GLINTON PARISH COUNCIL
PARISH COUNCIL MEETING
held on Tuesday
21st July, 2020
Using the ZOOM software application to hold virtual meetings as permitted by Covid-19 legislation
Present: Councillors; D Batty, J Bell, Mrs Bysshe, J Holdich, OBE (Chairman), R Johnson, G Kirt, D Lane, R Randall, P Skinner, E Spendelow, C Wilde and Mr JV Haste (Clerk). 3 members of the public were also present.
MINUTES OF MEETING
|367||APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE – None, all councillors present|
|368||MEMBERS DECLARATION OF INTERESTS – Cllr. Holdich declared an interest in the planning application in respect of his own dwelling at 1 Rectory Lane and the application in respect of Tree work at the Bluebell 10 High Street.
Cllr. Spendelow declared an interest in the planning application of a family friend at 5 Helpston Road
a. The Chairman welcomed Beatrice Wilson (aged 7) and her mother Viki present to represent the Glinton Rainbows in respect of the item on our agenda to consider the village survey conducted by the Rainbows. The chairman took that item at this stage of the meeting to allow Beatrice and her Mum to leave the meeting afterwards if they wished.
Beatrice was invited to speak about the survey and said that there were things that the rainbows liked (20mph and clear road signs, benches and specific dog poo bins). There were things the Rainbows did not like (litter, lack of lids on waste bins; poor lighting outside the village hall; cars parked on pavements) Rainbows noted that there were three play parks for children living East of the crossroads and none for those to the West of the crossroads.
Rainbows suggested posters to take litter home or use the bins, replace litter bins with covered ones, more dog pooh bins, install play equipment on the green in the Jelson estate.
A number of councillors congratulated the Rainbows for conducting an excellent survey. The chairman responded for the parish council and said that some additional bins of the covered style were already being considered. The suggestion of play equipment on the open space in Beech Road Oak road had been rejected by residents. Parish councillors noted that some additional litter bins of the covered variety were already in hand. We also agreed to consider the suggestions put forward again when the financial budget for 2021/22 was being considered.
b. David Cowcill expressed his concern that dealing with the Larkfleet planning application was taking so long and that the delay may play in to the hands of the developers. The chairman explained that planners had asked for further information before determining the application.
We unanimously RESOLVED to approve the minutes and these were to be duly signed by the Chairman when we next meet.
Proposed Cllr. kirt seconded Cllr. Johnson
|371||MATTERS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES (Information Only) – the chairman provided an update to the land offer for a footpath at the end of North Fen Road. The landowner had withdrawn the offer to sell a narrow strip of land for £15,000 and was now only willing to sell a larger piece of land rather than that required for a footpath. Price of the larger parcel of land being reduced to £50,000
|372||PLANNING – The Chairman vacated the chair and handed the meeting over to the vice chairman for all planning applications and took no part in the discussions
a. The currents status of planning applications had been circulated with the agenda and we noted that 4 more applications were on our agenda this evening. In addition we were advised that of those previously considered and on the status report we had been asked to reconsider the application for two dwellings to be constructed at 24 Peakirk Road. The applicant had submitted revised plans which addressed the main concerns of the parish council.
Garages had been omitted on the revised plans and the proposed dwellings moved towards the Peakirk Road and in line with the building line of nearby properties. In the light of the revised plans we have no objections to raise but ask the planners to take in to consideration the legitimate concerns of neighbours where raised on planning grounds
b. 20/00782/HHFUL – 1 Rectory Lane – We noted that as this was a planning application submitted by our chairman and Leader of the City council; three planning officers were involved in considering the application and that it would automatically be referred to the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee (P&EPC). The original version of the plans had been circulated to members of the planning working group and members of that group had raised no objections. Revised plans had since been submitted, taking in to account observations of the conservation officer. Revised plans now had a garage separated from the dwelling and with a timber clad finish. Cllr Johnson listed the planning policies applicable to Glinton in a supplementary Planning document formally adopted by the planning authority containing an emphasis on finishes in stone materials and matching neighbouring buildings
We concluded that whilst we had no objections to the original plans we had to OPPOSE the application in its current form as against planning policies in respect of the timber finish and also because of the appearance of the roof angles of the garage being different to the main dwelling. We would have less objection to the revised plans if the garage were to be finished in material to match the dwelling. We also reserved the right to speak at the P&EPC if the officers were minded to approve the application based on the latest plans and would support officers if they were to recommend approval based on the original plans.
Clerk to inform Planning
|c. 20/00784/CTR – The Bluebell, 10 High Street – T1 Sycamore Fell. We discussed the merits crown reduction as opposed to the felling of the tree and noted the tree proximity to the Bluebell and the neighbouring fence. We agreed to have no objections.||Clerk to inform Planning|
|d. 20/00805/WCPP – 5 Helpston Road – We noted that the original planning permission had been granted by the planning inspector on appeal. On upholding the appeal the planning Inspector had only made two conditions one of which was to be very specific that the permission was strictly in accordance with a specified plan. This application was to vary the plans. Given the very specific conclusion of the inspector we unanimously RESOLVED to OBJECT to the variation of the original condition C2 to planning permission 18/01252/FUL.||Clerk to inform Planning|
|e. 20/00823/DISCHG – Yew Tree House, North Fen Road – we noted thatb this application would be determined by planning officers and that parish councils were not consulted on applications of this nature
|f. 20/00824/HHFUL – 10 The Willows – We noted that this was retrospective application in respect of the replacement of a timber decking with a similar structure of greater depth. We had no objections to make.
Councillor Holdich resumed Chairmansip of the remainder of the meeting
|373||Heavy Goods Vehicle Weight Restrictions – We noted that we had been invited to join with Newborough and Borough Fen parish council in their application for weight restrictions and in doing so any restrictions approved would commence at the Junction of the A16 with B1443 subject to the additional agreement of Peakirk Parish Council. We unanimously RESOLVED to support the proposal.
Proposed Cllr. G Kirt Seconded Cllr. D Lane
Clerk to write to notify Newborough And Borourg Fen PC
|374||REPORTS from Councillors – STANDING ITEM – Cllr. Mrs Bysshe had attended the Langdyke Trust meeting of parish councils at which parish councils had agreed on next steps in the rural vision project. Cllr Mrs Bysshe reported that she had contacted Sally Jackson and Judy Staines and that the four local parishes of Glinton, Peakirk, Northborough and Deeping Gate would be working together to contribute to the Langdyke Trust initiative|
|375||GOVERNANCE MATTERS –
a. Future Parish Council meetings – Given the easing of the Covid-19 restrictions we considered holding future meetings in the village hall. We noted the advice of NALC, CAPALC and The SLCC to continue to avoid face to face meetings and to continue to hold remote meetings using video conferencing applications. We agreed to keep the situation under review and consider the matter again in September.
b. Website Accessibility Regulations – We noted that these come in to force on 23rd September and that our clerk is doubtful that the present website would meet the full requirements. We also noted that there was some scope for compromise if the costs and effort involved in meeting the requirements were disproportionate to the purpose of the website. We agreed to keep the matter under review and to await further advice from CAPALC or NALC.
§ School Street initiative. We noted the trial week carried out at a school in Peterborough and that the involvement of the school would be key if the scheme were to be considered in Glinton. There was need to weigh up the potential safety benefits and the possibility of exacerbating the current traffic issues around the start and finish of the school day. We were of the opinion that with Goodwill on the part of the school(s), Highways and other agencies a scheme in modified form could have some benefits. We agreed to investigate the possibilities further.
§ Willows Footpath Hedge – We noted the request of the landowner to consider adoption of the hedge by the parish council. We considered the precedent that would be set and the potential costs involved and agreed to decline to adopt the footpath hedge
§ Cllrs. Highways observations – Cllr Kirt referred to the overgrown cycleway / footpath towards Northborough. We agreed to ask the clerk to write to the highways officer to seek his support in requesting the landowner to clear the perceived hazard.
§ Cllr Kirt also asked for feedback from the conservation officer on refurbishing the base of the village pump.
§ Cllr. Holdich asked for larger waste bins to be supplied for Nine Bridges recreational area as it was constantly in a mess.
§ Cllr. Wilde referred to the footpaths in North Fen Road almost obscured and the verge needs to be cut back and footpaths re-established.
§ Steps at the end of the footpath by Maxey cut are in urgent need of attention. We agreed to seek the advice of Lee Moore, Public Rights of Way officer at the City Council.
Clerk to write to Martin Benn
Clerk to write to M. Benn &
|377||DATE OF NEXT MEETING – We noted that the next scheduled meeting would be on September 15th , however we are already aware of a new planning application by AMVC and agreed to aim for a meeting on 11th August. The August agenda to be limited to planning applications unless any other Urgent matters needed to be dealt with and could not wait until the September meeting.|
|378||Matters to be held over to future meetings
a. VE day deferred commemorations no longer to be carried forward and we noted that there was to be a VJ commemorative service at the Cathedral
b. Dedication of replaced war grave memorial stone
c. Protection against strimmer damage
d. Dedication of the new WWll commemorative bench and new bench for Welmore Road. We agreed to consider commemorating the Welmore Road bench to the memory Of Dave Wragg for his contribution to the village
e. New Community Centre working group – once back on track for consultation within the parish