Agenda and minutes

Councillor M Brock declared a personal interest in Agenda Item No. 5 – 45 Westgate, Southwell (21/00759/FUL), as he was involved in consideration of the application at Southwell Town Council and would not take part in the discussion or vote.

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 6 July 2021, were approved as a correct record of the meeting and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought planning permission for the demolition of the existing single storey outbuilding.  New 1-1.5 storey dwelling to the rear.  Renovation to Beckett’s Yard Radio and Cycle Office wall to Westgate elevation and new garage.

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 applicants and neighbours at 47 Westgate. Southwell.

Councillor D Martin on behalf of Southwell Town Council spoke against the application, in accordance with the views of Southwell Town Council, as contained within the report.

Members considered the application and the loss of two car parking spaces on the highway was considered a major loss given the problem with car parking in this location.  Concern was also raised regarding surface water and pressure on the Potwell Dyke.  It was further commented that on first view the site appeared constrained, however when looking at the plan the site was deep and would not be visible from the street scene.  It was suggested to alleviate surface water condition 13 could be amended to require the hard surfacing to be permeable.

Councillor M Brock having declared a personal interest took no part in the vote.

AGREED      (with 10 votes For and 2 votes Against) that planning permission be approved subject to the conditions and reasons contained within the report, with the amendment to Condition 13 for the hard surfacing to be permeable.

Councillor M Skinner left the meeting at this point.

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought planning permission for the erection of a single storey rear extension.

Members considered the presentation from the Business Manager - Planning Development, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.  The Committee was also informed that Eakring Parish Council had responded to the consultation with no comments.

Members considered the application acceptable.

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 reduction of one Plum tree to obtain end height of 4 metres and spread of approximately 3.5 metres.

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

Members considered the application acceptable.

AGREED      (unanimously) that no objection was raised to the proposal.

Three Members of the Planning Committee to be nominated to the Local

Development Task Group (Planning Committee Representatives for 2019/20

were the Planning Committee Chairman, Councillor M Skinner and Councillor T Smith).

The Committee were asked to nominate three Members of the Planning Committee to sit on the Local Development Framework Task Group. 

AGREED      (unanimously) that Councillors R. Blaney, L. Dales and M. Skinner be appointed as the Planning Committee representatives on the Local Development Framework Task Group for 2021/22.

The Committee considered the urgent report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, as the applicant needed to know whether there was agreement for an amendment to the Section 106 Planning Obligation relating to this land prior to the next Planning Committee in September 2021.

The application proposed to modify the Section 106 Agreement pursuant to Planning application 14/01978/OUTM for modifications sought in relation to altering the trigger for the build out of the Southern Link Road (SLR) and Off site sports contribution.

Members considered the proposal and agreed that it was in the Council’s interest to support the developer by agreeing the proposed amendments.

AGREED      (with 12 votes for and 1 vote against) that the proposed variation to the Section 106 be agreed as per the amendments to Schedule 1 (Highway Improvement), Schedule 2 (Affordable Housing) and Schedule 3 (Community Facilities).

Verbal update on planning appeal decision

The Committee considered the verbal update of the Business Manager – Planning Development, regarding the Flowserve Pump Division appeal which was refused by the Planning Committee, contrary to Officer recommendation and granted permission on appeal.

The Business Manager – Planning Development informed Members that the outcome would not be challenged.

AGREED      that the verbal report be noted.

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 April to June 2021.  In order for the latest quarter’s performance to be understood in context, in some areas data going back to April 2019 was provided.  The performance of the Planning Enforcement team was provided as a separate report.

AGREED      that the report be noted.

The Planning Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning & Regeneration which provided an update on Enforcement Action for the first quarter from 1 April to the 30 June 2021 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.

Schedule A within the report outlined the enforcement activity for Q1 in terms of the numbers of cases that had been received and closed and also provided a breakdown of the reason that cases had been closed. Schedule B provided a more detailed position statement on formal action (such as enforcement notices served) since the previous performance report was brought before the Planning Committee. This section did not detail Planning Contravention Notices served.

It was reported that formal enforcement action was usually the last resort and where negotiations had failed to produce a satisfactory resolution of a breach of planning control. In the vast majority of cases, negotiation, or the threat of formal action, was enough to secure compliance with planning legislation.

AGREED      that the report be noted.