Agenda and minutes

The Members had before them:

A.    The Agenda papers (previously circulated);

B.    A copy of the summary presentations from public participants invited to speak (previously circulated); and

C.   The Minutes of the meeting held on 27 March 2018 (previously circulated).

Ms C M Stalker for Mr P Denham.

Apologies were received from Mr P Denham, Mr A Fry and Mrs A T Hingley.

The Council has put in place arrangements which usually allow one speaker each on behalf of objectors, the applicant and supporters of applications to address the Committee.  Speakers are chosen from those who have made written representations and expressed a desire to speak at the time an application is advertised.  Where there are speakers, presentations are made as part of the consideration of each application.

Those presentations made are recorded at the Minute to which they relate.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 March 2018. (previously circulated – pink pages)

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 March 2018 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee considered a County Matter planning application for the proposed construction of an Anaerobic Digestion (AD) storage tank (part retrospective) on land at Springhill Nursery, off A44 near Vale Green Energy, Springhill Nursery, near Fladbury, Pershore, Worcestershire.

The report set out the background of the proposal, the proposal itself, the relevant planning policy and details of the site, consultations and representations.

The report set out the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Planning's comments in relation to the Waste Hierarchy, the Location of the Development, Landscape Character and Visual Impacts, Residential Amenity (Noise, Odour and Health Impacts), Traffic and Highway Safety, the Water Environment, Ecology and Biodiversity, Cultural Heritage, and Other Matters (Economic Impact, Mineral Safeguarding, and Integrity of Railway Line).

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Planning concluded that the applicant stated that the proposal was required to supplement two existing and operational tanks / chambers on site, which were experiencing technical faults due to issues with the type of agitators that had been used. The internal agitators had broken and the stored material had solidified. This meant that repair could not be undertaken until the storage facilities could be emptied. The applicant was proposing that the material would be emptied into the proposed storage tank. In the future this proposed tank would then be used, so that the two existing tanks no longer had to be filled as much as presently, which would help prevent this issue arising again. The applicant was also proposing that the internally mounted agitators on the existing plant would be replaced with externally fitted agitators. The proposed storage tank would also have an externally fitted agitator.

It was considered that this proposal would modernise and improve the operation of the existing AD plant, in that it would help to improve the operation, efficiency and resilience of the plant, which was considered to be a sustainable waste management development that supplied a source of renewable energy. It was considered that the development accorded with the National Planning Policy for Waste and the Worcestershire Waste Core Strategy in relation to the waste hierarchy, as it would support and enhance the existing AD plant.

The proposed development formed part of the curtilage of an existing waste management site (AD plant), was ancillary to the existing AD Plant, would be a scale appropriate to the location and rural character of the area, and therefore, complied with Policies WCS 3 and WCS 6 of the Waste Core Strategy, relating to the Geographic Hierarchy and compatible land uses, respectively and Policies SWDP 2, SWDP 8 and SWDP 12 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan relating to the Development Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy, and development in rural areas.

Due to the location of the proposal within the existing operational greenhouse, biomass boiler and AD plant site, it was considered that the proposed development would not have an adverse or detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the local area.

Based upon the advice of Worcestershire Regulatory  ...  view the full minutes text for item 990.

The Committee considered the annual review of activities carried out by Worcestershire County Council (WCC) Directorate of Public Health Emergency Planning team to discharge statutory duties under the Safety at Sports Grounds (SatSGs) and related legislation during 2017/2018.

The report set out details of the Safety Advisory Groups, details of the safety certificates and Safety Advisory Groups findings for Sixways Stadium – Worcester Warriors RFC, Aggborough Stadium – Kidderminster Harriers FC, The Grandstand – Worcester Racecourse, and the Victoria Ground – Bromsgrove Sporting and Worcester City FC, other event safety advice and the Regulatory (Fire Safety) Order.

In the ensuing debate, the following principal points were raised:

·         A Committee site visit to the Sixways Stadium and the Victoria Ground would be welcomed. Charlie Heritage indicated that if possible he would arrange a visit to both grounds on the same day depending on fixtures. Worcester Warriors would not be holding matches next season on Friday nights due work taking place on junction 6 of the motorway

·         In response to a query, Charlie Heritage explained that Counter Terrorism Plans and Disorder Plans were not new but it was intended that specific clauses be included in the safety certificate in the future to be clear as to how these plans would be incorporated

·         In response to a concern expressed about issues experienced with the turnstiles at the Victoria Ground, Charlie Heritage commented that the aged turnstiles were unable to count the number of spectators entering the ground and therefore total attendance was not known until half-time. This was not a problem during the regular season matches which were well under capacity however for big cup matches it could be a problem. These matches were therefore made all-ticket

·         Did the SAG provide advice for the larger cycling events taking place in the county? Charlie Heritage responded that the SAG provided one-off advice for events taking place in the county eg. the Velo bike event and the Worcester Carnival

·         Was a grading system applied to the stadia to give an indication of the level of safety standards? Charlie Heritage commented that there was no form of grading criteria as such. Discussions had taken place at regional SAG meetings to establish general trends and the only trend identified had been the use of flares. Every attempt was made to implement national safety standards. All the grounds in the county offered a reasonable level of crowd safety

·         Was there a formal procedure for the inspection of grounds? Charlie Heritage indicated that he visited each venue at least once a year however if there was a particular issue of concern, he would revisit it

·         Was one visit a year sufficient and was it forewarned or unannounced? Charlie Heritage responded that his visit generally coincided with the busiest match of the season so that the facility could be observed at full capacity and therefore it was not necessary to undertake an unannounced visit.

RESOLVED that:

a)    The 2017/18 Annual Review of activities carried out by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 991.