Agenda and minutes

The Members had before them:

A.    The Agenda papers (previously circulated);

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

C.   The Minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2020 (previously circulated).

None.

An apology was received from Mr P A Tuthill.

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 29 September 2020. (previously circulated)

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 July 2020 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee considered a County Matter application for the demolition of part of existing industrial building; erection of extension to retained building and connection to adjacent waste transfer station to provide additional storage space for waste materials, office and staff facilities, and a new weighbridge (part-retrospective) at Metal and Ores Industrial Estate, 138 Hanbury Road, Stoke Prior, 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 Planning and Transport Planning’s comments in relation to the Waste Hierarchy, location of the development, landscape character, visual impacts and historic environment, traffic and highway safety, residential amenities (including noise, dust, lighting and air quality), ecology and biodiversity, water environment including flooding, climate change, other matters - Integrity of the railway line, contaminated land, future monitoring of site, minerals, and use of site, and other matters.

The Head of Planning and Transport Planning concluded that the proposal would involve the sorting and bulking up of various sources of waste in preparation for transfer and also for subsequent recycling in some instances. The percentage of waste that would be able to be recycled would be able to increase. The proposal would also contribute to Worcestershire’s equivalent self-sufficiency in waste. The proposal would comply with the objectives of the waste hierarchy and would be consistent with Policies WCS 2, WCS 3 and WCS 15 of the Waste Core Strategy.

Whilst there were a variety of different uses on the wider site including industrial, retail and residential uses, the site was identified in the adopted Bromsgrove Development Plan as an employment site where waste management facilities were appropriate. The proposal was for additional space to meet the needs of the existing waste transfer station, which was an established facility. The Head of Planning and Transport Planning was, therefore, satisfied that the principle of the location of the development had already been established and that the proposal was considered to be consistent with the objectives and Policies WCS 3 and WCS 6 of the Waste Core Strategy, and Policy BDP 13 of the Bromsgrove District Plan.

The Head of Planning and Transport Planning considered that as the proposal would move waste up the waste hierarchy, the public benefits of the proposal outweighed the less than substantial harm to the heritage asset of the Worcester and Birmingham Canal Conservation Area. Based on the advice of the County Landscape Officer, the Head of Planning and Transport Planning considered that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the local area, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, relating to details of finishing materials.

Given the existing access and that there would be no increase in vehicle movements or the type of vehicles as well as the lack of objection from the County Highways Officer, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including limiting the throughput of the site, the Head  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1058.

The Committee considered an application under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992 for the proposed retention of an existing double mobile classroom building at Hanbury Church of England (CE) First School, Hanbury, 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 Planning and Transport Planning’s comments in relation to the need for the modular building, Green Belt, landscape character and appearance and residential amenity, historic environment, traffic and highways safety, water environment, and ecology and biodiversity.

The Head of Planning and Transport Planning concluded that the proposal would meet the existing needs of the school for school places in the area. However, a condition was recommended to be imposed limiting planning permission to a period of 5 years, as the mobile classroom was a temporary structure which was not suitable for permeant retention. A 5-year period would enable the applicant to consider alternative options, whilst meeting the school’s current educational needs.

The Head of Planning and Transport Planning considered that very special circumstances had been demonstrated to justify this otherwise inappropriate development in the Green Belt. It was also considered that the proposed development would have no adverse or detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity or heritage assets due to its design, size and location. It was considered that the proposed development would not have any adverse traffic or highway safety impacts. Based upon the advice of the Lead Local Flood Authority and the County Ecologist, it was considered the proposal would have no adverse effects on the water environment or ecology and biodiversity at the site or in the surrounding area.

Taking in to account the provisions of the Development Plan and in particular Policy WCS 17 of the adopted Worcestershire Waste Core Strategy and Policies SWDP 1, SWDP 2, SWDP 4, SWDP 5, SWDP 6, SWDP 21, SWDP 22, SWDP 24, SWDP 25, SWDP 28, SWDP 29, SWDP 30, SWDP 31, SWDP 33 and SWDP 37 of the adopted South Worcestershire Development Plan, it was considered the proposal would not cause demonstrable harm to the interests intended to be protected by these policies or highway safety.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         It was disappointing that pupils had to continue to be taught in limiting conditions in a mobile classroom as the Council had failed to provide a permanent replacement. There was a concern that a similar situation would arise in 5-years time. Steve Wharrad from Place Partnership, acting on behalf of the applicant responded that the mobile classroom was needed to teach the national curriculum. He argued that modern mobiles were of a much higher standard than older models and were not detrimental to teaching. The Council realised that a permanent new build classroom would be required for the school to continue to meet the needs of the national  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1059.