PTC 2022 Agendas

Dear Councillors Bowell, Denman, Gilbert, Halls, Hosking, Little, Robinson, Shinkins-Hoppe, Stevens (District) and Thomas (District).  

Copy to Cllr P Dilks for information. 

You are hereby summonsed to attend the next meeting of the Planning & Transport Committee on Tuesday 13 September 2022 at 7.00pm held at the Institute.  POSTPONED

Louise Brown 

Assistant Clerk 

AGENDA 

38.23 To receive apologies of absence. 

Apologies received from Cllrs Bowell, Halls and Rose. 

39.23 To receive declarations of interest, if any. 

40.23 To agree the Minutes of the previous meeting held on 16th August 2022. 

Please see Appendix 1

41.23 To receive reports from the Clerk. 

Cllr Dilks has been to view the lamp posts that could be used along Linchfield Road to hold a SIDS device and can be included in the SIDS rota.  The office are awaiting the information to put forward to the LRSP. 

The Assistant Clerk has sent traffic calming letters to the residents of Prentice Place. 

The Assistant Clerk has sent a letter to Stonegate Brewery regarding the bollards and permissive right of way along Bell Lane. 

Councillor Denman has sent an email to DSJPC office to be forwarded to PCC regarding the signage and use of Heavy Goods Vehicles on the DSJ Bridge. 

42.23 To consider the Licence for Gambling Survey (Closing date 18th September) 

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/skdcsgp2022 

SKDC has recently reviewed and updated its Gambling Statement of Principles.  We are keen to find out what you, as a local public sector organisation, think of the rules governing the licensing of premises where gambling is permitted.   

Please look if you can, to discuss at the meeting regarding completion. 

43.23 To receive an update regarding the traffic calming on Church Street. 

Please see Appendices 2 and 3 below. 

44.23 To receive an update regarding the bollards/permissive right of way along Bell Lane. 

Please see Appendix 4 below. 

45.23 To receive an update from the Neighbourhood Plan. 

46.23 To receive a report of the budget position to date and expected outturn for the financial year 2022/23.  

47.23 To consider budget estimates for 2023/24 and make recommendations to the Finance, Policy and Personnel Committee. 

48.23 To receive and consider the following Planning Applications and put forward recommendations to the next Council Meeting, or make decisions in accordance with the Committee’s delegated powers: 

http://www.southkesteven.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=8170#/ 

S22/1599  

Rear and side extension. 

83 Church Street, Deeping St James, Lincolnshire, PE6 8HF 

S22/1708  

Extension to garage to form tack room.  

Five Acres, Hards Lane, Frognall, Lincolnshire, PE6 8RP 

49.23 To report the outcome of previous Planning Applications: 

http://www.southkesteven.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=8170#/ 

S22/1231 

Erection of detached dwelling. 

16 Park Estate Deeping St James Lincolnshire PE6 8NG 

DSJPC - Objected 

SKDC – Permission has been refused. 

S22/1081  

Erection of single storey rear extension. 

9 Kesteven Close Deeping St James Lincolnshire 

DSJPC – Consultation not required 

SKDC – Lawful Certificate 

S18/0045  

Use/operations/other matter Lawful development certificate (proposed) for use of domestic garage as dog grooming salon. 

25 Thackers Way Deeping St James PE6 8HP  

DSJPC – Consultation not required 

SKDC – Lawful Certificate 

S22/1275  

Change of use of land to residential garden and erection of fencing. 

Land To the Rear Of 29 & 31 Broadgate Lane Deeping St James Lincolnshire PE6 8NW 

DSJPC - Objected 

SKDC – Grants Planning Permission 

S22/1283 

One two-storey side extension, one first floor side extension and a single storey flat roof rear extension.  

155 Eastgate Deeping St James Lincolnshire 

DSJPC - Supported 

SKDC – Permission has been refused 

S22/1441 

New premise licence for Deeping Rugby Club. 

Deepings RUFC Spalding Road Deeping St James 

DSJPC – Not consulted 

SKDC – No objections 

S22/1249  

Demolish existing conservatory, erection of single storey side and rear extension. 

60A Horsegate Deeping St James Lincolnshire PE6 8EW 

DSJPC - Supported 

SKDC – Grants Planning Permission  

S22/1300  

Two-storey front and rear extension and enlargement of existing dormers.  

150 Eastgate Deeping St James PE6 8RD 

DSJPC - Objected 

SKDC – Withdrawn by agent 

S22/1496  

Single storey rear extension, modification of existing conservatory.  

73 Horsegate Deeping St James Lincolnshire PE6 8EW 

DSJPC – Approved 

SKDC – Grants Planning Permission 

50.23 To agree the date of the next meeting. 

Tuesday 11th October at 7pm. 

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

Four responses from residents of Church Street re traffic calming.

1.

We live along Church Street and we are very grateful for your information about the proposed traffic calming scheme.

We had a positive reaction when we looked at the map and the options. We have now had a few days to think about it and would like to make the following suggestions:

1. It would make it difficult for us to turn left out of our drive if the curb outside the Waterton Arms was built up. This may also be an issue for numbers 77, 79, 81 and the new house being built behind number 81. Our strong preference would be for white line hatching.

2. In place of the white lines in the centre of the road on the eastbound approach, we would suggest another area of white line hatching, from approximately number 85 to number 91. This would significantly slow down the westbound traffic and the traffic turning out of the new housing development. There would need to be appropriate 'Give Way' and 'Priority' signage at each end of both areas of white line hatching.

3. We would also suggest 'Give Way' signage for the traffic driving out of the new housing development.

Please see attached photograph for more information.

2.

Thank you for the info re: proposed traffic calming, it's good to see action at last.

We live along Church Street & have experienced numerous accidents over the last 40 years. The police would be able to give you precise dates & details as they have been involved on the worst occasions.

My neighbours at no:89 have had their house damaged on at least 3 occasions - one causing £60,000 of damage.

My previous neighbours at 85 had the 4 ft brick wall, adjacent to the pavement, demolished & a work van written off, plus the highway chevron sign obliterated.

Large stones on the green next to no: 91 were installed following an incident several years ago.

The proposals look like a good solution. I think there also needs to be a convex traffic mirror installed opposite the entrance to the new development so that residents can look in either direction on exiting. I think it would help to have a 20mph in the section of road shown as cars coming from the Church towards Market Deeping will have a very restricted view round the bend & will be proceeding with the white priority arrow.

3.

Thank you for your letter dated 29 July 2022.

We don’t believe that giving priority over westbound traffic will prevent further accidents.  All major accidents on this bend have been from westbound traffic travelling too fast with the apex of the bend pushing them into the path of Number 89 Church Street.  Traffic calming on both sides of the road would be more effective - slowing down traffic both east and west bound (something similar to Glinton?).

The placing of signage - please ensure that any signage placed does not hinder other residents safe exit on to Church Street.

We appreciate very much that the Parish Council objected strongly to the new development.  We believe that the owners of the development should have been made to contribute towards improving road safety, as they have added to the existing problems, and that this should have been a condition of planning permission.

We have lived at Church Street for six years.  Four of those years we have had to put up with noise and disruption from the new development (our garden runs along the full length of the new housing).  The developers removed all our mature hedging on the promise of replacing it and we are still battling with them to resolve this (they don’t turn up for meetings and don’t return calls).

We are very keen to get the dangerous situation with traffic resolved, but would appreciate as little disruption as possible.  We love living in Deeping St James and look forward to when this issue can be resolved.

Thank you for including us in this process and if we can help with anything then please let us know.

 

4.

Our property has been involved in 2 accidents in the last 3 years. Cars crashed into the front / side of our house on the 1st August 2019 and again on the 21st April 2021.

There are other incidents that I'm aware of but unfortunately, I have no record of the dates:

1) The low wall outside number 83 was knocked down by a car a number of years ago.

2) A car ploughed into the bollards that used to be positioned along the edge of the Parish garden, next to number 91 (they were later replaced by the large rocks that are there now).

3) A car ran into the wall outside number 81 (I believe the current owner lived there at the time so he should be able to provide more details on that).

I hope that's helpful but if you need any more information please feel free to get in touch.

Appendix 4

Responses from residents of Bell Lane and Bridge Street

Landlord of The Bell Tavern

I received your letter this morning concerning the posts that have been put in place at the end of my car park and Bell Lane. I'm sorry to tell you I had no doing with the installation of said posts. It was one of the residents of Bell Lane that put them in place. I believe they did this to try and stop mopeds and motorbikes using it for a rat run.

Resident from Bell Lane – Office visit 1 August 2022.

The gentleman has lived in The Deepings since 1968 and does not want to lose the path. It was suggested a gate of some description would be good, to allow pedestrian access, but not motorised vehicles. It is known that the path is permissive and has investigated himself into making it a definitive right of way in the past, but pursuing this is so long winded and time consuming, he did not complete it.

The gentleman has the right of access over the piece of land to get to his drive, but believes that the two houses on the other side claim it is private land as shown on their deeds.

Support will be given by this resident, if DSJPC made an application and got permission to put some sort of gate in. The resident went on to say that he would hate for more buildings to be built on the Bell site and the access to be lost. In the past, there was a developer that looked at access from Bell Lane as it wouldn’t be allowed from Bridge Street, so it remains a possibility.

Resident from Bell Lane – Office visit 3 August 2022.

This resident bought a plot in 1987 from Mr Ayres, which was sold with access across the unadopted bit of land from the end of Bell Lane and the start of The Bell car park. There is an understanding that there is also a strip of land which is owned by The Thompson’s (Skip hire firm), originally Horace, who was a former DSJPC Councillor.

The resident would support the access remaining open for the use of pedestrians and like the idea of it being gated in some way.

The gentleman acknowledged that the Knowles Transport lorry reversed into the bollards and an SKDC representative coming to reinstate one of the posts to put the no dog fouling sign on. Whilst living along Bell Lane, there has always been bollards (originally 3), but mopeds/motorbikes are cutting through and have nearly knocked one elderly lady resident.

The resident understands and agrees with DSJPC’s wishes to make the permissive path official, to avoid loss if further building work ever took place.

Resident from Bridge Street – Telephoned 26 August 2022

The house this resident lives in was previously a shop, and the property has access rights into Bell Lane, with double side gates into the garden, but these gates have since been removed.

Motorbikes are a problem and one or two cars hanging around antisocially. The space is used 95% as it should be.

This resident would be supportive of DSJPC investigating options to make what is a permissive footpath into something more permanent, so that it’s use was not lost, should The Bell land be repurposed.