Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Link to further information in the Council’s Constitution

There were no declarations of interest made.

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday, 11 November 2025 were agreed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

To answer questions submitted by citizens on the Council or its services.

There were no Citizens’ questions.

To answer questions submitted by Opposition Group Leaders on items on the agenda.

Question from Councillor Birch to Councillor Upton. Councillor Birch was unable to attend the meeting, so his question was read out by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Clarke MBE.

How many existing Section 106 obligations across Rushcliffe remain undelivered or partially delivered?

Councillor Upton advised that the Council would shortly be publishing its annual Infrastructure Statement, setting out the position of all Section 106 obligations. He reiterated that the Council acted as the banker for third parties for agreed planning obligations attached to planning approvals, for various infrastructure. The situation remained fluid as trigger points were reached and monies released and it was noted that the County Council now managed Section 106 obligations relating to its own functions, including education. As of today, Councillor Upton advised that there were no Section 106 financial obligations where the purpose of the obligation was no longer required, and that there were three where the purpose of the obligation remained partly delivered.

The report of the Director – Neighbourhoods is attached.

It was RESOLVED that the Public Space Protection Order (General ASB) as set out in Appendix 1 to the report be approved, to take effect from 9 December 2025.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Environment and Safety, Councillor Inglis, presented the report of the Director – Neighbourhoods, seeking approval to amend and renew the Council’s Public Space Protecting Order PSPO (General ASB).

Councillor Inglis stated that the original PSPO had been approved in 2017 and renewed twice. It was not intended as a heavy-handed prosecution means, but as an additional enforcement tool, to encourage persons to cease or leave an area under specific criteria, as detailed in paragraph 4.1 of the report. It had been very effective in doing that since its introduction, and it was noted that no fixed penalties had been issued. A review ensured that the Order remained current to new legislation, with dynamic measures focusing on the most prevalent problems affecting areas, as detailed in Appendix 3 to the report, with no changes proposed to those areas. The current controls were listed in paragraph 4.3, and it was recommended that three of those controls were removed, as they were now covered in new legislation or had been assessed as low risk by crime data, and he thanked the Neighbourhood Policing Inspector and his team for their continued engagement. Councillor Inglis confirmed that a public consultation had taken place, with 110 responses and 50 written comments received, and they were summarised in Appendix 2, with overwhelming support for the proposed renewal. He felt that a PSPO was an effective deterrent to specific ASB problems and he considered this was a valid and proportionate Order to remain in place, with an evidence based review, and it was noted that the implementation costs would be negligible and kept within existing budgets.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Brennan agreed that this had been very effective and noted how well Police and Rushcliffe’s officers had worked together to ensure that it had the right impact. She felt that it was appropriate to undertake regular reviews as legislation changed, to ensure that all measures were proportionate and she noted the strong public support.   

It was RESOLVED that the Public Space Protection Order (General ASB) as set out in Appendix 1 to the report be approved, to take effect from 9 December 2025.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the proposed revisions to the draft Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document be supported;

b)               the adoption of the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document be approved;

c)                authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth, in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, to make any necessary final minor textual, graphical and presentational changes required to the SPD prior to publication; and

d)               the Developer Requirements Supplementary Planning Guidance that was adopted in December 2003 be revoked.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, Councillor Upton, presented the report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth, which detailed the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

Councillor Upton advised that the current SPD, adopted in 2003, was now largely outdated and this report proposed its revocation and replacement. Councillor Upton detailed the purpose of the SPD, including when infrastructure provisions would be secured and stated that details of the revised draft SPD were outlined in Appendix 1 to the report. The SPD aimed to give developers a greater understanding of the Council’s expectations and priorities and he hoped that this would reduce the time taken to negotiate those developer contributions. Councillor Upton confirmed that the draft SPD had been considered by the Council’s Local Development Framework Group, which had supported the revisions and recommended its adoption. A public consultation had also taken place, with 17 consultee responses, which were detailed in Appendix 2.    

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor J Wheeler welcomed the consultation feedback and the modifications referred to in 3.44 Appendix 1, relating to Parish/Town Councils potentially taking on parcels of land, and stated that it was crucial that they were given appropriate support and involvement at an early stage. He stated that residents’ biggest concerns regarding new developments was to ensure that infrastructure was in place and he called on the Government to provide support to ensure that as more development occurred, appropriate infrastructure would also be provided.

The Leader echoed those comments regarding the importance of new developments having appropriate facilities and infrastructure.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the proposed revisions to the draft Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document be supported;

b)               the adoption of the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document be approved;

c)                authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth, in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, to make any necessary final minor textual, graphical and presentational changes required to the SPD prior to publication; and

d)               the Developer Requirements Supplementary Planning Guidance that was adopted in December 2003 be revoked.

The report of the Director – Neighbourhoods is attached.

It was RESOLVED that the adoption of the Rushcliffe Nature Conservation Strategy 2026-2030 be approved as a Strategy of the Council.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Environment and Safety, Councillor Inglis, presented the report of the Director – Neighbourhoods, detailing the updated Rushcliffe Nature Conservation Strategy 2026-2030.

Councillor Inglis stated that the Strategy was first produced in 2003 and subsequently updated and adopted by the Council three times. He detailed the aims of the current Strategy, and it was noted that it had been developed in conjunction with various groups and interested bodies forming the Rushcliffe Nature Conservation Strategy Implementation Group (RNCSIG). The items covered and key commitments were detailed in paragraphs 4.4 to 4.6 of the report. Councillor Inglis confirmed that costs were captured within the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy, with no additional resource required and that a budget had been allocated for a five-year period, to support tree and wildflower planting in Rushcliffe, as detailed in paragraph 7.1.2. Councillor Inglis referred to the foreword of the Strategy, which highlighted Rushcliffe’s poor biodiversity scores and that it was likely due to the Borough’s successful farm production, leading to a long history of intensive agriculture. Those inequalities could not be ignored, and he stated that Rushcliffe had to do everything possible to redress that, with this report being a big part of that process. He concluded by thanking the Environmental Sustainability Officer, and the Ecology and Biodiversity Assistant, together with the RNCSIG team for their hard work.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Upton referred to the Borough’s long history of intensive arable farming, which had led to it having relatively low levels of biodiversity, and it was important to continue to take measures to address that, as well as the impact of climate change, and he felt that this Strategy would help.

It was RESOLVED that the adoption of the Rushcliffe Nature Conservation Strategy 2026-2030 be approved as a Strategy of the Council.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               it be agreed that the Director – Development and Economic Growth be authorised to request that the Planning Inspector(s) examining the Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan (GNSP) recommends any main modifications to the GNSP, if necessary, in order for the Plan to be legally compliant and found sound;

b)               the suggested Main Modifications and Other Modifications to the GNSP as set out in Appendix 2 to the report be approved;

c)                authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth, in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, to propose and consult on necessary modifications to the GNSP during its examination stage;

d)               the ‘substantially the same effect’ compliance statement for the GNSP as set out in Appendix 3 to the report be approved; and

e)               the revised Local Development Scheme as set out in Appendix 4 to the report be approved.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, Councillor Upton, presented the report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth, which detailed the Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan (GNSP).

Councillor Upton confirmed that this document had been prepared jointly with Broxtowe Borough Council and Nottingham City Council, referred to previous debate, the joint public consultation, and that it was a statutory requirement for the Council to have an up to date Plan, which must be reviewed every five years. Councillor Upton detailed the examination process that would take place before it could be adopted, and that a failure to do this would result in the Borough no longer having an up to date Development Plan. This could led to speculative, unplanned development and also weaken the Council’s ability to effectively deal with all planning applications. The report detailed modifications to the draft Plan, many of which were raised during the public consultation, together with textual changes to reflect the withdrawal of Gedling Borough Council from the joint partnership. Councillor Upton confirmed that once adopted, this would replace the current Plan adopted in 2014. It was hoped to submit the Plan and all supporting documents later in December, to begin the examination process, and if found sound, the Plan should be ready for adoption by Full Council in December 2026.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Brennan referred to the considerable work already undertaken to reach this point, and how necessary it was to provide as much control as possible to avoid speculative and unplanned development. She noted that this would now be submitted for independent examination, which would provide further opportunities for consultees to raise issues, and she hoped that at the end of the process the Plan would be approved.

The Leader agreed that this was a long, detailed process; however, it was necessary to ensure that all important issues were covered within the document.

Councillor J Wheeler reiterated the importance of having a Plan in place, to avoid speculative development, especially given the Borough’s increased housing targets. He advised that if adopted, sites in the Plan would still have to go through the planning process, to ensure that they were suitable, with appropriate infrastructure requirements.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               it be agreed that the Director – Development and Economic Growth be authorised to request that the Planning Inspector(s) examining the Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan (GNSP) recommends any main modifications to the GNSP, if necessary, in order for the Plan to be legally compliant and found sound;

b)               the suggested Main Modifications and Other Modifications to the GNSP as set out in Appendix 2 to the report be approved;

c)                authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth, in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, to propose and consult on necessary modifications to the GNSP during its examination stage;

d)               the ‘substantially the same effect’ compliance statement for the GNSP as set out in Appendix 3 to the report be approved; and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

It was RESOLVED that the report be approved and the following be noted:

a)               the projected revenue budget efficiency for the year of £0.810m and proposals to earmark this for cost pressures as set out in Appendix A and paragraph 4.1 of the report;

b)               the projected capital budget efficiencies of £1.466m including the budget changes as set out in Appendix D to the report; and

c)                the projected overspend on Special Expenses of £19k, as set out in paragraph 4.7 of the report.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Finance, Transformation and Governance, Councillor Virdi, presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services, which set out the Quarter 2 budget position for revenue and capital.

Councillor Virdi was pleased to report a relatively positive position; however, there remained much uncertainty around Local Government finance, including Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and it was noted that following on from the recent Autumn Statement from the Chancellor, it was unlikely that the Government would be increasing councils’ spending powers.

In respect of revenue, Councillor Virdi advised that there was an overall budget efficiency for the year of £0.810m and referred to Table 1 of the report and Appendix B, which highlighted the reasons, with Appendix A detailing proposals to earmark some of this for additional cost pressures. Appendix F detailed a projected minor overspend on the Special Expenses of £19k, with details of that in paragraph 4.7. Paragraphs 4.9 to 4.12 provided details of additional financial pressures that the Council continued to face and Councillor Virdi reiterated that the Council had no external borrowing. He stated that the Transformation and Efficiency Plan was progressing well and on target. In respect of capital, Appendices C, D and E detailed its overall position, with a projected underspend of £1.466m, with Table 2 highlighting the reasons.

In conclusion, whilst noting the Council’s positive financial position, Councillor Virdi said that things could change, and the Council’s healthy reserves allowed it to mitigate risks, whilst investing in services for the benefit of residents, and looking ahead, reserves would be required to address future pressures and uncertainties.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor J Wheeler referred to ongoing financial uncertainties, particularly associated with LGR and how the Council’s resilience ensured that it remained in a positive position financially to allow it to make the best choices to benefit residents. He thanked the Director – Finance and Corporate Services and his team for their continuing hard work to manage the Council’s finances so well.

It was RESOLVED that the report be approved and the following be noted:

a)               the projected revenue budget efficiency for the year of £0.810m and proposals to earmark this for cost pressures as set out in Appendix A and paragraph 4.1 of the report;

b)               the projected capital budget efficiencies of £1.466m including the budget changes as set out in Appendix D to the report; and

c)                the projected overspend on Special Expenses of £19k, as set out in paragraph 4.7 of the report.

“To move “That under Regulation 4 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, 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 Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.”

It was resolved that under Regulation 4 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, 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 Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Question to Councillor Brennan was submitted by Councillor J Walker in relation to Exempt Item 13 on the agenda – Proposed Sale of Council’s Freehold Interest at Hilton Crescent, West Bridgford.

Councillor Brennan responded to the question.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the disposal of land at Debdale Lane, Keyworth as set out in the body of the report be approved; and

b)               authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth to complete final negotiations and sale terms, subject to the minimum value set out in the report.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Business and Growth, Councillor Brennan presented the report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth, which provided an update on the proposed sale of the Council’s Freehold Interest at Debdale Lane, Keyworth.

The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Brennan and seconded by the Leader.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the disposal of land at Debdale Lane, Keyworth as set out in the body of the report be approved; and

b)               authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth to complete final negotiations and sale terms, subject to the minimum value set out in the report.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)                the disposal of the land at Hilton Crescent, West Bridgford, as set out in the body of the report be approved; and

b)               authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth to negotiate the final terms of the disposal, undertake appropriate due diligence and dispose of the asset in accordance with the Acquisitions and Disposal Policy.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Business and Growth, Councillor Brennan presented the report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth, which provided an update on the proposed sale of the Council’s Freehold Interest at Hilton Crescent, West Bridgford.

The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Brennan and seconded by the Leader.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)                the disposal of the land at Hilton Crescent, West Bridgford, as set out in the body of the report be approved; and

b)               authority be delegated to the Director – Development and Economic Growth to negotiate the final terms of the disposal, undertake appropriate due diligence and dispose of the asset in accordance with the Acquisitions and Disposal Policy.