Tetford & Salmonby Parish Council

TETFORD & SALMONBY PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of the Meeting held on Wednesday, 10th May2017

which commenced immediately following the Annual Council Meeting

which started at 7.30 pm in Hamilton Hall

Present: ChairmanCllr M Renshaw

Cllr B Harden

Cllr G Louis

Cllr J Larder

Cllr J Taylor

Cllr R Stockdale

Cllr P Todd

Mrs J Brown - Clerk

There were75members of the public present & District Councillor Andrews

The Chairman informed the meeting that the usual 10 minutes of public session at the start of the meeting would be for general items & the Council would stand down Standing Orders prior to the agenda item for Planning to enable residents wishing to speak on that item to have the opportunity.

00355Apologies for absence - None

00356Minutesof the Parish Council Meeting on 19th April 2017had been circulated & it was resolved to accept themas correct;the Chairman signed the Minutes.

00357Declarations of Interest – Cllr P Todd declared an interest in Planning Applications S/177/00721/17 and S/177/00736/17 due to the nature of his business.

00358Finance

Accounts to be paid/authorised– The Council noted the following payments –Clerks Salary & Expenses for April; J Cooper – Internal Auditor - £40.00; CPRE – Best Kept Village Entrance Fee - £18.00 (Authorisation only); Tudor Ground Maintenance – Grass Cutting April - £204.00 -it was resolved to authorise all the payments pGLsBH.

Budget Sheet – The updated Budget Sheet as at 20th April 2017 had been circulated & it was resolved to accept as accurate; the Chairman signed the document

Mandatory Insurance Police – The Council considered the three quotations for the policy which was due to commence on 1st June 2017 & following debate it was resolved to renew the policy with the existing insurer, Came & Co at a cost of £168.00

Grass Cutting – Council noted the letter from LCC regarding transition payment towards grass cutting.

00359Audit 1st April 2016 – 31st March 2017

Internal Auditor Report – the Report had been circulated & it was agreed that the Clerk’s hard work to improve everything should be noted. There were no points raised in the report that required additional action.

Approval of Annual Governance Statement (Section 1 of the Annual Return) – The Council considered the Annual Governance Statement 2016/17 & the Internal Auditors Report;it was noted that the Council considered the arrangements for effective financial management during the year, and the preparation of the accounting statements was effective; an adequate system of internal control, including measures designed to prevent & detect fraud and corruption was in place & all reasonable steps were taken to consider potential non-compliance with laws, regulations & proper practices; proper opportunity was taken during the year for the exercise of electors rights in accordance with the requirements of the Accounts & Audit Regulations, suitable risk assessments were carried out, together with steps to manage the risks. An adequate & effective system of internal audit of the accounting records & control systems was maintained throughout the year and any matters raised from internal and external audit were acted upon. Everything about the Councils business had been declared, which included events taking place after the year end & it was resolved that the Council confirmed that to the best of its knowledge & belief it had complied with the requirements p JL s RS

Approval of the Accounting Statements (Section 2 of the Annual Return) – The Council considered the Accounting Statements for 2016/17 & following debate it was resolved that the accounting statements in the return presented fairly the financial position of the Council p PT s GL

Exercise of Public Rights – the Council noted that the Clerk would be displaying, as required by Accounts & Audit Regulations 2015, Regulations 12, 14 & 15 – the Audit information on the Council web site together with the details of how to contact the External Auditor with any queries & the Clerk with regard to examining the documentation.

00360Annual Parish Meeting – the Council considered the circulated Minutes; it was noted that the issue with the mobile Post Office missing was generally down to a problem with the equipment & not something that the Council could assist with; the Bus Service potential loss was ongoing; Highways issues were under constant appraisal & reported regularly.

00361Training – The LALC Training Programme had been circulated; the invitation from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust on an Information/Training evening being held on Wednesday 21st June on Bluestone Heath Road, Worlaby was welcomed & Councillors Louis, Larder & Taylor wished to attend; Clerk to email names

00362Pensions Regulator – Council noted the correspondence regarding automatic enrolment; the Clerk advised that currently she did not reach the level for automatic enrolment but Council had to non-the less follow procedure.

The Chairman stood Standing orders down to enable comments on the planning applications on the agenda.

There were no comments regarding S/177/00756/17.

The following comments were received from residents on S/177/00721/17:

The Design Access Statement was misleading; it mentioned Burgh-Le-Marsh, Cycle Track etc. This had obviously been cut & pasted from another application and in no way related to Tetford which was not ideal
Density – the ELDC had recently submitted to the Secretary of State its plan which stated that Tetford was made up mostly of frontage development; this plan was not frontage development & in effect was a ‘third tier’ of development which was not in keeping with the village
The 3-tier development effectively eroded the centre of what was a ‘Ring Village’, the only one in Lincolnshire which the residents were very proud of, the justification statement said that ‘it would not create a precedent’, but it was clear that it would
The forthcoming Local Plan gave no allocation for building in Tetford
Access – The application for the houses built in Woodman’s Yard had its access via this entry rejected because of the splay. It is not appropriate to consider access at this point as the situation has only worsened; exiting from the Woodman’s Yard development is at best difficult – the parking of cars makes visibility very difficult
Public Footpath – The previous application forWoodman’s Yard showed the footpath to the west & not as per this application to the East side of the entry. If this planning application was to be accepted it would mean 15 + vehicles on a regular basis, delivery vehicles all of which would be crossing the public footpath – this is not a bridleway. The LCC Footpath Officer has commented about the footpath placement, NOT the effect of the application on pedestrians/ walkers using the footpath. Residents also reiterated the comment about the location of the footpath being on the west side
Walls & Fences 1.8m high; trees to 2m high – the area under consideration for application had already lost a large amount of trees and vegetation; Tetford was a village in the Lincolnshire Wolds, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty – not a housing estate!
Plot 1 is approximately 1.8m from Woodman’s Yard – which was unreasonable & unsafe;
Loss of Privacy – the wood behindWoodman’s Yard development was the deciding factor for purchasing their house; they had unfortunately had to watch the wood behind being systematically removed & along with it the wildlife – owls, bats & deer; the Design & Access Statement stated that it would not be visible when in fact it would be seen from all over the village as a walk around would testify.
Traffic Generation – this size of development would increase traffic into the village quite considerably – 3 & 4 bedroom houses – 2 + cars per property; the local employment is scant – it is extremely likely that the homes would be purchased by individuals who would either need to travel to work, work from home or be retired.
The School is oversubscribed with a waiting list; living in Tetford does not guarantee a place at this school as any potential buyers would discover upon enquiring
The Doctors surgery – a wait of 2 – 3 weeks to see a Doctor is normal
Tetford as a ‘Large Village’ – the information held by ELDC was incorrect which labelled Tetford a large village, it only had one public house, not two, one shop that only sold basic items, no pre-school and if these items were removed it effectively made Tetford a ‘Medium village’
The residents requested that it be called into Planning Committee to decide as the effect on the village would be large if it was allowed to go ahead

The Council asked for a show of hands for the application: In favour – 1; Against – 53

District Councillor Andrews commented that the Local Plan had not yet been adopted but had been submitted to the Secretary of State for approval.

The applicant asked to respond & noted that they had worked hard to keep the footpath & it would be wider – comment was passed that it would still be over a roadway; the trees that had been planted behind Woodman’s Yard had initially been intended by his Father to be a Nursery and for sale but due to ill health that had not happened; he would have liked to have made it into a paddock but that was not now possible & they would unfortunately be leaving the village. He noted the building of Dove Cote Lane which he believed had already set a precedent for building in gardens.

A resident raised the Government Direction in 2010 which was aimed at preventing ‘Garden Grabbing’ and & asked what provision ELDC had made to prevent the same as the current application was exactly that.

A resident noted that Tetford & Salmonby were situated in the heart of the Lincolnshire Wolds, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and if estates of this size were allowed in large gardens, the area would change irrevocably.

Further comments were made on the effect of Traffic on the village – due to its location walkers regularly parked their cars in the village & there had been an instance where an emergency vehicle could not gain access, additional traffic of 15+ cars would only add to the problem.

Standing Orders in place.

00363Planning Matters

Applications Requiring Comment:

S/177/00756/17 – Mr R Finney – Planning Permission – Extension & alterations to existing dwelling to provide a garden room – Birch Lodge, Fulletby Road, Salmonby & following

Debate it was resolved to support the application p JL s BH

S/177/00721/17 – Mr & Mrs D Smyth – Outline erection of 7 dwellings, Bluebell Woods, North Road, Tetford & following debate it was resolvedto Object to the application p MR s JL 2 abstentions.

Standing Orders were stood down.

The following comments were received from residents on S/177/00736/17:

There was no provision for garages on the Outline Application which could result in households requiring other means of storage, i.e. garden sheds
Larger houses suggested were likely to have a minimum of 2 cars per household – additional cars would have to park on Salmonby Road as there was insufficient parking area – serious visibility risk when existing the area.
Visibility splays – the application stated that these were sufficient, it was believed that if you stood back 2ms into the drive the neighbouring hedge blocked visibility in line with requirements
The plans appeared to show part of the proposed access was actually using some of the adjacent property, Ridge View, in order to obtain the minimum junction splay of 2m
Too close to the road junction with increased hazard to vehicle drivers & pedestrians, especially elderly residents; busy junction especially during school times
Building in large rear garden could set a precedent & would increase noise pollution & traffic
This was infill; a recent planning application was turned down by ELDC & at appeal (S/177/01047/16) Land South of Upper Garth on the grounds of ‘development that would intrude physically & visually into the countryside to the unacceptable detriment of the character of the area & the setting relation of the village with its countryside context. The proposed development would therefore be harmful to the distinctive local character & to the character & appearance of the LincolnshireWolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty within which it is located; This should also apply to the current application
The question of caveats on the land was raised as it was believed that part of the land was in fact Agricultural Land – pond area – as far as the Parish Council was aware that had not changed
Garden grabbing
Lack of communication by the applicant to neighbours
The Design Statement refers to ‘Mature Planting’ at Grange Farm that would obscure vision – if Grange Farm does not go ahead that would be irrelevant
Size of houses
The percentage of planning applications currently being considered in relation to the number of houses in Tetford was high
The Sewage system was questioned; it had been in existence since 1960’s/1970’s & served Belchford & Tetford – Belchford had experienced a considerable increase in the building of homes & there had been some in Tetford; the capacity of the system was not known but a resident present had experienced sewage at her home which indicated there were problems with the system
Bus Service was poor & under threat
School was over subscribed
The tranquillity of the area would change; this was also a tourist area & the addition of housing in such numbers threatened the tranquillity & enjoyment for visitors and residents
Increase of vehicles in the villages
No footpath there – the prospect of 18 wheelie bins on the road
Bus stop opposite
Environmental impact of knocking a relatively young house down
Frontage development the standard in Tetford

The Council asked for a show of hands on the application: In favour – None; Against – 65.

Standing Orders in place.

S/177/00736/17 – Mrs A Hollingworth – Outline erection of up to 9 dwellings – Land to the rear of Knocknashee, Salmonby Road, Tetford & following debate it was resolved to object to the application p BH s RS 2 abstentions.

00364Land on the Corner of Mill Lane & West Road – The Clerk had circulated prices & information on recycled plastic benches to be purchased with the £500 funds granted by the Tetford & District Flower & Vegetable Show & following debate it was resolved to leave in abeyance pending advice from NALC with regard to signage; the Clerk informed Council that as it did not have a lease or owned the land she had been advised that its Public Liability Insurance would not cover any incidents there, however any bench purchased by the council would be covered by its insurance. Council noted the letter of thanks sent to Mr Ellis.

00365Broadband Issues – The Council considered the issues raised at the Annual Parish Meeting of ongoing problems; a request for information had gone in Tennyson Chronicle, the noticeboard & on the web site & the Council would continue monitoring.

00366Reactive Speed Signs–The Clerk had contacted the Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership regarding grants & had been advised they could not help. It was agreed that sharing a device would be a good idea in principle. Clerk to request further use of the loan unit

00367Bus Service–Councilconsidered the comments at the Annual Parish Meeting & the response to its letter submitted to Victoria Atkins MP noting that she had forwarded a copy of the Council’s letter to Mr Richard Wills, Executive Director for Environment & Economy at Lincolnshire County Council.Council would continue monitoring the situation.

00368Best Kept Village Competition – Council noted the copy of the completed application form, the Clerk noted that she had placed the details of when judging was expected to take place on the web site; the Volunteer Group would assist but it was hoped that residents & business owners would continue to maintain their areas.

00369Defibrillator – Cllr Larder reported that the unit had not been used but maintenance had been carried out.

00370Community Emergency Volunteers Plan –The Clerk had placed a further request for volunteers in the Tennyson Chronicle; Cllr Louis put forward the offer of emergency accommodation.

00371Volunteer Group – Cllr Harden noted the last litter pick had been 23rd April as previously reported & another would be held towards the end of the month.

00372Highways & Footpaths –Appendix A had been circulated, Salmonby bends repair was coming out – Clerk to re-report; the Clerk noted that Little London was on the list with the contractors for work.

00373Clerks Report –The Clerk Informed Council that she had submitted the pre-application form to War Memorial Trust, together with pictures of the memorial & was awaiting a response as whether the Council was eligible to apply for a grant; a VAT refund had been claimed valued at £137.17; a communication had been received from ELDC re a consultation on a Public Space Protection Order – the Clerk read the document to the Council which was noted.

00374District Councillors Report – ELDC had introduced some free parking in market towns but all parking areas would have individual pricing structures; the Council ~AGM was being held next Wednesday.

00375County Councillors Report – None

00376Correspondence – The Council noted the following item: LALC Newsletter.

00377Councillors Reports– None

00378Items for the next Agenda –As above.

00379Next Planned Meeting – Wednesday 19th July 2017

The meeting closed at9.10pm.

Chairman…………………………...... Date………………………..

Clerk…………………………………………..Date………………………..