Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting

Contact: Committee Administration 01905 722027, 722006, 722085 

Items
No. Item

92.

Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of interest.

Minutes:

The following  declarations of other disclosable interest were made:

 

Application 20/00579/FUL – ‘Mayfield’, 282 Malvern Road

(Minute No. 99)

 

Councillor Cawthorne – as a friend of a near neighbour to ‘Mayfield’.  Councillor Cawthorne left the meeting during the consideration of this item.

 

Application 20/00872/FUL – Warndon Community Centre, Shap Drive

(Minute No. 101)

 

Councillor Hodges – as a Trustee of Worcester Community Trust.  Councillor Hodges left the meeting during the consideration of this item.

93.

Minutes of Previous Planning Committee pdf icon PDF 179 KB

of the meeting held on 17th December 2020 to be approved and signed.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 17th December 2020 be approved as a correct record and signed remotely by the Chair.

94.

Minutes of Previous Conservation Advisory Panel pdf icon PDF 174 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 42 - It was noted that reference had been made to the Lowesmoor Wharf application and Members asked what the timescale was for this application to be considered by the Planning Committee.  It was also noted, that as this was a significant application, would there be a special meeting of the Planning Committee to consider this.

 

The Development Management Team Leader in response stated that he did not yet have a specific timescale for this application to be considered by the Committee and would not anticipate it being brought forward before the end of the financial year as the scheme was being looked at in some detail.  He informed the Committee, that unless otherwise advised or requested, there was no reason why a special meeting would be held.

 

95.

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.

96.

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.

97.

Supporting Housing Delivery and Public Service Infrastructure Consultation pdf icon PDF 246 KB

That Planning Committee notesthe current government consultation ‘Supporting housing delivery and public service infrastructure’ and provide their views for inclusion in the city council’s consultation response.

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report on the ‘Supporting housing delivery and public service infrastructure’ consultation.

 

The Acting Team Leader (Planning Policy) presented the report which was to make the Planning Committee aware of the current government consultation and to obtain views for inclusion in the City Council’s response.

 

In presenting the report, the Acting Team Leader (Planning Policy), provided Members of the Committee with the background to the consultation and its proposals and responded to questions from Members.

 

In the ensuing discussion, the following main points were made:

 

·         In response to a question about use of temporary accommodation for in fast-tracking public service buildings, Officers will check whether this is permissible under the proposal.

 

·         In response to a concern expressed about the potential impact on the city centre, Officers advised that, under the proposals, permitted development rights will apply in conservation areas.

 

·         The view was expressed that the proposals may allow developers to build new city centre accommodation which does not meet acceptable internal space standards if there is a lack of regulation.

 

In conclusion, the Chair advised that any further comments should be sent by email to Corin Beames.

 

RESOLVED: That the Committee note the current government consultation ‘Supporting house delivery and public service infrastructure’.

98.

Application 20/00352/FUL - Land at Former Tolladine Golf Course, Tolladine Road pdf icon PDF 832 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 a proposed residential development to erect 16 units for affordable housing at the former Tolladine Golf Course, Tolladine Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the adopted Scheme of Delegation.

 

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 representations and consultations where applicable.  The draft Heads of Terms for a Section 106 agreement were attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

 

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

 

·         final consultee comments from the County Council Highway Authority indicating support for the proposal, subject to recommending 6 conditions;

·         additional comment from the Agents providing topographical drawings with site overlays to demonstrate that the access could be accommodated within the land controlled by the applicant and confirmation of the retention of the Oak Tree that is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, together with an additional condition relating to landscaping;

·         amendment of condition 14 related to slow worm translocation; and

·         additional comments from Warndon Parish Council.

 

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.

 

Public Representations

The following people had registered to speak on the application:

 

Tony Mathews (Objector on behalf of local residents) and Eamon Thompson (on behalf of the Applicant)

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         The objector stated that local residents were concerned about the increase in the number of proposed dwellings from 9 to 16. They did not object to the principle of development but the increase from 9 dwellings would result in over-development of the site and was contrary to the Development Plan allocation. He raised a number of other issues including the removal of vegetation and consequent drainage problems, the potential for overlooking if trees are removed, the presence of Japanese knotweed, the accuracy of the plans and the increase in vehicular movements.

 

·         The applicant spoke in support of the application and explained that the development will provide a balanced mixture of property types. Planning Officers had not raised any objection to the proposal, which would help to meet a significant need locally for affordable housing, providing high quality properties. Platform will abide by any tree replacement scheme. Parking provision will be in accordance with the Council’s required standards. Platform were not aware of any Japanese knotweed on the site.

 

·         In response to questions, the applicant stated that the protected tree on site will be retained. Platform will minimise the loss of trees and replace in accordance with the condition regarding a replacement scheme. Reference was made to the Section 106 agreement, which will include reference to the local authority’s allocation policy, and Platform will abide by this.

 

·         The Ward Member stated that many local residents  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

99.

Application 20/00579/FUL - 'Mayfield', 282 Malvern Road pdf icon PDF 2 MB

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 1990 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 an existing site consisting of 6 residential dwellings and associated access, parking and turning facilities at ‘Mayfield’, 282 Malvern Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Alan Amos on the grounds that it, or similar has already been refused by the Committee once; and on the grounds of serious concerns about the loss of green/open space and damage to the environment and biodiversity.

 

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 representations and consultations where applicable.  The draft Heads of Terms for a Section 106 agreement were attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

 

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

 

·         amendment of condition 5; and

·         updated Draft Heads of Terms

 

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.

 

Public Representations

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         A local Member spoke and commented that the application was inappropriate for a variety of reasons including the principle of backland development, the impact on the privacy of local residents and loss of amenity, the restrictions on access for refuse collection and damage to biodiversity and wildlife. It was also commented that none of the local Members had been involved in discussion regarding the use of Section 106 funds.

 

·         The Legal Team Manager clarified that the statutory duty to collect refuse can be waived in certain circumstances, as set out in paragraph 7.67 of the report. The extant permission for this site provided for collection by the local authority.

 

·         It was noted that the applicant has reverted to the original proposed location for the bin store with private refuse collections to service the site. Officers considered this to be an appropriate response.

 

Committee Members expressed views both for and against the proposal. It was proposed and seconded that the Committee are minded to refuse the application, on the grounds that the principle of development of this backland site is unacceptable, the proposal will be harmful to the amenity of local residents due to loss of privacy and overlooking, the site is not able to accommodate suitable arrangements for waste and refuse collection, and the impact on biodiversity and landscape, in particular the loss of trees on the site. Upon being put to the vote, the proposal for refusal was lost on the Chair’s casting vote.

 

A proposal to approve the application, subject to the amendment of condition 5 and the updated draft Heads of Terms as set out in the late paper and further verbally updated was made and seconded.  There being no further points made the Chair asked the Legal Team Manager to request the voting of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

100.

Application 20/00644/FUL - Land at Green Lane and Mayfield Road pdf icon PDF 672 KB

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

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application for the erection of 6 bungalows with parking and amenity and removal of existing garages for parking on land at Green Lane and Mayfield Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Collins on grounds as set out in paragraph 1.2 of the report.

 

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 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.

 

Public Representations

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         The Development Management Team Leader advised that it would not be feasible to seek a contribution for the provision of a play area in an alternative location as the existing playground had been vacant at least since 2009 and the proposal was under the relevant threshold.

 

·         In response to a question about the impact of the development due to its proximity of the site to Green Lane, Members were advised that a requirement to provide a scheme for boundary treatment and landscaping is included in the proposed conditions and any such scheme will need to be approved by Officers.

 

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 vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal was agreed, subject to the amendment of condition 6.

 

It was noted that Councillor Hassan had left the meeting and therefore did not participate in the vote on this item or any of the subsequent items.

 

RESOLVED: That the Committeegrant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of the report and to the amendment of condition 6 relating to electric vehicle charging points.

 

 

101.

Application 20/00872/FUL - Warndon Community Centre, Shap Drive pdf icon PDF 1 MB

The Deputy Director - Economic Development and Planning recommends that the Planning Committee grant planning permission, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 for the erection of a new two storey community extension to the existing building block building at Warndon Community Centre, Shap Drive.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the adopted Scheme of Delegation.

 

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 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.

 

Public Representations

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         In the ensuing discussion, Members commented on the need for this facility in the local area. The principle of development was acceptable and development would be sustainable. The improved access arrangements and landscaping were highlighted.

 

·         It was highlighted that the existing car park is well used and it was proposed that a scheme for the car park to be repaired and marked out be included in the 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 vote. Following the recording of the votes the proposal was unanimously agreed, subject to the additional condition.

 

RESOLVED: That the Committee grant planning permission, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of the report and to the additional condition for repair and marking out of car park prior to occupation of development.

102.

Application 20/00865/FUL - Tesco Express, Unit 1, Brindley Court, Gresley Road pdf icon PDF 409 KB

The Deputy Director - Economic Development and Planning recommends that the Planning Committee refuse this application for the reasons set out in Section 9 of this report.

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered a retrospective application for the installation of steel security spikes around the roof at Tesco Express, Unit 1, Brindley Court, Gresley Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee at the request of the Chair of Planning Committee, Councillor Mitchell.

 

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 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.

 

Public Representations

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

Committee Members acknowledged the need to make the site secure but were of the view that the security spikes were visually obtrusive and detrimental to the character of the local area.

 

A proposal to refuse 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 vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal was refused as per the Officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED: That the Committee refuse planning permission for the following reason:

Policy SWDP 21 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan 2016 requires that development proposals achieve a high standard of design, having regard to the character of the area and harmonising with their surroundings and to make a positive contribution to the character and quality of its environment through good layout and design.

This is reflected in the aims and interests that the National Planning Policy Framework seeks to protect and promote with regard to design.

 

In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the security spikes unacceptably detract from the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area by reason of their scale, design, appearance and siting in a prominent position on the site that would appear wholly incongruous within the street scene.

 

The proposal would thereby also be contrary to Policy SWDP 21 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan 2016. 

 

 

 

103.

Any Other Business

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

Minutes:

The Chair informed the Committee that the Infrastructure Funding Statement 2020, which provides details of the income and expenditure relating to Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 agreements, had recently been reported to the South Worcestershire Development Plan Joint Advisory Panel and was to be presented to the meeting of the Place and Economic Development Sub-Committee in February. She asked whether the Committee wished to receive a similar report.

 

The Deputy Director – Economic Development and Planning advised that the reporting process was under review and that an all-Member briefing would be organised as part of this review.

 

Members concluded that there would be benefit in both a briefing and a report to this Committee and asked the Deputy Director to proceed on this basis.