Agenda and minutes

Link to further information in the Council’s Constitution

Councillor R Walker declared a non-pecuniary interest as Ward Councillor for application 24/00388/CMA and would remove himself from the debate and not vote for this item.

Councillors H Parekh and S Mallender arrived after the start of discussion for application 25/00025/TPO and did not take part in the debate and did not vote for this item.

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 February 2025 were agreed as a true record and were signed by the Chair.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth

The Committee considered the written report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth relating to the following applications, which had been circulated previously.

32.1    25/00025/TPO - To the Upper Broughton No.1 Tree Preservation

Order 2025 - The New House, Station Road, Upper Broughton

Updates

In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Protocol for Planning Committee, Mrs C Wilson (Objector) addressed the Committee.

DECISION

THE UPPER BROUGHTON NO.1 TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 2025 BE CONFIRMED FOR THE SPECIFIED REASONS SET OUT IN THE REPORT PUBLISHED WITH THE AGENDA

Councillor R Walker removed himself from the Committee and did not contribute to the discussion or vote on the following application.

32.2    24/00388/CMA – Extraction, processing, sale and distribution of sand and gravel, and subsequent restoration together with the necessary highway and access improvements - Land Off Green Street, Mill Hill And Land At Barton In Fabis Off Chestnut Lane

Updates

Additional representations were received after the agenda was published and this was circulated to the Committee before the meeting.

In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Protocol for Planning Committee, Mr J Coles (Objector) and Councillor R Walker (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee.

Comment

Members of the Committee expressed concern about the inappropriateness of the development in the Green Belt by virtue of the size, scale and location of the engineering and processing operations and it was not considered that there were any other considerations that clearly outweighed the harm to the Green Belt. The Committee also considered that it had not been fully demonstrated that the proposed development would not have significant adverse impacts in respect of contamination, amenity, landscape, rights of way, noise, dust, air quality, ecology, or cumulatively from existing or future housing applications/permissions.

Councillor S Ellis moved to reject the recommendation and put forward the proposal that the Council raise an objection to the principle of the development and amend its response to Nottinghamshire County Council as discussed and this was seconded by Councillor H Parekh and the vote was carried.

DECISION

RUSHCLIFFE BOROUGH COUNCIL RAISE AN OBJECTION TO NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCY AS TO THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE BASIS THAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD REPRESENT INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GREEN BELT AND IT IS NOT CONSIDERED THAT THERE ARE ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT CLEARLY OUTWEIGH THE HARM TO THE GREEN BELT WHICH WOULD AMOUNT TO VERY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

RUSHCLIFFE BOROUGH COUNCIL ALSO CONSIDER THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN FULLY DEMONSTRATED TO THE SATSFACTION OF RUSHCLIFFE BOROUGH COUNCIL THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT IN RESPECT OF CONTAMINATION, AMENITY, LANDSCAPE, RIGHTS OF WAY, NOISE, DUST, AIR QUALITY, ECOLOGY, OR THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT WITH EXISTING AND FUTURE HOUSING APPLICATIONS/PERMISSIONS.

IT IS ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL OBTAIN FURTHER INFORMATION PRIOR TO DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICATION IN RESPECT OF THE POINTS AS SET OUT IN THE REPORT AND AS PROVIDED IN THE LATE REPRESENTATIONS AND UPDATE TO COMMITTEE.

SHOULD NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE APPLICATION TO BE ACCEPTABLE THEN RUSHCLIFFE BOROUGH COUNCIL RECOMMENDS CONDITIONS  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

The report of the Director – Development and Economic Growth

The Committee noted the Planning Appeal Decisions report which had been circulated with the agenda.