Agendas, Meetings and Minutes - Agenda item

Agenda item

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 (Agenda item 6)

Minutes:

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 design of the bridge would result in a minor local landmark feature, whilst not resulting in a bridge that was unduly prominent or overbearing in the landscape. Notwithstanding this, the Development Management Team Manager recommended the imposition of conditions regarding its detailed design and colour palate so that opportunities could be explored regarding the size and proportions of each element of the bridge in order to maximise its elegance and design quality, and to accentuate the bow arch.

 

Based on the advice of the County Landscape Officer and Worcestershire Regulatory Services, it was considered that subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the local area, or upon the amenity of local residents.

 

Based on the advice of South Worcestershire Land Drainage Partnership, Environment Agency, Lead Local Flood Authority and Severn Trent Water Limited, it was considered that the proposal would have no adverse effects on the water environment, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

 

Based on the advice of Natural England, the County Ecologist and Worcestershire Wildlife Trust, it was considered that subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, the proposed development would not have any adverse impacts on ecology and biodiversity at the site or on the surrounding area and would enhance the application site’s value for biodiversity.

 

It was considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable adverse impact upon Power Park, subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition, requiring the reposition of the existing football pitch prior to the opening of the bridge.

 

The Development Management Team Manager considered that the proposal would not unduly exacerbate the risk of crime and antisocial behaviour in the local area.

 

Taking into account the provisions of the Development Plan and in particular Policy WCS 17 of the Adopted Worcestershire Waste Core Strategy, Policies SWDP 1, SWDP 2, SWDP 4, SWDP 5, SWDP 6, SWDP 7, SWDP 21, SWDP 22, SWDP 24, SWDP 25, SWDP 28, SWDP 29, SWDP 30, SWDP 31, SWDP 32 and SWDP 45 of the adopted South Worcestershire Development Pan, and Policies K12 and K15 of the adopted Neighbourhood Plan for Kempsey, it was considered the proposal would not cause demonstrable harm to the interests intended to be protected by these policies or highway safety.

 

The Development Management Team Manager introduced the report and commented that members had visited the site and observed the location of the nearest residential properties and the football pitch. Members had also visited the south side of the proposed development along Taylor’s Lane. Mr Mackie, an objector to the proposal had been invited to address the Committee but was unable to attend. He had made comments in respect of concerns over the impact of flooding and the length of the ramp.

 

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

 

·         The local councillor commented that although he understood the need for the bridge, he had a number of concerns. The stretch of descent into Power Park was unsightly compared to the present vista and he would ask that the planting scheme be sympathetic to this concern. The parish council believed that compensatory land would be given by the County Council in lieu of the land taken for this development. Fields in Trust were aware of the situation but had not asked for compensation. Was it possible for the County Council to provide compensatory land, perhaps Broomhall Green to be given to the City Council for upkeep by the Parish Council? He was concerned about the loss of foliage as a result of the creation of the access road to the construction compound in Power Park as this would increase the noise from the SLR for local residents. He asked that the route of this access road from Broomhall Way be kept as close as possible to the location of the bridge to avoid the removal of foliage near houses next to the SLR. Local residents were concerned about the loss of privacy as a result of the location of the bridge and asked that any lighting on the bridge not be intrusive. He understood that at the conclusion of the works in Power Park, the football field would be levelled and kept to a good standard, including the raising of the footpaths and the movement of earth to ensure that flooding was kept to a minimum

·         In response to the comments by the local councillor, the Development Management Team Manager indicated that these issues could be incorporated as part of proposed condition e) part ix which related to the landscaping and ecology management plan which required an updated planting scheme. The issue of compensatory land and Fields in Trust was a separate landowner matter rather than a planning matter. It was proposed that the lighting would be down-light and directional not only because of the amenity impact but also the ecological impact. The potential use of solar lights or hand-rail lighting was being examined. Condition s) required that the development not be brought into use until the works to reposition the existing football pitch had been completed. Additionally, Sport England would be consulted. Condition m) required the reprofiling and raising of the footpaths in Power Park. Andy Maginnis, on behalf of the applicant added that if approached by Fields in Trust, compensatory land could be released

·         The local councillor added that notwithstanding that Fields in Trust had not asked for compensatory land, he wondered if a gentlemen’s agreement could be reached for a plot of land given in lieu, bearing in mind the amount of land taken by the County Council. Andy Maginnis responded that there was already a piece of land in the park in the ownership of the City Council which was not Fields in Trust which was an option. It was not a planning matter but he could look at the possibility of the transfer of land at Broomhall Green to the City Council. The Development Management Team Manager added that the Fields in Trust issue was not a planning matter but Policy SWDP 38 could require alternative green space to be released to the community at a suitable location. However, officers did not think it necessary in this case because the proposal did not compromise the quality of the existing green space

·         The need for the bridge had been well-established with the connectivity to major housing developments to the south however there were public safety concerns about the height of the parapets and potential for stone-throwing and jumping off the bridge. In addition, the design of the bridge was very utilitarian and could be improved. Perhaps consideration should be deferred until these matters were resolved. Victoria Edge, on behalf of the applicant responded that the 1.4 metres height of the parapets had been designed in line with current standards for combined pedestrian/cyclist use. This was considered sufficient to reduce the risk of bridge jumping and objects being thrown from the bridge. The bridge step would be 6 metres from the carriageway which was felt to be excessively high and therefore not a risk. The bridge had been designed in a way that was sensitive to its location in a residential area and to lessen the visual impact on the Malvern Hills and to local residents and users of the park. After consultation, the design was modified to create a butterfly effect with a more open feeling for users of the bridge

·         The receipt of S106 funding from the housing developers to help fund the bridge was welcomed. Ideally there should be compensatory land provided for the land lost as a result of the flood alleviation measures

·         Deferral of consideration of this application was unnecessary as all the necessary information was available in the report. The design of the bridge was very practical and allowed disabled access. It was impossible to entirely prevent people throwing stones or attempting suicide

·         The loss of green space was a serious consideration and compensatory land would be welcomed

·         The applicant should have taken into account the known and unknown housing developments to the south of the City. It was also disappointing that West Mercia Police had not commented given the potential for anti-social behaviour. In response it was commented that the Committee should only take into account the factors before it in the consideration of this application

·         The bridge design was acceptable and the openness of the design was preferable to the introduction of side-panels. Given the height of the bridge it was unlikely to be used for suicide attempts

·         Had a circular ramp ever been considered in the design of the bridge? Andy Magginis responded that he had not received any negative feedback on the design of the bridge from a well-attended pre-planning engagement session held in St Peters. However, following comments received from Malvern Hills District Council, a butterfly effect design was adopted. A spiral design had been considered but to get the radius necessary for cyclists would mean that the structure would dominate and overlook nearby housing

·         The representative of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that where a proposal to grant permission was not carried, it would automatically represent a refusal of planning permission and there would not be a further opportunity for the Committee to consider deferment. The established practice where members had concerns about an application would be to defer consideration to give officers time to look at their concerns.

 

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted 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, subject to the following conditions:

 

Commencement

a)    The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission;

 

b)  The developer shall notify the County Planning Authority of the start date of commencement of the development hereby approved in writing within 5 working days following the commencement of the development;

 

Approved Drawings

c)   The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on submitted Drawing, except where otherwise stipulated by conditions attached to this permission:

 

·         03.GD.0004, Rev P04 – Broomhall Way Footbridge Location Plan;

·         20-04-DG-0001, Rev P02 – General Arrangement and Site Constraints for Planning Sheet 1 of 4;

·         20-04-DG-0002, Rev P02 – General Arrangement and Site Constraints for Planning Sheet 2 of 4;

·         20-04-DG-0003, Rev P02 – General Arrangement and Site Constraints for Planning Sheet 3 of 4;

·         20-04-DG-0004, Rev P02 – General Arrangement and Site Constraints for Planning Sheet 4 of 4;

·         01.DG.0002, Rev P02 – Outline Landscape Proposals;

·         20-DR-D-2001, Rev P01 – Non-Motorised User Route Options Between Broomhall Way Footbridge and the Public Highway;

·         694944CH/BW/Topo/2d, Rev 3.0 – 2d Topographical Survey;

·         20-DR-D-1001, Rev P01 – Existing Modelled Flooding;

·         20-DR-D-1002, Rev P01 – Proposed Flood Alleviation and Drainage Strategy'

 

Construction Environmental Management Plan

d)   Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to commencement of development hereby approved, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), in accordance with Worcestershire Regulatory Services "Code of Best Practice for Demolition and Construction Sites" shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The approved CEMP shall beimplemented for the duration of the construction works. The CEMP shall address the following:

 

Hours of Working

                             i.        A scheme providing the days and hours of construction operations;

 

Biodiversity

                            ii.        Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities;

                           iii.        Identification of "biodiversity protection zones";

                           iv.        Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction to be provided as a set of Method Statements;

                            v.        The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features.

                           vi.        The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works;

                         vii.        Responsible persons and lines of communication;

                        viii.        The role and responsibilities on site of a suitably competent Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW);

                           ix.        Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs;

                            x.        A procedure to ensure that during the construction phase all trenches / excavations / pipes are closed off overnight, or if unavailable, are fitted with wood or earth escape ramps to allow trapped wildlife to escape;

 

Lighting

                           xi.        Details of the proposed construction lighting;

 

Dust and Air Quality

                         xii.        A scheme to minimise and mitigate the impacts of dust emissions and impacts to air quality;

 

Noise and Vibration

                        xiii.        A scheme to minimise and mitigate the impacts of noise and vibration;

 

Water Environment

                        xiv.        Measures to be undertaken to ensure that any pollution and silt generated by the construction works shall not adversely affect groundwater and surface waterbodies;

 

Highways

                         xv.        Measures to ensure that vehicles leaving the site do not deposit mud or other detritus on the public highway;

                        xvi.        Details of site operative parking areas, material storage areas and the location of site operatives facilities (offices, toilets etc);

                      xvii.        The hours that delivery vehicles will be permitted to arrive and depart, and arrangements for unloading and manoeuvring;

                     xviii.        Details of any temporary construction accesses and their reinstatement; and

                        xix.        A highway condition survey, timescale for re-inspections, and details of any reinstatement;

 

Landscape and Biodiversity

e)    Notwithstanding the submitted details, within 3 months of the commencement of the development hereby approved, a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. Thereafter, the LEMP shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. The LEMP shall include the following:

 

                             i.        Description and evaluation of features to be managed;

                            ii.        Ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management;

                           iii.        Aims and objectives of management;

                           iv.        Appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives;

                            v.        Prescriptions for management actions;

                           vi.        Preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of being rolled forward over a five-year period);

                         vii.        Details of the body or organization responsible for implementation of the plan;

                        viii.        Ongoing monitoring and remedial measures; and

                           ix.        An updated planting scheme to include native species of local provenance, locations, numbers, densities, spacing and planting sizes for the development hereby approved. The scheme shall be implemented within the first available planting season (the period between 31 October in any one year and 31 March in the following year) on completion of the development. Any new trees or shrubs, which within a period of five years from the completion of the planting die, are removed, or become damaged or diseased, shall be replaced on an annual basis, in the next planting season with others of a similar size and the same species;

 

f)     Notwithstanding the submitted details, within 3 month of the commencement of the development hereby approved, a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy (BES) shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. The BES shall include:

 

                             i.        Purpose and conservation objectives for the proposed works;

                            ii.        Review of site potential and constraints;

                           iii.        Detailed design(s) and/or working method(s) to achieve stated objectives;

                           iv.        Extent and location/area of proposed works on appropriate scale maps and plans;

                            v.        Type and source of materials to be used where appropriate, e.g. native species of local provenance;

                           vi.        Timetable for implementation demonstrating that works are aligned with the proposed phasing of development;

                         vii.        Persons responsible for implementing the works;

                        viii.        Details of initial aftercare and long-term maintenance;

                           ix.        Details for monitoring and remedial measures; and

                            x.        Details for disposal of any wastes arising from works;

 

Thereafter, the BES shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details;

 

g)   On implementation of the approved CEMP under condition d) and approved BES under condition f), a Statement of Conformity shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority by the applicant or their Ecological Clerk of Works confirming their successful implementation. A further report shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority providing monitoring information at the end of the approved LEMP Management Plan period;

 

h)  All vegetation clearance at the site shall be undertaken outside the bird nesting season which generally extends between March and September inclusive. If this is not possible then any vegetation that is to be removed or disturbed should be checked by an experienced ecologist for nesting birds immediately prior to works commencing. If birds are found to be nesting any works which may affect them would have to be delayed until the young have fledged and the nest has been abandoned naturally;

 

i)    All existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows indicated to be retained shall be protected by suitable fencing in accordance with BS5837:2012 No materials shall be stored, no rubbish dumped, no fires lit and no buildings erected inside the fence.  In the event of any trees, shrub or hedgerows being damaged or removed by the development, it shall be replaced in the next planting season;

 

Lighting

j)    Notwithstanding the submitted details, within 3 months of the commencement of the development hereby approved, a lighting scheme shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall include details of the height of all lighting, the intensity of lighting (specified in Lux levels), spread of light, including approximate light spillage levels (in metres), the times when the lighting would be illuminated, any measures proposed to mitigate impact of the lighting or disturbance through glare and upon protected species and habitats, in particular bats. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

 

Design

k)   Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, drawings of the detailed design of the bridge, ramps, landings, and steps including materials, colour, finishes, size, and cross section of the parapets shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

 

l)    Notwithstanding the submitted details, within 1 month of commencement of the development hereby approved, a schedule and / or samples of all surfacing materials shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

 

Drainage

m)Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development shall commence until detailed design for surface water drainage, including Power Park re-profiling and raising of footpaths within Power Park have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

 

n)  No development shall commence until a management plan for the drainage on site, as detailed in drawing numbered: 20-DR-D-1002, Rev P01, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The management plan shall include details on future management responsibilities including details on the funding mechanism, along with maintenance schedules for all drainage features and associated pipework. This plan shall detail the strategy that will be followed to facilitate the optimal functionality and performance of the drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. The approved management plan shall be implemented in full in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions and shall be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved maintenance plan and thereafter;

 

Archaeology

o)   Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a programme of archaeological work, including a Written Scheme of Investigation shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and:

 

                     i.        The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording;

                    ii.        The programme for post investigation assessment;

                   iii.        Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording;

                   iv.        Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation;

                    v.        Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation; and

                   vi.        Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation;

 

p)   The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under conditions o) above and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition has been secured;

 

Contamination

q)   No development shall commence, other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation, until Parts i) to v) below have been complied with:

 

                     i.        A preliminary risk assessment (a Phase I desk study) submitted to the County Planning Authority in support of the application has identified unacceptable risk(s) exist on the site as represented in the Conceptual Site Model. A scheme for detailed site investigation must be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority prior to being undertaken to address those unacceptable risks identified. The scheme must be designed to assess the nature and extent of any contamination and must be led by the findings of the preliminary risk assessment. The investigation and risk assessment scheme must be compiled by competent persons and must be designed in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's "Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land, CLR11";

 

                    ii.        The detailed site investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Scheme and a written report of the findings produced. This report must be approved by the County Planning Authority prior to any development taking place;

 

                   iii.        Where the site investigation identified remediation is required, a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to identified receptors must be prepared and is subject to the approval of the County Planning Authority in advance of undertaking. The remediation scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as Contaminated Land under Part 2A Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation;

 

                   iv.        The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development, other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority; and

 

                    v.        Following the completion of the measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval of the County Planning Authority prior to the use of the development hereby approved;

 

r)     In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the County Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, these will be subject to the approval of the County Planning Authority. Following the completion of any measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a validation report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the County Planning Authority prior to the use of the development hereby approved;

 

            Playing Pitch

s)    The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the works to reposition the existing football pitch have been completed, the works shall be in accordance with the details outlined at Section 4.4.4 'Sport England' in the 'Planning Statement and Design and Access Statement', dated May 2019 and drawing numbered: 01.DG.0002, Rev P02, and shall be laid out in accordance with the standards and methodologies set out in the guidance note "Natural Turf for Sport" (Sport England, 2011); and

 

Highways

t)     Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the development being brought into use, details of a joint pedestrian / cycle route shall be provided from the bridge to the public highway, south of Broomhall Way (A4440), as shown on Drawing Number: 20-DR-D-2001, Rev P01 and shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Supporting documents: