September 2020

Minutes of a meeting of Bracebridge Heath Parish Council held remotely using Zoom on 8th September 2020 at 19:30

Present:  Cllrs F Adeyemi (joined at 19:34), C Broad, C Callan, J Kilcoyne, S Manders, V Marden, J Moran, A Smith, K Trought and A Walker.

In attendance: Clerk to Council, Mrs S Knowles was present. No members of the public were present

PUBLIC COUNCIL SESSION

A reminder was given to members about the need to submit to the monitoring officer at NKDC any changes to the content of their Register of Member Interest Forms.

20116. TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES AND ACCEPT VALID REASONS FOR ABSENCE – It was RESOLVED: That apologies for absence from Cllr Barr be accepted.

It was RESOLVED: That apologies for absence from Cllr Hauton be accepted.

It was RESOLVED: That prior apologies to leave the meeting early be accepted from Cllr Marden

20117. TO RECEIVE MEMBERS’ DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY, NON-DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTERESTS IN RELATION TO ANY AGENDA ITEM –

20118. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD 1st September 2020 - It was RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 1st September 2020 be approved and signed as a true record by the chairman.

Cllr Moran passed the chairmanship of the meeting to Cllr Manders and abstained from speaking and voting on the matter

Cllr Adeyemi joined the meeting at 19:34

20119. TO CONSIDER COUNCIL’S RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION ON THE DESIGN CODE FOR THE CENTRAL LINCOLNSHIRE LOCAL PLAN SOUTH EAST QUADRANT (SEQ)

It was agreed that the following comments be submitted in response to the consultation:

Green separation zone

• Parish Council is pleased to see that there is an emphasis on keeping Bracebridge Heath separate from the rest of the SEQ with the use of green corridors. However, the parameters set for the width of this separating corridor need to be more clearly defined. A separation of just 60m is less than the width of a professional football pitch and will not enable a clear separation of communities. Council is concerned that providing such wide parameters will enable developers to choose the minimum requirements each time. Council also seeks clarification as to whether the 60m to 200m separation includes grassed areas only or whether it also includes footpaths, roads and other paved areas. The inclusion of other paved areas will further reduce the visual separation of communities and will not achieve the desired outcome.

Open spaces and green areas

Allotments

• It is noted that the allotments situated next to the International Bomber Command Centre are under the ownership of the City of Lincoln Council. Council requests that separate provision is made in the design code for existing communities and the new community to be developed on the SEQ.
• Council welcomes the inclusion of disabled access for allotments.

Formal playing fields

• Bracebridge Heath already lacks recreational space and formal playing fields for the size of the community. The proposed design code does not provide for any such recreational space in the Bracebridge Heath area of the SEQ. The provision of playing fields to the north of Lincoln Road, B1188, will not be easily or safely accessible to residents south of the road. It will be particularly difficult to access for residents situated closer to Bracebridge Heath. This will result in additional pressure for the use of the already oversubscribed recreational space in Bracebridge Heath. Council requests that formal playing fields are located so that they are accessible to all residents of the SEQ. It is noted that the formal playing fields are not included within the phasing plan but Council feels that these community facilities should be provided alongside the phase 1 residential developments.

Play parks

• The inclusion of LEAPs and NEAPs is noted and it is understood that NKDC does not wish to be overly prescriptive about locations. However, Council requests that further information be provided about the proposed play equipment. In particular, the age ranges for the equipment and ensuring that there is enough equipment for children of older ages.
• Council is concerned that the future management of play parks and other recreation facilities is not being addressed at this stage. Parish Council is keen to avoid the use of management companies for the maintenance of these facilities as it represents an additional charge to residents.

Landscaping, wildlife and biodiversity

• The planting and landscaping scheme is not explicit. More specifics should be included such as the use of bird and bat boxes.  
• Council notes that there is a limited species range in the landscaping plan and there is no provision of evergreens. This would help to maintain separation between communities throughout the year including the winter months.
• Council is keen to see the introduction of wildlife corridors throughout the SEQ and linking surrounding settlements. This should include trees and hedges on the amenity areas as well as adequate landscaping provision in gardens to encourage animals, birds and insects.
• Adequate planting for the swales and SUDS should also be included in this document alongside plans for their effective future management.

Climate change, noise and air pollution

• Parish Council is very concerned that this section of the design code does not provide enough specifics or insistence for the inclusion of renewable technologies.
• Using the words ‘may be included’ and ‘subject to the viability considerations’ will hold no weight in ensuring that effective renewable technologies are provided in residential or public buildings. Similarly, residential properties may be aligned east to west to maximise solar potential but there is no requirement to actually provide the solar energy equipment. Grey water recycling systems could also be employed in residential properties.
• Equally, it should be an expectation that public buildings are constructed with renewable technologies. It is not enough to suggest that these technologies will be provided subject to ‘commercial viability’.
• It is disappointing that the full extent of measures to combat climate change have not been embraced and the highest standards of specification are not being insisted upon. This higher specification is currently being delivered at many NKDC sites and residents of the SEQ and surrounding areas should be able to expect and benefit from the same standard.
• Council would like to see an increase in the green credentials of the SEQ and in particular to include schemes such as those used at Kingsbrook in Aylesbury where fruit trees have been provided in back gardens.
• The inclusion of electric charging points for cars and bikes should be provided as standard.

• It is noted that the properties located on the primary roads especially Canwick Avenue do not appear to have a front garden. Are there any measures to reduce noise and air pollution for these properties such as the use of triple glazing and other methods of ventilation?

Cycleways

• Parish Council is very concerned that cycleways will not be delivered or will scaled back and included as a low priority in the phasing of the SEQ.
• Bracebridge Heath has very poor cycleway provision already and has been waiting many years for this to be prioritised. Existing residential areas need the benefit of this infrastructure now and it needs to be prioritised to ensure that it is provided before or alongside the first phases in residential development.
• The proposed cycleways have no specification. This needs to be provided to ensure surfaces are suitably permeable.
• With adequate cycleways, the SEQ would also be able to benefit from schemes such as the hire bikes available in North Hykeham.

Housing and character

• The document outlines that there will be a percentage of affordable housing. The minimum percentage of affordable homes should be defined and Council requests that these are pepper potted throughout the SEQ.
• Attention should be drawn to the evidence from the public consultation carried out for the emerging Neighbourhood Plan for Bracebridge Heath. This shows that housing of more than 2 storeys is not desirable in this area. The Neighbourhood Plan is close to completion and Council feels that weight should be given to this document and particularly the public consultations that have been undertaken.
• The document suggests that there will be ‘limited use’ of 2.5 storey buildings. A definition of limited should be provided. Similarly, 3 storey buildings are not commonly found in Bracebridge Heath. Council feel that the use of 3 storey and taller buildings at the gateways to the SEQ and Bracebridge will give an enclosed feeling and is incongruous with the existing settlement. A gradual approach on entry to the SEQ and Bracebridge Heath will emphasise the existing views and retain a village look and feel.  
• Efforts to retain the character of existing settlements is welcomed. However, it is noted that there is reference to ‘adopting a high street approach’ and the use of the word ‘townscape’ appears several times. This is inconsistent with existing settlements. It would be helpful to set a maximum housing density for the SEQ that is appropriate for a village setting. 
• The document suggests that different coloured render including blue will be used. This is inconsistent with the surrounding settlements which are predominantly white and cream where rendered.
• Council notes the types of housing in the design code and wishes to limit the use of terraces in this area. Long terraces are the style of dwelling seen in town or city centres and not villages. Council notes the wording, ‘opportunity for bungalows to be fully explored’. This provides no strength at planning stage to insist on a mix of housing that includes bungalows.
• Section 5.1 of the document states that the ‘regulating plan does not prescribe or set the exact location of any given street type, streetscape character frontage or non-residential deliverable. Instead it sets indicative zones for the location of the streetscape character frontages…’ Whilst Council understands that there will need to be a degree of flexibility in the design, it feels that the design code will hold very little weight at the planning stage enabling developers to choose the areas of the code that it wishes to comply with.
• Adequate bin storage areas will need to be suitable for a minimum of 4 bins per property to include a new paper/cardboard bin in 2021. Collection areas at the end of unadopted roads may also need a maximum number to be imposed to ensure they don’t become unsightly.

• The inclusion of limestone features within the design code is welcome. However, Council considers that the use of character features such as limestone should also be incorporated near other listed and non-designated heritage assets such as the St John’s Hospital, White Hall Farm, the Manor Hose and its walls on Sleaford Road.

• Parish Council would like to see the inclusion of footpaths and pedestrian shortcuts linking residential areas throughout the SEQ. Whilst this must be balanced with the need to minimise crime through design, Council feel that this will make the SEQ more accessible and joined up.

Community buildings, local centres and education

• Council notes that the community centre closest to Bracebridge Heath is planned for delivery in phase 2 and not phase 1 with the residential development that surrounds it. Similarly, the community hub and amenities planned near Mill Lodge are being built as part of phase 3 rather than alongside the nearby residential development in phase 2. The infrastructure and local amenities need to be delivered at the same time so that a sense of identity for the new community can be developed.
• Council is concerned about the overall lack of infrastructure for the local community such as a doctor’s surgery, dentist, library, religious buildings, community halls for meetings, groups and other activities. If this infrastructure is not planned for, there will be pressure to add them at a later stage which will likely result in a loss of green space.
• The proposed 640 entry secondary school will not be financially viable to provide a comprehensive range of A level subjects. The school will need space to expand to accommodate this.
• The design code states that the primary school can be used as a community space in the evenings and weekends. The decision to hire indoor community space will be for an individual school to make and as such it should not be counted as part of the overall provision of indoor community space. Similarly, outdoor space required for the secondary school will not be available for the local community to use.

Cllr Marden left the meeting at 20:55

Highways and bus routes

• Council welcomes the inclusion of new bus routes and stops for the northern part of the SEQ. Parish Council would like to see similar plans for the southern section on the Church Commissioners land. Residents of this area will still be a considerable walking distance from the existing provision. Being an employment zone, this area would benefit from public transport.
• Council is keen to see a specification for the construction of shared access, car barns, laybys and car parks be included to ensure that the surfaces are constructed of permeable materials.
• There is concern that phase 1 includes construction on either side of Bracebridge Heath meaning there will be considerable traffic congestion during the construction phase.
• Safe pedestrian crossing points have not been defined for the area and these are vital to encourage walking and cycling.

Other matters

• The southern green corridor only has one green edge on the west side. A similar green edge should be provided on the other side.
• A key view has been missed from the document. This is a view over the Witham Valley and to the Wolds which can be seen looking eastwards along Canwick Avenue from London Road.
• Page 13 includes a statement about the inclusion of dwellings located outside of the SEQ immediately south of Bracebridge Heath to the west of Sleaford Road. Is this area now included in the SEQ?
• The summary of the Design Workshop held in March 2020 is missing.

In summary, Council considers that the design code has missed an opportunity to plan for a truly sustainable SUE. The lack of detail and enforcement for the inclusion of climate change technologies is disappointing. NKDC has previously been recognised for its building excellence and use of sustainable measures at its own sites and the same standards could be levied for the SEQ. Parish Council would also like to see the commitment to delivering the necessary infrastructure such as community buildings, health provision and cycleways much earlier in the phasing. The provision of a S106 agreement at an earlier stage would illustrate this commitment.

As specified in the comments, Council feel that much of the document doesn’t go far enough in prescribing standards and designs. Unless this is strengthened, Council fear that the design code will have little weight in the planning process.

The chairmanship of the meeting was passed back to Cllr Moran

20120TO CONSIDER ITEMS FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING - Nil

There being no further business the meeting closed at 21:17

Signed___________________________Chairman                                                                                   08 September 2020