Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor C S Macey and R P H Reid.

No declarations of interest were made with respect to any items on the agenda.

The Chairman moved that the first motion of minute 83a be amended to read:

“On a motion proposed by Councillor S A J Blackburn and seconded by Councillor Mrs M J Overton MBE”

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 11 April 2022, be approved as a correct record, and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee considered a report in connection with nine objections received to the proposed introduction of waiting restrictions at Edison Court following a request from the local County Councillor. The majority of the objections were concerned about limited parking availability deterring visitors, thus, impacting upon business viability and displaced parking overflowing onto Enterprise Way. However, it was the officer’s view that the introduction of the restrictions would remove persistent, long term parking ensuring access to businesses in Edison Court were maintained at all times. The carriageway on Enterprise Way was considered an adequate width to support parking without causing an obstruction to traffic.

Members understood that, since road surveys had been carried out, a change in business ownership had taken place which, they felt, may have an impact on the necessity for this proposal. They suggested that a deferral may prove an effective means of assessing the need for the order.

On a motion proposed by Councillor Mrs A M Newton MBE and seconded by Councillor N H Pepper, it was:

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

That the application be deferred for six months, while the impact of changes in occupancy is assessed.

The Committee considered a report which detailed a request for the existing 50mph speed limit on the A16 through North Thoresby to be reduced to 40mph. Investigations and a speed survey have indicated that a reduction in the level of limit may be considered a 'Borderline Case', as defined within the Council's Speed Limit Policy. Therefore, the Planning and Regulation Committee could approve a departure from the criteria if they felt it appropriate.

On a motion proposed by Councillor T R Ashton and seconded by Councillor I G Fleetwood, it was:

RESOLVED (unanimous)

That the Committee approved the reduction in speed limit proposed so that the necessary consultation process to bring it into effect may take place.

The Committee considered a report in connection with two objections received to the proposed introduction of waiting restrictions at Pennine Way, Penrhyn Way and Arundel Drive, Grantham. The objections raised concerns that the proposed restrictions at the junction with Arundle Drive would prevent parking outside properties and negatively affect residents and their visitors. However, it was the officer’s view that, the extent of the proposed restrictions were the minimal required to promote safety for pedestrians and vehicles at this location. Moreover, the restrictions potentially affected a small number of residents all of whom had off street parking facilities, with alternative on street parking available nearby.

On a motion proposed by Councillor I G Fleetwood and seconded by Councillor T R Ashton, it was:

RESOLVED (unanimous)

That the Committee approved the reduction in speed limit proposed so that the necessary consultation process to bring it into effect may take place.