Notice of Motion’s shall be referred to the appropriate Committee meeting. The mover of the motion can outline the proposal and then it will stand adjourned. The motion may be debated to assist debate later if agreed by two-thirds of Council Members.
Motion 1
The following motion on Queen Street Future High Street Fund 'traffic reduction and pedestrianisation' plans has been presented by Cllr Daws and supported by Cllrs Hall, J Taylor, P Parker, Gearon, Bradford, Macgregor, Mullone, Radford and Ryan.
Queen Street Future High Street Fund 'traffic reduction and pedestrianisation' plans. Given the huge concerns expressed by Queen Street retailers over the Future High Street Fund plans, it is proposed that TDC park the project plan for the street and, as a matter of urgency, enter full and meaningful 'face to face' consultation involving meeting, listening to and acting on the concerns of all retailers and residents directly affected by the proposed plans. The aim being to create a vision for the future of Queen Street and the Town Centre that carries the support of the majority of retailers and the community.
Motion 2
The following motion on the Alexandra Theatre has been presented by Cllr Daws and supported by Cllrs Hall, J Taylor, P Parker, Gearon, Bradford, Macgregor, Mullone, Radford and Ryan.
The Alexandra Theatre. Reflecting the distress of the cinema industry and the lack of appetite for the current operator of the Alexandra Theatre, Scott's Cinema's, to expand into any new multiplex, it is proposed that the council members, alongside officers, enter 'blue sky' discussions with Scott's. As the cinema lease is up for renewal in October it would be both in the residents best interests as well of those of a long serving tenant of the council, to explore the potential model of Scott's continuing the operation of a cinema offer at the Alexandra, alongside other extended live entertainment usage, similar to the relationship with NADMCS theatre group, who already use the theatre three weeks of the year. The aim being to protect the provision of a cinema offer to the town and extend the offer of live entertainment within the district in an already fully functioning theatre that is both grade 2 listed and registered as an asset of community value.
Motion 3
The following motion on recordings of meetings has been presented by Cllr Daws and supported by Cllrs Hall, J Taylor, P Parker, Gearon, Bradford, Macgregor, Mullone, Radford and Ryan.
- Recordings of council meetings. The council records public meetings for ease of access for residents. To maintain a full public record of meetings it is proposed that the council halts with immediate effect its current policy of deleting recordings of meetings after a set number of years and maintains public access to meetings on streaming platforms, such as YouTube currently. It is proposed that all meetings currently in the possession of the council or in existence, are reinstated to a free publicly available platform and that all future meetings saved and are uploaded in a similar manner.
Motion 4
The following motion on Decision making has been presented by Cllr Bullivant and supported by Cllrs Atkins, Lake, Thorne, Purser, Smith and Peart
Democratic oversight of the administration of the Council is a fundamental responsibility of elected councillors.
Decisions taken by the Council are taken with the authority of all councillors given through the established voting procedures following receipt of officer advice, appropriate review, analysis and consideration of councillors by way of prior notification and properly conducted debate and voting.
This process requires that a meeting agenda and associated papers are available to councillors and the public for a minimum of (5)days prior to a meeting taking place and any questions received must be within (3) days to allow proper evaluation and answers by officers.
Over recent months there have been a number of council meetings with agenda items withdrawn, altered or added to by the Executive within minutes of a meeting taking place and without going through due process.
This has led to changed proposals being introduced that have not had the benefit of proper examination by other councillors or officers before a debate takes place and decisions being imposed by means of majority group voting.
The rules of council decision making are well established and work when applied.
In view of the serious potential challenge to any decision taken without following due process I propose that in future any agenda item circulated properly when meeting notices and agendas are issued cannot be changed prior to the scheduled meeting, and no changes allowed prior to the scheduled meeting.
Agenda items may be withdrawn prior to any debate but any request to modify or alter an agenda item should only be permitted following a properly submitted amendment proposal submitted during the meeting which will allow a detailed explanation of the reason for an amendment and subsequent debate and voting by councillors.
Motion 5
The following motion on variation of planning conditions and section 106 has been presented by Cllr J Taylor and supported by Cllrs Macgregor, Hall, Radford, Gearon, P Parker, Ryan, Daws, Bradford
I would like your support for the following motion, which I believe will improve transparency within the planning process and give councillors more decision making in regards to planning applications and amendments of major developments. It is particularly important that all decisions relating to the loss of agreed 106 affordable units, are made by the Planning Committee.
Planning is a process tied up in legislation, including the committee decision making element. Councillors are, when an application comes to committee, presented with recommendations, accompanied by detailed reports and are expected to adopt an open mind when deciding on the merits of that application. Often, the officer presenting the report has anticipated where concerns might lie and along with technical aspects listed conditions that will apply should the application be passed.
On large sites, those conditions might relate to aspects such as the number of affordable homes, children’s play areas and green landscaping. Thus, typically, the committee members make a decision based on what is in front of them but in reality the ends product looks nothing like the approved application.
That application may then change beyond recognition by a process of amendments, submitted by the applicant and approved by delegated authority. It may never come back to the Planning Committee.
This is a well-established practice by Developers which enables the Plans to be passed and then amended so that the maximum profit can be achieved. It is called value engineering. I call it deception and it’s time it stopped.
The council are well aware of this process but choose to engage with it for fear of the monetary consequences of non-compliance. It is no secret that this council, along with many others, has an unhealthy dependency on the money provided by major house builders.
It is time to draw the line and take the first steps to breaking the cycle and distancing ourselves from this unhealthy relationship, by developing a transparent process and sending a clear signal to Developers. We will not be bartering to build houses. Submit, approve, build. We will no longer be engaging in planning ping pong.
The motion calls for additional transparency by ensuring that on all major developments (over 20 homes,) where variations to conditions are applied for, must be brought to the planning committee.
This is to apply to all 106 changes and any visible amendments, eg. change of materials, removal of garages, landscaping, etc.
All amendments on the grounds of viability, must come to the Planning Committee. (However, it should be an exception rather than the rule. Viability should covered at the initial planning application stage. If a development is not viable then it should be withdrawn.)
Minutes:
Motion 1
Cllrs Dawson and Nutley left the meeting before discussion of this item.
Cllr Daws presented the motion on Queen Street Future High Street Fund 'traffic reduction and pedestrianisation' plans.
More than five members asked for a roll-call to decide if two thirds of Members present wanted to debate this matter today.
Recorded vote under Procedure Rule 4.13.5
For: Cllrs Bradford, Daws, Gearon, Hall, MacGregor, Mullone, P Parker, Radford, Ryan, J Taylor Total 10
Against: Cllrs Bullivant, H Cox, Farrand-Rogers, Goodman-Bradbury, Hayes, Hook, Keeling, Palethorpe, Parrott, Peart, Rollason, Sanders, Smith, Swain, G Taylor,Thorne, Wrigley, D Cox Total 18
Abstain Cllrs Atkins, Henderson, Jackman, Nuttall, Steemson, Clarance Total 6
Absent: Cllrs Buscombe, Dawson, Foden, James, Jeffries, Lake, Morgan, Nutley, C Parker, Purser, Rogers, Webster and Williams, Total 13
As two-thirds did not agree to a debate the matter it was referred to Executive.
Motion 2
Cllrs H Cox, Henderson and Jackman left the meeting before discussion of this item.
Cllr Daws presented the motion on the Alexandra Theatre.
More than five members asked for a roll-call to decide if two thirds of Members present wanted to debate this matter today.
Recorded vote under Procedure Rule 4.13.5
For: Cllrs Atkins, Bradford, Daws, Gearon, Hall, MacGregor, Mullone,
P Parker, Radford, Ryan, J Taylor Total 11
Against: Cllrs Farrand-Rogers, Goodman-Bradbury, Hayes, Hook, Keeling, Palethorpe, Parrott, Rollason, Sanders, Swain, G Taylor, Wrigley, D Cox Total 13
Abstain Cllrs Bullivant, Nuttall, Peart, Smith, Steemson, Thorne, Clarance Total 7
Absent: Cllrs Buscombe, H Cox, Dawson, Henderson, Foden, Jackman, James, Jeffries, Lake, Morgan, Nutley, C Parker, Purser, Rogers, Webster and Williams, Total 16
As two-thirds did not agree to a debate the matter it was referred to Executive.
Motion 3
Cllr Daws presented the motion on recordings of meetings.
As two-thirds did not agree to a debate the matter was referred to Executive.
More than five members asked for a roll-call to decide if two thirds of Members present wanted to debate this matter today.
Recorded vote under Procedure Rule 4.13.5
For Cllrs Atkins, Bradford, Bullivant, Daws, Gearon, Goodman-Bradbury, Hall, MacGregor, Mullone, Nuttall, P Parker, Peart, Radford, Ryan, Smith, Steemson, J Taylor Total 17
Against Cllrs Hayes, Hook, Keeling, Palethorpe, Parrott, Rollason, Sanders, D Cox Total 8
Abstain Cllrs Farrand-Rogers, Swain, Thorne, Wrigley, Clarance Total 5
Absent: Cllrs Buscombe, H Cox, Dawson, Henderson, Foden, Jackman, James, Jeffries, Lake, Morgan, Nutley, C Parker, Purser, Rogers, G Taylor Webster and Williams, Total 17
The matter was referred to Executive Committee.
Motion 4
Cllr Bullivant presented the motion on Decision making.
As two-thirds did
not agree to a debate the matter (amended 28 November 2023) it was referred to
Procedures Committee.
Motion 5
Cllr J Taylor presented motion on variation of planning conditions and section 106.
More than five members asked for a roll-call to decide if two thirds of Members present wanted to debate this matter today.
Recorded vote under Procedure Rule 4.13.5
For Cllrs Atkins, Bradford, Daws, Gearon, Hall, MacGregor, Mullone, P Parker, Peart, Radford, Ryan, J Taylor, Thorne, Total 13
Against Cllrs Goodman-Bradbury, Hayes, Hook, Keeling, Palethorpe, Parrott, Rollason, Sanders, Swain, G Taylor, Wrigley Total 11
Abstain Cllrs Bullivant, Farrand-Rogers, Nuttall, Smith, Steemson, D Cox, Clarance Total 7
Absent: Cllrs Buscombe, H Cox, Dawson, Henderson, Foden, Jackman, James, Jeffries, Lake, Morgan, Nutley, C Parker, Purser, Rogers, Webster, Williams, Total 16
As two-thirds did not agree to a debate the matter it was referred to Procedures Committee.