Agenda item

At this stage in the meeting the Vice-Chairman withdrew to the Public Gallery; with Councillor S. J. Baxter taking the Chair.

The Application had been brought to the Planning Committee for consideration at the request of Councillor M. Marshall, Ward Councillor.

Officers presented the report and in doing so highlighted that the application was for the demolition of existing garages and the erection of new build dwelling including associated access and landscaping.

Officers presented the presentation slides, as detailed on pages 50 to 56 of the main agenda report.

The site was located in a residential and sustainable location off an unclassified road, the site has an existing vehicular access with good visibility in both directions. Willow Gardens had footways and street lighting on both sides of the road and no parking restrictions were in force in the vicinity. The site was located within walking distance of amenities, bus route and bus stops.  It was noted there would be a loss of 13 garages, the applicant had provided a justification and reasoning as to why the loss of these garages should be accepted by highways. There was no legal right for the applicant to provide the 13 garages to accommodate local residential car parking. The applicant had provided a car parking survey which confirmed that the streets in the vicinity (within 300m) had the capacity to provide parking for the 9 garages which were occupied. 

At the invitation of the Chairman (in the Chair), Mr. K. Lawrence (via Microsoft Teams), the Applicant’s Representative and Councillor M. Marshall, Ward Councillor addressed the Committee.

The Committee then considered the application, which officers had recommended be granted.

Members expressed their concerns with regards to known parking issues on Willow Road and Crabtree Lane, making it difficult for buses to pass.  Whilst it was good to see a development on a Brown Field site, the proposed development would increase parking issues, which Members were concerned about.

Members commented that the garages were in a state of disrepair so could not be used by existing tenants of Bromsgrove District Housing Trust (BDHT).  Were BDHT tenants happy with the garages being demolished?

BDHT proposed to build one new one bedroom dwelling with garage on quite a large site.  It appeared that BDHT had not done anything to sort out the parking problems for the residents in Willow Gardens.  Some residents drove across the grass verges and also parked on the grass verges.  The garages being in a state of disrepair added to the parking problems.

Officers highlighted that the scheme did not include a garage, it would include two parking spaces.  The applicant’s representative was not here to address parking issues.

Members referred to the parking survey that was carried out by the applicant which confirmed that the streets in the vicinity (within 300m) had the capacity to provide parking for the 9 garages which were occupied.  Members questioned what were the parking numbers of the road, 20 cars? Members referred to BDHT’s similar Planning Application 23/01400/FUL which detailed that the parking survey carried out by the applicant confirmed that the streets in the vicinity (within 300m) had the capacity to provide parking for the 3 garages which were occupied.  This would take up another 3 parking spaces.

Councillor D. G. Stewart stated that he knew this part of the town and had joined BDHT on a walkabout.  The garages were in a state of disrepair but there were 12 cars parked and ad hoc parking taking place on the road; it would deprive the residents of car park spaces and shift the larger vehicles using the space onto the roads.

With the agreement of the Chairman (in the Chair), the Applicant’s representative clarified that there were two separate Technical Notes.

Members continued and agreed that parking needs and parking displacement needed to be considered and that due to this, both Planning Applications 23/01400/FUL and 23/01401/FUL, should be looked at together.

Members also considered deferring both applications to a future meeting of the Planning Committee whereby an officer from WCC Highways would be asked to attend.

Officers explained that the applicant could put up a gate to stop any parking taking place at the garages.  Whilst officers accepted that there was not a WCC Highways officer in attendance at tonight’s meeting, WCC Highway had looked at both applications individually and cumulatively and had looked at a one bed unit and not potential parking displacement.  Officers were of the opinion that the scheme was acceptable.

Members further questioned if cumulative impact was not a matter to be considered could visual impact be considered

Officers stated that WCC Highways had assessed visibility, and drew Members’ attention to the comments received from WCC Highways, as detailed page 39 of the main agenda report.

At the request of the Committee, officers displayed (on the overhead screen) a street view of the area using Google Maps.

Officers further explained that Members could look at both applications collectively, but Members would need to make a decision individually for each application.

Members agreed that this made sense, there was a need to look at both applications together in order to fully understand the full cumulative impact.

An Alternative Recommendation was proposed and seconded, and on being put to the vote; it was

RESOLVED that further consideration of the Application be deferred to a future meeting of the Planning Committee; whereby an officer from Worcestershire County Council Highways will be in attendance.