Agenda and minutes

Councillor L Brazier declared a personal interest regarding Agenda Item No. 7 – Land at Main Road, Boughton (21/00257/FUL), as he lived 200 yards from the site.

Councillor M Brock declared personal interests regarding Agenda Item No. 5 – Norwood Park Farm, Norwood Park, Halam Road, Southwell (20/02472/FUL) and Agenda Item No. 8 – 12 Monckton Drive, Southwell (21/00163/FUL), as both items had been considered at Southwell Town Council of which he was a Member.

Councillor Mrs P Rainbow declared a disclosable pecuniary interest regarding Agenda Item No. 8 – 12 Monckton Drive, Southwell (21/00163/FUL), as her husband was the applicant.

The Chairman informed the Committee that the Council was undertaking an audio recording of the meeting, which would be webcast.

AGREED           that the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2021 were                            approved as a correct record of the meeting, to be signed by the                                  Chairman.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the change of use of land to site a retort to support an existing firewood business.

This application was presented to the 2 March 2021 Planning Committee. The Committee resolved to approve the application in accordance with Officer Recommendation subject to discussing the addition of a condition to specifically control emissions from the retort with colleagues in Environmental Health. It was concluded that if no agreement could be reached between the Environmental Health Technical Officer (EHTO), Planning Officer and Local Ward Members the application would be referred back to Committee.  The report provided the EHTOs professional opinion, advising that charcoal production was exempt from the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016 and as such, there was no legal requirement for such a process to quantitatively monitor stack emissions.

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

The Business Manager – Planning Development informed Committee that there was a recommended change to Condition 08, requiring the moisture content to be no more than 15%, as opposed to 20%.

The Chairman informed the Committee that the Local Ward Member had confirmed in writing that he was satisfied with the proposal and was grateful to the Environmental Health Business Unit for their work.

Members considered the application and noted the Environmental Health Officers advice and as the Planning Committee had voted to approve the application with 12 votes For and 1 vote against at the previous meeting, subject to further discussion and advice from the Environment Health Business unit, the vote was taken as follows.

(Having declared a personal interest Councillor M Brock took no part in the debate or vote of this item).

AGREED             (with 11 votes For and 2 Votes Against) that full planning permission                      be approved subject to the conditions and reasons contained within                       the report, subject to the amendment to condition 08 requiring the                    moisture content to be no more than 15%(as opposed to 20%).

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the change of use of the land for the siting of caravans for residential purposes for two gypsy pitches and hardstanding ancillary to that use, the application was retrospective.

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

A schedule of communication was tabled at the meeting which detailed correspondence received after the Agenda was published from the Planning Case Officer.  The notes to the applicant – 05, was a duplicate of 01 and therefore required deleting.  There was also proposed changes to the wording of Condition 10.

Members considered the application and whilst Members supported the gypsy and traveller family, concerns were raised regarding the site being in the open countryside and the NCC Highway Authority objection, as there was no footway or cycle route provision close by and very infrequent bus service.

A Member sought clarification regarding Condition 06 and whether planning permission would fall if the 5.8m of public highway was not provided.  The Business Manager – Planning Development confirmed that if a breach occurred an assessment would be undertaken by the Planning Enforcement Team. 

The Business Manager – Planning Development further advised the Committee regarding whether the splay should be 5.8m wide as set out within the condition or 4.8m wide as set out within the main report and did not want to include a requirement that was unreasonable or unachievable.  It was suggested that if the Committee were minded to approve the application this would be reviewed prior to the decision notice being sent to the applicant.

AGREED           (with 11 votes For, 2 votes Against and 1 Abstention) that:

(a)          planning permission be approved subject to the conditions and reasons contained within the report, with the amendment        to the notes to the applicant, deleting 05 and the amendment         to Condition 10, to remove the wording ‘prior to occupation’;          and

(b)               the Business Manager – Planning Development review Condition 06, regarding whether the splay should be 5.8m wide or 4.8m wide.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the change of use from a residential garden to create a new pedestrian footpath from Holles Close connected into existing footpath with 1800mm high closeboard timber fence with trellising.

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

A Member commented that the name of the road as indicated in the report as ‘Hollies Close’ was incorrect, the correct name was ‘Holles Close’.

Members considered the application acceptable and commented that this would be beneficial for local people and the 1.8m high fence would alleviate any residents concerns.

AGREED           (unanimously) that planning permission be approved subject                                    to the conditions and reasons contained within the report and the                   amendment to the name ‘Holles Close’.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the creation of a driveway, drop kerb and retaining wall.

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

Members considered the application acceptable.

(Having declared a disclosable pecuniary interest Councillor Mrs P Rainbow took no part in the debate or vote and turned off her camera and muted herself in accordance with Council protocol, for the duration of this item.  Councillor M Brock having declared a personal interest also took no part in the debate or vote of this item).

AGREED             (unanimously) that planning permission be approved subject                                           to the conditions and reasons contained within the report.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought the erection of four hoardings, six flag poles and fifteen airmesh banners fixed to Heras boundary panels, the application was retrospective.

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

Members considered the application and whilst they considered the application acceptable, they were disappointed that the application was retrospective given that the applicant was Arkwood Developments, a company owned by Newark and Sherwood District Council.  The Chairman commented that this matter had been raised with the Leader of the Council.

AGREED           (with 13 votes For and 1 vote Against) that advertisement consent be                  approved subject to the conditions contained within the report.

The Committee considered the report of the Director – Growth & Regeneration which sought Committee approval for the adoption of a policy for under enforcement of temporary structures requested as a result of the Covid – 19 pandemic.

The report had previously been presented to the 3 November 2020 meeting of the Planning Committee and the adoption of a policy for under enforcement of temporary structures requested as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic had been adopted.  Since that time the District had been in lockdown due to Covid-19 restrictions.  The timescale previously approved, for allowing this under enforcement was due to expire on the 31 March 2021.  The report sought to extend the time period until the 31 October to allow for the Government’s slow release of restrictions.

The Chairman suggested that an amendment be made to recommendation (b) to read ‘prior to 31 October 2021’.

AGREED                       (unanimously) that:

(a)                Members agree the approach to under enforcing                                                breaches of the planning regulations for temporary                     structures for businesses for a temporary period up                            until the 31^st March 2021; and

(b)                prior to 31 October 2021 Officers will review the                                              requests received or any temporary structure erected                         without a request to determine whether it is                                       appropriate to allow the structure to remain for a longer                                period of time.

AGREED that the report be noted.

AGREED that the report be noted.

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning & Regeneration which related to the performance of the Planning Development Business Unit over the three month period October to December 2020.  In order for the latest quarter’s performance to be understood in context, in some areas data going back to January 2019 was provided.  The performance of the Planning Enforcement team was provided as a separate report.

The Chairman on behalf of the Planning Committee congratulated the Business Manager – Planning Development for the work undertaken and asked for the Planning Committee’s thanks to be forwarded to the Planning team.

AGREED                           that the content of the report be noted.

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning & Regeneration which followed on from the report that was presented to the 3 November 2020 Planning Committee, which highlighted planning enforcement performance during the second quarter of 2020/21. The report related to the third quarter 1 October to the 31 December 2020 and provided an update on cases where formal action had been taken.  It also included case studies which showed how the breaches of planning control had been resolved through negotiation.

It was noted that due to periods of national and local lockdowns due to Covid-19, response times for visits and compliance periods for remedial works had been affected. Members also noted that Officers had received more cases than in previous years and achieved positive results despite those challenges.  The report presented a snap shot on the general volumes of cases received and dealt with and showed an overview of the enforcement activity compared to previous quarters.

AGREED                           that the content of the report be noted.

To consider resolving 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 involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

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 part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

The Committee considered the exempt report of the Director of Planning & Growth, which updated the Planning Committee regarding a Planning inquiry.

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