Back to Top

Meeting Minutes 18 April 2016

MINUTES of the Parish Council meeting held on MONDAY 18th APRIL, 2016 at 6.30pm upstairs in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.


Cllrs. A. Wetton Chairman (MDC), J. Kerr, (MDC), J. Cockroft, S. Moody, S. Adey, J. Brealey and S. Dale.
19 members of public.


Cllrs P. Crawford (MDC), J. Allin Vice-Chairman (NCC), L. Moody and B. Dawson



No police present or written.


Bill Power wanted to thank Cllr Peter Crawford regarding the War Memorial. He mentioned that he hopes the Carrs Plan comes to fruition. He asked if there would be any disabled parking at the Carnival. He also asked about any town centre shopping plans. He informed the council and public about the new petition for the Netto application along with demolition of the old Strand building.

Karen Hardy from the Let Warsop Speak Group handed out some booklets to councillors. She stated at a previous Parish Council meeting the council have called this development at Stonebridge a vision and that you’d listen to the people of Warsop when the time was right and when you’d collected the evidence.
She said following the Pegasus exhibition on 22nd March it’s now obvious this is no longer a vision as they are preparing to submit plans to MDC by July 2016. Has the Parish Council yet sort the views of the people of Warsop and district? Let Warsop Speak has delivered 3600 leaflets to households in the district and the majority of the people say no to building near the Hills and Holes. We have evidence to demonstrate how many people are against this development. Has the Parish Council any evidence to suggest otherwise? As representatives of the people of Warsop and district will the Parsih Council now support our objections?

Various members from the Let Warsop Speak Group asked questions and put their points across to the council.

In the strategic housing land availability assessment undertaken by MDC in September 2013, the 2 fields of Stonebridge and Sookholme, adjacent to the Hills and Holes were deemed unsuitable for housing. The final conclusion of this report was that they were outside the urban boundary and other more suitable sites were available. The sites would require a major residential road with 2 points of access; Sookholme Lane past number 19 is part of an ancient highway and prior to number 19 the lane is an adopted highway. Therefore no suitable access to Sookholme Lane was available. It also states within the SHLAA report that there would be no impact on protected habitats – untrue, as under the hedgerows Act, the hedgerows along Sookholme Lane are deemed protected due to them being over 1000 years old. This report states Sookholme and Stonebridge fields would not be available for 10-15 years.

Sookholme field has potential contamination from the railway, however though Stonebridge field follows the same conclusions there is no potential contamination in this field. It does though state within the report that there is no natural features or impact on the SSSI – when in the next section it states there are protected habitats of arable, calcerous and grasslands.

We ask why does it clearly state within this report that the fields are not available when we have evidence to show that MDC and Pegasus were discussing these fields at the same time this report was wrote? Pegasus were seeking advice from Natural England regarding how to overcome the issue of the SSSI and the Hills and Holes?

The field south of the railway on the A60 was also considered at this point, but not pursued. The field was available and would obviously cause far less disruption to the area than the ones around Stonebridge. The main reason apparently for the field on the A60 being disregarded was it was a strong defensible boundary – from what we ask? There is already housing along this route and development on this site would not breach the urban boundary as it’s on the fringe.

Would the Parish Council be open to request MDC to further pursue this route as according to Harworth Estates they have not yet purchased the 2 fields in question? And would the Parish Council care to comment on the proposal to move the urban boundary to accommodate the development on Sookholme and Stonebridge fields?

Prior to the redevelopment of the royal estate it was claimed by Warsop Estates that once this estate was rebuilt the centre of Warsop would require urgent regenerating and opportunities for employment would have arisen due to the build. They acknowledged that Warsop was among the 25% most deprived ares in England and Wales and yet they continue to encourage high value housing projects that local people can’t afford. Over the last 5 years 500 houses have been built in Warsop, and during this time we have seen the centre of Warsop steadily decline.

When Pegasus was questioned at their exhibition how locals would afford one of their affordable houses, priced at 120k, the reply was they would save like everybody else, or they’d get a share buy and rent the property (40k mortgage plus ¾ rental value possibly a further £300 per month). People of Warsop want and need affordable housing, however these developers are clear that affordable housing does not provide the profits they require to build. Therefore, the government only ask that up to 20% of the project is affordable housing (normally about 10%).

It is very clear that Pegasus has invested a lot of time and effort in establishing housing in Warsop. In the initial comments for MDC Local Plan they talk about assisting with the regeneration of central Warsop. Unfortunately at their exhibition they were clear that their pot of money was for opening up the train link between Warsop, Edwinstowe, Thorseby and Ollerton where the said estates are heavily investing their money and investments into the community to establish and regenerate. Thorseby Colliery site belongs to Harworth Estates and they need this site to make money for them. Therefore, the proposed employment and opportunities won’t be in Warsop, which will become a dormitory town and therefore there is no need for regeneration in its centre.

We ask the Parish Council what are the proposals to regenerate the centre of Warsop and what are the proposals for the infrastructure that currently can’t cope.

Debra Barlow said it is clear from our research that discussions between Pegasus and MDC have been occurring for a number of years regarding the 2 fields in question. Pegasus have told us they have been having meetings with Natural England with the aims of overcoming the issues of SSSI, flood zones 2 & 3 and how to overcome the low permeability of the fields.
It appears to many of us that nobody has thought about the will of the people of Warsop. Nobody has considered how revered the Hills and Holes are. Research into Natural England demonstrates they haven’t updated their records for a number of years and the last known data 2008 and 2010 stated the Hills and Holes was recovering and the threat risk was medium.
It came as a significant shock then when NE stated it’s unlikely that the proposal would lead to significant impact on the SSSI even thought they had identified a minimum of 6 points that needed and haven’t been addressed; buffer zones, reinforcing boundaries. All that Pegasus have proposed are in extra 5 m of garden on houses that border the Hills and Holes. It was suggested by NE that an Environmental Impact Assessment would be beneficial. However, this is another bypass that Pegasus has been able to overcome due to the site having fewer houses than is required to mandatorily need one. We would say that this development would have significant urbanising effect on the area, the traffic and pollution would significantly increase and to date there has been no survey/data collection on the impact of the wildlife in the area. Flooding in the 2 fields may be low and the drainage poor, however the risk of flooding on the Hills and Holes and further downstream, not forgetting potential flooding of Stonebridge estate does not appear to have been seriously considered. One attenuation pond has been suggested to cope with what we know already poses significant flooding without a development. Also we would ask for independent hydrology testing, as thus far the only testing that has been undertaken by Pegasus or their associates.
We call upon the Parish Council to demand an environmental impact assessment and independent hydrology testing along with a wildlife assessment to ascertain potential damage and destruction that would be caused if such a development were given the go ahead.

John Downie spoke to the council about the Pegasus Group meeting that he attended. He said that every question he asked the Pegasus representative, the representative had an answer for it. He was told that traffic wouldn’t be an issue and he hoped people would walk to work. He was also told that there would be no impact on the doctor’s surgery and schools. Pegasus told him that they had done a survey on the doctor’s surgery and found there were 750 appointments available. He said that you need to be at Warsop doctors for 7.30am to try and get an appointment for that day if you’re lucky. A friend of Mr Downie’s mentioned the 750 available appointments to Dr Allen and he said that they couldn’t cope with the numbers that they have now. He stated that he didn’t want Warsop or any part of the Parish to be used as a dumping ground and he didn’t want us being treated like our neighbours are at Shirebrook.

The Clerk left the meeting to attend a meeting with an I.T. consultant


The Chairman informed the meeting that he would deviate from normal public participation procedure because most members of public were attending to raise concerns about the proposed Pegasus development. He left public participation open to allow councillors to engage with the public and try to answer their points as fully as possible with further questioning allowed if necessary.

Taking points raised by Bill Power, Cllr Kerr stated he would pass on his thanks to Cllr Crawford who had been at Nottingham City hospital all day so had been unable to attend tonight’s meeting.

Cllr Cockroft responded to Bill Power on the disabled parking matter that he raised. She said there will be accessible parking which will be fenced off and closest the bridge.

The Chairman thanked Bill and Tina Brown for re-organising a petition in support of Netto planning application including the demolition of the old cinema building. The Netto planning application is scheduled to come before MDC planning committee on 31st May.

The situation regarding the shops in the centre of Warsop, there is still no progress as receivers are not looking to let at the moment. He added that the Parish Council had been and continued to be proactive in regeneration of the town centre with Boyes taking over the old Nisa store, a much welcomed development.

In attempting to address the points raised by Karen Hardy and the ‘Let Warsop Speak group’, the Chairman summarised replys following general discussion with councillors as follows:

Again the Chairman stated that MDC Local Plan has been approximately 13 years in its development, it is a visionary document identifying areas within Mansfield District for potential building projects. It had been put out for public consultation and planning officers were now considering the public responses with the finalised plan to come to full council meeting for adoption possibly in October this year, it could take longer.

The Chairman stated that the Parish Council had not been in pre-development meetings with Pegasus and only had the same information as the public received by attending their exhibition on 22nd March.
Clearly Pegasus had talked to some planning officers at MDC but two lead officers (Rob Routelege and Dean Bellingham) had recently left the councils employ.

In discussing the Local Plan, the Pegasus development and possible use of alternative fields on A60 for housing projects, with the head of planning at MDC. He was told that the Local Plan was still in a state of flux with decisions on urban boundary not finalised. Public reaction to the consultation is now being worked through by officers.

The Chairman thanked the Let Warsop Speak group for their enthusiastic response and well organised campaign against the Pegasus proposals. The evidence they are collecting is extremely valuable and the Parish Council would champion public opinion and support the views of the wider Warsop and District public.

On the points of environmental impact assessments, flood plain assessments, independent hydrology testing and usual wildlife surveys. These are all assessments that would be required should a full planning application be lodged by the Pegasus group. If a full planning application comes forward these assessments would and should be demanded as part of the planning process.

On the point of 106 monies raised against developments. These are negotiated during planning process and the suggestion that any monies raised would be put into rail project at this stage is presumptuous by Pegasus group – clearly the project is being discussed at higher tiers of government surrounding the re-development of Thorseby colliery site (Harworth Estates) and possibility of national funding coming into the area.

If a project the size of the Pegasus proposal were to come to fruition, 106 agreements would be a major negotiation, affordable housing, public open space, road infrastructure, school place contribution etc.

On the points raised by John Downie on the impact on doctor’s surgery and schools, the Chairman agreed there would be a huge impact on local services that would have to be addressed. NCC would typically seek contributions towards school places and road infrastructure running into thousands.

To conclude the Chairman thanked public for raising concerns over the Pegasus proposals and advised them to continue their campaign in preparation for a planning application coming forward.

Karen Hardy and Debra Barlow thanked the council for giving a full response to the points they had raised.

John Downie agreed with Cllr Brealey’s point regarding the building of houses without any new roads.

He thanked the Chairman for allowing public participation extra time to continue the discussion.


Big Warsop Partnership - Cllr. J. Cockroft
Warsop Town Hall Management Group - Cllrs. P. Crawford, J. Kerr, S. Moody and J. Allin.
Warsop Carnival - Cllr. J. Cockroft, S. Moody and Sharron Adey.
SOS - Cllrs. S. Moody, P. Crawford and J. Kerr
CCTV - Cllr. J. Allin
Age Concern - Cllrs. J. Allin and P. Crawford
Welbeck Colts - Cllr. A. Wetton
Market Warsop Players - Cllr. S. Moody
Meden Vale the Future - Cllrs. J. Allin and J. Kerr
Warsop Youth Club - Cllrs. S. Moody and J. Cockroft
Friends of the Carrs - Cllrs. J. Kerr and P. Crawford
The Friends of Thynghowe - Cllr. B. Dawson
Warsop's Real Poppy Campaign - Cllr. L. Moody
Warsop Vale Village Association - Cllr. P. Crawford
Assoc of Labour Councillors - Cllrs. A. Wetton, J. Allin, P. Crawford, J. Kerr S. Moody and S Adey
Boyes - Cllr J. Cockroft.


Monday 21st March 2016. Accepted as a true record.


The Chairman explained to the council that Warsop Parish Council staff have had a number of computer system issues which has caused delays to their work. This is why the Clerk has left this meeting to speak with an I.T. consultant to get these issues resolved and she will return shortly.


No new updates.


No report given.

The Clerk returned to the full council meeting.


Cllr Kerr mentioned that some of the dates printed in the paper have been wrong or are out of date.


Cllr Kerr stated that he and the Clerk have submitted the end of grant report and received a letter stating that the grant agreement has ended and there is nothing further to do in relation to this grant award.


Cllr Adey talked about putting together a partnership that is about the community and working together in the community. This partnership should include representatives from schools, healthcare, voluntary and business sector and meetings are to be held every 3 months.

The Chairman spoke of this idea and said it was similar to the area assemblies and Warsop used to have one of the best in the district. This ended up being replaced as a model that didn’t work. The Chairman thinks it’s a good idea but there may be something like this already happening with Sure Start being involved.

Cllr Kerr stated he had reservations about the idea as the area assembly had funding from MDC but it’s very different starting a new group. He also said that Parish Councillors are meant to talk to each other on projects they are working on. He stated that he already has that many different groups he is involved with.

Cllr S. Moody stated that the aim of the partnership is to do more within the community. Council meetings have lots of rules and regulations that it is bound by.

The Chairman said all different agencies came to the meetings that were run by MDC and supported by Notts County Council but after a while the promises that were made were not being kept and the different agencies wouldn’t always turn up to every meeting so this might happen with this new partnership. He stated that previously funding was given to volunteers but with this partnership there is no funding pot so this may lead to it failing before it starts and there may be a struggle getting the right representatives to attend. The Chairman stated that councillors could trial this if they were in agreement.
Cllr Cockroft mentioned that when she attended a regeneration meeting, it was mentioned there about getting a group up and running but nothing happened in the end.

Cllr Adey said that we have great councillors and parishioners who are very active and with their help this can’t fail. She said she supports the trial and she would be willing to be the chairman. She asked for just one representative from the Parish Council.

The Chairman mentioned that there should be a representative from MDC and NCC.

It was agreed Cllr Adey would arrange and chair a meeting to pursue this idea. A notice would go in the Warsop & District News with a date and venue; possible attendees should be given written invitations. An agenda, aims & objectives of the group need to be in place before the meeting goes ahead and the Chairman requested Cllr Adey to report her progress at the next Parish Council meeting.


All payments were agreed to be paid.

  • Payments already paid:
    • V01492. Cash - Delivery W&DNs - £380.00
    • V01493. Cash - Postage - £70.00
    • V01494. Minster Cleaning - £561.32
    • V01495. Mortons - £1,163.00
    • V01496. Notts County Supplies - £8.12
    • V01497. Post Office -MDC-Treatment of mole hills- Parish Church - £175.56
    • V01498. MDC Loan - £4,775.60


  • Eon (Changes to terms and conditions) - Accepted
  • Came & Company (Spring council matters 2016) - This is to go to the next F&GP meeting.
  • Groundwork - The Chairman read the leaflet to the council.

Cllr Adey suggested that we look at green energy deals.
The Chairman stated the Eon contract is for 2 years and when the time comes for renewal he has some ideas to put forward.


No report given due to Cllr Allin being unable to attend the meeting. Cllr Cockroft mentioned that the pedestrian controls on the traffic lights outside Sure Start on the A60 are not working properly.


Planning Applications

  • Land at Friar Lane, Warsop - Non material amendment to planning permission 2015///0477/NT (Regulation 3 application for 2 no. bungalows) too amend hard/soft landscaping, boundary treatments and elevations.
  • 6 Southgate Road, Warsop - Two storey front and side extension and single storey side extension.
  • Unit 1 & 2 Mill Farm, Church Road, Church Warsop - Change of use and alteration of existing buildings to form 2 no. dwellings.

Cllr Brealey asked about another planning application on York Terrace on that isn’t on the agenda. The Chairman informed her that this was due to a computer issue that will be fixed shortly.

The Chairman stated he was keeping an eye on the first planning application. He said that all the garages have been taken down and the builders also took down a wall that was unsafe. He said that this application was amendment of the first one and that they have been told to build the wall back up again. The builders were not happy about this and the Chairman said he would chase this issue up.

Cllr Kerr informed the council that Cllr Crawford wanted to bring up a concern regarding planning application number 3 because of flood plains. The Chairman stated he would like this to be brought to the planning committee rather than being dealt with under delegated powers. The Chairman advised that if anyone has concerns regarding this application that they should put their objections in but make sure it’s done by individuals and not as a Parish Council. If an objection was to be put in by the council then he and Cllr Kerr would have to leave the planning meeting.

Cllr Adey asked Cllr Brealey if she could ask the person she knows if she would put in an objection regarding this planning application. Cllr Brealey said she would ask.

Cllr Kerr stated that three objections will be required for it to go to a planning committee.

The Carrs

During public participation concerns were raised for the amphitheatre.

Meden Baths

Cllr Kerr stated that he has not received a reply from the John Eastwood Trust Foundation regarding possible funding. He said he is looking at other routes.

The Chairman stated that the main problem is money and the labour candidate for mayor had put these funds into the budget but unfortunately didn’t receive enough votes to be elected. The current mayor did support the new swimming baths at first but now it seems that she doesn’t want to spend the money in Warsop.

Cllr Kerr stated that a good job was done in fighting for the money and Notts County Council were prepared to do a land swap.

Cllr Adey mentioned she had gone through the report and Cllr Crawford suggested that a special meeting was held for the leisure centre.

The Chairman said he agreed there should be a meeting just for the swimming pool.


Monday 16th May, 2016

Council Pages


Tel: 01623 846 011
Mob: 07817 216 876