Minutes June 2019
Minutes of Meeting held on 24th June 2019
at 7.00pm, Pavilion, Queensway, Potterhanworth
|
Item |
Discussion |
|
1.Attendance and Apologies |
Attendance: Apologies: Cllr. Bourne – Chairman Cllr. Watson Cllr. Orton – Vice Chairman Cllr. Burns (left meeting at 19.55) Cllr. Foster Cllr. Hollidge Cllr. Sardeson Mrs J Bourne – Clerk
Also in attendance: Cllr. Oxby – LCC. Cllr. Lundgren - NKDC. Cllr Cucksey - NKDC 2 members of the public
|
|
Police Crime Report The police report stated there had been no reported crimes from 28th April to 24th June.
Lincolnshire County Council matters: Cllr. Oxby Please see Annex 1 £1.5m grant is available for super fast broadband. This is aimed at the rural community where there is most need. It is hoped to get 92-95% of the county supplied. Cllr Hollidge noted that Potterhanworth Booths does not receive Broadband speed equal to the village, as they get a maximum of 1.2 Mbps. He has tried to gain clarification from LCC when this speed is likely to reach The Booths. Cllr Oxby will try to obtain dates.
North Kesteven District Council matters: Cllr. Lundgren The Local Plan is up for review. The consultation will have an impact on our communities. There is a proposal to de-allocate at some places and reallocate to others, which are more popular. There is a concern that these allocations will become just around Lincoln and the outlying communities will have no benefit from growth or development. There is also a proposal to allocate the windfall into the Local Plan which at present happens adhoc. If those windfall sites are allocated then the community would have no say in the matter because essentially it is in the Local Plan.
There is also the possibility of an increase in the total number of houses across the whole of the district.
The Chairman added, that there are several options being considered; one of which is to count all the houses built and planned in the village and base the new growth on 10% of this number. This would require us to grow by around 35 houses discounted by the number approved but still waiting to be built (24), reducing the required growth down to 11. This would mean that the new growth would be on top of the growth we have already had at present, which is already above the target of 10%!
The other option is for those villages, such as ours, who have already met their growth targets, that they will have to grow by half of the future 10% growth target, which would equate to 18 new properties, again discounted by the number approved but still waiting to be built, which would mean we had exceeded our growth target by 6.
The final option is to do it pro rata, where you divide the original growth figure by 24 years, which was the original plan duration and then multiply that by 28 years, which is the new plan duration. This would give a growth target of 29 properties, again discounted by the number approved but still waiting to be built, leaving a growth target of a further 5 houses. There is only so much growth a village of our size with no amenities whatsoever could sustain. Cllr Lundgren agreed, wondering where this local growth was coming from within NKDC as this local growth is not being supported by actual building in the region. There are a lot of sites which have got planning permission but are not being built, so the level of demand doesn’t seem to be as high as the growth numbers included in the local plan currently. This is the type of comment we might like to make as a Parish Council. Also, in the Local Plan there is a deal that if you accept the application that was written in the plan 2 years ago you then had some control over future development within your community. Just 2 years from that we are now in a situation where we are being asked to take a similar growth again and it is just not right. Particularly as the overall growth figures have now been reduced from 1700 to less than 1000 across the central Lincolnshire area. Countywide the growth figures are also not being met. Why would we effectively have to have more growth than the likes of Lincoln that may be able to have more space. Cllr Lundgren suggested that this is the kind of message to take to the meeting and the consultation. He also advised that anyone, not just the Parish Council can respond to the consultation.
Cllr Foster said that there does not appear to be any encouragement with regards to employment. There does not appear to be an injection into employment to justify housing for more people moving into the area. Cllr Lundgren agreed, also saying that the current infrastructure cannot cope with the amount of people already living in the area let alone moving more people in.
A bus shelter grant is available – The Clerk will get details from Branston.
Bardney bridge is still planned to reopen on 5th July.
North Kesteven District Council: Cllr. Cucksey
There is a discretionary business rate relief available for properties up to £50K business rates, which was introduced in the Autumn budget. Out of 230 businesses being eligible for relief only half have applied. There is still a further £270K in the budget that needs to be claimed under this scheme. |
|
|
|
Cllr Sardeson declared an interest in Planning application 19/0639/FUL - Land off Moor Lane, Storage of 6 caravans, as he had assisted the Culfrey Trust in completing the planning application. |
|
5. To resolve, notes of the meeting held on 24 June 2019 are approved as the Minutes |
It was resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 24th June 2019 be approved as a correct record and were signed by the Chairman.
|
|
6. Matters Arising from previous minutes |
|
|
7.Correspondence Received.
|
Posters have been displayed on all noticeboards as well as Spotted. To view the Issues and Options consultation and to submit your views, please visit https://central-lincs.inconsult.uk Hard copies of this consultation document are available from: City of Lincoln, City Hall, Beaumont Fee, Lincoln.NKDC, District Council Offices, Kesteven Street, Sleaford
Changes have been made to this informal enquiry following our earlier comments.We requested 2 parking spaces for each house and the oversized garden on one of the houses has been made into a public wooded area.The formal application is likely to be submitted in September. Cllr Cucksey stated that it is important to gather comments now and voice any concerns.
The Chairman stated that the main issue is the fact that the plans do not comply with our Neighbourhood Plan, as flawed as the plan may be, as they are outside the boundary of the village. The gardens where they are proposed lie outside the village boundary, even though the houses are inside the boundary, also our plan will support up to 6 properties and this plan is for 8.Although there are 3 types of houses, 2 of which are the same, just offset differently, they are all 2 bedrooms, this does not really count as a range of dwelling types as only 2 bedrooms are catered for. So, on all counts it is not supported under Policy 1 of our Neighbourhood Plan. Additionally, our growth targets have also been met. Cllr Hollidge believes there is a justifiable need for social housing, as he has received a letter from one person in the village asking for a council house within the village.It is also questioned that the land in question is not being utilised and is just waste barren land. The Chairman explained that The Neighbourhood Plan was written following a referendum which all members of the public as well as the Parish Council were part of and agreed would be the document to assist in our planning decisions. Cllr Lundgren confirmed that these houses will be subject to the right to buy.34 “council houses” were sold in the district last year under the right to buy and there has been 130-140 sold off over the last 6-7 years. The council is now trying to replace these numbers. The Chairman stated that we have a Neighbourhood Plan and this potential application does not meet that plan.If we wish to throw the plan out of the window then we may find that the next development which may or may not be council, will point to this application and question why we approved it when it clearly does not follow our Neighbourhood Plan. Cllr Sardeson suggested we request this application be in line with the NP, be within the boundary, within 6 houses and we would prefer the houses to be built as rent only not with the right to buy option. Cllr Lundgren believes that a public consultation should be led by NKDC, although officers have advised that this application does not warrant a public consultation.He does feel that councils should be going above and beyond the minimum in ensuring that they (NKDC) meet all criteria for community consultation.He suggests using tonight’s discussion as a basis for future comments and ensure information is made available and plan a proper consultation event with the people who are proposing this development (NKDC), we could get them all around the table and have a discussion and come to a proper conclusion as a community and advise accordingly.This could then be fed back into the planning process.The council have failed to consult properly with this community. The Chairman said that he thinks NKDC believe they have done all they need to, with a poster on lamp posts and letters to some neighbours.However, there is a good chance that not all parishioners are aware of this proposal. Cllr Lundgren advised that the professional planning officers have come to the conclusion that where a planning application is above what would be normal in a village of our size; which is 9 for a medium village and 6 with our NP, that the local plan allows for development above that number in exceptional circumstances. This is understandable when a site is big enough and the community supports it.What these officers have decided is that when it is exceptional circumstances there is no requirement for the developer to consult with the community.This is rather bizarre as it should be the most important time to consult with the community.So, in this case as a medium village, we allow up to 6 properties with consultation, but there is no requirement to consult between 6-25 and bizarrely there is again a need to consult after 25 properties.This change has come through recently.The council is taking advantage of this rather curious ruling; where you get community consultation up to 6 and you get it after 25 but nothing in the middle, not to have public consultation. Cllr Lundgren therefore recommended to move forward, we:- Request a consultation and submit comments in ASAP It is down to the developer to arrange the consultation (NKDC) If they say no to a consultation, then we can arrange a community meeting without them. Cllr Foster offered to print any plans, up to A0, for display in the pavilion.
The drain was jetted out which has alleviated the problem, but is not a permanent fix. Further works are due to take place to repair or upgrade the drain.A timescale cannot be given but it is definitely on the work list.If the area floods, it must be reported.
Continental have apologised and put the damage down to the cutter being too low.We will not be charged for the cut.
|
|
8. Planning Applications received |
Planning Applications Potterhanworth 19/0534/FUL. Rushfield. Erection of storage building. NO COMMENTS 19/0639/FUL. Land off Moor Lane. Storage for 6 caravans. NO COMMENTS Decision Notices 19/0440/FUL. Land to the rear of Shumac. WITHDRAWN 19/0150/RESM. Battles 16 dwellings + retail unit. APPROVED |
|
9. Pavilion Committee update |
The Football team, now called Potterhanworth FC (Over 18s) have their first game at the Playing Field on 7 July. The goalposts are to be renewed by the Pavilion Committee.The team are also looking for a shirt sponsor. The lawn mower drive belt has broken again and Cllr Orton will speak to Grundys as it has not worked properly since the service.The mower will be needed to mow the football pitch in between Continental cuts.
|
|
10. Finance |
All Payments total = £4,363.94 Balance total = £19,474.28 NS & I balance = £12,884.56 |
|
11. Dates |
2020:27th January, 24th February, 30th March, 27th April, (11th May Annual Parish Meeting), 18th May, 29th June, 27th July
|
|
PARISH COUNCILLORS’TABLE OF ACTIONS B/F and from meeting held on 24th June 2019
|
||||
|
Action |
Resp. Person |
Start date |
Finish date |
Complete |
|
Tennis nets – Cllr Orton will firstly clean around the mechanism and if new nets are required, will discuss with Cllr Sardeson to approach the Beer Festival Committee for a grant. Cllr Orton will revisit this before the next meeting.
|
Cllr Orton |
25/2/19 |
24/6/19 |
Mechanism cleaned and now working. |
|
Take pictures of horsebox and email to clerk
|
Cllr Orton |
20/5/19 |
|
|
|
Neighbourhood Plan (NP) comments to be forwarded to Cllr Watson for Steering Group Meeting |
Chairman |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Local Plan (LP) comments to be submitted via website on poster |
Chairman |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
8 Council houses – submit comments to NKDC (Developer) and request public consultation |
Chairman/Clerk |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
School Safety Zone – submit comments re objections. Include Cllr. Oxby |
Chairman/Clerk |
|
|
|
|
Lawn Mower – Cllr Orton to speak to Grundys about the mechanical issues following the service |
Cllr Orton |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Bus Shelter Grant – Clerk will enquire |
Clerk |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Suckers growing around bus shelter – to remove |
Cllr Sardeson |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Hanging trees at church wall need trimming and cow field |
Clerk |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Mole man – George to arrange visit |
Clerk |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Plans of 8 council houses – print out on A0 |
Cllr Foster |
24/6/19 |
|
|
|
Bus shelter bulb replacement |
Cllr Orton |
24/6/19 |
|
|
Mrs Jackie Bourne 28th June 2019