Agenda and minutes

Public Speaking: To register your intention to speak at a Council, Cabinet or Committee meeting, please contact Democratic Services on committee@uttlesford.gov.uk or 01799 510410 or 510548. Panel and working group meetings do not generally permit public speaking. Please refer to a specific meeting's pdf agenda pack for further information and registration deadlines.

Live Broadcast:For Council, Cabinet and Committee meetings the audio player will appear on this page a few minutes before the meeting is due to begin.

Venue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, London Road, Saffron Walden, CB11 4ER. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services  Email: committee@uttlesford.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Public Speaking

The Chair welcomed Members and the public to the meeting.

 

Statements were made by Professor Banatvala, Mr Fox, Mr Gildea, Ms Jones, Mr Twigg and Mr Woodcock. Summaries of these statements have been appended to the minutes.

 

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed Members and the public to the meeting.

 

Statements were made by Professor Banatvala, Mr Fox, Mr Gildea, Ms Jones, Mr Twigg and Mr Woodcock. Summaries of these statements have been appended to the minutes.

 

2.

Apologies for Absence and Declarations of Interest

To receive any apologies and declarations of interest.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Asker, Caton, Driscoll, Eke, Hargreaves, Loughlin, Merifield, Oliver, Reeve and Sell.

 

Councillors Dean, Foley, Tayler and Sutton declared non-pecuniary interests as members of Stop Stansted Expansion.

 

CouncillorsBagnall, Fairhurst, Freeman, Gerard, LeCount, Lemon, Pavitt and Storah declared non-pecuniary interests as members of the Council’s Planning Committee.

 

CouncillorsBagnall (Takeley), Coote (Saffron Walden), Fairhurst (Saffron Walden), Gerard (Newport), Gregory (Great Chesterford), Isham (Broxted),LeCount (Henham), Light (Saffron Walden) and De Vries (Saffron Walden) declared non-pecuniary interests as members of their respective town/parish councils.

 

Councillor Barker declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Essex County Council.

 

Councillor Gerard declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Hundred Parishes Society.

 

3.

Petition: Refer Stansted Airport Planning Application back to Uttlesford Planning Committee

To receive the petition ‘Refer Stansted Airport Planning Application back to Uttlesford Planning Committee’.

 

At the time of publication, the petition had 1,289 signatories. The petition can be viewed here: http://chng.it/QGYQV46xvr

 

Petition statement:

 

“The 2018 Stansted Airport Planning Application for 43mppa must now be referred back to the UDC Planning Committee for further consideration having regard to outstanding concerns as to the adequacy of the proposed Section 106 Agreement and to the new material considerations and changes in circumstances that have arisen since provisional approval was granted in November 2018.”

Minutes:

Mr Ross, Deputy Chair of Stop Stansted Expansion, presented a petition to Full Council. The terms of the petition were:

 

“The 2018 Stansted Airport Planning Application for 43mppa must now be referred back to the UDC Planning Committee for further consideration having regard to outstanding concerns as to the adequacy of the proposed Section 106 Agreement and to the new material considerations and changes in circumstances that have arisen since provisional approval was granted in November 2018.”

 

Mr Ross said the reasoning behind the petition was twofold:

 

  1. Concerns as to the adequacy of the proposed S106;
  2. New material considerations and changes in circumstances since provisional approval in November 2018.

 

The petition had received 1,700 signatures. He argued that the decision for reconsideration should be taken by members, and the Planning Committee was the appropriate body to reconsider the ‘Planning Balance’ of the application. He said ‘costs risk’ would be a factor regardless of how the application was determined.

 

 

4.

Requisition for Extraordinary Council Meeting - Decision Notice for Planning Application UTT/18/0460/FUL pdf icon PDF 314 KB

To consider the following motion included in the requisition calling for this Extraordinary Council Meeting:

 

“To instruct the Chief Executive and fellow officers not to issue the Planning Decision Notice for planning application UTT/18/0460/FUL until members have had an opportunity to review and obtain independent legal corroboration that the legal advice provided to officers, including the QC opinion referred to by the Leader of the Council on 9th April 2019, confirms that the proposed Section 106 Agreement with Stansted Airport Limited fully complies with the Resolution approved by the Planning Committee on 14 November 2018 such that officers re lawfully empowered to conclude and seal the Agreement without further reference to the Planning Committee.”

 

A briefing report from Officers is to follow and a supplementary pack will be published as soon as the report is available.

 

If members wish to discuss the legal position and legal advice received, or if they wish to seek further legal advice from Council officers, they are recommended to resolve to exclude the press and public from the meeting while this takes place pursuant to paragraph 5 of Schedule 12A, Local Government Act, 1972: Consideration of legal advice in public would involve the disclosure of Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair introduced the item relating to the Decision Notice for planning application UTT/18/0460/FULsubmitted by Stansted Airport Ltd and approved by the Planning Committee on 14 November 2018. He invited Councillor Lodge to propose the initial motion as set out in the agenda.

 

Councillor Lodge said the requisition for this meeting had been submitted at the end of the Extraordinary Council meeting on 25 April 2019, and although the Council’s position had now moved on, due process dictated that the initial motion set out in the requisition be formally proposed as follows:

 

“To instruct the Chief Executive and fellow officers not to issue the Planning Decision Notice for planning application UTT/18/0460/FUL until members have had an opportunity to review and obtain independent legal corroboration that the legal advice provided to officers, including the QC opinion referred to by the Leader of the Council on 9th April 2019, confirms that the proposed Section 106 Agreement with Stansted Airport Limited fully complies with the Resolution approved by the Planning Committee on 14 November 2018 such that officers re lawfully empowered to conclude and seal the Agreement without further reference to the Planning Committee.”

 

Councillor Lees seconded the motion.

 

Councillor Fairhurst proposed an amendment to the substantive motion; notice of the amendment had been given by Councillors Gerard, Day, Light, Sutton, Pepper, Isham, Bagnall, Fairhurst, De Vries and Lodge:

 

Delete all and replace with;

 

“In accordance with Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 143(2) of the Localism Act 2011 to instruct the Chief Executive and fellow officers not to issue a Planning Decision Notice for planning application UTT/18/0460/FUL unless and until the Council's Planning Committee have had a sufficient opportunity to consider in detail, as timely as possible:

 

(i)            the adequacy of the proposed Section 106 Agreement between UDC and Stansted Airport Ltd, having regard to the Heads of Terms contained in the resolution approved by the Council's Planning Committee on 14th November 2018;

 

(ii)        any new material considerations and/or changes in circumstances since 14 November 2018 to which weight may now be given in striking the planning balance or which would reasonably justify attaching a different weight to relevant factors previously considered;

 

And thereafter ask the Planning Committee to determine the authorisation of the issue of a Planning Decision Notice."

 

Councillor Gerard seconded the amendment.

 

Councillor Fairhurst said the issue at hand was regarding process; did the S106 agreement comply with the law, and was the S106 adequate to mitigate against the potential harm the application would cause if approved. He said it was the role of the Planning Committee to deliberate over these considerations.

 

Councillor Criscione said the application had been determined at Committee in November and the issue had been politicised. He said the Council would face certain legal challenge for non-determination and it was likely the applicant would win, leaving the Council with large legal costs that would rob residents of much needed funding.

 

Councillor Tayler said material changes had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.