MINUTES OF THE LOUTH TOWN COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
HELD ONLINE BY ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE
ON TUESDAY 19TH JANUARY 2021
Present Councillor S. Crew (SC), (in the chair).
Councillors: Mrs. E. Ballard (EB), J. Baskett (JB), M. Bellwood (MB), J. Garrett (JG), D.J.E. Hall (DJEH), D. Hobson (DH), D. A. Leonard (AL), Mrs. S.E. Locking (SEL), Mrs. J. Makinson-Sanders (JMS), J. Simmons (JS) and Mrs. P.F. Watson (PFW).
Councillors not present: Cllrs. L. Cooney (LMC), A. Cox (AC), H. Filer (HF), D. Ford (DF), G.E. Horton (GEH), D. Jackman (DJ), K. Norman (KN), F.W.P. Treanor (FWPT) and D. Wing (DEW).
The Town Clerk, Mrs. L.M. Phillips and the Town Clerk’s Assistant, Mrs. M.C. Vincent were also present.
232. Apologies for Absence
Cllrs. L. Cooney, A. Cox, H. Filer, D. Ford, G.E. Horton, D. Jackman, K. Norman, F.W.P. Treanor and D. Wing (DEW).
233. Declarations of Interest / Dispensations
The following declarations of interest were made:
a) Cllr. Mrs. JMS – Items 4 and 5 as a member of ELDC
b) Cllrs. DJEH –Items 4 and 5 as a member of ELDC
c) Cllr. AL – Items 4 and 5 as a member of ELDC and planning applications 6 as known to the applicant.
d) Cllr. Mrs. EB – Planning application 9 as a member of Louth Golf Club
It was RESOLVED that the notes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 15th December 2020 be approved as the Minutes.
235. Applications received by the Local Planning Authority
The Committee considered all planning applications received, including those listed on the schedule (PA/Schedule 01-19-21) and RESOLVED as follows:
a) N/105/02261/20 Former Park Avenue Football Ground,- Support but would comment that the access road will require traffic management and that there are a high number of neighbourhood objections.
b) N/105/02310/20 – Land at Former Railway object on the grounds of Flooding, Access, Traffic Generation, Highway and Pedestrian Safety (this area is already a notoriously dangerous spot and 10 additional houses will put a lot of pressure on the access).
c) N/105/02328/20 – Land at Wintringham Way – objected to this application on 19th January 2021 on the grounds of Access, Highway and Pedestrian Safety and flood risk
d) N/105/02367/20 – Copse and Pond, Legbourne Road, object on the grounds that there is proven flooding in the area
e) N/105/02041/20 – HALLAMS CLOSE, objected to this application on 17th November 2020 (reasons immediately below). After further consultation and discussion on 19th January 2021 it resolved to reiterate previous objections and add to them, see section below marked ‘Additional Comments’:
Access and Highway Safety / Traffic Generation
The access road leading to the site (Julian Bower) is a narrow, single car, farm track which is unadopted and not suitable for the level of traffic which this venture will generate and which should not be used for commercial purposes. If a commercial venture, such as this, is to be run from a site along Julian Bower the road should be adopted and made into a proper two lane road.
The junction of Julian Bower with London Road is extremely dangerous being located on the brow of a hill, where vehicles entering the town from the countryside often crest the hill travelling too fast.
Relevant Previous Planning History / Noise and Disturbance from the Scheme
Louth Town Council are concerned that this business has been running for a number of months without the correct permissions. It believes that these proposals constitute over intensive use of a site sold 18 months ago for horses which has resulted in the residents of Julian Bower being subjected to constant upset and disruption since commercial activity on the site commenced. The amount of passing traffic has increased exponentially, this has damaged the surface of the road, cars are using people’s driveways to turn around in, cars are parking down the road, blocking it, endangering lives as emergency vehicles would struggle to pass and causing a nuisance etc. The amount of pedestrians using the road has also increased significantly too and there is no public footpath. The Police have also had to be involved because of breaches of the peace.
Louth Town Council is concerned that:
• Approval of this application will set a dangerous precedent as it is afraid that it is the lead up to other applications for a residential dwelling(s) and other businesses on the site.
• This application and any made in the future will both individually and cumulatively have a detrimental effect on the AONB within which the site is located
• Health and Safety is being breached by allowing Llamas in the vicinity of people eating picnics.
• This application proposes that a gate across Julian Bower itself be installed, which would be wholly unacceptable and surely illegal.
• This application would necessitate the use of floodlights which would be a nuisance and source of light pollution.
• An emergency sleeping room has been proposed. This is wholly unacceptable, unrequired for such livestock and has not been necessary in the past eighteen months.
Louth Town Council discussed the above application on 19th January, following submission by the applicant of additional supporting documents. Louth Town Council resolved to object again as it felt that these documents do not address all of the concerns raised originally by the Town Council in relation to access and traffic. They also raised further objections as follows:
– Traffic generation/Noise and disturbance/Adequate parking and servicing/Overlooking and loss of privacy
The Council were concerned to note that within the documentation it is mentioned numerously that approval of the proposals will result in a very limited increase in use of the road. However, the Council questioned these statements, given the proposals to provide additional services such as birthday parties, refreshment facilities for walkers and community events.
– Overbearing nature of proposal/Public Visual Amenity/Loss of ecological habitats
The Council were concerned that the building proposed for the site is described as small when it is the equivalent size of a 3 bedroom house and at 6 meters tall it will tower over the landscape and block views of the AONB in which the site is located.
– The Council were also concerned that as the site is located in the AONB account should be taken of how such an important area would be protected and how biodiversity would be properly managed across the site by the scheme. Further comments from other organisations such as The Lincolnshire Wolds Countryside Service and The Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust plus those from the Historical Officer and all pertaining to the site being of scientific interest have not been dealt with.
The Council were dismayed to hear that a wooden access style on the edge of the field had been damaged and not fixed, hindering the publics use of the public footpath running through the site. The Council also heard that appropriate fencing had not been installed and consequently the Llamas were escaping on a regular basis. The Council considered that sleeping quarters were not necessary on site as Llama’s are traditionally ‘left out’ and have no need for human intervention.
g. N/105/01961/19 – Land Off Brackenborough Road, originally objected to this application on 11th February 2020 and object again, reiterating previous reasons (see below) and on the grounds that
237 dwellings is over the maximum number allowed in the local plan, making the proposal overbearing in nature and too dense.
The proposed increase in numbers makes the density of buildings on the site too high, numbers should stay as originally proposed. The Council believes that the proposals will present problems re. overlooking and loss of privacy. The Council also wished to reiterate its previous objections:
1) Ecological concerns i) regarding endangered species in the area e.g., badger and bat, ii) Protected bird species and iii) Japanese Knot Weed known to be growing in the vicinity.
2) Water supply and pressure issues – Councillors are concerned that in the event of a fire in the area there would be insufficient water pressure in the vicinity to accommodate emergency services. Further, Councillors have been informed that there is not an adequate supply of water to this area and in order to rectify this Westgate Fields and Westgate would have to be dug up again to lay suitable pipework. This work is currently taking place for another nearby development.
3) Flooding issues caused by inadequate sewer systems unable to cope with current demand and concern over who will adopt the maintenance of proposed SUD’s scheme. The low level of land in this area will increase the potential for flooding.
4) Visual impact in an area of Great Landscape Value with views to the AONB.
5) Transport and traffic problems – Louth Town Council have responded to proposals in the Local Plan that building in the North East of the town where the road infrastructure is already strained is not acceptable. There are no proposals to improve or slow traffic. Road links are already inadequate and moving traffic is reduced to single file on all of the main roads leading away from the site to negotiate parked cars for which there is no discernible solution. The additional traffic movements will create a road safety danger and impact on all major junctions leading to the development. Access via the Industrial Estate would shift traffic volume issues through an unsuitable area not designed for this purpose.
6) Town Centre Car Parking – The proposed site is deemed to be too far from the centre of town for pedestrians resulting in increased car journeys which will have an adverse effect on traffic and parking in the town and will be detrimental to everyone’s overall lifestyle. Car journeys will be necessary to access any medical, educational, leisure or retail purposes.
7) The development location is outside the envelope of the town boundaries and has been largely discounted in the proposed Local Plan, the quantity of houses proposed would provide around 20% of the allocation of housing for Louth concentrated in an unsuitable area without support facilities such as schools, shops and community centres which would not optimise sustainability. There is only one indicated access to this development which raises safety concerns.
8) Detrimental impact on the town generally from the increased pressure on health and education services and increasing volumes of traffic which will destroy the character of the town. ELDC should also be aware that members of the public, not adjacent to this site, have attended meetings to express their concerns regarding the impact on traffic numbers and the inability of the infrastructure to cope.
NB: Cllr. JS left at 10:51pm during this discussion returning at 10:53pm.
236. Planning Correspondence
The following correspondence was noted.
a) ELDC Planning Decisions
i) Approved – N/105/02064/20 – Planning Permission – Land – 46 Hawthorne Ave – LTC Supported
ii) Approved – N/105/01841/20 – Listed Building Consent – Ivy House, 50 James Street – LTC Supported
iii) Approved – N/105/01917/20 – Planning Permission – 1 Elsham Park – LTC Supported
iv) Approved – N/105/01386/20 – Planning Permission – Louth Garden Centre – Supported
v) Approved – N/105/01939/20– Planning Permission – Land East of AE Cook Ltd – LTC Supported
vi) Approved – N/105/02072/20 – Planning Permission – Plot at Rowsar House – LTC felt not enough info to comment
vii) Approved – N105/01942/20 – Section 73 – Aldi Supermarket, Newbridge Hill – LTC Objected.
i) Location: 17 Mercer Row – vinyl to shop stall riser and facia – ELDC written to inform them of breach of planning control.
ii) Location: 47 Broadley Cres – Untidy land and building – Written to resident to ask to remove waste and overgrowth.
iii) Location: 14 Westgate – Satellite dish in conservation area – Breach of Planning Control – ELDC has written to request planning permission be applied for.
iv) Location: 13 Market Place – Untidy land and building – acknowledgment of complaint.
v) Location: 28-30 Mercer Row – Untidy land and building – acknowledgment of complaint.
vi) Location: 13 & 13a Cornmarket – Untidy land and building – acknowledgment of complaint.
vii) Location: 14 Market Place – Untidy land and building – acknowledgment of complaint.
c) Withdrawn Applications
i) N/105/01810/20 – land off Keddington Road – Application withdrawn 14th December 2020.
d) Temporary Traffic Restrictions
i) ORGANISATION RESPONSIBLE – Sunbelt Rentals UK – B1200 St Mary’s Lane (Southbound slip road only between St Mary’s Lane and Westgate on 4/2/2021
ii) ORGANISATION RESPONSIBLE – Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board -REASON FOR RESTRICTION: Structural Repairs & Replacement Weir Installation Public Right Of Way (PROW) Closure Orders in place on: PROW 343 (Ticklepenny Lock Road to PROW 213), PROW 213 (PROW 343 to River Lane), PROW 213 (PROW 343 to Eastfield Road), PROW 214 (PROW 213 to PROW 534) 1/2/2021 to 16/4/2021 (Restrictions to be implemented as & when required during this period (Monday to Friday 06:30 to 17:30 only), signage detailing accurate dates & times will be displayed on site in advance)
237. Next Meeting
The Committee noted that the date of the next scheduled Planning Committee meeting was 16th February 2021.
The Meeting Closed at 11:26pm.
Signed_______________________ (Chairman) Dated________________________