BRAMPTON ABBOTTS & FOY GROUP PARISH COUNCIL
Draft Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Parish Council held on Wednesday 22nd July 2026
at 19.07 pm at Brampton Abbotts Village Hall
C26/16 – C26/30
Members Present: R Lewis (Chair), M Cunningham, R Diggle, Mrs W Gething-Lewis, K Lathan, D Teague
In attendance: 4 members of the public, Ward Cllr. Barry Durkin (WCD), Miss A Jones (Clerk).
C26/16 To receive, consider and approve apologies for absence. Apologies received from Cllr. Scudamore.
C26/17 To receive declarations of interest and consider written requests for dispensation – Cllr. Lewis declared an interest in Item C26/20 (a) as the applicant is his employer.
C26/18 To receive, amend as necessary and approve the minutes of the meetings on 27th May 2026.
It was resolved that the minutes, as provided by the Clerk, represented an accurate record of the proceedings of the meetings on 27th May, subject to the councillor to be added as a new signatory being amended to read Cllr. Lathan, and they were duly signed by the Chairman
C26/19 Open Session
Members of the public to note that this is the only opportunity to address the parish council and that the meeting will be “closed” to the public after this item unless a member of the council specifically asks a member of the public for comment or to answer a question (though the public is welcome and encouraged to stay and listen to the deliberations of the council)
a) To receive the views of local residents on parish matters:
• A resident raised the issue of the obstructed speed limit signs and questioned the response of the highways department – which was that it would be passed for action but that it wasn’t considered “urgent” in maintenance terms. It was noted that the initial reporting of the issue may have been lost as a result of the changeover to the new reporting system when M Group took over from BBLP (though not certain), this may have caused further delay. The resident raised a number of points including the potential for accidents, the vicinity (nursery / very young children), liability etc. There was complete agreement from the PC members. The Chair advised that the landowner had arranged for a contractor to cut various hedges in the parish for visibility reasons and that the section in question was due to be done the following week. The Clerk had also sought clarification via the Locality Steward, regarding legal responsibility and he had advised that it was entirely for the landowner to ensure that their hedges do not obstruct any road signage, although highways would act if necessary, but only in line with the lower priority as previously mentioned.
• A resident was concerned about the significant quantity of straw on the sides of the road and the likelihood of it blocking drains when it rains. A lengthy discussion took place regarding how it could be dealt with. In theory the PC could pay the Lengthsman (but he had previously advised that using a road sweeper was not a good option because it is a short term solution, there is no curb and it erodes the roadside and causes further mud to fall into the road), but there is no funding for this in the grant this year (and likely to be even less next year). It was generally considered that it should therefor fall to the highways department to deal with it but Ward Cllr. Durkin (WCD) did not consider that this was correct because the straw had been dropped by local farmers and would therefore be considered their responsibility to clear up. It was also noted that harvest was continuing so there was no point doing anything now. Cllr. Teague advised that this was one of the matters raised in his site meeting with Jason Himsworth (formerly BBLP but now HC) and that he had said at the time (August 2025) that he would get someone out to deal with it (this did not happen). It was resolved that:
• The Clerk would ask HC what the official policy / position is with regard to straw etc. on roadsides
• The Clerk would investigate whether HC would carry out any clearing activity
• The Chair would advise contact details for local farmers and the Clerk would write asking them to carry out some form of clearing activity once harvest is finished
• The Chair raised a matter on behalf of a resident. Considerable work has recently been undertaken on the riverbank in Foy, involving bulldozer and the construction of a peg and the resident was concerned about the damage being done to the river. The resident had apparently passed the matter to Natural England but asked that the PC also investigate. It was resolved that the Clerk would raise the matter with the Planning Team to see whether planning permission was necessary and if so, whether it had been sought / provided.
b) To receive a report from or on behalf of the Ward Cllr. He provided a brief summary of his full monthly report (a copy of which is on the PC website) including:
o New Chief Executive is now in place. WCD has offered to arrange a joint meeting for PC members to meet with his but there is little appetite for it.
o HC grants available for natural environment improvements
o Transport hub will open in October this year
o Other buildings projects relating to the Shire Hall and museum are progressing
Q A resident asked WCD about the subsiding path on the way to Ross and the fact that it now had a sign saying it’s closed. It was noted that this was the issue that was reported to Ross TC after the previous meeting.
Q Cllr. Teague asked WCD about the new public realm contract and how it was going so far. WCD advised that there were some teething problems but that it was generally working well and the new format of the contract enabled HC to have greater ability to instruct M Group to do specific tasks. They were working well together.
C26/20 Planning
a) To consider and agree comments relating to new applications
261309 Townsend Farm, The Byres, Church Road, Brampton Abbotts
Temporary (3 years) static caravan for use by agricultural worker
It was noted that this proposal had been considered under a different planning reference in November 2025 and that the PC had raised no objection. The basic application was unchanged but additional details relating to landscaping were added. It was resolved that the parish council had no objection.
b) To note planning decisions – Noted
261563 Underhill Farm, Foy
Application to determine if prior approval is required for a steel portal frame agricultural building for storage of machinery and fodder. Prior Approval is Not Required
c) Applications Between Meetings – Noted
261419 Land at Hillcrest, Foy – Demolition of Hillcrest and related outbuildings and the erection of 2 no. self build dwellings.
The PC had no objection in principle but raised a number of matters for further consideration prior to any decision being made and also requested that certain matters be dealt with using appropriate conditions:
Prior to any approval being given to fully investigate the following matters and ensure that satisfactory information / proposals are received:
• The drainage report does not appear to reflect what is on the ground and / or the development permitted on site. Clarification should be sought to ensure that any drainage / treatment plant requirements are properly satisfied.
• The lane to the site requires improvement to ensure no adverse impact on the public highway.
• There is no mains drainage for emptying the swimming pool. It is unlikely that chemically treated water of this nature can be drained into a septic tank both because of the volume of water and the fact that the chemicals would affect the bacterial balance of the tank. It would also be inappropriate for this amount of chemically treated water to be drained into the surrounding area due to the possible effect on flora and fauna.
If the planning department is minded to approve the application, we ask that the following matters are dealt with via suitable conditions:
• Visual impact of the dwellings is limited only if the trees and hedges are well maintained, it should therefore be dictated by condition that these are retained, at existing heights, and where necessary replaced, in perpetuity.
• Specific drainage facilities should be provided for the swimming pool and should be maintained in perpetuity.
• Only permission for residential use should be allowed.
• All permitted development rights should be removed
d) Other Planning Matters – St Michaels Grove (AKA Church Road Development) was now the subject of a second enforcement case relating to the failure to replace failed plants within the planting scheme and cutting the grass area that should be wild flowers. The enforcement team have been in contact with the developer, who has advised that the required replacement planting will be carried out during the next planting season and that measures will be taken to ensure that the wild flower area flourishes. Enforcement is due for follow up in September. Since receiving this information the Clerk had been advised that the grass was still being cut (as grass rather than being dealt with as a wild flower area) and this information had been passed to the enforcement team who have since advised that the Management Company have stated that this cut was not sanctioned by them. It was resolved that the Clerk would write to the developer asking for evidence of the wildflower activity being undertaken. CARRY FORWARD – September meeting
C26/21 Finance
Invoice No. Payee Goods / Services Total £
n/a Miss A Jones Expenses (inc. antivirus) 123.61
298 Brampton Abbotts Village Hall Room hire May 26 20.00
TGC 3927 Terry Griffiths Contracts Bins – May 28.20
It was resolved that the above payments be made and the cheques were duly signed.
(b) Other Expenditure to be noted
n/a Miss A Jones Clerks wages and office allowance (paid monthly by s/o) 569.62
n/a Lloyds Bank Bank charges – debited in June 5.25
n/a Lloyds Bank Bank charges – debited in July 4.75
(c) Income – None
(d) Online Banking – Cllr. Scudamore was not present but the Chair advised that he had signed some paperwork recently and it was understood that online access would be arranged for the necessary councillors soon.
C26/22 Highways / Footpaths / Greenspaces
a) Update on previously raised issues:
o Speed limit signs as per earlier discussion
o Empty property / abandoned vehicle and possible road safety issue with loose fencing panel – this matter has been raised by WCD with teams within HC and they are attempting to trace the property owner so that the matter can be dealt with, this activity is ongoing.
o Litter at Welsh Water pumping station at Ross – this matter was passed to Ross TC and the Clerk is due to chase it up over the summer. The Clerk has also attempted to raise it directly with WW using an email address obtained recently.
o Bins being left in the road after emptying – there was confusion over who took this action point away but WCD said that he would do so after this meeting.
o Ross Road, Welsh Water (WW) damage to drainage asset. This matter has been deemed “fixed” by WW but the resident whose address has been impacted by the resulting flooding has advised that they simply “joined” the two sections of 9” pipe with a section of 5” pipe and then filled it all back in. If this is correct, then this would not constitute and acceptable standard of repair. It was resolved that the Clerk would provide these details to WCD so that he can chase with HC Senior Managers and obtain evidence from WW of there repair.
b) To consider and agree any urgent new highway/footpath issues to be reported to BBLP/HC. The PC had received reports of a PRoW that was blocked with overgrown plants, the location was at the NE end of PRoW FY5 near Orchard Cottage. It was resolved that the Chair would ask a resident whether it was on their land and if so ask for it to be cleared, if it was not on their land then the Clerk would investigate ownership via Land Registry.
c) Local Drainage Fund – Clerk advised that she had not heard back from HC regarding the grant application and that she was still awaiting further guidance from HALC regarding their legal concerns around the scheme. CARRY FORWARD
d) PRoW Grant – Clerk advised that the Lengthsman had been instructed to carry out the approved PRoW work. She had not yet received any invoices so assumed that nothing had yet been done.
e) Lengthsman – Clerk advised that it remained an option to use some of the approved PRoW clearance funding for the matter reported under Item C26/22(b) but that this would likely only be a last resort if the landowner either couldn’t be located or refused to clear the path. It was agreed that landowners had to be the first port of call as it was their responsibility and the PRoW grant would quite likely be unavailable next year so landowners shouldn’t think that it’s a fallback position.
C26/23 Contacting the Parish Council – Council to consider latest legislation regarding addresses on Registers of Interests and how this feeds through to general accessibility of the council and councillors and agree necessary actions. It was resolved that parish councillor mobile phone numbers be detailed on notice boards and the website to cater for residents who prefer this as a means of contact, but that addresses not be shown.
WCD left the meeting at 20.16 hrs
C26/24 Review of Standing Orders / Financial Regulations / Risk Register – Councillors had reviewed the documents, including some minor amendments drafted by the Clerk primarily around the online banking requirements (to reflect what was agreed at the previous meeting) and dealing with planning applications between meetings. Cllr. Teague also raised a number of other queries:
o References to the Planning Group and Planning Committee needed to be consistent
o Urgent Actions Between Meetings – the need for a consensus before the Clerk proceeds, although understood, needs to be clarified within the actual document.
It was resolved that the Clerk would provide new versions of all the documents including all the original proposed changes plus those suggested by Cllr. Teague, for approval at the next meeting
It was noted that the Clerk currently backed up all current PC working documents to a free version of Dropbox, and that if councillors were to want access to those documents it would likely require a paid version of the service. No further action on this matter at this time.
C26/25 Notice Board at Hole-in-the-Wall – Clerk advised that she had spoken to the LS and that it was his opinion that the area where the original Hole-in-the-Wall notice board was located is on County Highways land, and as such, if the PC wanted to place the new notice board there all it would require would be a licence from HC. However, he was due to provide her with evidence if this and this had not yet been received. The Clerk advised that given that this information contradicted what the local resident thought (who claims to own the area), she thought that, ideally, HC should advise the resident of this before the PC made any attempt to site a new notice board at the location. It was agreed that it was not for the PC to argue over ownership boundaries and that the Clerk would continue to obtain the necessary evidence and written confirmation from HC. CARRY FORWARD – September.
C26/26 Correspondence – general – council to consider and agree actions if appropriate
a) Herefordshire Council – All noted – comments in bold
i. Various updates relating to roads including resurfacing works in and around the parish between meetings
ii. Notification of a scheduled 1 day road closure of the C1273 Brampton Road at Greytree for Open Reach asset works on 24th August
iii. Warning about putting batteries in general waste and the risk of fires as a result.
iv. Cabinet approves carbon management plan
v. Cabinet confirms re-election of key leadership and governance roles at AGM
vi. Leader’s Newsletter – May 2026
vii. Update to the FAQs relating to the National Planning Policy Framework (as at June 2026). Cllr Teague advised that the PC must keep appraised of progress with the Local Plan (LP) and be ready to decide what to do about the NDP when sufficient information becomes available. He advised that the parish should take part in consultations to try to ensure that it is classed as “open countryside” in the new LP (as it was previously). He noted that a lot of housing is planned around the new ring road and that this should greatly reduce pressure on rural villages.
viii. Details relating to the new arrangements for dealing with Code of Conduct complaints against parish councillors. This does not apply to this PC as it resolved to leave such matters to be dealt with by the Governance team in Herefordshire Council.
ix. New Job Description for Volunteer Parish Footpath Officers (PFOs) who report to HC. This does not apply to this PC as it resolved that the requirements of HC were unreasonable for a volunteer role and that the existing arrangement of having a volunteer report direct to the PC only should be retained.
b) Ward Cllr. Barry Durkin – June and July reports (also available on PC website)
c) HALC – 10 things you need to know – June 2026
C26/27 Information Share – not requiring discussion, expenditure or decision
• The Clerk had been advised by the Village Hall Committee that the order for the doors and windows had been finalised (after final on site survey and minor clarifications) that day and that it would not be passed for fabrication to commence.
C26/28 Items for next / future meetings
• Councillor Numbers / Community Governance Review – once advice received from HALC regarding their proposed “group approach” to HC. Unlikely now until after the 2027 local elections.
• £1000 per annum ring-fenced from 2027/28 onwards (to be considered as part of budget setting) – September
• Foy Bridge – follow up additional report(s) as and when available – review June meeting
• NDP – to confirm the PCs position once clear guidance is received from HC / HALC
• Litter near pumping station – Clerk to chase – summer 2026, for September meeting
• St Michaels Grove – enforcement
C26/29 Next meeting – Next scheduled ordinary meeting – Wednesday 23rd September 2026.
Members of the public were asked to leave the meeting at this time for consideration of a confidential matter
C26/30 CONFIDENTIAL ITEM – Clerk’s Employment. Council to consider and approve contract amendment information / documents. The minutes for this Item are recorded separately.
With no further matters requiring consideration, the meeting was closed at 20.39 hrs