Papers
EAST BEACH RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
NORFOLK BOWLS CLUBHOUSE
NORFOLK GARDENS PARK
SOUTH TERRACE, LITTLEHAMPTON
SATURDAY 29th APRIL 2023 AT 7 PM
AGENDA
1. Apologies for absence
2. Minutes of last General Meeting
3. Matters arising not already on the Agenda
4. Chairman’s Report
5. Treasurers Report
6. Neighbourhood Watch Report
7. Election of Committee Members
8. To approve amendment to the Constitution
9. Update on current issues, plus Members to put forward local issues for consideration.
10. Any Other Business
If you have not already joined EBRA for 2023 please complete the slip below, detach it and put through the door of 5 NORFOLK MEWS, NORFOLK PLACE, including the £2 subs. per household. Funds raised this year will be used mainly to provide plants for Honeysuckle Walk and other areas in Norfolk Gardens Park and maintaining the Greens in Norfolk Place.
Thank You
==================================================================
Please find herewith my £2 subscription for membership of EBRA for 2023
Name…………………………………………
Address…………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………… Tel. ………………………………………………
Email……………………………………………….
Proposed amendment to the Constitution
It is proposed to amend the Constitution by adding the following clauses in Para 9 Notice of Meetings. This is to ensure the use of Electronic and Zoom facilities are accepted and agreed as part of the operating structure of the Association.
Meetings may take place in person or wholly or partly by suitable electronic means (including telephone or video conferencing facilities). Notice of a meeting will set out the details of any physical place (if there is one) and suitable telephone/ electronic details to allow members to participate. A person participating remotely is present at the meeting and forms part of the quorum thereof.
Any notice required to be given by this constitution may be sent to members by hand, by post, or by such electronic means (such as by email or via a website) as the committee decides. In the case of electronic communications, the recipient must have given their prior consent(either generally or specifically) to receiving communications electronically. Electronic communications should only be used to the extent that the committee is satisfied that this will not prejudice any members who do not wish to use this form of communication
East Beach Residents Association
Chairmans Report on 2022
COVID-19 finally reduced its grip in 2022 and we were able to run a full year’s programme of events. My thanks to the committee and other willing volunteers who helped to make it all happen.
Our AGM in April was well attended, and was followed by a presentation on
“The Conservation Area Past and Present”.
In May we held a Quiz Night, with a meal, at the Vardar Restaurant. We sold most of the seats available and thanks go to staff at the Vardar for ensuring a smooth-running evening, and to Mike our Quiz Master.
To celebrate the Queen’s Jubilee in June it was originally planned that we would work with the New Inn to hold a street party in Western Road. Problems over the road closure and liability eventually made this impossible, and so EBRA organised a Jubilee Party in Norfolk Place. I have to say this was a great success, mainly due to the support from you, our residents. In no time at all we had four tables groaning with the weight of food contributed by residents. Some 60 attended and all reports were what a good event it was.
Later in June we held our Pimm’s and Nibbles in the garden of Surrey Cottage. Again, well attended with some sixty residents passing through during the course of the afternoon. Our thanks go to Mark and Libby for use of the garden.
In July we held the Fair in the Square in Norfolk Place with Bric-a-Brac, Tea and Cakes and games for children and the not so young. This is our main fund-raiser of the year and although attendance was down a bit on previous years, our income held up. Any unsold Bric-a-Brac was donated to the local St. Barnabas Hospice Charity.
In August we held a Lunch-time BBQ in South Passage where everyone brings their own food and we provide the BBQ’s. I say lunch-time, but I judge it was a success as it did not finish until the sun was setting and it was getting too dark for people to see what they were drinking! Our thanks to residents who move their cars to allow us to use the parking space for the BBQ.
The planned Skittles in September had to be cancelled, as the Norfolk Bowls Club, who host the event, could not fit it into their schedule; but it is hoped to hold it in the Spring of 2023.
We held a second Quiz Night at the Vardar in October. Numbers were a bit down but it was a very enjoyable evening. Our thanks to Derek Warby who was our Quiz Master on this occasion.
In November we held our Coffee Morning which went well, as always. Many thanks to Linda and Phil who host the event.
In December we held our Carols in the Square. It was a chilly but dry evening and some fifty residents braved the cold to enjoy the singing, the hot mulled wine and the mince pies. Our thanks to Anne who played the keyboard. (We did provide a hot water bottle for her lap, to keep her fingers warm); our thanks also to her husband Peter who turned out on his 90th Birthday; and to Eileen who gave a really amusing reading, illustrated with every chocolate bar you have ever heard of and some we hadn’t.
In closing I must thank Edward for organising the grass cutting rota and to all the volunteers who cut the grass; and the four volunteers that keep Honeysuckle Walk watered during the summer months.
On local issues:-
The application by Arun District Council (ADC) to add more Beach Huts on the seafront was on hold. Arun District ADC has now applied for planning permission to add thirteen more Beach Huts on the seafront.
EBRA has submitted an objection.
Rampion 2, Protect Coastal Sussex has made a submission to West Sussex County Council(WSCC) and ADC on the Adequacy of Pre-Application Consultations (AoC) On the Rampion 2 Windfarm.
We have made yet another application to WSCC for the Double Yellow lines at the entrance to Norfolk Gardens to be extended by a small amount to improve access.
| Treasurer’s report for 2022 | ||||||||||
| Summary of EBRA accounts for 2022 | ||||||||||
| cost | profit | |||||||||
| April | AGM | £18.11 | ||||||||
| May | Quiz Night 1 | £25.00 | ||||||||
| June | Jubilee Party | |||||||||
| June | Garden Party: Pimms & Nibbles | £26.58 | ||||||||
| July | Fair in the square | £289.73 | ||||||||
| August | BBQ | £9.00 | ||||||||
| October | Quiz Night 2 | £42.25 | ||||||||
| November | Christmas Coffee Morning | £114.75 | ||||||||
| December | Carols in the Square | £6.15 | ||||||||
| Subs for 2022 | £162.00 | |||||||||
| Donations to EBRA | £196.00 | |||||||||
| Miscellaneous stationery costs | £133.83 | |||||||||
| Speaker system for Carols in the Square | £233.98 | |||||||||
| Hose for Honeysuckle Walk | £l08.98 | |||||||||
| EBRA Banner | £54.00 | |||||||||
| Green Waste Bin hire | £77.76 | |||||||||
| Gardens: lawn treatment | £90.00 | |||||||||
| Gardens: hedge cutting & clearance | £380.00 | |||||||||
| Gardens: plants | £130.00 | |||||||||
| Total gardens: | ||||||||||
| Totals | £1,235.66 | £862.46 | ||||||||
| Overall cost in 2022 (ie £1235.66 – £862.46) | £373.20 | |||||||||
| EBRA funds at beginning of 2022 | £1,206.93 | |||||||||
| EBRA funds at end of 2022 | £833.73 | |||||||||
 |  |
Minutes of the AGM for 2021
EAST BEACH RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION
MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGs for 2021
SATURDAY 23rd APRIL 2022 AT 7.00 pm
The Chairman, David Warne, began by welcoming everyone to this meeting, and thanked the Norfolk Bowls Club for the use of the venue and bar, and Linda Collins for providing the buffet.
- Apologies for Absence
Eileen Ross, Cathy Palmer, Christopher & Joyce Bird, Sue & Phil Wadley, Helen Wrigglesworth, Mike Webber
- Minutes of last AGM
Approved - Matters Arising not already on the Agenda
The chairman reported that an application had been made to West Sussex County Council for the verges in Norfolk Gardens to be reinstated and improved. WSCC had replied that they had carried out a survey of the verges but they did not meet their criteria for remedial work, at this time.
On the Pedestrian crossing on Sea Road, the Chairman had applied to West Sussex County Council for a crossing to be installed. WSCC had replied :-
“Following your application for a signalised controlled crossing as part of the Community Highway Scheme application process, I can confirm a survey has been undertaken at the site and data analysis has been carried out to determine the feasibility of this request.
West Sussex County Council uses pedestrian and vehicle data from potential crossing locations to calculate how difficult it is for pedestrians to cross during gaps within the traffic. We use a nationally recognised formula and method that weights factors such as children, disabilities and history of pedestrian casualties. The data from the 4 busiest hour periods is used to calculate a score (a PV2 score) for a location and these scores are used to decide where crossings should be installed.
The reason we use a PV2 calculation to assess new crossing requests is to ensure a consistent and fair approach is applied across the County when justifying and prioritising the installation of new equipment on the highway. The cost of this equipment is expensive, approximately £100,000 for a standard new crossing, with maintenance charges of approximately £1500 per year, plus equipment replacement at the end of its lifetime (typically 15-20 years depending on location). The County Council must make sure any crossings put in will be well used as the budget available to install and maintain them is limited.
I can confirm that data for the site has been collected and analysed as described above and I am sorry to have to inform you that your request did not meet the necessary scorerequired to install new facilities at this location. The location has a PV2 score of 0.16 and West Sussex County Council Policy states a minimum score of 0.7 is required to justify the installation of new controlled crossing facilities.
Additionally our Engineers assessed the site specifics in the locality to see if there was an obvious alternative solution that would be able to meet current engineering design within the existing highway limitations, and unfortunately it was concluded that there was no obvious alternative solution.”
4.Chairman’s Report
Our programme for 2021 was again affected by COVID. However, thanks to Zoom, your committee was able to hold regular meetings and it enabled us to hold our AGM. Unfortunately, there were some technical problems using Zoom for the AGM and a few people were unable to gain access to the meeting; for which I again apologise. As there were sufficient numbers online to make the meeting quorate it was decided to proceed. The minutes of that meeting come with the AGM papers.
Thankfully not all was doom and gloom and we were blessed with a beautiful day in July for our Pimm’s and Nibbles in the garden of South cottage, for which our thanks to Mark and Libby for allowing us to use the lovely garden.
Our Fair in the Square was a close run thing. Having set out the tables and all the goods, black clouds rolled up and it started to rain. Tarpaulins were hastily thrown over everything, but luckily it was a short burst and 10 minutes later covers were being folded and we opened for business; and it turned into a successful day.
Our Quiz Night in September moved to the Vardar Restaurant, and was changed to a Sunday in order to be able to use the restaurant. It proved to be a great venue, providing comfortable accommodation for the 40 or so people who turned up together with excellent food and a full range of drinks to purchase. Mike Webber provided his always challenging and enjoyable quiz and, sad to report, my team managed to win the wooden spoons. We will be using this venue again.
Shortly after this the next strain of COVID emerged and we felt it safest to cancel the Coffee Morning and, later, the Carols in the Square. We hope for better times in 2022.
5.Treasurer’s Report
The Treasurer, Linda Collins, reported that the events which it had been possible to hold during the year had been well attended and donations had been very generous. A summary of income and funds was provided.
| Treasurer’s report for 2021 | ||||||
| Summary of EBRA accounts for 2021 | ||||||
| cost | profit | |||||
| April | AGM | held on zoom | ||||
| July | Pimms & Nibbles | £114.50 | ||||
| August | Fair in the square | £280.50 | ||||
| September | Quiz Night | £14.00 | ||||
| Subs for 2021 | £170.00 | |||||
| Donations to EBRA | £329.00 | |||||
| Miscellaneous stationery costs | £35.37 | |||||
| Gardens: lawn treatment | £90.00 | |||||
| Gardens: hedge cutting & clearance | £310.00 | |||||
| Gardens: plants | £50.00 | |||||
| Total gardens: | £450.00 | £450.00 | ||||
| Totals | £485.37 | £908.00 | ||||
| Overall profit in 2019 (ie £908.00 – £485.37) | £422.63 | |||||
| EBRA funds at beginning of 2019 | £784.30 | |||||
| EBRA funds at end of 2019 | £1,206.93 | |||||
Linda outlined the problem of some members paying their subs more than once. To try to avoid this problem members will be issued with a small membership card, so they know they have paid.
6. Neighbourhood Watch Report
Phil McErlain reported that there has been no reported crime in the area. A car windscreen had been broken and a car opened but nothing stolen. Shuna Le Moine reported her car window had been damaged.
7. Election of Committee Members
The current committee all agreed to stand again and there being no further nominations
it was agreed the election of Committee Members should be carried out ‘en bloc’:
Chairman: David Warne
Treasurer: Linda Collins
Other Committee Members: Barbara Hughes, Cathy Palmer, Freda Ley, Elaine & Hugh Montgomery.
Proposed: Richard Jenkins Seconded: Roger Mayhew Carried
8. Update on Current Issues
There are two current issues of concern.
Rampion 2 Wind Farm
The chairman reported that the extended consultation period on the proposed windfarm had now ended. A campaign group to raise concerns about Rampion 2 has been organised under the banner Protect Coastal Sussex. The main concerns are the visual impact, with turbines as tall as the Eiffel Tower being only 8 miles offshore, damage to the seabed during construction and the damage to the countryside that will be caused by laying cables from Clymping to Bolney.
Larry Haas spoke on behalf of PCS and explained that the next important stage was the preparation by local authorities of Local Impact Reports. There seem to have been a reluctance by authorities to start work on this issue or to share it with local community groups. PCS was preparing their own Local Impact Report which will be submitted to the inquiry that will finally consider whether or not the windfarm proceeds. A full briefing note by Larry Haas is attached as an Appendix.
Additional Beach Huts
In 2021 Arun District Council(ADC) had proposed to place an additional 20 beach huts on the seafront at Littlehampton, placing the majority on the western end of the existing line of huts. The, then, Development Committee had rejected the proposals, following strong lobbying by EBRA and others, on the grounds that the proposal breached several ADC policies on use of the seafront and visual impacts, and there were concerns over disabled access.
A similar proposal for 17 additional beach huts has now been put to the Economic Committee of ADC. EBRA has written to James Walsh, our Ward Councillor, setting out our continued objections and seeking his advice and guidance. Objections have also been sent to the CEO of ADC.
9. Issues Raised by Members
A member raised the issue of the increasing number of foxes in the area and that a lady had been seen feeding them on a regular basis. After discussion it was agreed not to involve the local authority, as this might result in foxes being culled. It was agreed the best action was to discourage any feeding of foxes so that they will be encouraged to seek other territories.
10. AOB
There being no other business the meeting closed at 7.40pm and was followed by an illustrated talk on the Local Conservation Area, Past and Present.
EBRA AGM April 2022 Appendix
Briefing Note: Update on the Status of Community Engagement on the Rampion 2 Windfarm Development Consent Order Process
The extended community consultation period on the proposed Rampion 2 wind farm had now ended. A campaign group consisting of coastal residents engaging with area MPs and interested Councillors was established to help raise community awareness of Rampion 2 under the banner Protect Coastal Sussex (PCS); and to offer informed scrutiny of the Rampion 2 proposal and its local impacts.
While everyone supports Renewable Energy, concerns are that Rampion 2 as proposed does not contribute to the achievement of sustainable development of the Sussex coast.
This is important because the National Policy Planning Framework supported by the Planning Act asserts, “The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.” Sustainable development is recognised in UK policy and international commitments as pursuing three overarching objectives (environment, social and economic), which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways to meet current and future needs.
Concerns expressed about Rampion 2 on these grounds are often challenged by the developer RWE saying that people who object are largely worried about aesthetics. RWE thus uses statements including: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” and “we need to look at the bigger picture”.
PCS suggests the bigger picture is there are reasonable alternatives to locate these same turbines offshore in better wind regimes for the same £3 bn investment that generate far more energy, without compromising sustainable development of the UK’s inshore coastal waters. That not only reduces UK gas imports sooner, but helps the UK reach Net Zero sooner and does more to reduce the upward pressure on UK electricity tariffs – all urgent priorities due to recent international events.
To fill in the bigger picture, Rampion 2’s proposed layout and inshore location will lead to a variety of construction and operation stage impacts that permanently disrupt complex inshore ecosystems on the seabed (e.g., kelp and thriving habitat for crustacean), in the sea (affecting a variety of marine life and animals), as well as in the air (impacting cross-channel migration of birds and insects), and on the land. Together the myriad of largely unseen impacts make the natural capital of the South coast more vulnerable and at risk to longer term-climate change. While opinions on the magnitude and significance of individual and cumulative ecological impacts may vary, it is accepted there is considerable uncertainty, risk and opposing scientific views.
The visual seascape impacts of large turbines as tall as the Eiffel Tower (325m tall in the worst case for Rampion 2) starting only 8 miles from shore conflicts with the Government’s own Strategic Environmental advice to install wind turbines taller than 240m at least 25 miles (40km) away from sensitive coastal visual receptors and National Parks. That visual buffer advice exists to help avoid a known range of adverse social, heritage, wellbeing and harder socio-economic impacts on coastal community residents and their visitor economies that arise from the permanent transformation of valued natural seascapes and landscapes into visible industrial power parks.
The Rampion 2 proposal is particularly challenging in these regards due to its proposed scale, proximity and expanse extending along the inshore waters of the Sussex Bay.
The land component of Rampion 2 similarly will impact on the countryside to varying degrees due to laying cable from the landing at Clymping passing through the Southdown National Park to Bolney where vegetation and trees will not be permitted on the permanent corridor. This disrupts planned biodiversity corridors (under the “weald to wave” initiative) and forecloses future biodiversity corridor options. It also has other localised biodiversity and social impacts.
Apart from impacts (environmental, social and economic) that compromise rather than contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, there is the opportunity to consider alternative locations to achieve a more efficient windfarm for the same £3 bn investment as Rampion 2.
This is important as the cost per unit of energy from windfarms as well as supply reliability impacts on affordability at both the household and national level, given that all the development, operation and decommissioning costs are repaid to developers and investors at commercial rates of return via the UK consumer electricity tariff. The amount and cost of backup energy needed when wind is not blowing also factors into tariffs levels. This will mostly be natural gas in the near to mid-term, increasingly using expensive imported LNG is the expectation.
Installing the same turbines proposed for Rampion 2 in offshore in locations that fully respect the Government’s own strategic environmental advice can generate up to 60% more energy, due to higher and steadier winds in those locations as compared to the South Coast inshore. One such location is the Rampion 2 developer’s own SOFIA windfarm licence area 195 km offshore on Dogger Bank where Rampion 2 – like turbines would provide greater carbon offsetting benefit (the climate objective), and do far more to meet urgent UK energy priorities sooner.
The German multinational RWE says its SOFIA windfarm now under construction in 35m deep water will also cost £3 bn for 1,400 MW (200 MW more than Rampion 2). Most important, the SOFIA site offers that higher load factor (more output per MW installed capacity). The North Sea has ample room to meet the UK’s ambitious 2050 offshore windfarm targets. It also offers other cost and practical advantages, such as greater potential for mutually beneficial two-way power exchange with the Continent and connection to an integrated offshore grid to minimise transmission costs and controversial onshore landings in the UK increasingly subject to judicial review.
Next Steps Like most residents PCS supports offshore windfarms and the UK renewable energy thrust, but advocates that Rampion 2 like any RE infrastructure must be sensibly located and fully respect sustainability safeguards, especially given the top-down nature of the Development Consent Order (DCO) decision process for windfarms. Apart from the one month Acceptance stage triggered when RWE submits its Application, a key activity is the preparation of Local Impact Reports by Councils.
Given the ongoing reluctance of local authorities to start that work during pre-application stage (i.e. now), as Government Advisory Notes (“local authorities are strongly encouraged to use the pre-application period to start their own evaluation of the local impacts”), and reluctance to share any information or collaborate with local communities, as was requested in Community-led Public Consultation meetings, PCS contacted the Planning Inspectorate for advice.
The advice was that local communities either under a PCS umbrella, or as individuals or groups can register as Interested Parties to offer their own Local Impact Reports or views directly to the DCO Examination process and also to make their views known to local authorities representations.
The plan therefore is for PCS to submit timely local impact representations to both ADC and WSCC asking Council Officers to take those views, local knowledge and evidence into account and to Reference them in the Council’s own Local Impact Reports that they hire external consultants to prepare on our behalf. The DCO process is such that Councils may take into account our views and evidence at their discretion. And Councils are not obligated to have public consultations on Consultant-prepared impact reports that they arrange, but may do so if they wish.
Thus in parallel, the PCS local impact report (offering community based research, evidence, local knowledge and views) will also be directly submitted to the 3-4 person Rampion 2 Examination Authority Panel as an Interested Party Representation sometime early next year, once the Examination Panel is constituted and calls for such Representations.
The Examination Panel after a fixed 6 months of quasi judicial Hearings only open to those registered as Interested Parties will then consider the views and evidence it has received and recommend to Government whether the commercially preferred development should proceed as the RWE proposes in its Application, whether it should be refused outright, or if modifications are needed to avoid or minimise local impacts and better achieve UK Policy aims.
Drafts of the PCS Local Impact representations will be openly shared for comment by individuals and community groups (including EBRA Members) area MPs and Councillors likely early 2023. Timing depends on when the RWE submits its Application, expected before September 2022.
In the meantime, any EBRA Member or anyone you know wishing to support PCS on a voluntary basis are most welcome, whether in research, gathering of evidence, analysis either of a scientific nature or offering local knowledge.
More information: on what local impact reports are all about is available here:
https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/legislation-and-advice/advice-notes/advice-note-one-local-impact-reports/ and PCS context https://www.protectcoastalengland.org/
Notes from the East Beach 