Berkswich Parish Council 7 October 2025

BERKSWICH PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of the Berkswich Parish Council Meeting held on

Tuesday 7 October 2025 at 7.30 pm at Walton Village Hall

Present:       Cllr Alan Taylor (Chair), Cllr Caroline Pearson, Cllr Tim Luker, Cllr Vicky Campbell, Cllr Ann Millichap, Cllr Malcolm Millichap, Cllr Bob Gilson, Cllr Beverley Hughes and Cllr Sue Francis.

In attendance:   Sue Fullwood, Clerk/RFO and 26 members of the public.

Cllr Taylor welcomed everyone to the meeting.

25/110      Public Session

The members of the public were concerned about planning applications around the parish.  Cllr Taylor had prepared some observations on planning application 25/41179/OUT Land to the North of Milford Road and reiterated that they were not the views of the parish council, they were personal thoughts to try and avoid comments being repeated at this meeting.

Cllr Taylor said that looking at the SHELAA, if all the potential sites were approved for planning, cumulatively there would be a lot of houses.  He had calculated that on the East side of Stafford, if all the sites were developed, there could be up to 8000 new dwellings.  There were also potential sites in Gnosall, Eccleshall, etc which would result in an enormous amount of houses.  He added that SBC needed to ensure that they were addressing whether there were the facilities to service all of those dwellings.  Cllr Taylor encouraged everyone to comment on planning applications on SBC’s planning portal or by emailing planning@staffordbc.gov.uk including the planning application reference if they had concerns.

Cllr M Millichap said that the public’s attendance at parish council meetings was an opportunity to share their views and show the strength of feeling.  He added that following the presentation on the proposed development at Old Croft Road at the September meeting he felt that there was some criticism of the Council for not commenting and that that was not because the Council had no view, it was because the Council did not want to be accused of predetermination if the application went to appeal.

Person 1 said that since the planning application for Walton Garden Village in 2014 Stafford had spread and a lot of houses had been built. Person 1 asked if the land was part of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  Cllr Taylor replied that the land was just outside the Cannock Chase National Landscape (previously AONB).

Person 2 said that the concentration of traffic in the area would increase exponentially.  For 360 houses there would be at least 500 vehicles going into that bottleneck, there was not the infrastructure or the space.  There were not enough school places, or capacity with GP surgeries.  Cllr Taylor responded that they were very valid points to make.  The developers had added the Highways Transport and Travel documents to SBC’s portal over the previous days, which stated that due to more people working at home there would only be 180 vehicles going out each morning from the potential development.  Cllr Taylor felt that the summary document was both enlightening and depressing.  There was mention of mitigation with car sharing.

Person 3 said that they thought there were some trees on the land with TPOs on them.  Cllr Taylor encouraged people to include that in their comments.

Person 4 felt that the planning requirements were potentially misleading.  The value of the land was more than they would get for 360 houses, so it was likely to be the first stage of many.  In one of the previous applications for the site they started with 225 houses, but it turned out to be 600!  Cllr Taylor replied that he thought people were right to be sceptical.

Person 5 said that in the transport statement paragraph 7.5.2 it mentioned the double roundabout at the top of Radford Bank.  The statement says that mitigation is required but it doesn’t demonstrate what the mitigation would be, it is an admission from the developer that there isn’t enough capacity on the roads.  They added that this was part of the reason the 2014 application was rejected, and the situation was worse now, the developers have not added any mitigation at all.  The 2014 application suggested using some the land at the previous police headquarters at Weeping Cross, but that land was not available now.

Person 5 added that the developers have said that for the shortfall of 69 and 101 school places contributions might be required from them to support traveling to schools outside the area.  With regards to the screening onto Walton Coppice, the plans show a strip of land but the developers have made no promises.  The plans were marked with “landscape indicative”, but it shouldn’t be indicative.

Cllr Taylor added that 60% of the land would be public open space and where Local Authorities would previously have taken on management of those areas, in recent times it was more likely that a management company would be engaged who would collect money from the homeowners and were rarely seen after that.  This was a problem across the country.

Person 6 said that they were disappointed at the turn out for the meeting and that with the seriousness of what was going on they would have expected 200 people to turn up.  They added that they were happy to drop off leaflets if it helped.  Cllr Taylor responded that from the Parish Council point of view, they had only found it on the SBC website the week before and the Council would welcome local residents publicising applications. Once the Parish Council were consulted SBC would give a deadline for receipt of comments 21 days from the date the letter was issued.

Person 6 also felt that the main reason for buying property in the area was the local schools.  They thought the developers were talking about giving transport vouchers so the children could travel to schools further afield.  Person 7 added that they knew people with children in three different schools.

Person 8 raised planning application 25/41031/PIP for 9 dwellings at land off Milford Road near School Lane.  They said that they felt that developers had gone for permission for 9 houses as that number was beneath scrutiny, but the land had the potential for 150 houses on it.  Access for the 9 properties was drawn down the side.  Cllr Taylor confirmed that the Parish Council had objected to the application.  Person 8 said that they were only notified of the application by SBC 8 days before the deadline for comments.  They believed that an application for 9 houses could be determined by a Planning Officer, it did not need to go to Planning Committee.  Cllr Taylor added that he understood that SBC Cllr Peter Edgeller had “called in” the application so it would go to Planning Committee.

Person 9 said that they had commented using SBC’s planning portal but he couldn’t see his comment online.  Cllr Taylor thought that comments were added straight away and suggested contacting SBC Planning Department to check the comments had been received.  Person 9 added that when he had commented there were 30 comments online, but when he checked again there were only 27.

Person 10 said that they had raised an issue when the developers initially shared potential plans in March 2025, that they thought that no view could be interrupted, but the development would take away the view of green fields from Stockton Lane completely.  There would be a significant change to the landscape looking towards Stafford from Cannock Chase and this should be highlighted to SBC.  Cllr Taylor replied that one of the principal views of planning is that people were not entitled to a view, but the point was well worth making to SBC.

Cllr Taylor continued and said that SBC were under a lot of government pressure to meet their manifesto target of 1.5million homes built by 2030.  If SBC did refuse permission the developer had the right of appeal and it was not possible to raise new issues at appeal stage so it was important that all issues were raised at this stage.  He encouraged residents to comment on planning applications with all possible objections before the deadline for comments.

24 members of the public left the meeting at 8.10 pm.

25/111       Apologies – received from Cllr Michael Norris as he was unwell.  Apologies were also received from County and Borough Cllrs Ann and Peter Edgeller.

25/112      Minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2025 – Cllr M Millichap felt it was wrong not to have complete minutes for confidential agenda items where the press and public were excluded.  The Clerk had shared part of the Clerk’s Handbook 2023 which confirmed that there was no scope for confidential minutes of local council meetings as per LGA 1972 s.228 and suggested 3 alternatives.  Cllr M Millichap said that it needed to be looked at for everyone’s sake. Resolved: Minutes for confidential items to be looked at and brought to the next meeting. With the proviso above It was agreed unanimously that the minutes were accurate and should be signed by the Chair.

25/113       Declarations of Interest regarding items on the agenda.  Cllr Sue Francis declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 124 iii.

25/114      Clerk’s Report for September 2025

Resolved: the report was accepted unanimously.

25/115      Potential to Adopt Bluebell Hollow Playground

                 The Clerk had emailed Taylor Wimpey Customer Services who had confirmed receipt of the email and that someone would respond, but no response had been received.  A response was necessary before progressing further.  Maintenance costs for hedge trimming and grass cutting would be £1000pa.  A substantial endowment would be required for the council to take on the play area.  Clerk to continue preparing approximate costs. Action: Clerk

25/116      RoSPA report on Hollybush Playing Fields

TGM had provided a quote for minor remedial work at Hollybush Playing fields and discussions took place around whether all the work should be done immediately.  Resolved: It was agreed to accept the quote from TGM for all the work.  Action: Clerk

25/117      Support and Funding for Community-led Neighbourhood Plans

                 Cllr Luker asked if there was a reason that the Parish Council wouldn’t support the campaign.  Cllr M Millichap said that the council wouldn’t want anyone to think that they were saying “we would like development here”.  Cllr Taylor added that BPC were slightly behind the curve as there wasn’t a current SBC Local Plan and it would be several years before a neighbourhood plan for Berkswich could be accepted by which time Stafford would be part of a unitary council.  Cllr M Millichap added that BPC had resisted having a neighbourhood plan in the past and should continue to do so.

25/118      Plans to Rotate the SID on Brocton Road

When discussing the purchase of the SID with Highways, they had suggested having one SID and then turning it around periodically so that it slowed traffic in both directions.  Resolved: Clerk to ask the company who installed the SID if it would be easy to turn and how much they would charge to turn it.  Action: Clerk

25/119      Potential Joint Application with Ingestre with Tixall PC for a HGV Order on Holdiford Road

Cllr Francis reported that ex-SCC Councillor John Francis had tried to get weight restriction on the road previously.  Cllr Taylor said that since then, the traffic lights had been installed and the road geometry changed risking HGVs causing damage to them. Resolved: Council were happy to proceed jointly with Ingestre with Tixall PC.  Action: Clerk

25/120      Potential Purchase of Village Gateway Signs

As Cllr Norris had requested this item it was deferred to the next meeting.  Action: Clerk

25/121      Rocks and Planting in verges

Council noted that SCC’s position seemed to be more relaxed than previously and agreed that the matter should not be pursued.

25/122      HR Policies

Resolved: Council approved the following policies unanimously:

1. Dignity at Work Policy

• Equality and Diversity Policy

1. Homeworking Policy
2. Loneworking Policy
3. Performance Improvement Policy

Clerk to update the policies on the Council website.  Action: Clerk 

25/123      Financial Matters

1. Bank reconciliation and expenditure for August and September 2025 – Resolved: Approved unanimously.
2. Budget report for August and September 2025 – Resolved: Approved unanimously.
3. Potential Projects for 2026/27 The Finance Working Group were meeting on 22 October to discuss the draft budget for 2026/27 and it would be useful to have details of any potential projects and costs ahead of the meeting.  There was potential for the purchase of Village Gateway signs and there may be more work necessary at the coppices.  Resolved: Cllr Taylor asked everyone to consider any projects they would like to undertake during 26/27 and let the Clerk know before 20 October if possible.  Action: all

 Signatories for New Accounts

Signatories for the new bank/building society accounts were agreed as follows:

• Unity Trust Bank Savings Account: Cllr Taylor, Cllr Hughes, Cllr Campbell and Cllr Pearson (Clerk has admin access only).
• Stafford Building Society 90-Day Notice Account: Cllr Taylor, Cllr Francis, Cllr M Millichap and Cllr Hughes.
• Hampshire Trust Bank Charity Easy Access SME Saver Account: Cllr Pearson, Cllr Norris, Cllr Luker and Sue Fullwood, Clerk.

25/124      Planning Matters

1. Response to outline planning application 25/41179/OUT Land to the North of Milford Road – Resolved – Council agreed to object to this application. Action: Cllr Taylor/Clerk  Cllr M Millichap suggested holding another meeting specifically for concerns about this application.  Resolved: if the deadline for comments was before the meeting on 4 November an extraordinary meeting would be scheduled to allow residents to share their views.  If the deadline for comments was after 4 November that meeting would be extended to start at 7pm and the application would be on the agenda.  Leaflets would be prepared for local distribution to inform residents of the meeting.  Action: Clerk  Cllr Campbell added that environmental concerns should include air pollution and damage to the health of people inside vehicles and pedestrians, particularly children and young people walking to school.
2. Response to planning application 25/41081/HOU at 53 Old Croft Road –Resolved: no objection, agreed unanimously. Action: Clerk
3. Ratification of the response to application 25/41031/PIP for permission in principle for the erection of nine dwellings at land off Milford Road/School Lane – Resolved: The council had objected to the application under delegated powers and the response was ratified unanimously. Cllr Gilson expressed dismay that residents of School Lane only had 8 days to respond to SBC’s consultation on this application.
4. Ratification of the response to application 25/40176/HOU at Congreve House – Resolved: The council had responded under delegated powers that they had no objection in principle to the application and the response was ratified unanimously. Suggestions had been made regarding the materials and SBC were waiting for a listed building application.

25/125      Reports from other meetings

1. Environment Group

Cllr Luker reported that there had been a failure of some of the new planting this year, possibly because of the drought, and it was proposed to buy small numbers of replacement plants.  Cllr Taylor had walked through the coppices with Nick Mead but the quotes he submitted for trimming and felling two trees at Hollybush Coppice and thinning the clusters of pine trees at Walton Coppice and cutting the hawthorn hedge to 6 feet tall seemed expensive.  The holly planted at Hollybush Coppice last year was not doing badly.  Cllr Taylor was researching drought-resistant species.

1. Approve maintenance costs for the Coppices – Resolved: Council approved expenditure of up to £2000 each for the arboriculture work for both coppices and if the work could be done for less, it would be.
2. Village Hall Management CommitteeCllr Pearson had cleaned the Hall for a week.  Loft access for sorting out the Parish Council’s papers had been booked for 15 October at 9.15 am.  Anyone who could help was welcome to come along.

25/126      Items for the Agenda for the Parish Council Meeting scheduled for Tuesday 4 November 2025

Items agreed were: the Outline Planning Application for land to the north of Milford Road (unless an extraordinary meeting was necessary); confidentiality; draft budget for 26/27; coppices maintenance; village gateway signs; rotating the Brocton Road SID.

Meeting closed at 9.05 pm.