Declarations of interest for agenda item 'Declarations of Interest'
- Councillor Clive Smitheram - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor David Reeve - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor David Wood FCA - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Humphrey Reynolds - Other Interest - Councillor Humphrey Reynolds and Councillor Jan Mason declared that they were known by the objector.
- Councillor Humphrey Reynolds - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Jan Mason - Other Interest - Councillor Humphrey Reynolds and Councillor Jan Mason declared that they were known by the objector.
- Councillor Jan Mason - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor John Beckett - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Martin Olney - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Mike Teasdale - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Neil Dallen MBE - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Peter O'Donovan - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Tina Mountain - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.
- Councillor Vince Romagnuolo - Other Interest - In the interests of opennes and transparency, it was noted that the majority of the Committee were known to the neighbour of the applicant. However, it was not considered that this could be regarded as sufficiently close an association as to effect the consideration of this item.