Agenda and minutes

Venue: Guildhall

Contact: Committee Administration 01905 722027, 722006, 722085 

Note: To view the live broadcast go to https://www.youtube.com/user/WorcesterCityCouncil 

Media

Items
No. Item

24.

Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of interest.

Minutes:

The following declaration of interest was made:

 

Application 20/00775/FUL – Ketch Field, Broomhall Way

(Minute No. 27)

 

Councillor Barnes – Had received email correspondence from a Member of St Peter’s Parish Council, but did not respond.

25.

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.

26.

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.

27.

Application 20/00775/FUL - Ketch Field, Broomhall Way pdf icon PDF 1 MB

The Deputy Director - Governance 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 Managing Director approval to grant the necessary planning permission, subject to recommended conditions.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application for the development of 92 affordable dwellings and improvement of existing access, including green infrastructure and associated works at the Ketch Field, Broomhall Way.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation as it is a major application.

 

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 were attached as Appendix 1 to the report.  Further comments from Worcestershire County Council Highway Authority were also attached as Appendix 2 to the report.

 

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

 

·         Consultee response from the Conservation Advisory Panel meeting held on 4th November 2020;

·         Further information from Officers related to density and Policy SWDP 13; and

·         Recommended conditions.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The information was presented as set out by the Deputy Director – Governance, in accordance with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

 

Public Representations

 

The following people had registered to speak on the application:

 

David Saunders (Objector on behalf of St Peter’s Parish Council), David Hannon (Applicant – Rooftop Housing Association) and Joe Bennett (Agent – RCA Regeneration)

 

A local Ward Member, Councillor Mackay also addressed the Committee objecting to the proposal.

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         The objector, a member of St Peter’s Parish Council and Vice Chair of the Conservation Advisory Panel, addressed the Committee and questioned the suitability of the site for housing development with regard to access and highway safety.  The lack of public transport, pollution and noise levels were also of a concern.  He also considered that the house type designs were of poor architectural merit with most objections from the residents of St Peter’s relating to the three storey apartment blocks.

 

·         The applicant and agent addressed the Committee in support of the application, commenting that the principle of development has been established at the outline stage.  The concerns of buildings heights raised by residents were acknowledged.  Reference was made to the northern elevation of the apartments that would be most visible from St Peter’s which have been designed to take the appearance of a 2.5 storey building in order to mitigate their impact.  An earth bund and tree planting will soften the visual impact. 

 

·         The comments of the Highway Authority were noted who had no objections and thanks were given to them for their efforts.  Thanks were also given to Officers for their collaboration.   They highlighted that the site will deliver 92 affordable houses which will contribute to the city’s housing need and met Rooftop Housing Association standards.  The project had been designed to have a mixed development community which has the full support of Homes England and would welcome positive planning permission.  Both agent and applicant responded to questions from Members.

 

·         The local Ward Member, Councillor Mackay in addressing the Committee echoed the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

28.

Application 21/00176/FUL - County Cricket Ground, New Road pdf icon PDF 640 KB

The Deputy Director - Governance recommends that the Planning Committee grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as set out in Section 9 of this report. 

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application for the resurfacing of an existing temporary over-spill car park and new drainage infrastructure at the County Cricket Ground, New Road.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation as it is contrary to policies relating to flooding and Green Space.

 

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 Committee’s attention was drawn to the late paper which related to further clarification of paragraph 7.27 of the Officers report related to drainage.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The information was presented as set out by the Deputy Director – Governance, in accordance with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

 

Members were informed that the car parking area has been in operation for over 10 years, the use of which has been confirmed via a Certificate of Lawful Use.

 

The Development Management Team Leader informed the Committee that he proposed two additional conditions, which related to details of the headwall construction and a landscaping scheme.

 

Public Representations

 

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

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         Details of the location of the headwall and whether it would be visible was requested by Members. The Development Management Team Leader in response, identified on the map of the powerpoint presentation, the location of the headwall and stated that it would be  a small outlet and would not be an incongruous feature.

 

A proposal to approve the application, with the additional two conditions, had been made and this was seconded.  There being no further points made the Chair requested the voting of each Member of the Committee, who were eligible to vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal was unanimously agreed.

 

RESOLVED: That the Committee grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in section 9 the report, and to the additional conditions relating to details of the headwall construction and landscaping scheme.

 

 

 

29.

Land at Sherriff Street Industrial Estate, Sherriff Street pdf icon PDF 228 KB

The Deputy Director - Governance recommends that the Planning Committee is minded to approve the variation of the Section 106 Agreement dated 13th December 2018 as previously amended by a Deed of Variation dated 6th July 2020, subject to:-

 

i)             The Chair and Vice-Chair being satisfied with the Heads of Terms for the variation of the S106 Agreement; and

ii)           The applicant and all persons having an interest in the land entering into a Deed of Variation to the satisfaction of the Deputy Director – Governance.

Minutes:

The Committee considered  a report for the variation of a Section 106 Agreement dated 13th December 20218 relating to planning application P12G0199, land at Sherriff Street Industrial Estate, Sherriff Street.

 

The applicant had requested a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 planning agreement to reduce the affordable housing obligation to 10%, together with a reduction in financial contributions to £2.63m.  The applicant has however agreed to a deferred contingency ‘clawback’ clause capped at an amount that is equivalent to the difference between the provision of policy compliant and the 10% affordable housing and reduced contributions.

 

Members were informed that the request is supported by an updated financial appraisal which has been the subject of an independent assessment on behalf of the Local Planning Authority, although the appraisal submitted is not disputed, it is whether the reduction in the provision of affordable housing and contributions is acceptable.

 

The procedure to vary a Section 106 Agreement was set out in paragraph 3 of the report.

 

Members were very disappointed that a further request to vary the Section 106 Agreement had been received, reducing the affordable housing from 30% to 10% and a shortfall in contributions of £2,161,158 and some Members did not find this acceptable.

 

The Development Management Team Leader acknowledged Members comments and referred to the Education Authority and Highway Authority who had confirmed that on the basis of the viability appraisal, that had been independently assessed on behalf of the Authority and not wanting to stagnate urban regeneration, accepted the position, as outlined in paragraph 4.4 of the report.

 

Reassurances were sought by Members that if the market recovers then the contributions would be reviewed.  The Development Management Team Leader referred to the deferred contingency ‘clawback’.

 

A proposal to approve the variation of the Section 106 Agreement had been made and this was seconded.  There being no further points made the Chair  requested the voting of each Member of the Committee who were eligible to vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal was agreed as follows:

 

For – 9

Against – 1

Abstentions - 0

 

RESOLVED: That the Committee is minded to approve the variation of the Section 106 Agreement dated 13th December 2018 as previously amended by a Deed of Variation dated 6th July 2020, subject to:-

 

1.   the Chair and Vice-Chair being satisfied with the Heads of Terms for the variation of the S106 Agreement; and

2.   the applicant and all persons having an interest in the land entering into a Deed of Variation to the satisfaction of the Deputy Director – Governance.

30.

Item Involving the Disclosure of Exempt Information

The Committee are invited to pass the following resolution:

 

That under Section 100A(4) od the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of information as defined in Schedule 12A of the said Act.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of information as defined in Schedule 12A of the said Act.

31.

Counsel's Opinion in relation to 21/00462/FUL - Land at Everard Close

To note the content of Counsel’s Advice.

Minutes:

The Committee noted Counsel’s Opinion in relation to Application 21/00462/FUL Land at Everard Close.

32.

Application 21/00462/FUL - Land at Everard Close pdf icon PDF 263 KB

The officer recommendation remains that the Planning Committee grants planning permission subject to amended conditions set out in the Section 4 of this report.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Introduction

 

The Committee considered an application for the construction of a workshop (Use Class E(g) on land at Everard Close.

 

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

 

The application was referred to Planning Committee on the 24th June 2021.  At this meeting Members unanimously resolved to refuse planning permission, contrary to Officer’s recommendation, for the following reasons:

 

·        Significant impact on residential amenity. The workshop is situated in an entirely residential neighbourhood and the impact upon the neighbouring residential properties from noise and other pollution and operating hours is completely at odds with the residential setting and conflicts with SWDP 21 (of the south Worcestershire Development Plan 2016).

 

·        The impacts and potential risk of pollution, such as dust fumes, noise, smell, vibration and chemicals, of this unknown activitied workshop, being located in a residential area conflicts with SWDP31.

 

·        The proposed plans for the route to store the rubbish is legally not tenable, as it assumes access across the land that is not in the ownership of the applicant and for which permission has been refused by the owner. Therefore, the plans presented to this committee today, are incomplete and unworkable.

 

In accordance with the adopted procedure the application was deferred to enable Officers to examine the proposed grounds for refusal and to provide their professional opinion on the robustness of the same.

 

The previous report and late papers to Planning Committee on 24th June 2021 were attached as Appendix 1.

 

Report/Background/Late Papers

 

The report set out the comments of the Deputy Director – Governance, which related to the grounds for refusal given at the last meeting, summarized in paragraphs 3.1-3.9.

 

Following concerns raised at the last meeting additional conditions had been recommended related to refuse storage and collection details and a refuse management plan and sound proofing and a noise management plan.  Paragraph 4.1 of the report listed all recommended conditions.

 

There were no late papers circulated.

 

Officer Presentation

 

The Development Management Team Leader continue to recommend the application for approval, with the benefit of the additional conditions, but if Members resolved to refuse the application then a suggested reason for refusal was given at paragraph 5.2 of the report.

 

Public Representations

 

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Part 5, Committee Procedure 11.3.8, as public representations were made at the 24th June 2021 meeting and no significant changes had been made to the scheme, no-one had been permitted to register to speak again on this application.

 

Key Points of Debate

 

·         The amendment to the condition on hours of operation were more acceptable to Members.  However, following concerns raised again on noise levels from extraction equipment and generators the Development Management Team Leader agreed to amend condition 3 to include details of ventilation, external plant and equipment.

 

·         Some Members expressed their concerns, as previously, stating that the proposed workshop was unsuitable for a residential area and those objections made at the last meeting remained.

 

·         Not knowing what type of business would be operating from the proposed workshop, how it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

33.

Any Other Business

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

Minutes:

None.