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 1 December 2020 (previously circulated).

None.

None.

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 1 December 2020. (previously circulated)

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2020 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 the Proposed replacement of existing staggered junction with a 4-arm roundabout at A38 / A4104 Junction, near Upton-upon-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 Planning and Transport Planning’s comments in relation to Traffic, Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way, Landscape Character, Visual Impacts and Historic Environment, Residential Amenity (including noise impacts), Ecology and Biodiversity, Water Environment, Other Matters - Utilities including Pipeline, Consultation, Future Development, Importation of Soils, Waste and other matters.

The Head of Planning and Transport Planning concluded that she was satisfied that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon traffic, highway safety or Public Rights of Way subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to construction details; signage information and existing Public Right of Way connection details as well as diversion routes, and an updated Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

As the proposal would help to alleviate problems with queuing and provide more efficient traffic flows, as well as providing a safer junction for vehicles and pedestrians, it was considered that the public benefits of the proposal outweighed the less than substantial harm to heritage assets. The proposal would not have an unacceptable adverse or detrimental impact upon landscape character, visual impact or the historic environment subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) and a programme of archaeological work, including a written scheme of investigation.

The proposal would have no adverse noise, vibration, dust, light or air quality impacts upon residential amenity or that of human health, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to an updated Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) and a Lighting Design Strategy.

The “derogation tests” in the Habitats Directive could be met, and that the proposal would not have an unacceptable adverse impact on ecology and biodiversity at the site or on the surrounding area, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to an updated CEMP, Lighting Design Strategy, Ecological Design Strategy and a LEMP.

The proposal would not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the water environment or flooding, subject to the imposition of conditions relating to foul and surface water drainage scheme and management plan.

Taking into account the provisions of the Development Plan and in particular Policy WCS 16 of the adopted Worcestershire Waste Core Strategy and Policies SWDP 1, SWDP 4, SWDP 5 SWDP 6, SWDP 7, SWDP 21, SWDP 22, SWDP 23, SWDP 24, SWDP 25, SWDP 28, SWDP 29, SWDP 30, SWDP 31 and SWDP 33 of the adopted SWDP as well as Policy WCS 16 of the adopted WCS, the Head of Planning and Transport Planning considered the proposal would not cause demonstrable harm to the interests intended to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1064.