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 registerable interest for any relevant items as appointed representatives on the Trent Valley Internal Drainage Board.

Director of Planning & Growth declared an other registerable interest on Agenda Item No. 7 – Land off Mansfield Road, Clipstone – 23/01846/OUTM, as he was a Grant Funder and was known to the applicant and would leave the meeting for this item.

AGREED                      that the minutes from the meeting held on 12 February 2026                                     were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought outline planning permission (with all matters reserved except for access to Allenby Road) for up to 70 dwellings (including affordable housing), highway works, public open space, children’s play space, landscaping, drainage and all other associated works, including infrastructure.

Members considered the presentation from the Senior Planning Officer, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

The application was presented to the Planning Committee on 12 February 2026 with a recommendation of approval. Members of the Committee resolved to defer the application to allow Officers to seek professional landscape advice on the impact of the proposal. Officers had sought such advice, and the updated report sought to address Members concerns and to address some of the other matters raised during those discussions.  An amendment was communicated to Members on the slides and via the Officers presentation on the removal of First Homes from the requirement for S106 affordable homes (due to the removal of First Homes from the NPPF as mandatory) and the new split would be 60% Social/Affordable Rent and 40% Shared Ownership, still keeping the 30% onsite affordable housing provision.

The Committee report from 12 February was appended to the report as Appendix A. The independent landscape advice was contained in full in Appendix B to the report.

Mr R Lewis, representing Southwell Civic Society and another objector, spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs A Brooks, the Agent spoke in support of the application.

Members considered the application, and it was commented that this was a wrong site for development.  There was an emerging Neighbourhood Plan which was being considered.  There were better sites in the area which Southwell Town Council had agreed through Referendum.  This was a gateway site and was good quality agricultural land.  The site was in open countryside which was contrary to policy DM8. The proposed plans had footpaths along the road which was considered inappropriate. If the land was developed it would allow urban creep to the village of Halam and other villages, which would lose their unique character. It was felt that this development would be highly visible, which had not been considered in the independent landscape assessment.  Southwell was full to capacity with residents, additional people would have an overbearing impact on local doctor surgeries, schools and other facilities. Members debated the tilted balance and the landscape advice. One Member advised that they would want to see a bold landscape buffer at reserved matters stage if it was approved.

AGREED           (with 7votes For and 6 votes Against) that Planning Permission                              be approved, subject to the conditions contained within the report                 and the signing of a S106 agreement for the contributions.

Site Visit: 10.20am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought permission in principle for residential development for a minimum of 1 and up to 2 dwellings.

Members considered the presentation from the Planning Case Officer, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Mr W Eastwood, Chair of Winburn Parish Meeting, spoke in objection to the application, although commented that Winburn Parish Meeting in principle had no objection as such. The development of this area should be reviewed as part of the development of the village, which should be shared, debated and encouraged.

Members considered the application, and it was commented that there should be a plan for development, concern was raised that the proposed two dwellings would not be affordable housing, but two large dwellings in a hamlet with no facilities.  The Chair commented that there was no indication at this stage of the size of buildings as the application was for planning in principle.  There was a discussion on backland development and links to adjacent commercial uses.  It was also commented that whilst the location was not sustainable and the two dwellings may be affordable, the proposed development would not alter the character of the hamlet.  The hamlet was isolated, but the proposed development would not be isolated as there were other houses and businesses in situ.  Other Members commented that they expected a high-quality, sustainable development of two houses at the technical design stage and affordable if possible.

AGREED           (with 9votes For and 4 votes Against) that Permission in Principle                          be approved.

Having declared an other registerable interest, the Director for Planning and Growth left the meeting for the duration of the following minute.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought proposed leisure and recreation facilities at Clipstone Colliery.

The meeting was adjourned for 10 minutes to consider the additional information provided by the Senior Planning Officer including minor amendments to the conditions contained in the report.

Members considered the presentation from the Senior Planning Officer, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Members were provided with a late response from Sport England which confirmed no objection to the scheme but suggested minor amendments to the Conditions as follows:

Condition 2 (Plans condition) be amended to include the updated Mitigation Report dated February 2026 instead of October 2024;

Condition 22 to delete the wording ‘[or other specified time frame]’.

Mr D Ridout, spoke in support of the application, on behalf of the Applicant.

Members considered the application and were delighted with the proposed scheme, which would turn an eye sore into a fully developed site providing sports development, which would benefit the local community.  Members raised concern regarding the pedestrian and cycle access and suggested that additional gates onto the site be provided to encourage pedestrians and cyclists, which would reduce traffic on site.

A Member suggested an amendment to Condition 15, if the Committee were minded to approve the application.  The Committee had a short adjournment to enable the Planning Officers to seek legal advice.  Following this, it was proposed that an additional condition be inserted to resolve the concerns of the Members in relation to the pedestrian access to the site.  The proposed additional condition was read out to the Committee:  Prior to first use of development hereby approved, details for an additional provision of access to the Northern boundary shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and implemented in accordance with the approved details.

AGREED                       (unanimously) that:

(a)          Planning Permission be approved, subject to the      conditions contained within the report and the             amendment to the conditions as proposed by Sport         England to include the Updated Mitigation Report   dated February 2026 in the list of approved plans and     documents in condition 2; and delete the wording [or           other specified timeframe] from condition 22; and

(b)         an additional Condition to read:  Prior to first use of            development hereby approved, details for an   additional provision of access to the Northern       boundary shall be submitted to and approved in      writing to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and       implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Site Visit: 10.45am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought permission in principle for a proposed residential development of a minimum of 1 dwelling and a maximum of 9 dwellings

Members considered the presentation from the Senior Planning Officer, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Members considered the application, and it was commented that the use of agricultural land for housing development was not necessary.  Members were also concerned that there was no footpath running along the site and a ribbon effect of development would start if this was approved which was considered inappropriate to the village.

A vote was taken and lost for Approval, with 4 votes For, 8 votes Against and 1 Abstention.

AGREED           Moved Councillor D Moore and Seconded M Home (with 8votes For,                    4 votes Against and 1 Abstention) that contrary to    Officer                                     recommendation Planning Permission be refused, for the                                               reason inappropriate use in this location.  The wording for reason of                         refusal to be delegated to the Business Manager – Planning                                    Development.

In accordance with paragraph 18.5 of the Planning Protocol, as the motion was against Officer recommendation, a recorded vote was taken.

AGREED           that the report be noted.

AGREED           that the report be noted.

The Committee considered the report of the Director for Planning & Growth relating to the performance of the Planning Development Business Unit over the three-month period October to December 2025 (Quarter 3).  Performance had continued to be met and exceeded, despite challenges within and without the organisation.  

The Planning Department undertook a range of activities including the processing of planning applications and associated appeals, planning enforcement, conservation and listed building advice, tree applications, pre-application advice as well as other service areas including land charges, street naming and numbering and management of the building control service for the Council. The report related to the planning functions of the service area.

Between October and December 2025, a total of 514 applications were validated. This figure was the lowest recorded in years for this period, albeit it followed the usual drop observed ahead of the festive season and New Year. Compared to the same quarter in 2024, there was a 13% decline in validated applications. It was likely that this reflected the national picture, with many Councils’ reporting lower numbers during 2025. Uncertainty on planning reforms, delays in securing legal agreements and challenges with securing BNG were also likely to be factors.

The Planning Business Manager for Development highlighted that the team had consistently met and surpassed performance expectations, and their ongoing support and dedication was commendable. This was further highlighted with the following comment as contained within the report, received from Raymond Crawford (PAS) after his visit:

“I would like to say that in most DM teams that I visit there is a kind of air of exhaustion and resignation. The experience at your council was very different and there seemed to be a real feeling of optimism and enthusiasm. I found the experience really positive - so well done, and please pass that message from me on to everyone involved.”

The Planning Committee Chair requested statistics regarding Planning in Principle applications to be included in future performance reports.  A Member also asked if information could be included regarding tree determinations, what tree work had been done and what protection was in place.  The Business Manager confirmed that trees in the conservation area were challenging.  Tree decisions could be included including the number of trees that had been protected by Tree Preservation Orders in that reported quarter.

The Planning Committee Chair thanked the Business Manager – Planning Development and the Development Control team for their work.

AGREED          that:

(a)         the report be noted; and

(b)         future performance reports to include statistics on Planning in       Principle applications and tree decisions including the number       of trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders in the relevant       quarter.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development updating Members as to the activity and performance of the planning enforcement function over the fourth quarter of the current financial year.

The Chair indicated that the meeting duration had expired therefore a motion was moved and seconded to continue the meeting.  A motion was voted on with unanimous agreement to continue for a further few minutes.

The report provided Members with examples of cases that had been resolved, both through negotiation and via the service of notices and provided detailed and explanations of notices that had been issued during the period covered 1 October 2025 – 31 December 2025.

The report was broken down into Schedule A to D.  Schedule A outlined the enforcement activity for Q3 in terms of numbers of cases received, the reasons for cases being closed and response times.  Schedule B included a small number of examples of where formal planning enforcement action had been taken (such as a notice being issued) in the quarter.  Schedule C provided examples of cases where officers had managed to resolve the breaches through dialogue and negotiation during the quarter; and Schedule D provided examples of Notices having been complied with.  The examples within the report showed considerable success that had been achieved by the enforcement team.

The Planning Committee Chair expressed his thanks to the Enforcement Team for their commitment and hard work.

AGREED          that the contents of the report and the ongoing work of the planning                         enforcement team be noted.