Agenda and minutes

The Chair informed the Committee that the Council was undertaking an audio recording of the meeting and that it was being live streamed.

Councillors L Dales, A Freeman and K Melton declared an other registrable interest for any relevant items, as they were appointed representatives on the Trent Valley Internal Drainage Board.

AGREED           that the minutes from the meeting held on 8 May 2025 were                                 agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Site Visit at 11am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought approval for the temporary siting of a portable classroom that would allow the current child places to increase from 55 to 72. The proposal site was identified as being within Oxton Conservation Area, the Green Belt and within the setting of listed buildings.

A site visit had taken place prior to the commencement of the Planning Committee, for Members as there were specific site factors and/or significant policy or precedent implications that needed to be carefully addressed; and the impact of the proposed development was difficult to visualise.

Members considered the presentation from the Business Manager – Planning Development, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Mr I Wigglesworth, neighbour, spoke against the application.

Councillor H Lempicki, Oxton Parish Council, spoke against the application.

Ms S Vanner, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Councillor R Jackson Local Ward Member, Dover Beck, spoke against the application.

Members considered the application, and some Members commented that they could not see a problem with the temporary classroom, it would be set back from the building line of the main school building, would be located in the playground which was already tarmac.  Members carefully considered the impact on adjacent residents.  The noise from the children may be quieter for neighbours, with the children being in the classroom rather than being outside in the playground.  There was also a need for pre-school places.  Other Members felt that this should not be allowed in the Green Belt and raised concerns about the design of the portable building in a conservation area.  Members also debated the need for the classroom, including noise and traffic impacts.

In accordance with the Planning Protocol, as Councillor E Oldham arrived during the Officer presentation, she took no part in the debate or vote.

AGREED          (with 6 votes For and 3 votes Against) that Planning Permission be                         approved subject to the conditions contained within the report.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the variation of condition 01 and 05 to make temporary and personal permission permanent attached to planning permission 21/02492/S73; Change of use of former abattoir site and paddock to gypsy and traveller caravan site.  The officer recommendation was to vary the condition for a further 12 months rather than remove it. Members were advised that the proposal site was in Flood Zone 3b.

Members considered the presentation from the Business Manager – Planning Development, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Members whilst considering the application sought clarification regarding the reason why a further one year was proposed and not two, as it would provide time for this issue to be resolved and prevent the application be submitted again at the end of the year.  Members discussed the need for making a long-term decision to give certainty to the local community.  The outcome of the Examination for the Amended Allocations and Development Management Development Plan Document (DPD) was not yet published. Officers had advised that new content around Gypsy and Traveller provision had been emerging through this process. Members considered that as the Council was close to the DPD being resolved and that a long-term solution might be secured, one year was justified. Members were concerned about where the local community would go if approval was not given. Members discussed the challenge of flooding in this area. 

AGREED          (unanimously) that Planning Permission be approved subject to the                         conditions, including the variation of Condition 01 (as proposed to its                         removal) and Condition 05, as contained within the report.

Site Visit at 10.15am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought an application for permission in principle for residential development for one dwelling.  Members were advised that the application had been referred to Committee as it was contrary to the Development Plan.

A site visit had taken place prior to the commencement of the Planning Committee, for Members as there were particular site factors which were significant in terms of the weight attached to them relative to other factors if they would be difficult to assess in the absence of a site inspection.  There were specific site factors and/or significant policy or precedent implications that needed to be carefully addressed and the impact of the proposed development was difficult to visualise.

Members considered the presentation from the Business Manager – Planning Development, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

The Planning in Principle process was explained, noting that Members needed to consider location, land-use and number of dwellings proposed. The Business Manager advised that whilst the scheme was clearly contrary to the Council’s countryside policy (DM8), officers had reasoned that the proximity to the village, modest quantum of residential proposed and acceptability in land use terms warranted a favourable decision in this case. The precise appearance and design would be considered at a later date through the Technical Consent process.

Members whilst considering the application discussed Policy DM8, as the proposal was contrary to this.  They felt that one property could be considered under-intensification and a waste of the land, when the site could provide a higher density of houses, especially affordable houses which were needed.  Additional houses however would provide an issue for highway access, as there were already four cottages using the current access.   It was further commented that Norwell was a unique village, which had different house styles, and that one additional house would not look out of keeping with the rest of the village.

AGREED          (with 8 votes For and 2 votes Against) that Permission be granted in                         principle.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought to upgrade eight doors to FD60 fire doors, provide bespoke security shutters to two doors, upgrade internal and external CCTV with additional cameras, provide additional external security lighting, provide improved means of escape from the Attic; and conservation and repair of the front entrance.

Members considered the presentation from the Business Manager – Planning Development, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

The Business Manager explained the significance of the Museum and Theatre, including the archaeological features on display. It was advised that although there would be some impact on the special interest of the listed buildings, Conservation Officers had worked with the applicant to secure appropriate mitigation and optimum outcomes to reduce impact (this was to be secured via conditions). One Member asked whether traditional metal designs might be more appropriate and whether they would have a matching paint finish. Fire safety was discussed.

Members considered the proposals acceptable.

AGREED          (unanimously) that Planning Permission be approved subject to the                         conditions contained within the report.

The Committee were asked to nominate four Members of the Planning Committee to sit on the Planning Policy Board. 

AGREED     (unanimously) that Councillors A Freeman (Chair), D Moore (Vice-Chair)

                   K Melton and E Oldham be appointed as the Planning Committee representatives on the Planning Policy Board for 2025/26.

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive which detailed the exempt business considered by the Committee for the period 1 March 2024 to date.

AGREED           (unanimously) that:

(a)    the report considered at the 28 May 2024 Planning Committee, during exempt business, entitled: Implications of new evidence on pending planning appeals in relation to applications: 22/00975/FULM - Construction of a solar farm, access and all associated works, equipment and necessary infrastructure at Land At Knapthorpe Lodge, Hockerton Road, Caunton, Newark On Trent, NG23 6AZ (Knapthorpe Lodge); and 22/00976/FULM - Construction of a solar farm, access and all associated works, equipment and necessary infrastructure at Field Reference Number 2227, Hockerton Road, Caunton (Muskham Wood). The information would now be open; and

(b)   the report considered at the 11 July 2024 Planning Committee, during exempt business, entitled: 22/02341/OUT – Holly Court Rolleston - Outline application for erection of two detached dwellings and the re-alignment of Rolleston Public Footpath no.5 with all matters reserved except access.  The information would now be open.

AGREED           that the report be noted.

AGREED           that the report be noted.

There are none.

That, under section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 5 of part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

The Planning Committee considered the exempt Schedule of Communication in relation to Appeal and Application reference:  APP/B3030/W/25/3364181; and 23/01837/FULM – Land to the West of Main Street, Kelham.  This information was noted. Officers advised that Members would be kept updated through the Chair and Vice-Chair on all aspects of the Appeal.

(Summary provided in accordance with Section 100C(2) of the Local Government Act 1972).