Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote

Contact: Committee Administration 01905 722027, 722006, 722085 

Items
No. Item

71.

Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of interest.

Minutes:

The following declarations of interest were made:

 

Application 19/00561/FUL – Worcester Muslim Cemetery, John Comyn Drive

(Minute No. 77)

 

All Members – the applicant, Councillor Ditta, is known to all Members.  All Councillors elected to speak and vote on the item.

 

Councillor Hassan – knows one of the persons who has made representations.  She is also part of the Muslim community - but has no personal interest in the application and has not discussed it.  Councillor Hassan elected to speak and vote on the item.

 

 

72.

Minutes of Previous Planning Committee pdf icon PDF 258 KB

of the meeting held on 22nd October 2020 to be approved and signed.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 22nd October 2020 be approved as a correct record and signed remotely by the Chairman.

73.

Minutes of Previous Conservation Advisory Panel pdf icon PDF 172 KB

That the minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel be received.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel are received.

 

Matters Arising:

 

Minute 26 – Application 20/000035/REG3 – Land including and between Gheluvelt Park

 

It was asked if the City Council was to be consulted on this application.  In response the Development Management Team Leader confirmed that the consultation had been received and it was anticipated that there would be a report to the next Planning Committee to consider the feedback to Worcestershire County Council.

74.

Public Participation

Up to a total of fifteen minutes can be allowed, each speaker being allocated a maximum of five minutes, for members of the public to present a petition, ask a question or comment on any matter on the Agenda or within the remit of the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 10.

Minutes:

None.

75.

Public Representation

Members of the public will be allowed to address the Committee in respect of applications to be considered by the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 11. Members of the public will address the Committee during the Committee’s consideration of the respective item.

Minutes:

Those representations made are recorded at the minute to which they relate.

76.

Application 20/00559/REM - Waitrose, 223 London Road pdf icon PDF 485 KB

The Deputy Director - Economic Development and Planning recommends that the Planning Committee grant permission subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application to vary conditions 6 and 8 attached to planning permission P14G0153 to extend the permitted delivery and lighting hours of the service yard at Waitrose, 223 London Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation as the original application had been determined by the Planning Committee.

 

Report/Background/Late Papers

 

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the proposal itself, relevant polices, planning history and the representations and consultations where applicable.

 

There were no late papers circulated.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The information was presented as set out by the Deputy Director – Economic Development and Planning, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

 

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Ministerial Statement issued on 13th March 2020, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, whereby Local Authorities were being asked to act flexibly to ensure that goods can be delivered to stores to support the response to Covid-19.

 

Worcestershire Regulatory Services had originally requested a temporary permission of 6 months, but this has been changed in line with the Written Ministerial Statement and a revised time period of 12 months was proposed which would allow the assessment of impact on local residents.

 

Public Representations

 

There had been no one registered to speak on the application.

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         Reassurances were requested that there would be no deliveries between 8.30am and 9.15am and 3.00pm and 4.00pm due to school children passing the entrance to Waitrose.  The Senior Planning  Officer confirmed that these conditions still applied.

 

·         It was acknowledged that online shopping had increased and support was shown for the temporary 12 month change to the conditions.  Members noted that the applicants would need to re-apply at the end of the 12 months if they wished to make the conditions permanent.  It was agreed that there was a need to be flexible during these times and a proposal to approve the proposal was made.

 

·         Some Members preferred 6 months permission to then ask for a further 6 months if needed and felt that the original judgement of Worcestershire Regulatory Services was the correct one.  A proposal to amend the recommendation to 6 months was made.

 

·         The Chair did state that this would prove an administrative burden on the applicants.  The Senior Planning Officer also stated that they would need to re-apply and provide updated surveys and 6 months would not give them enough time to implement it and carry out the recording data.

 

·         Clarification was requested on when the permission would commence, the Legal Team Manager confirmed  that it would be from the date of the issue of the Decision Notice.

 

It was proposed that a vote be taken to amend the recommendation, to reduce the period of the permission from 12 months to a period of 6 months, this proposal was seconded.  The Chair asked the Legal Team Manager to request  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

77.

Application 20/00246/FUL - Land at 4 Mayfield Road pdf icon PDF 719 KB

The Deputy Director - Economic Development and Planning recommends that the Planning Committee is minded to grant planning permission subject to the applicant and all persons having an interest in the land entering into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act in accordance with the agreed Heads of Terms, and subject to the Deputy Director - Governance being satisfied with the nature of such an Agreement delegate to the Deputy Director of Economic Development and Planning approval to grant the necessary planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application for the redevelopment of a site to include demolition of existing building and construction of 22no. residential apartments with associated car parking and amenities, land at 4 Mayfield Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the adopted Scheme of Delegation and at the request of Councillor Gregson on the grounds of highway matters/parking issues and the scale of the development.

 

Report/Background/Late Papers

 

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the proposal itself, relevant planning policies, planning history and the representations and consultations where applicable.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The information was presented as set out by the Deputy Director – Economic Development and Planning, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

 

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the late papers which related to the following:

 

·         Revised comments from the Lead Local Flood Authority recommending three additional conditions; and

·         A further written submission from Sam and Emma Powell, neighbour objections.

 

The Development Management Team Leader, in referring to the report, made particular reference to the issue of car parking provision, which was previously a feature of this site, planning permission from 1983, reference 83/0774 refers, the decision notice was attached as appendix 1 of the report.  He explained that there is no reason why these 6 spaces are to be retained which was clarified in paragraphs 7.29 and 7.30 of the report.

 

It was also confirmed that the application was the subject of a Section 106 Agreement and the draft Heads of Terms were attached as appendix 2 of the report.

 

Public Representations

 

The following people had registered to speak on the application:

 

Tony Urosevic (Objector) and David Addison (Agent on behalf of Applicant)

 

A local Ward Member, Councillor Gregson also addressed the Committee.

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         The objector, who lives adjacent to the development site, informed the Committee that the proposed apartment block will overlook his property, which will result in a loss of privacy.  He considered the proposed building to be visually overbearing which will be out of keeping with the neighbouring properties. In referring to the decision of 1983 he believed that the 6 spaces made available to local residents were a lifetime covenant and should be included on any plans.  He felt that the proposal would increase the already busy and congested road.  He asked that the Committee refuse the application and that the developers re-submit a building design that is smaller, less intrusive and more sensitive to the area.

 

·         The objector responded to questions from Members, in particular around the current issues relating to parking in the area.

 

·         The agent, on behalf of the applicant, in addressing the Committee stated that this proposal was a carefully considered and sympathetic redevelopment of the site.  The applicant has worked with Officers to address any concerns raised, and as part of discussions had agreed to bring forward the front block so as to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

78.

Application 19/00561/FUL - Worcester Muslim Cemetery, John Comyn Drive pdf icon PDF 328 KB

The Deputy Director - Economic Development and Planning recommends that the Planning Committee grant planning permission subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered a retrospective application for the change of use to burial land at the Worcester Muslim Cemetery, John Comyn Drive.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation as the applicant is an elected Member.

 

Report/Background/Late Papers

 

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the proposal itself, relevant policies, planning history and the representations and consultations where applicable.

 

There were no late papers circulated.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The information was presented as set out by the Deputy Director – Economic Development and Planning, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation.

 

There were no late papers circulated, but the Development Management Team Leader read out a letter of support received from the Chairman of the Worcester Muslim Welfare Association.

 

Members were informed that the cemetery was originally granted planning permission in 1985, however since that time some limited burials have taken place outside the originally defined site area.  This application sought to regularise the use of the area of land for burials which are outside the originally defined boundary.

 

Members were further informed that the current application had been held in abeyance for some time, as the Environment Agency had raised concerns over water pollution, to allow for the commissioning and production of a Hydrogeological Risk Screening Assessment to be considered by the Environment Agency.  This report has now been produced and the Environment Agency have no objection, subject to a condition and informative statement, as outlined in paragraph 6.1 of the report.

 

Public Representations

 

There had been no one registered to speak on the application.

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         Members questioned the use of the site without planning permission for which the Committee were now being asked to approve a retrospective application.  The Development Management Team Leader stated that issues had arisen from the lease of the site by the City Council, the due diligence by Property Services meant that this matter has now been raised.

 

·         The Legal Team Manager further clarified that when the site was managed by the City Council there was planning permission for the then existing burial site.    When transferring the land to the current owners, the Council transferred a larger area than the area that had planning permission.  Over time burials have taken place in the extended area and the lack of planning permission was an oversight, which this application seeks to address.

 

·         Members agreed that the situation needed to be regularised and it was an important amenity for the community.  The site is in green space and green belt and it was considered an appropriate use of the land. It was also noted that the Environment Agency had no objection, subject to conditions.

 

A proposal to approve the application was made and this was seconded. There being no further points made the Chair asked the Legal Team Manager to request the voting of each Member of the Committee, who were eligible to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

79.

Any Other Business

Which in the opinion of the Chairman is of sufficient urgency as to warrant consideration.

Minutes:

None.