Meeting Details

The Democratic Services Officer (Regulatory) opened the meeting and sought nominations for a Chair of the Committee for the 2023/24 municipal year.

On the proposition of Councillor Ewart, seconded by Councillor Daly it was

RESOLVED

That Councillor Sarah Plummer be elected Chair of the Strategic Planning Committee for the 2023/24 municipal year.

The Chair sought nominations for a Vice-Chair of the Committee for the 2023/24 municipal year.

On the proposition of Councillor Fisher, seconded by Councillor Grey it was

RESOLVED

 That Councillor Mark Packard be elected Vice-Chair of the Strategic Planning Committee for the 2023/24 municipal year.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Deacon, Mike Ninnmey, Mark Packard and Kay Yule.  Councillors Peter Byatt, Jan Candy, Owen Grey and Stephen Molyneux attended as their respective substitutes.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Toby Hammond.  No substitute attended in his place.

On the proposition of Councillor Ashdown, seconded by Councillor Hedgley, it was by a unanimous vote

RESOLVED

 That the minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2023 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Committee received a presentation on energy projects within East Suffolk from the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Energy and Climate Change.

Councillor Daly introduced the presentation, noting that he was committed to continuing the regular updates on energy projects that began in the previous term. 

The Committee received updates on Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) in East Suffolk, including information on new nuclear, offshore wind, interconnectors, and network reinforcement projects taking place out of district.  Councillor Daly provided more detailed information on the current status of Sizewell C and both East Anglia One North and East Anglia Two offshore wind farms.

Councillor Daly outlined the status of the consultations for the Five Estuaries and North Falls offshore wind farms.  The Committee was advised that the Council had responded to consultations on community benefits for electricity transmission network infrastructure and the revised National Policy Statements EN-1 to EN-5.  Councillor Daly noted that the Council's responses could be found on its website.

The Committee was provided an update on post-consent work on NSIPs; Councillor Daly explained that the grant of a Development Consent Order (DCO) was not the end of the planning process and there was significant work for officers related to the discharge of requirements; it was noted that early works could be consented under Town and Country Planning Act applications.  Councillor Daly highlighted that in the case of Sizewell C early works applications had been consented for development relating to ecological mitigation and enhancement.  It was noted that the Council continued to request that developers engages with communities appropriately and effectively.

Councillor Daly highlighted that all responses to project and government consultations were published on the Council's website and that the Council continued to engage government, take part in consultations, and engage with developers and local communities.  Councillor Daly noted that a number of issues were to be resolved through the discharge of conditions and that the Council would continue to raise these concerns with developers at all stages; he added that many outstanding issues relating to Sizewell C were out of the scope of the nuclear site licensing assessment and said that the Council was concerned that these matters of public health remained unresolved.

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Daly and the officers.  Councillor Daly advised that he had read the comments of the recent dismissal of the judicial review into the Sizewell C DCO (the judicial review) regarding water, and would be fully familiarising himself with the judgement in full in due course.

In response to a question from Councillor Byatt, Councillor Daly invited the Planner (Energy Projects) to comment on the artificial badger setts already delivered for Sizewell C.  The Planner confirmed that these works were consented in July 2022 following consultation with Natural England; the Committee was advised that the exact location of the setts was not publicly available and only contained on non-published maps.

Following further queries regarding the dismissal of the judicial review and the development of Sizewell C, Councillor Daly said he was not in a position to go into the detail of the judgement and noted that he had publicly disagreed with it, considering there were unresolved issues that needed to be dealt with for the safety of the environment.  Councillor Daly acknowledged that the GLI group on the Council was opposed to the construction of Sizewell C but said it was important that the Council engaged constructively with the process going forward and that the new administration was accepting of that fact.  Councillor Daly said it was important to make Sizewell C as good as possible for East Suffolk.

In response to a point raised by Councillor Byatt, Councillor Daly noted that he had attended a presentation on geological storage of nuclear waste, but had made it clear at that presentation it was not something he would consider in East Suffolk.

The Chair thanked Councillor Daly and the officers for the presentation.

NOTE: Councillor Daly left the meeting at the conclusion of this item.

The Committee received  a presentation on major development sites in East Suffolk from the Assistant Cabinet Member for Planning and Coastal Management, who made the presentation in Councillor Yule's absence.

Councillor Molyneux invited the Planning Manager (Development Management, Major Sites and Infrastructure) to address the Committee.  The Planning Manager summarised the purpose of the update and outlined the structure of the Council's Major Sites team.

The Committee was shown a map of the district which demonstrated the areas covered by the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans and the location of strategic sites, garden villages, garden neighbourhoods, sustainable urban neighbourhoods, and new communities.

The Planning Manager gave a summary of the history and principles of the concept of garden cities and garden suburbs, which underpins current planning policy.  The Committee was apprised of the Statement of Community Involvement and the Planning Manager detailed the purpose of the document.

The Planning Manager provided updates on the following major sites:

• Woods Meadow, Oulton
• North of Lowestoft Garden Village
• Kirkley Waterfront and Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood
• Land South of the Street, Carlton Colville/Gisleham
• Beccles and Worlingham Garden Neighbourhood
• South Saxmundham Garden Neighbourhood
• Brightwell Lakes
• North Felixstowe Garden Neighbourhood

The Planning Manager concluded the presentation by detailing the delivery plan/infrastructure funding statement, which informed masterplans and delivery of strategic sites.  The Committee was informed that there was a need for a more focussed approach for strategic sites in North Felixstowe and the Trimley villages, to ensure a holistic approach to capture the cumulative growth in this area.

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  In response to a question from Councillor Ashdown on Woods Meadow, the Planning Manager confirmed that the site had now reached the stage where work with the Highways Authority would commence to discuss how the £1,000,000 earmarked in the Section 106 agreement for traffic infrastructure can be best used to deliver what was needed for the site.  The Planning Manager added that CIL and Section 106 funding would be used to expand existing secondary schools in the area and that it would not normally be viable to deliver a new high school on a strategic site; he noted that there was a secondary school was being delivered on Brightwell Lakes as an existing provision deficit in the area had been identified.

Councillor McCallum noted that development had slowed or been put on hold nationally due to a lack of buoyancy in the market and sought assurances that infrastructure delivery for consented major sites was appropriately secured by condition.  The Planning Manager highlighted Brightwell Lakes as an example of where appropriate trigger points had been inserted into the Section 106 agreement to ensure infrastructure is delivered in line with the pace of the development.  The Committee was advised that developers were investing upfront in strategic sites and would need to see a return on this, so development was likely to keep pace.

In response to a query from Councillor Candy on primary healthcare capacity in Felixstowe, the Planning Manager acknowledged that increasing this capacity was difficult to do, highlighting that population growth rather than simply development was the biggest impact on primary healthcare capacity. 

The Committee was informed that the Council was engaging with Integrated Care Boards to find opportunities to expand primary healthcare capacity as part of infrastructure delivery, but that the nature of GP surgeries meant that although "bricks and mortar" expansion could be delivered, it was not always possible to find the doctors to fill the buildings.  The Planning Manager explained that expansion of primary healthcare facilities was part of both local plans for strategic sites and that ongoing conversations with the NHS were needed.

Councillor Gee highlighted the advanced development at Woods Meadow and asked when the stipulated increase in primary healthcare capacity would occur.  The Planning Manager said this was being discussed by all parties and that the local Member of Parliament had been involved; Section 106 funding was available but there were complexities on bringing forward local investment.

Councillor Ewart asked about the requirements for social housing provision on strategic sites.  The Planning Manager (Policy, Delivery and Specialist Services) explained that both local plans had policies related to strategic sites, with both plans being underpinned by a strategic housing assessment including social rent, affordable rent, and affordable tenure for purchase.  The Planning Manager noted that both local plans had policies setting out the percentages of each type of housing on strategic sites, and that affordable housing for rent was set at 50% of the affordable mix in both cases.

Councillor Byatt queried what the Council was doing to encourage developers to contribute towards achieving the net zero target.  The Planning Manager (Development Management, Major Sites and Infrastructure) highlighted that Taylor Wimpey (developing Brightwell Lakes) had removed gas as an energy source for the development and the Section 106 agreement had been amended as a result.  The Planning Manager said that all major sites would be gas free and that developers were working to the standards of the latest building regulations, moving towards ground and air source heat pumps.

The Chair thanked Councillor Molyneux and the officers for the presentation.

The Committee received report ES/1569 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which To provided information on the performance of the enforcement section of the Development Management Team.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Head of Planning and Coastal Management to comment.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management highlighted the detail of the enforcement statistics in the report, presented to the Committee for noting.

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  Councillor Ashdown noted the massive improvement in enforcement in recent years and congratulated the officers for this success.

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management confirmed a Latin term (De Minimus) used in the report, which translated as "not of any consequence".

Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Ashdown.  There being no debate on the recommendation, it was then put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

 That the content of the report be noted.

The Committee received report ES/1570 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which provided an update on the planning performance of the Development Management Team in terms of the timescales for determining planning applications.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Head of Planning and Coastal Management to comment.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management highlighted the work of the Development Management team and outlined its hard work to meet government targets, thanking the team for its commitment to do so.

The Committee received a presentation from the Principal Planner (Technical Lead, Development Management) summarising the following 2022/23 statistics in the report:

• Key facts and numbers
• Applications per quarter
• Applications per month
• Proportion of applications approved and refused
• Timeliness of decision making
• Proportion of major and minor applications
• Appeals received
• Enforcement cases received
• Enforcement cases closed
• Reasons for enforcement case closures
• Enforcement notices served
• Freedom of Information (FOI) requests received
• Complaints received
• Complaint outcomes

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  Councillor McCallum asked if the issues with determining applications within timescale had been resolved.  The Planning Manager (Development Management, Major Sites and Infrastructure) noted that government targets had been met over the latest two-year monitoring period, with significant work being made in the second year to improve the timeliness of decision-making.

Councillor Byatt asked if there was a notional figure of the cost to the Council in dealing with the FOI requests received in the 2022/23 period.  The Planning Manager was not aware of the cost but noted that officer time spent on responding to FOI requests was recorded by the Council's FOI team.  The Planning Manager stated that some requests required considerably more work than others.

Councillor Ashton expressed concern with meeting government targets on the timeliness of decision-making, highlighting that there had been a significant increase in extensions of time (EoT) in the last two quarters, and asked if meeting targets was sustainable.

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management acknowledged the increase in the use of EoTs, which were always in agreement with the applicant, and highlighted that the rate was lower compared to other authorities; he considered that the work of officers ensured there was rigour in place to achieve the government's targets.  The Committee noted that quarterly reports were made to the Committee and any concerns would be picked up with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management well in advance of an issue developing.

The Committee was advised that the Development Management team was fully staffed for the first time in a significant period and this would increase its capacity, and further resources would be requested if required.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management assured the Committee that decisions being made were sound and robust, being made quickly but not in a rushed manner.

The Committee was informed that the increase of planning applications during the COVID-19 pandemic had impacted on the work of the Development Management team.

Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Ashdown.  There being no debate on the recommendation, it was then put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted

NOTE: Councillor Grey left the meeting at the conclusion of this item.

The Committee received report ES/1571 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which provided an update on the planning performance of the Development Management team in terms of the quality and quantity of appeal decisions received from the Planning Inspectorate following refusal of planning permission by East Suffolk Council.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Head of Planning and Coastal Management to comment on the report.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management summarised the report and highlighted two appeal decisions allowed; he said this was not an urgent concern but something that would be monitored going forward. 

The Committee was advised that the appeal for costs in both instances had been dismissed.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that when refusing applications, committees must give sound and strong planning grounds for doing so, and to not do this could result in cost implications for the Council at appeal.

There being no questions, Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation set out in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Wakeling.  There being no debate on the recommendation, it was then put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.

NOTE: following the conclusion of this item, the Chair adjourned the meeting for a short break.  The meeting was adjourned from 12.25pm to 12.35pm; Councillors Graham and Parker left the meeting during the adjournment.

The Committee received report ES/1573 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which provided a review of the work of the Strategic, North, and South Planning Committees, and the operation of the Planning Referral Panel for the 2022/23 municipal year.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Principal Planner (Technical Lead, Development Management) to comment.  The Principal Planner gave a presentation summarising the information set out in the report as follows:

• How the Planning Referral Panel process is triggered via the Scheme of Delegation in the East Suffolk Council Constitution
• The proportion of Planning Referral Panel items in the north and the south of the district
• The proportion of Planning Referral Panel items that were major, minor or other applications
• The number of items received by the Planning Referral Panel
• The proportion of applications triggering the Planning Referral Panel process
• The number of Planning Referral Panel items per parish
• The proportion of Planning Referral Panel items with comments from town/parish council
• The proportion of Planning Referral Panel items with comment from the Ward Member(s)
• Ward Member attendance at Planning Referral Panel meetings
• The current routes for applications to be determined by committee
• The number and scale of applications determined by committee
• The percentage of applications with and without public speaking at committee (broken down by each entitled party)
• The percentage of applications with and without public speaking at committee, where the application had been referred by the Planning Referral Panel (broken down by each entitled party)
• The timeliness of decisions via each determination route

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  Councillor Smithson asked if the incoming Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) would reduce spurious objections.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management considered this unlikely but assured the Committee that they would provide further clarity when determining applications against the policies of the two local plans.

The Committee was advised that the Council would be hosting an open forum with town and parish councils in Darsham on 7 July 2023 and would be discussing how to respond to planning applications.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management complimented the work of the recently appointed Planning Services Business Support Manager to improve engagement between the Council and town and parish councils.

Councillor Fisher asked if there had ever been a time where all applications were determined by committee.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised there had been a scheme of delegation for East Suffolk Council since its inception in 2019 where planning applications could be delegated to his post for determination, and that its predecessor authorities had also had the same arrangements; he could not recall a time where no such scheme was in place.

Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation set out in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Pitchers.  The Chair invited the Committee to debate the recommendation. 

Councillor Ashdown requested that Members, when attending town and parish council meetings in their ward, encourage them to speak on applications at committee where they have triggered the Planning Referral Panel process; he was disconcerted that applications were being brought to committee via this process and town and parish councils were not speaking at the meeting.

Councillor Hedgley reiterated the points made by Councillor Ashdown and acknowledged that some town and parish councils were either apprehensive about speaking at meetings and/or were not always available to attend.  Councillor McCallum added to this and noted the amount of officer time invested when an application is taken to Planning Referral Panel and then a committee meeting.  Councillor Ewart suggested these points be addressed at the forum on 7 July 2023.

Councillor Ashton suggested that all Members be briefed on this information.

There being no further debate, the recommendation was put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted and that no changes be made to the Referral process.

NOTE: Councillor McCallum left the meeting at the conclusion of this item.

The Committee received report ES/1574 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which responded to the recommendations of the Council’s Scrutiny Committee when it considered democratic accountability within the Planning process and other associated matters, resolved at its meeting held on 2 March 2023.

The Chair advised that Councillors Mike Deacon and Dan Clery, the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Scrutiny Committee, had been unable to attend the meeting; she highlighted that Councillors Ashdown, Byatt and Hedgley, all present at the meeting, had also been present at the meeting of the Scrutiny Committee on 2 March 2023.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Head of Planning and Coastal Management to comment.  The Committee was reminded that the Democratic Services Officer (Regulatory) had circulated a link to the recording of the 2 March 2023 Scrutiny Committee meeting to members of the Committee for review prior to this meeting.

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that following discussions with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, the introduction of a "triple lock" call-in process was supported subject to regulation to ensure no delays to determination and that it was in line with the existing call-in and Planning Referral Panel processes. 

The Committee was informed that it was recommended that should a ward member or town/parish council request, during consultation, that an application be determined by a planning committee the case officer would refer this on to the members of the relevant planning committee.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that committee members would then have five working days to call in the planning application and must set out the material planning reasons for doing so; if all these criteria were met an application would be referred for determination by the relevant planning committee.

In respect of the recommendation relating to the casting vote at Planning Referral Panel it was recommended that this remain with the Head of Planning and Coastal Management, who recalled only having to do so on three occasions.

Regarding the length of time for public speaking at planning committees, it was considered that the existing three-minute limit for each party allowed sufficient time to make relevant points.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management noted that the opportunity for questions at the end of an address allowed the committees to obtain further information from speakers.  The Committee was advised that for major applications it was within a committee chair's gift to extend the time for all parties if required.  Officers recommended that the three-minute limit remained as such.

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management referenced the suggestion to add QR codes to planning site notices to direct to further application information; site notices already contained QR codes directing to Public Access and there was no space in the site notice layout to add a further code.  The Committee was advised that the Planning Services Business Support Manager was working to ensure the planning section of the East Suffolk Council website remained up to date.

The Committee was informed that since the Scrutiny Committee's meeting a joint statement between the Council and the Suffolk Association of Local Councils (SALC) had been issued on working together going forward.  The Strategic Director and the Head of Planning and Coastal Management had met with SALC representatives, along with the Planning Services Business Support Manager.  SALC had been invited to the open forum with town and parish councils on 7 July 2023 but was unable to send representatives on that occasion.

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  Councillor Ashdown asked if ward members could approach the Head of Planning and Coastal Management directly to call in a planning application to committee; the Head of Planning and Coastal Management said this had happened in the past and he would take such representations into consideration if received.

Councillor Byatt queried the current officer resource for determining planning applications.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management said that the Council was fortunate to have a well-staffed cohort, especially compared to other local planning authorities.  The Committee was advised of the ongoing national issue recruiting planners to local government.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management confirmed there was a budget in place to increase capacity as and when Sizewell C progresses and highlighted the additional impact on existing resources if more smaller-scale applications are routed to planning committees for determination.

Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation set out in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Ewart.  The Chair invited the Committee to debate the recommendation.

Councillor Byatt suggested it be made clear to all councillors that they should reviewing planning matters they receive at the earliest opportunity.  The Chair noted the importance of this.  Councillor concurred with this point and highlighted that councillors should review all planning applications in their ward, even if they do not necessarily comment on each one.

Councillor Hedgley highlighted that ward members were given longer to speak at planning committees and said that if town and parish councils work with their ward members they can increase the amount of time available to express their views.  Councillor Hedgley referred to his previous suggestion about allowing ward members to speak at Planning Referral Panel and said that if accepted, this could have avoided the need for the new call-in process proposed.

Councillor Ashton concluded debate, highlighting that there had been a general sense from the public during the recent election campaign that the Council was not transparent and democratic in relation to planning; he supported the recommendation.

There being no further debate, the recommendation was put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the Strategic Planning Committee thanks and welcomes the Scrutiny Committee for its recommendations and recommends the following:-

1. That the Audit and Governance Committee considers and recommends to Full Council the approval of the introduction of a ‘Planning Committee Member Call-In’ process as set out in the report at paragraphs 2.17-2.20, via the amendment of the East Suffolk Council Constitution.

2. That the casting vote at the Referral Panel is still undertaken, where required, by the Head of Planning and Coastal Management.

3. That the public speaking time be maintained at three minutes for each participant. 

NOTE: Councillor Ashton left the meeting at the conclusion of this item.

The Committee received report ES/1575 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which provided an update on key elements of the current work programme, including the preparation of Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) and Neighbourhood Plans, and on housing delivery. 

The report also included updates for Specialist Services (Design and Conservation, Arboriculture and Landscape (including Rights of Way) and Ecology) that form part of the Planning Policy and Delivery Team, as well as on the delivery of infrastructure to support growth through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Planning Manager (Policy, Delivery and Specialist Services) to comment.  The Committee was apprised of the key elements of the report; the Planning Manager highlighted that the Rushmere St Andrew and Shadingfield, Sotterley, Willingham and Ellough Neighbourhood Plans were made at Full Council on 28 June 2023, which took the total number of made Neighbourhood Plans to 21 with another approximately 20 in the process of being prepared.  

The Committee was advised that the referendum on the Draft Saxmundham Neighbourhood Plan had been held on 29 June 2023 and of the votes cast, 87% had been in favour of making the Neighbourhood Plan; the Planning Manager confirmed this plan would be brought to Full Council to be made. 

The Planning Manager added that the final Examiner's report on the draft Wickham Market Neighbourhood Plan had been received and published in the previous week and this plan would proceed to referendum.  It was highlighted that the CIL Charging Schedule was approved by Full Council on 28 June 2023.

The Committee was notified that a number of SPDs were being prepared; the Planning Manager explained that SPDs were important documents to assist in the implementation of the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans and provide clear guidance on the implementation of policy and the development of allocated sites in the district.

The Planning Manager referred to the work of the Design and Conservation Team, noting that it was reviewing a number of conservation area appraisals; the Aldeburgh and Southwold conservation area appraisals had been subject to public consultation, with responses being considered prior to these going through the approval purpose.

The Committee was advised that the deadline for submissions for the 2023 Quality of Place Awards had been extended to 21 July 2023.  The Planning Manager highlighted that the Council was working with neighbouring authorities to develop interim guidance on biodiversity net gain ahead of the requirements coming into force in November 2023.

The Chair invited questions to Councillor Molyneux and the officers.  Councillor Ewart asked if the information in the report could be shared with towns and parishes on a quarterly basis; the Planning Manager advised that the team were reintroducing a quarterly newsletter to towns and parishes which would include this sort of information.

Councillor Byatt asked when the final version of the Carlton Colville Neighbourhood Plan could be expected.  The Planning Manager confirmed that the consultation had finished on 21 June 2023 and the next step was for an Examiner to be appointed and the examination carried out.  The Committee was advised that an examination may take approximately two to three months and that following the examination process the Examiner's report would be published; the Council would then consider the Examiner's recommendations, before a decision was made on the Neighbourhood Plan proceeding to referendum.

Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation set out in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Gee.

There being no debate on the recommendation, it was put to a vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.

The Committee received report ES/1576 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, which provided an update on the progress towards the production and adoption of a Local Validation List and associated guidance, setting out the required documents/plans etc required for applications.

Councillor Molyneux introduced the report on behalf of Councillor Yule and invited the Principal Planner (Technical Lead, Development Management) to address the Committee.  The Principal Planner said the report could be taken as read.

There being no questions, Councillor Molyneux moved the recommendation in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Byatt.

There being no debate, the recommendations were then put to a vote and was unanimously

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.