Agenda and minutes

Councillors Pippa Corney, Sebastian Kindersley, Des O’Brien and Tim Scott sent Apologies. Councillors Philippa Hart, Charles Nightingale and Val Barrett substituted for Councillors Kindersley, O’Brien and Scott respectively

1.         Disclosable pecuniary interests (“DPI”)

A  DPI is where a committee member or his/her spouse or partner has any kind of beneficial interest in the land under consideration at the meeting.

 2.        Non-disclosable pecuniary interests

These are interests that are pecuniary involving a  personal financial benefit or detriment but do not come within the definition of a DPI.  An example would be where a member of their family/close friend (who is not their spouse or partner) has such an interest.

3.         Non-pecuniary interests

Where the interest is not one which involves any personal financial benefit or detriment to the Councillor but arises out of a close connection with someone or some  body /association.  An example would be membership of a sports committee/ membership of another council which is involved in the matter under consideration.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2016 will be presented to the meeting on 7 December 2016.

The draft Minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2016 would be presented to the meeting on 7 December 2016.

Because of the receipt of an email from Brian Williams (circulated to members before the start of the meeting), which had highlighted that public consultation did not finish until 21 November 2016, the Vice-Chairman proposed that the two applications be deferred. Councillor Deborah Roberts seconded the proposal.

Councillor Roberts welcomed the deferral as it would give Waterbeach Parish Council the opportunity to respond formally to the consultation.

The Head of Development Management also referred to an e-mail from Brian Williams in which he regretted not being given sufficient time in which to prepare a representation on behalf of residents. She told Members that the Committee had two realistic options: (i) to defer the applications, or (ii) to give officers delegated powers (in consultation with the Chairman) to decide whether to approve the applications subject to any further public representations received during the final days of the consultation period. The Head of Development Management highlighted that responses had been received from several consultees but acknowledged that the Parish Council had met yesterday and their comments were still awaited.

Councillor Peter Johnson (a local Member) said that he supported the proposal to defer.

Members were told that, should they be minded to defer, they must understand the consequences in terms of the matter then coming back before them. No Members objected to a fresh meeting taking place on Thursday 24 November 2016.

 In reply to a Member’s query, the Head of Development Management confirmed that the Appeal listed for 29 November 2016 was not a material planning consideration in deciding the two applications currently before Members. The Planning Lawyer agreed, but expressed the view that the opportunity for Members to consider the two applications might be material to anything which was then said at the forthcoming Appeal, and, as such, that the Appeal Inspector should be given the opportunity to take Members’ comments into account when reaching his or her decision.

Following further comments by Members, the Committee unanimously deferred the application until 2pm on Thursday 24 November 2016.