Agenda and minutes

Members observed a minute’s silence to honour the passing of former Councillor and Alderman, Gary Gregory.

The Mayor’s chaplain, Rev O’Kane, shared his thoughts on the recent civic service and how nice it was to celebrate inclusion in unity.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Pauline Allan, Roy Allan, Scroggie and Pickering.

The Mayor gave an update on the last few months of his mayoral year noting the wonderful events he had attended within the community. He highlighted his visits to the Daybrook Bowls Club summer fair, the LOCO Centre, the Lambley village show, Killisick fun day and a local film screening of “My Nieces Big Fat Delhi Wedding” held at the Bonington Theatre.

Thanks were given for a recent fundraising wine tasting evening at Taste First that raised over £300. The Mayor highlighted that his recent Civic Service had also raised £450 for his chosen charity and thanked all those who attended and supported the event, making it a successful event.

Members raised queries about the accuracy of an item on the 23 July 2025 minutes. It was noted that the minutes were not verbatim but that they would be looked into and amended as necessary.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the above meeting, subject to any necessary amendments, be approved as a correct record.

None.

None received.

Question 1 - Question to the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Economy and Growth – asked by Joan Sharp

Have you considered the effect of the Wighay housing development on the inadequate healthcare, road networks, secondary schools and flooding issues in Hucknall which due to the location of the development will mean residents living in the houses will be reliant on the already inadequate infrastructure currently in place?

Question 2 – Question to the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Economy and Growth – asked by Jodie-Ana Van Alten

Given the rapid pace of development being permitted across the borough, how does the council justify continuing to approve large-scale projects when the supporting infrastructure—such as roads, healthcare, schools, and public transport—is already stretched to its limits and, in many cases, operating at or beyond capacity. This situation appears increasingly unsustainable for both existing and new residents. Can you outline the council’s strategic agenda to ensure that infrastructure investment keeps pace with development and that essential services are not pushed to the brink?

Two questions were received from members of the public. The questions and answers were as follows:

1) Question to the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Economy and Growth – asked by Joan Sharp

Have you considered the effect of the Wighay housing development on the inadequate healthcare, road networks, secondary schools and flooding issues in Hucknall which due to the location of the development will mean residents living in the houses will be reliant on the already inadequate infrastructure currently in place?

Response from Councillor Hollingsworth:

Thank you for the question. In determining the application for planning permission for the development at Top Wighay Farm the Council did have careful regard to all these matters and consulted with statutory and other specialist consultees who provided appropriate advice. The impact of the development is mitigated through the imposition of conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement. The Section 106 agreement requires the housing developer to provide land for the construction of a primary school along with a contribution of £4.75m for its delivery. Other contributions include £802,500 toward highways including public transport provision and £436,209 toward healthcare improvements along with extensive areas of public open space within the development. In terms of drainage, detailed technical information has been provided and this has been independently assessed by technical experts at the County Council and the Environment Agency, prior to approval.

2) Question to the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Economy and Growth – asked by Jodie-Ana Van Alten

Given the rapid pace of development being permitted across the borough, how does the council justify continuing to approve large-scale projects when the supporting infrastructure—such as roads, healthcare, schools, and public transport—is already stretched to its limits and, in many cases, operating at or beyond capacity. This situation appears increasingly unsustainable for both existing and new residents. Can you outline the council’s strategic agenda to ensure that infrastructure investment keeps pace with development and that essential services are not pushed to the brink?

Response from Councillor Hollingsworth:

Thank you for the question. The Government sets a method for calculating local housing need in order to provide a minimum number of homes. The National Planning Policy Framework was revised in December 2024 and sets a minimum requirement for 631 new homes to be delivered within the borough per annum. If the Council is unable to deliver this number of homes or cannot demonstrate a housing land supply of 5 years, there will be risk of speculative development taking place in less sustainable locations within the borough.

The Council is currently progressing the Gedling Local Development Plan which will include policies and allocations for the future growth of the borough. The Council will continue to work closely with partners and key stakeholders, including Nottinghamshire County Council and the NHS, to ensure appropriate infrastructure improvements are delivered to mitigate the impact of any planned development. The Gedling Local Development Plan will be supported by an Infrastructure Delivery Plan which will use evidence to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

Question from Cllr Whiting to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy

Following recent media reports about the increased number of allotment sites being developed into housing, can Cabinet reassure us that Gedling Borough has no allotment sites in future housing plans and will not entertain any planning application to develop allotment sites in future?

Question from Cllr Whiting to the Leader of the Council

Following the passing of a motion in July 2024 by Full Council on the current situation in Gaza, which committed Council to "Consider ways in which the events can be remembered in the future", can the Leader of the Council update us on what, if any, progress has been made on this?

Question from Cllr Wheeler to the Leader of the Council

The Freedom of Information Act and the Council’s complaints system are an essential and legitimate part of democracy and governance, and both officers and Members respect these requests and respond to them appropriately.

However, I am aware that there are a small number of individuals who appear to target the Council, and submit frequent requests for information or make regular complaints, perhaps not always with the best of intentions.

Can the Leader tell me how much time has been spent by officers and estimated cost in gathering information in response to Freedom of Information requests and complaints from the top 3 correspondents over the last 4 financial years?

Question from Cllr Meads to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy

At the present time the county council is holding onto about £5million in section 106 money for school improvements from housing developments in Calverton, with the potential for much more to be handed over to them before LGR has taken place.

The county council has sat on some of this money for four years, and only around 10% of it has to be spent on specific Calverton schools under the terms of the various section 106 agreements. Buyers of the new homes in Calverton rightly expected that part of their purchase price included money for new school improvements within the village.

Since Reform have been in control at the county council projects have been put on hold. The same situation must exist across the borough.

Is there any pressure this council can put on the county council to ensure they spend the money now on our schools and before LGR takes place, rather than on schools that would remain in the new county authority if Gedling were put in with the new city based authority? I am aware it is the county council education department that draughts these 106 agreements but wonder if there any mechanism this council can use to ensure the future 106 money stays local, within our area.

Question from Cllr Meads to the Portfolio Holder for Public Protection

Over the last few summers the north west corner of Calverton has been blighted by a huge number of small flies. This unwanted phenomenon means that residents can  ...  view the full agenda text for item 54.

A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Natural Habitat by Councillor Whiting, as follows:

“Following recent media reports about the increased number of allotment sites being developed into housing, can Cabinet reassure us that Gedling Borough has no allotment sites in future housing plans and will not entertain any planning application to develop allotment sites in future?”

Response from Councillor Viv McCrossen:

Thank you for the question.

Allotments within the Borough are currently designated as Protected Open Space in the adopted Local Planning Document 2018. Any development proposals on these sites must be in accordance with Policy LPD 20 – Protection of Open Space which seeks to ensure that allotments and other open spaces are retained unless exceptions detailed in the policy can be evidenced.

There are two allotment sites in the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which is used to identify and assess possible future housing sites. These are:

• G1152 - Robin Hood Carlton Allotments, Carlton
• G1136 – Leapool Allotments, Redhill

Both sites were submitted to the SHLAA in 2019 by the GBC Property Team as part of an asset review undertaken at that time. Any decision to dispose of a Council allotment would require further consultation and approval. I can however confirm that there are no current plans to dispose of either allotment for the purposes of delivering housing.

A question was asked of the Leader of the Council by Councillor Whiting, as follows:

“Following the passing of a motion in July 2024 by Full Council on the current situation in Gaza, which committed Council to "Consider ways in which the events can be remembered in the future", can the Leader of the Council update us on what, if any, progress has been made on this?”

Response from Councillor Clarke:

Thank you for your question.

At the current time, no substantial work has taken place to consider ways in which the events in Gaza can be commemorated in the future. The events team have a scheduled events programme which has already been agreed for the upcoming year.

Work will take place shortly to see how this can be incorporated into the 2026/27 programme of events for the year, and this will be reviewed by the senior leadership team and cascaded to members and the public once agreed.

A question was asked of the Leader of the Council by Councillor Wheeler, as follows:

“The Freedom of Information Act and the Council’s complaints system are an essential and legitimate part of democracy and governance, and both officers and Members respect these requests and respond to them appropriately.

However, I am aware that there are a small number of individuals who appear to target the Council and submit frequent requests for information or make regular complaints, perhaps not always with the best of intentions.

Can the Leader tell me how much time has been spent by officers and estimated cost in gathering information in response to Freedom of Information requests and complaints from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

RESOLVED

To note the report.

No comments or issues were raised.

The Council forms a Local Development Plan Working Group to support the Portfolio Holder - Sustainable Growth and Economy and the Director for Place to explore the reasonable alternatives for delivering the spatial strategy for Gedling Borough for the period up to 2043 and beyond arising from the required growth in housing, employment, services and infrastructure that the Borough needs to accommodate.

This shall include consideration of the option for delivering growth through new settlements. The conclusions and recommendations of the Local Development Plan Working Group shall be taken into consideration by Officers, Cabinet and Council when formulating and agreeing the Regulation 19 Pre-submission version of the Gedling Local Development Plan (or the equivalent stage under any future change of legislation)

Proposer: Cllr Andy Meads

Seconder: Cllr Russell Whiting

Councillor Meads, seconded by councillor Whiting, proposed a motion in the following terms:

The Council forms a Local Development Plan Working Group to support the Portfolio Holder - Sustainable Growth and Economy and the Director for Place to explore the reasonable alternatives for delivering the spatial strategy for Gedling Borough for the period up to 2043 and beyond arising from the required growth in housing, employment, services and infrastructure that the Borough needs to accommodate.

This shall include consideration of the option for delivering growth through new settlements. The conclusions and recommendations of the Local Development Plan Working Group shall be taken into consideration by Officers, Cabinet and Council when formulating and agreeing the Regulation 19 Pre-submission version of the Gedling Local Development Plan (or the equivalent stage under any future change of legislation)

Proposer: Councillor Andy Meads

Seconder: Councillor Russell Whiting

Members debated the motion and on being put to a vote, the motion was lost.