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 26 March 2019 (previously circulated).

None.

Apologies were received from Mr R M Bennett and Mr J A D O’Donnell.

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 26 March 2019. (previously circulated – pink pages)

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2019 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee considered an application under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992 for proposed Pershore Northern Link Road comprising the construction of a new highway and road bridge to the north of Pershore in Worcestershire. The scheme would provide a direct link between the existing A44 / B4083 roundabout (north of the Oxford - Worcester - Wolverhampton (OWW) railway line) and the B4083 roundabout (south of the OWW railway line) to provide a critical connection between the A44 and B4083 Wyre Road and access to the Pershore Trading Estate. As part of the northern link road a new road bridge would be constructed which would cross the OWW railway line to the east of Pershore railway station on land between the A44 / B4083 roundabout and the Wyre Road / Ascot Road roundabout, 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 Development Management Team Manager’s comments in relation to: the Principle of the Development, Alternatives, Traffic, Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way, Landscape Character and Visual Impact, Residential Amenity (Air Quality, Dust, Noise and Vibrations Impacts), Water Environment, Ecology and Biodiversity, Historic Environment, Other Matters (Safety and Integrity of the Railway, Contaminated Land, Utilities, Cumulative Effects and EIA Team and Expertise).

The Development Management Team Manager concluded that the proposed development gained policy support from Policies SWDP 4 and SWDP 47 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan. The route of the Pershore Northern Link Road was safeguarded for transport infrastructure under Policy SWDP 4. The Reasoned Justification to Policy SWDP 47 stated that "in directing development to the north of the town it is important that infrastructure improvements are secured. These include provision of the Northern Link Road from the A44 / Wyre Piddle bypass roundabout to Keytec 7 Business Park.”

The applicant had confirmed that option development had been undertaken throughout the design process. This included a number of rail overbridge bridge options. In view of this, the Development Management Team Manager considered that the applicant's approach to the consideration of alternatives was acceptable in this instance.

The application was accompanied by a Transport Assessment, which stated that the proposal was not expected to generate trips, however the additional capacity the proposal would provide made it a more attractive route compared to other busier alternatives. The wider area net trip impact would be zero, and the scheme would not only benefit the local area, but the wider highway network by taking trips from other congested routes / junctions.

The Public Right of Way of Footpath PS-565 crossed the application site and adjoined Footpath WP-508. The applicant proposed to close these two Public Rights of Way for health and safety reasons throughout the duration of the construction works and reopen them on completion of the development. Based on the advice of the County Footpath Officer and Ramblers Association, the Development Management  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1020.

The Committee considered an application under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992 for proposed new cycle / footbridge to span Broomhall Way (Southern Link Road A4440) between the Ketch Roundabout and Norton Roundabout to provide a direct link between the existing housing and amenities at St Peters and a new development south of Broomhall Way (Part of Worcester South Urban Extension) at Broomhall Way (Southern Link Road A4440), Worcester, 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 Development Management Team Manager’s comments in relation to: the Need and Principle of the Development, Traffic, Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way, Visual Impact and Residential Amenity, Water Environment, Ecology and Biodiversity, Other Matters (Contaminated land, Utilities, Historic Environment, Power Park, and Crime and Safety.

The Development Management Team Manager concluded that Policy SWDP 45/1: 'Broomhall Community and Norton Barracks Community (Worcester South Urban Extension) (247.1 hectare)' of the South Worcestershire Development Plan, which related to the developments referenced above, allocated approximately 20 hectares of employment land and 2,600 dwellings. It also required measuring including proportionate contributions directly related to the development, to support and safeguard the implementation of relevant schemes set out in the Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3, including cycle and walking infrastructure and services which should include at least two grade-separated pedestrian / cycle crossings. The accompanying Diagram 1 – SWDP 45/1 showed the indicative location for a grade separated pedestrian and cycle crossing. In view of the policy support for this proposal, the Development Management Team Manager considered that the need for and the principle of the scheme had been established.

Overall the proposal would result in an improvement for public access to the area and provide a sustainable connection between the areas north and south of the Southern Link Road (A4440). Based upon the advice of the County Highways Officer, County Footpath Officer, and Malvern Hills District Footpath Society, it was considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon traffic, highway safety or Public Rights of Way, subject to the imposition of an appropriate conditions regarding a CEMP and details of the joint pedestrian / cycle route to be provided to the south of Broomhall Way connecting to the public highway.

Objections had been received from both Malvern Hills District Council and Worcester City Council on design grounds. It was considered that the proposal would appear flatter and heavier in appearance when compared to the approved bridges at Crookbarrow Way and Hams Way. Notwithstanding this, the Development Management Team Manager welcomed the amended design, which incorporated a 'butterflying' effect, which enhanced the aesthetics of the bridge, and it was recognised the height of the bridge needed to be balanced against any visual impacts upon neighbouring residential properties and its wider landscape impact. In view of this, on balance, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1021.

The Committee considered a County Matter planning application for a proposed extension to an existing waste recycling facility incorporating additional buildings to serve separate metals and mixed waste areas at Long Marston Works, Long Marston Road, Long Marston, near Stratford-on-Avon.

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 Economy’s comments in relation to: the Waste Hierarchy, Location of the Development, Residential Amenity (Noise, Dust and Odour Impacts), Traffic and Highway Safety, Water Environment, Ecology and Biodiversity and Other Matters (Contaminated Land and Renewable Energy).

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy concluded that as the proposed development would involve the bulking up of various sources of waste in preparation for transfer and subsequent recycling by specialist operators it would comply with the objectives of the waste hierarchy.

Although the development site was sited within Level 5 'All other areas' of the Geographic Hierarchy, it was considered that the proposal would be ancillary to existing MRW waste management site in that it improved the working conditions by providing new buildings, secure compounds and more space for the management of waste, thereby improving staff welfare and enabling greater working efficiency. In view of this, it was considered that the proposal would comply with Policy WCS 3 of the Worcestershire Waste Core Strategy. As the proposed development would be located on existing industrial land, it was considered the proposal complies with Policy WCS 6 of the Waste Core Strategy.

Based on the advice of Historic England and the County Landscape Officer, it was considered that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the local area or the historic environment, subject to the imposition of an appropriate conditions regarding details of the colour of the proposed buildings, height and location of external stockpiles and lighting scheme.

Based on the advice of Worcestershire Regulatory Service, Stratford-on-Avon District Council and the Environment Agency, it was considered that the proposal would have no adverse noise, dust or air quality impacts upon residential amenity or that of human health, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

The County Highways Officer had raised no objections to the proposal, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions requiring details of sheltered and secure cycle parking, accessible parking, electric vehicles charging point, employment travel plan, restricting the throughput of the facility and a HGV Management Plan. In view of this, the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy was satisfied that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon traffic or highway safety, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions as recommended by the County Highways Officer and requiring all HGVs carrying waste to be enclosed or covered.

Based on the advice of the Lead Local Flood Authority, the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered that there would be no adverse effects on the water environment, subject  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1022.

The Committee considered a County Matter planning application made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to vary condition 1 of planning permission: 13/000054/CM to allow for continued use of the site for recycling of soils by screening for off-site distribution until the completion of the landfill site in 15 years-time at Summerway Landfill site, Hillary Road, Stourport-on-Severn, 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 Economy’s comments in relation to: Waste Hierarchy, Location of the Development, Landscape Character and Visual Impacts, Residential Amenity (Noise, Dust and Air Quality Impacts), Traffic and Highway Safety, Water Environment, and Ecology and Biodiversity.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy concluded that it was expected that the landfilling operations would have been completed by now, but changes to the regulations relating to landfilling, the introduction of the Landfill Tax and changes in the way waste material was managed to ensure as much as possible was recycled and reused before any residue was disposed of by landfill had significantly reduced landfilling operations. Consequently, the site had previously not received any significant volumes of waste and the applicant had diversified his business to include operations involving the storage and recycling of waste materials. Landfilling and restoration operations continued on the site.

The recycling of soils could be considered ancillary to the landfill operations. The applicant had put forward very special circumstances for allowing the proposal to remain in this Green Belt location. However, the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered it would be prudent to impose a condition limiting the period of time of operations for a further 5 years after which time the position with regard to the landfill operations and compatibility of ancillary uses such as the soil recycling operations could be reassessed.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered that the proposal would comply with the locational Policies WCS 3, WCS 6 and WCS 7 of the Waste Core Strategy.

It was considered that as the proposed development would involve collecting, recycling and reusing waste soils, it would comply with the objectives of the waste hierarchy.

Based on the advice of the County Landscape Officer, it was considered that the proposed development would not have an adverse or detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the local area, subject to the imposition of appropriate extant planning conditions regarding restricting stockpile heights and locations to prevent visual harm, maintenance of landscaping scheme, and retention of horseshoe shaped bund for the duration of the operations.

Based on the advice of Worcestershire Regulatory Services and the Environment Agency, it was considered that the proposal would have no adverse noise, dust or air quality impacts upon residential amenity or that of human health, subject to the imposition of the relevant extant conditions.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1023.

The Committee considered a County Matter planning application made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to vary condition 1 of planning permission: 13/000053/CM to allow for continued use of the site for importation and stockpiling of hardcore and road planings for off-site distribution until the completion of the landfill site in 15 years-time at Summerway Landfill site, Hillary Road, Stourport-on-Severn, 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 Economy’s comments in relation to: the Waste Hierarchy, Location of the Development, Green Belt, Landscape Character and Visual Impacts, Residential Amenity (Noise, Dust and Air Quality Impacts), Traffic and Highway Safety, Water Environment and Ecology and Biodiversity.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy concluded that it was expected that the landfilling operations would have been completed by now, but changes to the regulations relating to landfilling, the introduction of the Landfill Tax and changes in the way waste material was managed to ensure as much as possible was recycled and reused before any residue was disposed of by landfill had significantly reduced landfilling operations. Consequently, the site had previously not received any significant volumes of waste and the applicant had diversified his business to include operations involving the storage and recycling of waste materials. Landfilling and restoration operations continued on the site.

The recycling of hardcore and road planings could be considered ancillary to the landfill operations. The applicant had put forward very special circumstances for allowing the proposal to remain in this Green Belt location. However, the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered it would be prudent to impose a condition limiting the period of time of operations for a further 5 years after which time the position with regard to the landfill operations and compatibility of ancillary uses such as the hardcore and road planings operations could be reassessed.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered that the proposal would comply with the locational Policies WCS 3, WCS 6 and WCS 7 of the Waste Core Strategy.

It was considered that as the proposed development would involve collecting, recycling and reusing hardcore and road planings, it would comply with the objectives of the waste hierarchy.

Based on the advice of the County Landscape Officer, it was considered that the proposed development would not have an adverse or detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the local area, subject to the imposition of appropriate extant planning conditions regarding restricting stockpile heights to prevent visual harm.

Based on the advice of Worcestershire Regulatory Services and the Environment Agency, it was considered that the proposal would have no adverse noise, dust or air quality impacts upon residential amenity or that of human health, subject to the imposition of the relevant extant conditions.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy was satisfied that the proposal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1024.

The Committee considered a County Matter planning application for the revised layout of buildings and offices to include the removal of existing office buildings and construction of replacement industrial storage building, amendment to existing workshop to include new two storey office inside the existing building (mezzanine floor), cladding and installation of new windows. Existing and replaced buildings to be retained until the completion of the landfill site in 15 years-time at Summerway Landfill site, Hillary Road, Stourport-on-Severn, 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 Economy’s comments in relation to: the Location of the Development, Green Belt, Landscape Character and Visual Impacts, Residential Amenity (Noise, Dust and Air Quality Impacts), Traffic and Highway Safety, Water Environment, and Ecology and Biodiversity.

The Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy concluded that planning permission had been previously granted for a temporary period for the existing workshop and lean-to building because it was considered that this was not an appropriate location to allow permanent workshops once landfilling operations were complete and to comply with Green Belt policy.

It was expected that the landfilling operations would have been completed by now, but changes to the regulations relating to landfilling, the introduction of the Landfill Tax and changes in the way waste material was managed to ensure as much as possible is recycled and reused before any residue was disposed of by landfill had significantly reduced landfilling operations. Consequently, the site had previously not received any significant volumes of waste and the applicant had diversified his business to include operations involving the storage and recycling of waste materials. Landfilling and restoration operations continue on the site.

The existing and proposed buildings were considered ancillary to the landfill and recycling operations. The applicant had put forward very special circumstances for the installation of the new replacement industrial storage type building and allowing the existing workshop and lean-to buildings to remain in this Green Belt location. However, the Head of Strategic Infrastructure and Economy considered it would be prudent to impose a condition requiring the buildings to be retained on site for a further 5 years after which time their retention as a necessary ancillary facility to the operations taking place on the site could be reassessed. 

Based on the advice of the County Landscape Officer, it was considered that the proposed development would not have an adverse or detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the local area, subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition regarding the type and colour of the materials of the proposed new building.

Based on the advice of Worcestershire Regulatory Services and the Environment Agency, it was considered that the proposal would have no adverse noise, dust or air quality impacts upon residential amenity or that of human health, subject to the imposition of the relevant extant conditions.

The Head of Strategic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1025.

The Committee considered the annual review of activities carried out by Worcestershire County Council (WCC) Directorate of Public Health (Emergency Planning) to discharge statutory duties under the Safety at Sports Grounds (SatSGs) and related legislation during 2018/2019.

The report set out details of the Safety Certificates, Safety Advisory Groups, findings for Sixways Stadium - Worcester Warriors RFC, Aggborough Stadium – Kidderminster Harriers FC, The Grandstand Worcester Racecourse, Victoria Ground – Bromsgrove Sporting FC and Worcester City FC, Other Event Safety Management Advice, and the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         In response to a query about the system used at the Victoria Ground to ensure that overcrowding was not an issue, Charlie Heritage commented that the capacity of the crowd was assessed by either making the match all ticket or stewards using a counter

·         How did Aggborough Stadium and the Victoria Ground differ from Redditch Football Club’s stadium? Charlie Heritage explained that the definition of stands under the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975 and various Fire Safety Regulations applied to stands with accommodation for 500 or more. Redditch FC had seating in a number of stands but did not have a single stand of that size and therefore fell outside the legislation

·         In response to a query about crowd safety and control of crowd flows within exiting stadia, Charlie Heritage indicated that in consultation with colleagues from the fire service, all of the premises to which the legislation applied were required to undertake fire evacuation practices which involved the timed evacuation of these stands. All of the qualifying stands had met the target of 8 minutes.

RESOLVED: that

a)    The 2018/19 Annual Review of activities carried out by the Council to manage and implement the Safety at Sports Grounds legislation be noted; and

b)   It be noted that the Council has successfully met its statutory duty in respect of Safety at Sports Grounds legislation during 2018/19.