Minutes of a Meeting of the Planning & Development Committee (07/05/13)


Present:  J.P.Anderson,  M.J.Sheppard, E.Padden,  T.Vennett-Smith, G.Clark.

1/    Election of Chairman for year May, 2013 – April, 2014:

It was moved by M.J.Sheppard, seconded by E.Padden and duly carried by unanimous vote:

That  J.P.Anderson be appointed Chairman for the ensuing year.

J.P.Anderson accepted the position of Chairman and thanked the Committee.

2/  Election of Vice-Chairman for year May, 2013 – April, 2014:

It was moved by J.P.Anderson, seconded by G.Clark and duly carried by unanimous vote:

That  E. Rodgers be appointed Vice-Chairman for the ensuing year.

3/   Apologies: B.J.Walker,       E.Rodgers  Absent: R.Muir

4/    Declaration of Interest: E.Padden in Planning Application ref: 13/00761/FUL (58 Nottingham Road).

5/    Minutes of the Previous Meeting:

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the Planning & Development Committee held on the 16th April, 2013 as previously circulated, be confirmed and signed as a true record of the business transacted.

PROPOSED: J.P.Anderson   SECONDED: E.Padden  Vote: All in favour.

6/ Progress from the last Minutes, not on the Agenda:

T.Vennett-Smith and B.J.Walker had attended an RBC Planning Forum on the 24th April, 2013. (B.J.Walker had submitted a written report).

T.Vennett-Smith reported the meeting had been designed, primarily, for Councillors unfamiliar with planning rules and was a valuable lesson in current procedure.

Councillor N.Clarke opened the meeting and announced a farewell to S.Harley who was being succeeded by Dave Mitchell, the new Executive Manager responsible for Communities.

Councillor Andrew Pegram gave a presentation on how RBC decided Planning applications and on the current Material Considerations. Some discussion took place re new extensions, now not necessarily requiring planning permission. 6-8 meters allowed (4 on a semi-detached dwelling).Eric Pickles has had to make concessions which will probably mean that District Councils will have to notify neighbours .Applicants would need to ‘talk’ to the Council before they began building  work, RBC would consult neighbours and if there were objections, planning permission would still be required.

Councillor Paul Randle reported on the Local Plan and Community Infrastructure – insisting that the proposed housing was to fill a need which spills out from the City.

Neighbourhood Plan funding available.

7/    Planning Decisions Received: Nil.

8/    Planning Applications Received:

13/7:   (Ref: 13/00761/FUL) 58 Nottingham Road – First floor rear extension.


PROPOSED: T.Vennett-Smith  SECONDED: M.J.Sheppard. Vote: Four in favour, one abstention (dec. of interest).

A copy of a letter of objection to the following planning application had been received.

13/6: (ref: 13/00707/FUL) – 8 Fairham Avenue – Single storey side extension plus 2 rear bedroom extensions.

9/     RBC Core Strategy Update on ‘Fight to Save the Green Belt’

J.P.Anderson reported that the RBC Core Strategy to build 3,500 houses at Clifton, justified by the green belt review,  had been formally adopted at a Cabinet Meeting held on the 14th May, 2013. He commented that this was an anomaly as the green belt review had to be re-done.

An e-mail from R.Mapletoft of RBC Planning Department had confirmed acceptance of the Core Strategy, as follows:

‘As you may be aware, Rushcliffe Borough Council submitted its draft Core Strategy for examination by a Planning Inspector late last year.  The Core Strategy is the Council’s strategic planning policy document, with proposals for major development sites in a number of locations across Rushcliffe (including at Edwalton (Sharphill) and south of Clifton).  The plan was that around 9,600 houses should be built by 2026.  Unfortunately, the Inspector has concluded that in her opinion this would still not be enough new homes to meet identified housing needs. 

As a consequence, the Borough Council is now proposing that at least a further 3,550 homes should be planned for up to 2028, based around the following proposals:

1. South of Clifton – around an additional 500 homes within the current proposed allocation.

2. Edwalton –  around an additional 550 homes within and adjacent to the current proposed allocation

3. East of Gamston – a new strategic mixed used development allocation, including the delivery of around 2,500 homes by 2028, and with capacity to provide around a further 1,500 homes post 2028.

The Council intends to consult on these proposals from mid-June onwards.  The thinking is that consultation will include holding, in each location, a workshop for local community representatives including those from parish councils, community groups and local businesses.  The workshops would look at matters such as the possible broad layout of development, what infrastructure and local services are necessary and so forth.  Following on from each workshop, there would then be a local public exhibition where members of the wider community can attend to understand and discuss what is being proposed’.

T.Vennett-Smith advised GPC  insist on a consultation held in Gotham with invitations to Kingston, Thrumpton, Ratcliffe on Soar, East Leake and Clifton. As the 3,500 houses are an urban extension of Nottingham City, GPC had no discernible input as the house were not in Rushcliffe. Previously, the City Council had not consulted Clifton residents which was unacceptable. T.Vennett-Smith warned that developers no longer offered adjacent villages recompense (Section 106) for inconvenience, etc. as this was no longer considered necessary. RBC had not insisted on a Development Brief in order to speed up building. The new building scheme allowed 25 houses per hectare of land.

J.P.Anderson, K.Mafham and D.Greenwood, of Thrumpton, had attended the Rt.Hon. K.Clarke’s recent surgery for a discussion on the RBC Core Strategy. Mr. Clarke had been reluctant to offer his support in preventing building on green belt at Clifton. He understood local opposition but pointed out that the houses had to be built ‘somewhere’ and everyone in adjacent villages felt indignant at land being taken. E.Padden suggested putting the question to the consultation of ‘what substansive evidence was there for the need for this number of houses’. It was evident that RBC did not want to argue over housing numbers anymore. C.Raynor was working hard on the City’s student population. It was feared that his work would not interest the Inspector as it may be too detailed. K.Mafham was progressing the acquisition of a 3D image of such a large development of houses which could be a valuable ‘wake up call’ to boost opposition. B.Lange of C.P.R.E. was progressing a written report and had attended a meeting with RBC planners. It was important RBC did not consider her attendance at a meeting as acceptance of the housing as this would be counter productive. J.P.Anderson would check on her progress. A Steering Group workshop would be held during June.

10/  Traffic Count following closure of Barton Lane.

As Barton Lane had yet to  close, there was no need to hold a traffic count at the present time.

11/  A453 (progress report)

Back Lane in Thrumpton was due to close from 28th May – 1st June due to A453 works.

12/ Affordable Housing in Gotham:

M.J.Sheppard had been unable to contact A.Gorringe re the result of a management meeting at St.Gobain when it had been hoped that a decision re land availability behind the Royal British Legion would have taken place.

13/ Matters to Report:

K.Steed reported reduced traffic on The Ridgway during roadworks which had necessitated temporary traffic lights.

J.P.Anderson asked the Clerk to confirm in writing to the Trustees of the Memorial Hall/Recreation Ground, GPC’s intention of financial assistance for resurfacing and new drainage to the car park, as agreed at the AGM.

14/ Date & Time of Next Meeting: Tuesday, 18th June,  2013 at 7.30.p.m. in the Weldon Room. Meeting closed at 8.30 p.m.