

neighbouring occupiers will be adequately safeguarded.

Ref: TRE/2018/0303 Proposal: Sycamore, laburnum and holm oak - various pruning works Location: Our House, The Green, Fritchley, Derbys. DE56 2FW Response: No Objection

Ref: TRE/2018/0305

Proposal: Refer to attached plan & schedule of works.

Location: Plantation To the Rear Of Frecheville Drive Fritchley Belper Derbyshire

Response: Objection. These trees have been protected for their significant contribution to the character of Fritchley and their importance to the significance of the nearby Fritchley Conservation Area from which they are clearly visible. A proposed change of ownership of land beneath part of the canopy of trees is not reason to carry out significant pruning

Ref: AVA/2018/0681

Proposal: Single storey rear extension

Location: Marlow, 16 Top Hagg Lane, Fritchley, Derbys. DE56 2HJ

Response: No objection

Ref: AVA/2018/0723

Proposal: Agricultural Lean to Extension Building to house and feed Livestock and Agricultural Building to Store

Fodder (The proposal may affect the setting of a Listed Building)

Location: Dial Farm, The Common, Crich, Derbys. DE4 5BJ

Response: No objection

AUGUST 2018

PLANNING APPLICATIONS – COUNCIL’S COMMENTS TO AVBC After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018: Ref: AVA/2017/1363 Proposal: Development of 71 dwellings (houses, bungalows & 30% affordable housing), infrastructure, public open space, equipped area for play, landscaping & ecological enhancement. The proposal may affect the setting of a listed building. The proposal is not in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan. Location: Land at Woodside Farm, The Common, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire Response: Further to the Crich Parish Council objection submitted 21 December 2017 in respect of proposals for 65 dwellings. and further to the Crich Parish Council representations dated 30 July 2018 and 2 August 2018 Crich Parish Council OBJECTS to the revised scheme for 71 dwellings submitted to AVBC (shown on the AVBC website with document dates of 25 July and 30 July 2018). Reasons for objection: Timing of determination Paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2018) states Local Planning Authorities may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: ● the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); ● the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and ● the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given). An error of AVBC has led to delay in the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan potentially becoming part of the Development Plan. The current application should not be determined in the context of a different Development Plan regime than would otherwise have been the case if the error had not been made. Determination of the applications should be delayed accordingly. The Proposals It is anticipated the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan will become part of the Development Plan on 6 September 2018. The Supporting Planning Statement submitted by the applicants makes specific reference to Policy NP2 and Appendix 4 only. This is a significant failing. Crich Parish Council request AVBC not to repeat this failing. The Housing and Planning Act (2016) requires any conflict with a neighbourhood plan to be set out in the committee/planning board report, that will inform any planning decision, where that report recommends granting planning permission for development that conflicts with an up to date neighbourhood plan. The NPPF (2018) is very clear that where a planning application conflicts with an up to date neighbourhood plan that forms part of the development plan permission should not normally be granted. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as they are in conflict with several policies of the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan not least Policies NP1 NP2 NP3, NP4, NP5, NP9 and NP11. These conflicts must be properly identified and considered. Policy NP 1 Spatial Strategy 1. All development in Crich Parish should be located so that it can make a positive contribution towards the achievement of sustainable development by: a) meeting development needs within the settlement development boundaries defined in Policy NP 2; and b) ensuring that the density of development is appropriate and related to the surrounding environment having regard to Policies NP2 and NP4; and c) conserving and where possible enhancing the landscape character and setting of the settlement having regard to Policy NP3; and d) avoiding the risk of damage to areas of importance for nature conservation having regard to Policy NP9; and

e) maintaining and where possible enhancing accessibility to a good range of services and facilities. 2. Development proposals within the settlement development boundaries defined in Policy NP2 that can demonstrate that they satisfy the principles of sustainable development set out in this policy and the more detailed criteria in Policy NP2 will be supported. Development will normally be in the form of individual dwellings or small groups of dwellings on small infill sites, or the redevelopment of brownfield sites, where larger proposals may be justified. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as they include development outside the settlement development boundary; include areas of development where the density is inappropriate and not related to the surrounding environment; do not conserve or enhance the landscape character and setting of Crich; harm areas of importance for nature conservation; and are of a scale of development to be implemented at one time that is greater than a small group of dwellings. Policy NP 2: Development within Settlement Development Boundaries. Within the SDBs shown in Maps 7,8 and 9, development proposals for infill development will be supported where: a) the proposed development is of a scale, density, layout and design that is compatible with the character, appearance and amenity of the part of a settlement in which it would be located; and b) it would not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is important to the character of the settlement; and c) it would not result in the loss of locally valued habitat which supports wildlife, and where this is unavoidable, equivalent compensatory provision should be made elsewhere; and d) any natural or built features on the site that have heritage or nature conservation value should be retained in the scheme; and e) it would have a layout, access and parking provision appropriate to the proposed use, site and its surroundings; and f) it is in accordance with the other policies in this neighbourhood plan. Where one or more of these criteria are not met proposals will only be permitted where the public benefit clearly outweighs the harm. 2. Within the SDB of Crich development is required to ensure that; a) important visual links with the wider countryside are maintained (see also Policy NP 3) b) it does not extend onto the lower slopes to the west; c) respect the local topography to the east d) rooflines are not prominent on the skyline when viewed from a distance…... 5. Land outside the SDB’s will be treated as open countryside, which will be protected for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty. Development proposals will be determined in accordance with national policy. Proposals for the provision of affordable housing on rural exception sites adjacent to Settlement Development Boundaries will be supported where they meet an identified local need, relate well to the built form of the existing settlement and are not intrusive in the countryside. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as they include development outside the settlement development boundary. These intrusions into open countryside are in areas of valued landscape (Paragraph 170 NPPF) and in particular extend to the lower slopes to the west. The proposals also extend beyond the settlement development boundary to the south. The proposals will harm locally valued habitat and heritage assets. Policy NP 3: Protecting the Landscape Character of Crich Parish 1. The green gaps identified in Maps 10, 11 and 12 play an important function in protecting the landscape character and setting of the settlements of Crich, Whatstandwell and Fritchley. 2. The green gap between Crich and Whatstandwell forms an important link to the Crich Chase SSSI and views into the valley. It forms the western boundary with Crich and is defined as a Special Landscape Area in District policy. Development in this gap will be very limited and should demonstrate how it maintains the landscape character of openness and protects the setting of Crich. 3. The green gap between Crich and Fritchley is critical in allowing these villages to maintain their separate identities. Development in this gap is required to demonstrate that it reinforces the setting of the settlements and their separate identities. To help maintain the separation of Fritchley and Crich, further development here should be resisted, as it will critically erode this important area of green space and cause the villages to coalesce. 4. The green gap between Fritchley and Bullbridge is a key character forming space which is already critically narrow due to previous development. Development in this gap is required to demonstrate that it would not create coalescence between the two settlements. 5. Development should not represent a significant visual intrusion into the landscape setting. The view corridors highlighted in Map 13 are particularly sensitive in these respects and development is required to demonstrate it will not have a significantly adverse impact on these publicly accessible views. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as they include development in areas of valued landscape (Paragraph 170 NPPF) defined as important Green Gaps and in particular extends to the lower slopes to the west. Crich Parish Council also objects to the inclusion in the application site of land immediately west and south of Woodbank House and to the rear of 144 to 148 The Common. The proposed drainage attenuation basin in this area will significantly alter the appearance of this agricultural land to the detriment of visual amenity in an area of landscape sensitivity. The proposed attenuation basin will also introduce an unnatural built feature in the important open break between Crich and Fritchley. Policy NP 4: Design Principles for Residential Development 1. Proposals will be supported where they demonstrate a high design quality. In order to achieve this development should; a) use a locally inspired range of materials (like local stone and slate roof tiles) to ensure a narrow colour palette; and b) be guided by the proportions and plot orientation of the existing dwellings; and c) reflect designs that draw upon local character in terms of style to ensure new development enhances the distinctiveness and quality of the Parish as a whole; and d) demonstrate that buildings, landscaping and planting will create well defined streets and attractive green spaces that respond to the existing settlement boundaries and built form in terms of enclosure

and definition of streets and spaces. e) Schemes should demonstrate a layout that maximises opportunities to integrate new development with the existing settlement pattern and wider landscape. f) Development should reflect local character, what this means for the main settlements in the Parish is set out at below. In Crich development should; a) avoid building across the end of streets where this blocks off views to the wider countryside to allow for views into the wider landscape beyond the settlement boundary; and b) respect the topography, with minimal cut and fill and roof lines should not be prominent in the skyline from distant views. 2 Applicants will be required to demonstrate how their proposals accord with Building for Life 12 standards where they are applicable to the scheme. Proposals for major development will be required to score 9 greens out of 12 unless it can be demonstrated that there are constraints which make this not possible or viable. Crich Parish Council objects to the site layout in that it proposes the southern boundary should be formed of private drives and road ends immediately adjacent to the adjoining field. The proposed layout does not form a satisfactory settlement boundary which should be formed of rear gardens which would provide a soft transition between the built development and the adjoining countryside. Crich Parish Council objects to the site layout in the northern part of the scheme in that it proposes a form of built development in terms of density, layout, and relationship to existing dwellings to the east that is detrimental to residential and visual amenity and not in keeping with adjacent existing development. Crich Parish Council objects to the design of individual properties and their proposed layout as this does not reflect the character of traditional development in the parish. Policy NP 5: A Mix of Housing Types 1. Where possible, residential development should provide a housing mix that reflects the most up to date published evidence of housing need at a local or district level. This should include smaller market dwellings (2-3 bedrooms) to suit older people and for first time home buyers. Planning applications for housing schemes are required to deliver a housing mix that reflects the demonstrable need for smaller dwellings. 2.The provision of smaller market dwellings, especially those suitable for older people, will be encouraged in locations within approximately a 10-minute walk of Crich village centre (Map 14). Crich Parish Council objects to the proposed housing mix as it is not demonstrated this adequately responds to local needs. Policy NP 9: Maintaining and Enhancing the Parish’s Biodiversity 1. New development should not harm the network of ecological features and habitats, including designated sites and areas of identified Priority Habitats. 2. Where major development is contiguous with a designated site the layout and design of the scheme should recognise the significance of the designation and demonstrate how the proposal will not cause harm to the designated area. 3. Proposals for the restoration, enhancement or creation of priority habitat will be supported, where appropriate. 4. Development proposals will be expected to retain, enhance and incorporate features which are beneficial for wildlife and habitat creation and ecological connectivity such as hedgerows, woodland, field margins and roadside verges. Landscape proposals and design should include incorporation of features supportive of wildlife such as bats, swifts and house sparrows in housing developments, where appropriate and practical. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as harm to important habitat is not avoided. Policy NP 11: Protecting and Enhancing Heritage Assets 1. Applications for development will only be supported within the Conservation Areas in Crich Parish where the proposals are of a high design quality and where such development meets the following criteria: a) it is in keeping with the character of the area particularly in relation to historic development patterns and plot sizes; and b) the design preserves and where possible enhances the heritage attributes of the Conservation Area, and c) the materials used should be locally inspired and in keeping with the prevailing colour palette. 2. Where applicable, development adjacent to the Conservation Areas should not detract from the setting of the Conservation Areas and should ensure that building lines and boundary treatment reflect the positive attributes in that character area and preserve the significance of the asset. 3. The effect of a proposal on the buildings and structures of local importance identified in paragraph 203 will be taken into account in determining an application in order to minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as it considers the scale of harm arising from the proposed development is inappropriate given the significance of the former Clay Cross Company mineral railway heritage asset. After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018: Ref: AVA/2018/0537 Proposal: General purpose shed to replace existing shed

Development Type: Minor other Location: Cross Farm, Roes Lane, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5DH Response: No objection After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018: Ref: AVA/2018/0750 Proposal: Reserved matters of AVA/2016/0464 including the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for 58 units. Location: Land Off The Track, Roes Lane, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire Response: Crich Parish Council Objects to the proposal for the following reasons: Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP 4: Design Principles for Residential Development states 1. Proposals will be supported where they demonstrate a high design quality. In order to achieve this development should; a) use a locally inspired range of materials (like local stone and slate roof tiles) to ensure a narrow colour

palette; and b) be guided by the proportions and plot orientation of the existing dwellings; and c) reflect designs that draw upon local character in terms of style to ensure new development enhances the distinctiveness and quality of the Parish as a whole; and d) demonstrate that buildings, landscaping and planting will create well defined streets and attractive green spaces that respond to the existing settlement boundaries and built form in terms of enclosure and definition of streets and spaces. e) Schemes should demonstrate a layout that maximises opportunities to integrate new development with the existing settlement pattern and wider landscape. f) Development should reflect local character, what this means for the main settlements in the Parish is set out at below. In Crich development should; a) avoid building across the end of streets where this blocks off views to the wider countryside to allow for views into the wider landscape beyond the settlement boundary; and b) respect the topography, with minimal cut and fill and roof lines should not be prominent in the skyline from distant views. 2 Applicants will be required to demonstrate how their proposals accord with Building for Life 12 standards where they are applicable to the scheme. Proposals for major development will be required to score 9 greens out of 12 unless it can be demonstrated that there are constraints which make this not possible or viable Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals in that they do not reflect local character and do not constitute high quality design.

Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP 9: Maintaining and Enhancing the Parish’s Biodiversity 1. New development should not harm the network of ecological features and habitats, including designated sites and areas of identified Priority Habitats. 2. Where major development is contiguous with a designated site the layout and design of the scheme should recognise the significance of the designation and demonstrate how the proposal will not cause harm to the designated area. 3. Proposals for the restoration, enhancement or creation of priority habitat will be supported, where appropriate. 4. Development proposals will be expected to retain, enhance and incorporate features which are beneficial for wildlife and habitat creation and ecological connectivity such as hedgerows, woodland, field margins and roadside verges. Landscape proposals and design should include incorporation of features supportive of wildlife such as bats, swifts and house sparrows in housing developments, where appropriate and practical. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as harm to important habitat is not avoided. A significant tree (reference 77) is proposed to be removed without justification.

Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP 7: Affordable Housing 1. Where local housing need data is available reference should be made in the application as to how the proposed scheme meets that need. 2. On developments of more than 10 dwellings 20-30% of new dwellings will be required to be affordable unless this can be demonstrated to be unviable. 3. Affordable housing should, wherever possible, be provided on site and be fully integrated and visually indistinguishable from market housing throughout the development. Crich Parish Council objects to the proposals as affordable housing is not integrated throughout the development but is located in an identifiable cluster. A concern is also raised that the proposals do not adequately demonstrate they will not exacerbate flooding difficulties in the dip on Roes Lane through restriction of release of storm water. After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018: Ref: AVA/2018/0629 Proposal: Outline application for 2 no. new three bedroom dwellings with access to be agreed (The proposal may affect the setting of Fritchley Conservation Area and is a departure to the adopted Development Plan) Location: The Pony Paddock, The Bungalow, Allen Lane, Fritchley, Belper, Derbyshire Response: Crich Parish Council objects to the current proposal for the following reasons:

Policy NP 2 of the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan requires development proposals for infill development to be of a scale, density, layout and design that is compatible with the character, appearance and amenity of the part of a settlement in which it would be located; and not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is important to the character of the settlement. Within the settlement development boundary of Fritchley development “is required to ensure that it follows the existing loose grain of development.” The application Design and Access Statement says “it is considered feasible that the proposed dwellings would be two storey 3 or 4 bedrooms dwellings”. The application states 3-bedroom properties and does not highlight this intention for two storey development. The proposal seeks to develop an open area that makes a significant contribution to the character of Fritchley without demonstrating it will be compatible with the character, appearance, and amenity of its surrounding area. The proposal does not respect the established building line along Allen Lane which is an important element of the character of this part of the village. The proposal will severely adversely affect the residential amenity of adjacent properties. Given the relationship to surrounding properties two storey development is not considered appropriate. Policy NP 5 of the Crich Neighbourhood Development Plan states “where possible, residential development should provide a housing mix that reflects the most up to date published evidence of housing need at a local or district level. This should include smaller market dwellings (2-3 bedrooms) to suit older people and for first time home buyers. Planning applications for housing schemes are required to deliver a housing mix that reflects the demonstrable need for smaller dwellings. 2.The provision of smaller market dwellings, especially those suitable for older people, will be encouraged in locations within approximately a 10-minute walk of Crich village centre (Map 14).” The application does not demonstrate it responds to local housing needs. Policy NP 11 of the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan states “where applicable, development adjacent to the Conservation Areas should not detract from the setting of the Conservation Areas and should ensure that building lines and boundary treatment reflect the positive attributes in that character area and preserve the significance of the asset”. The proposal includes land both within and directly adjacent to the Fritchley Conservation Area. The proposal includes demolition of a building within the Conservation Area without adequate justification. The proposal is close to an important Listed Building (Old Farm Bowmer Lane). The Court of Appeal judgement (Catesby July 2018) has established that setting is not limited to visual impact but includes understanding of historic relationships. The proposal fails to demonstrate public benefits that outweigh the harm to the significance of the Conservation Area and Listed Building. Note. Should Amber Valley Borough Council ultimately consider some limited development of the site is acceptable it is considered essential that the proposals should not be approved in outline. The application site is both within and directly adjacent to the Fritchley Conservation Area and in a prominent location in the village. Before anything at all is agreed by Amber Valley Borough Council a detailed scheme showing the massing, design and materials of the proposed buildings should be required so that the impact on the significance of the Conservation Area, and on the character of the village, can be properly assessed. A detailed scheme would also allow proper consideration of impact on the amenity of occupiers of existing adjacent dwellings. After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018: Ref: AVA/2018/0770 Proposal: Redevelopment of former Highways Depot for a proposed Therapy Centre with adjusted access (The proposal is not in accordance with the Provisions of the Adopted Local Plan) Location: Former Highways Storage Depot, Wakebridge, Matlock, Derbyshire Response: No objection subject to: a). facing materials being suitable for the location; b). highway authority agreement to access, and highway implications in particular in light of other development proposals nearby; and c). satisfactory arrangements for water disposal from the pool and site in general. After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 13th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2018/0792 Proposal: Removal of 3x existing life expired storage/display sheds/garages and construction of a replacement timber cabin for the display of lead mining interpretation and small artefacts Location: National Tramway Museum, Crich Tramway Village, Town End, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5DP Response: No objection

After circulation to all Councillors, discussion and agreement, this response was submitted on 20th August 2018 as deadline for comment would be missed. To be reported at the next Full Council Meeting 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2018/0817 Proposal: Detached single storey dwelling to rear of Tollgate Cottage and associated access to Bowmer Lane (The proposal is not in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan) Location: Tollgate Cottage, Bowmer Lane, Fritchley, Belper, Derbyshire DE56 2FY Response: Background This is the fifth recent application on the site. Crich Parish Council has consistently raised objection to these proposals:

1. Crich Parish Council Objection raised to planning application AVA/2015/0857 on 5 October 2015. Dwelling to rear of Tollgate Cottage Bowmer Lane. Objection on grounds of siting, impact and design. Case Officer Paul Wilson.

2. Crich Parish Council Objection raised to planning application AVA/2015/1215 on 4 January 2016. Dwelling

to rear of Tollgate Cottage Bowmer Lane. Objection on grounds of siting, impact, design and loss of residential amenity for adjoining property. Case Officer Mark Penford.

3. Crich Parish Council Objection raised to planning application AVA/2016/0667 on 4 July 2016. Detached

dwelling Tollgate Cottage Bowmer Lane Fritchley. Objection on grounds: The proposal is inappropriate tandem garden backland development that does not respect the character of the locality. The proposed relationship to existing dwellings will be detrimental to residential amenity. The proposal will be detrimental to visual amenity in an area of sensitive open countryside particularly when viewed from Bowmer Lane. Case Officer Paul Wilson.

4. Crich Parish Council Objection raised to planning application AVA/2017/1324 on 13 December 2017

Detached dwelling rear of Tollgate Cottage Bowmer Lane Objection on grounds of: 1. The application site is previously undeveloped garden land. Paragraph 53 of the NPPF refers to resistance of inappropriate development of residential gardens. 2. Paragraph 64 of the NPPF states “permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions”. The proposal does not conserve or enhance the quality and local distinctiveness of the natural and built environment as required by the NPPF and Policy LS3 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan. 3. The proposal is inappropriate tandem garden backland development contrary to Policy H12 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan that does not take account of the relationship with neighbouring homes, as required by Policy LS3 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan, and is detrimental to residential amenity. 4. The proposal does not propose adequate supplementary landscaping in a visually prominent position as required by Policy H12 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan. The proposal will be detrimental to visual amenity in an area of sensitive open countryside, particularly when viewed from Bowmer Lane. 5. The proposal as back land development does not achieve satisfactory vehicular access in terms of ease of being located by delivery or emergency vehicles.

The Current Proposal Planning Application reference AVA/2018/0817 Proposed Detached single storey dwelling to rear of Tollgate Cottager and associated access to Bowmer Lane (The proposal is not in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan). Case Officer: Mark Penford Objection on the following grounds:

1. An error of AVBC has led to delay in the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan potentially becoming part of the Development Plan. The current application should not be determined in the context of a different Development Plan regime than would otherwise have been the case if the error had not been made. Determination of the application should be delayed accordingly. It is anticipated the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan will become part of the Development Plan on 6 September 2018. The Supporting Planning Statement submitted by the applicants makes no reference to the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan. This is a significant failing. Crich Parish Council request AVBC not to repeat this failing.

2. Paragraph 130 of the NPPF states “permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions”. The proposal is not consistent with achievement of high standards of quality of design and local distinctiveness as required by the NPPF and Policy LS3 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan.

3. The proposal is inappropriate tandem garden backland development contrary to Policy H12 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan that does not take account of the relationship with neighbouring homes, as

required by Policy LS3 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan, and is detrimental to residential amenity.

4. The proposal does not propose adequate supplementary landscaping in a visually prominent position as required by Policy H12 of the adopted Borough Council Local Plan. The proposal will be detrimental to visual amenity in an area of sensitive open countryside, particularly when viewed from Bowmer Lane.

5. The proposal as back land development behind the existing dwelling, approximately 50 metres from Bowmer Lane, does not achieve satisfactory vehicular access in terms of ease of being located by delivery or emergency vehicles.

6. The proposal states the means of disposal of foul sewage is unknown. This is not satisfactory.

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018. Ref: AVA/2018/0758 Proposal: New attached garage to side of existing property Location: Broom Royd, 190 Crich Common, Fritchley, Belper, Derbyshire, DE56 2FL, Response: No Objection

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2018/0738 Proposal: Demolish existing porch and construct conservatory Location: 24 Main Road, Whatstandwell, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5EE Response: No objection

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: TRE/2018/0321 Proposal: T1 (Sycamore) - reduce lower, large north-westerly limb by 30% in length Location: Glebe Field Centre, Glebe Field Close, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire, DE4 5EU Response: No Objection

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: TRE/2018/0322 Proposal: We met on site with David Cunningham on 18 June and discussed how the area has been quite neglected over the years, and we have a lot of work to do to try and clear some of the trees to open it back up again. We will be keeping the more mature trees and trying to create an environment that retains the important habitat for wildlife while removing some of the self-set trees. Although the amount listed on this form might seem quite high, it is a small proportion of the trees on the land which must be well over 750, and we intent to carry out the work in stages over the next couple of years at times which will not harm wildlife such as nesting birds. None of the trees are subject to TPOs, and also are not near or easily viewed from a public highway or right of way. Trees we wish to fell are listed on the attached plan as: 1. Self-set Ash 2. Self-set Ash suffering from die-back 3. Self-set Ash 4. Self-set Ash 5. Hawthorn 6. Ash suffering from die-back 7. Ash 8. Alder 9. Sycamore 10. Sycamore 11. Hawthorn 12. Ash 13. Sycamore 14. Beech 15. Beech 16. Beech 17. Alder 18. Alder 19. Alder 20. Beech 21. Elderflower Location: Lindfield, The Dimple, Fritchley, Belper, Derbyshire DE56 2HP Response: No Objection

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2017/0940 Proposal: The demolition of an existing derelict dwelling and the erection of a detached agricultural worker's dwelling Location: Cross Farm, Roes Lane, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5DH Response: Objection Reason: The proposal will result in unnecessary loss of a heritage asset. Given the proposal is to demolish the existing building then there is no basis for the proposed siting in an open countryside location. If being as close as possible to the farm buildings is important the proposal should be co-located with them. If co-location is not essential then affordable homes are under construction off Roes Lane as part of the Devonshire Gardens development.

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2018/0849 Proposal: New Stable Block on existing paddock land adjacent to Ashfield House Location: Ashfield House Carr Lane Crich Matlock Derbyshire DE4 5DR Response: Objection Reason: The large size of the proposed building has not been justified will be detrimental to landscape quality and visual amenity contrary to the provisions of the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan. It is unclear whether or not a commercial operation is proposed.

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: AVA/2018/0856 Proposal: Erection of agricultural building (45ftx30ft) Resubmission of AVA/2018/0228 Location: Big Close Farm, Dimple Lane, Crich, Matlock, Derbyshire Response: Objection. Reason: This application follows withdrawal of a previous application (AVA/2018/0228) earlier this year. The AVBC agricultural consultant has commented on the current proposal before the application was lodged suggesting the scheme should be revised in terms of scale and appearance. The observations of the agricultural consultant are supported. The proposed building due to its size, siting and appearance will be harmful to visual amenity and landscape character in an area of open countryside contrary to the provisions of the Crich Parish Neighbourhood Plan.

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: TRE/2018/0333 Proposal: Fell twin stemmed sycamore Location: Cheriton Cottage, Thurlow Booth, Whatstandwell, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5ER Response: No Objection

Response discussed and agreed at the Full Council Meeting of 3rd September 2018 Ref: TRE/2018/0334 Proposal: Fell twin stemmed sycamore Location: Cheriton Cottage, Thurlow Booth, Whatstandwell, Matlock, Derbyshire DE4 5ER Response: No Objection

PAYMENTS - PAID AUGUST 2018

Date Chq No

Payee Vat No Vat Total Amount Detail

23/07/2018 2796 William Twigg (Matlock) Ltd

125424494 10.07 60.43 50.36 Chains, locks, keys trade waste bins

2797 British Gas - elec June public w/c

684966762 0.59 26.24 25.65 Public w/c - elec

2798 Belper Skip Hire /Derwent Waste

847759369 25.00 150.00 125.00 Burial Ground skip

2799 Tradefast Builders Ltd 257361004 10.00 60.00 50.00 Fritchley Green bench repair

2800 Viking 536153357 12.99 77.92 64.93 Stationery

2801 C Jennings - Clerk 0.00 1,196.49 1,196.49 Payroll

2802 HMRC - NI & Tax 0.00 148.56 148.56 Payroll

2803 C Jennings - Expenses 0.00 51.44 51.44 Expenses

2804 Mr D Creed 0.00 78.50 78.50 Handy Service

2805 Grasstrack 80.00 480.00 400.00 Rec Ground - goal mouth ground maint

2806 P Yorke/ Hall-Fast Industrial Supplies

883082606 118.13 708.77 590.64 Rec Ground bins - half to be repaid by PLACE

2807 BT - line rental and calls 245719348 15.73 134.40 118.67 Telecom

s/o Keptkleen 287852742 45.07 270.40 225.33 Cleaning public w/c

s/o Software into action - SIA 789358066 7.80 46.80 39.00 IT support

s/o Grasstrack 814252455 78.60 471.60 393.00 Landscaping

s/o Crich Glebe Field Trust Ltd

0.00 809.55 809.55 Glebe payment

s/o Mr D Creed 0.00 220.00 220.00 Burial Ground/ landscaping

Totals 403.98 4,991.10 4,587.12

RECEIPTS - RECEIVED TO END JULY 2018

Date Payee Total Detail

26/06/2018 359 E Cope & Son Ltd 60.00 Burial Ground

" " " J Beresford & Sons 66.00 Burial Ground

27/06/2018 360 Archway Funeral Service 300.00 Burial Ground

03/07/2018 361 AVBC - grant public w/c 600.00 Grant - public w/c

04/07/2018 362 J Beresford & Sons 110.00 Burial Ground

10/07/2018 363 Thomas Ryde & Son 260.00 Burial Ground

11/07/2018 364 Archway Funeral Service 100.00 Burial Ground

17/07/2018 365 J Beresford & Sons 110.00 Burial Ground

Totals 1,606.00

PAYMENTS – PAID SEPTEMBER 2018

Date Chq No

Payee Vat No Vat Total Amount Detail

01/09/2018 s/o Keptkleen 287852742 45.07 270.40 225.33

Cleaning public w/c

s/o Software into action - SIA

789358066 7.80 46.80 39.00

IT support

s/o Grasstrack 814252455 78.60 471.60 393.00

Landscaping

s/o Crich Glebe Field Trust Ltd

0.00 809.55 809.55

Glebe payment

s/o Mr D Creed 0.00 220.00

220.00

Burial Ground/landscaping

22/08/2018 2808 BT - line rental and calls 245719348 22.63 135.76 113.13

Telecom

03/09/2018 2809 Belper Skip Hire /Derwent Waste

847759369 25.00 150.00 125.00

Burial Ground skip

2810 Keptkleen 287852742 30.00 180.00 150.00

Public w/c - repair

2811 Nisbets 974803000 23.45 140.74

117.29

Jubilee Ground - picnic bench

2812 PKF Littlejohn LLP 440498250 80.00 480.00 400.00

External Audit fee

2813 C Jennings - Clerk 0.00 1,170.66 1,170.66

Payroll

2814 HMRC - NI & Tax 0.00 135.96 135.96

Payroll

2815 Viking 536153357 12.67 84.05 71.38

Stationery

2816 DALC 0.00 8.00 8.00

Admin - Cllr guides

2817 DALC 0.00 45.00 45.00 Cllr Training

2818 AVBC 118093772 0.00 429.12 429.12 Trade waste bins BG + RG

Totals 325.22 4,777.64 4,452.42

RECEIPTS - RECEIVED TO END OF AUGUST 2018

Payee Total Detail

Date 366

Archway Funeral Service

200.00 Burial Ground

08/08/2018 367 J Beresford & Sons 330.00 Burial Ground

14/08/2018 368 Archway Funeral Service

520.00 Burial Ground

29/08/2018 369 AVBC - NP banner cost refund 138.00 Neigh Plan

Totals 1,188.00