Agenda and minutes
PDF 391 KBVenue: Parkside Suite - Parkside. View directions
Contact: Pauline Ross
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
To receive apologies for absence and notification of substitutes Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S. P. Douglas, M. Glass, P. M. McDonald and M. A. Sherrey. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests. Minutes: Councillor A. B. L. English declared in relation to Agenda Item No.8 - (Planning Application – 22/01241/S73 - Attwell Farm Park, Seafield Farm, Seafield Lane, Portway, Redditch, Worcestershire, B98 9DB), in that she would be addressing the Committee for this item as Ward Councillor under the Council’s public speaking rules. Prior to the consideration of this item Councillor A. B. L. English was asked to leave the meeting room.
Councillor J. E. King declared in relation to Agenda Item No.5 - (Planning Application – 22/00803/FUL – The Keepers, 6A St. Catherine’s Road, Blackwell, Worcestershire, B60 1BN), in that she would be addressing the Committee for this item as Ward Councillor under the Council’s public speaking rules. Prior to the consideration of this item Councillor J. E. King was asked to leave the meeting room.
Councillor A. J. B. Beaumont declared in relation to Agenda Item No.7 - (Planning Application – 22/01137/S73 – The Barn, Woodman Lane, Clent, Stourbridge, Worcestershire, DY9 9PX), in that he knew the applicant. Councillor A. J. B. Beaumont left the meeting room prior to the consideration of this item.
It was noted that all Members present at the meeting declared Other Disclosable Interests in Agenda Item 7 (Planning Application 22/01137/S73 - The Barn, Woodman Lane, Clent, Stourbridge, Worcestershire, DY9 9PX), in that they were all aware that the Applicant, Ms J. Willetts was the partner of a District Councillor.
|
|
|
Minutes: The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 10th October 2022 were received.
That the minutes be amended at Minute No. 20/22, in that Councillor A. B. L. English was asked to leave the meeting room prior to the Officer’s report and presentation commencing, for Planning Application 22/00801/FUL – Seafield Farm, Seafield Lane, Portway, Redditch, Worcestershire, B98 9DB.
RESOLVED that, subject to the amendment as detailed in the preamble, that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 10th October 2022, be approved as a correct record.
|
|
|
Minutes: The Chairman announced that a Committee Update had been circulated to all Planning Committee Members and asked all Members if they had received and read the Committee Update.
All Members agreed that they had received and read the Committee Update. |
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: Officers drew Members’ attention to the Committee Update, which referred to the appeal for this Application (APP/P1805/W/22/3290354) which was allowed on 7th November 2022; and that following the publication of the Planning Committee agenda on 25th November 2022, one further comment was received as follows:-
“This comment relates to the level of illumination from the central void windows of the dwelling in the front elevation and indicates that this has had a detrimental impact on the residents residing at 6 St. Catherine's Road”.
Copies of the Committee Update were provided to Members and published on the Council’s website prior to the commencement of the meeting.
Officers further clarified that the Application had been brought to the Planning Committee for consideration at the request of Councillor J. E. King, Ward Councillor.
Officers presented the report and presentation slides, as detailed on pages 15 to 26 of the main agenda report; and in doing so, highlighted that this was a retrospective planning application for amendments to the previously approved dwelling house (Planning Application 21/01086/FUL), and included an attached garage, a rear orangery, internal alterations, including the creation of a 2nd floor and changes to the front and rear fenestration.
The application related to a dwelling to the rear of 6 St. Catherine's Road, located on the eastern side of the road in the residential area of Blackwell. The plot of land historically formed part of the garden at number 6 but was subdivided some years ago. An existing access road runs along the northern boundary of number 6 to serve the application site. The site was bound to the north by the rear garden of number 8 and to the south by the rear gardens of numbers 4 and, in part, 4a. To the east was a field understood to be in the ownership of number 10, and to the west was the rear garden of number 6. An area Tree Preservation Order ((26) 2003) covered the site. Most of the plot was enclosed by a high concrete wall. The dwelling had now been completed and was occupied.
Officers drew Members’ attention to the residential amenity issues, as detailed on page 11 of the main agenda report, and in doing so highlighted that; objections had been received in respect of overlooking, overbearing, loss of light, and outlook. It was noted that objections regarding the loss of amenity had been raised throughout the application. Ultimately, the applicant’s approach to building the dwelling through retrospective planning applications had not assisted in reducing residents’ concerns regarding this matter.
Officers further highlighted the background information, as detailed on pages 9 and 10 of the main agenda report; with particular reference to the disputed condition regarding the permitted development rights being removed and the comments made by the Planning Inspector in their assessment.
Following reassessment officers were now satisfied that the previous reason for refusal could not be substantiated. The dwelling as built was acceptable in character and appearance and was not out of ... view the full minutes text for item 29/22 |
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: Officers presented the report and presentation slides, as detailed on pages 37 to 45 of the main agenda report; and in doing so, informed the Committee that the application sought the demolition of a warehouse and replacement with an agricultural building for vertical farming.
The application site (Oakland International) was located on the east side of Seafield Lane approximately 650m north of the junction of Seafield Lane with the B4101 Beoley Lane leading onto the A435. The Oakland site comprised of a number of categories of buildings ranging from modern purpose built storage and distribution buildings to the immediate north and south of the application site.
Members questioned officers in relation to whether the proposed building would have regeneration facilities. Officers explained that there were other cold store facilities available at the Oakland site but that the building subject to the application would have a controlled ambient temperature to ensure optimum growing conditions.
RESOLVED that Planning Permission be granted, subject to the Conditions as detailed on pages 33 to 35 of the main agenda report. |
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: Prior to the consideration of this item, the meeting stood adjourned from 18:35 pm. to 18:37 p.m. whilst Councillor A. D. Kriss took a comfort break.
Officers presented the report and presentation slides, as detailed on pages 61 to 71 of the main agenda report; and in doing so, highlighted that this was an application for the removal of Condition 3, Permitted Development Rights and a variation of Condition 6, Conservation Rooflights of Planning Application 21/01248/FUL single storey side extension.
Officers provided additional slides (photographs) at the request of the Applicant.
Officers drew Members’ attention to the Location Plan and Aerial View slide, as detailed on page 62 of the main agenda report.
Officers highlighted that the Barn was originally granted permission for conversion into a dwelling in 1975. At this stage, Permitted Development Rights were not removed.
After the initial conversion an application for a bedroom and bathroom extension was subsequently approved in 1981, but again this pre-dated the current guidance and therefore PD Rights remained intact. This was followed by approval in November 2021 under reference 21/01248/FUL for a single storey side extension, whereby it was considered that in order for the extension to be acceptable in planning terms, certain permitted development rights needed to be removed and that in accordance with Paragraph 54 of the NPPF, there was a clear reason to do so.
Whilst the applicant had suggested that the removal of permitted development rights was unreasonable, as detailed on page 49 of the main agenda report, the LPA considered that the site-specific circumstances in this case warranted the condition to be retained. The implementation of these permitted development rights, without careful control, could harm the visual amenity of the area. Furthermore, it could harm the openness of the Green Belt.
Officers drew Members’ attention to the comments received from the Conservation Officer, as detailed on page 47 of the main agenda report.
At the invitation of the Chairman, Ms. J. Willetts, the Applicant, addressed the Committee.
Members then considered the application, which officers had recommended that planning permission be refused.
Members referred to the comments received from the Conservation Officer with regard to the rooflights and that top hung rooflights were more suitable to preserving the appearance of a converted agricultural building. Members commented that the barn was well set back from Woodman Lane and that no representations had been received from any nearby neighbours.
At the request of the Committee, officers referred to the Rooflight Images slide, as detailed on page 71of the main agenda report.
Some Members further commented that they were in agreement with the Applicant, that the new rooflights should match the existing rooflights. Councillor A. D. Kriss further added that he had conducted a site visit and had noticed that you could see all the rooflights which were quite predominate, so he could see why different rooflights would look odd. He was aware that the barn was a Non-Designated Heritage Asset; but felt that it should be seen to be ... view the full minutes text for item 31/22 |
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: Officers presented the report and presentation slides, as detailed on pages 83 to 85 of the main agenda report; and in doing so informed Members that the application sought the variation of Condition 8 planning permission 19/01544/FUL – Variation of opening hours to visiting members of the public.
The application sought to amend condition 8 attached to 19/01544/FUL to the following:
Halloween Easter Christmas And other national events that may be applicable e.g. Jubilee
An appropriate revision to Condition 8 was considered to be:
Visiting members of the public shall be limited to between: 9:00am and 5:00pm Monday – Friday on non-official school holidays authorised by the Local Education Authority in the Bromsgrove District Council area (currently Worcestershire County Council).
9:00am and 6:00pm Saturday and Sunday and official school holidays authorised by the Local Education Authority in the Bromsgrove District Council area (currently Worcestershire County Council) which officers felt were acceptable and proportionate.
Officers referred to the Planning Balance, as detailed on page 78, and material planning considerations, as detailed on pages 76 and 77 of the main agenda report.
Officers drew Members’ attention to the comments received from Councillor A. B. L. English, Ward Councillor, as detailed on page 74 of the main agenda report.
At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillor A. B. L. English addressed the Committee in objection to the proposed hours.
Councillor A. D. Kriss questioned if the hours as suggested by Councillor A. B. L. English, as detailed on page 74 of the main agenda report, could be implemented?
Officers commented that it would be for Members to decide.
In response to a query with regard to Condition 10, as detailed on page 81 of the main agenda report, the officer, Highways, Worcestershire County Council; responded and informed the Committee that highways had requested the secure motorcycle parking spaces in order to ensure that there was secure facilities.
Members were in agreement that this was a small business which needed to be supported, therefore Members were minded to grant the application.
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted, subject to the Conditions as detailed on pages 79 to 81 of the main agenda report. |
Copyright Bromsgrove District Council