Agenda item

It was noted that the Chairman had announced a 15 minute adjournment at the commencement of the meeting, in order for Members to read the three Committee Updates published during the afternoon of the meeting.

The Chairman asked Committee Members if they had had sufficient time to read all three Committee Updates, which had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting commencing, with a paper copy also made available to Members at the meeting.

Some Members indicated that they had not had sufficient time to read the detailed contents of all three Committee Updates.

Councillor J. Robinson stated to the Chairman, that it was ok if other Members had read all three Committee Updates, however, he felt that 15 minutes was not long enough for him to read the detailed information contained in all three Committee Updates, in order to determine the application. Councillor J. Robinson informed the Chairman that he would be leaving the meeting.

Councillor S. J. Baxter commented that she had read all three Committee Updates but could not fully understand all of the technical information as provided, it was too technical. A representative from Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Service (HWFS) should be in attendance to explain the technical information.

Councillor D. J. A. Forsythe further commented that 15 minutes was not enough time to read something that was highlighted to the applicants in 2024. In his opinion the application should be deferred until a full explanation was given to HWFS.

In response the Assistant Director for Planning, Leisure and Culture Services, stated that she could understand Members wanting to defer the application. However, Officers had received the questions / updates from HWFS at 09:30 a.m. that morning. Officers and the applicant had worked through the questions / updates and had responded to HWFS. Their detailed responses were included on the Public Access Planning Portal.

With the agreement of the Chairman, the Council’s Legal Advisor, asked the Committee to consider receiving the Officers detailed report and presentation,  the Public Speakers comments, then ask questions of Officers. If Members were still of the opinion that they could not make an informed decision, Members could then debate deferring the application and the reason(s) for deferring.

At this stage in the meeting, Councillor J. Robinson left the meeting room.

Councillor M. Marshall commented that Members had previously deferred this application, and that a second deferral could see the applicant appealing on the grounds of non-determination.

The Council’s Legal Advisor reiterated to Members, as detailed in the preamble above; to consider receiving the Officers detailed report and presentation, listen to the comments made by the Public Speakers, and then ask questions of Officers.  If Members were still of the opinion that they could not make an informed decision, Members could then debate deferring the application and the reason(s) for deferring.

Councillor S. J. Baxter further emphasised that Members were in receipt of the responses to the questions / updates requested by HWFS, which were requested at 09:30 a.m. However, you could not expect Members to process late information. HWFS had asked these questions back in October 2024.

The Planning Case Officer explained that the applicant had responded to the original HWFS comments, which had dictated the Risk Management Plan as provided. The applicant had sent questions to HWFS on fire risk and fire water management, but no comments were received from HWFS.

Councillor S. J. Baxter questioned as to why, having received such a detailed list of questions from HWFS in October 2024, a response was sent to North Worcestershire Water Management and not HWFS.

With the agreement of the Chairman, the Development Management Manager stated that from the Officers perspective the questions from HWFS had been replied to and that the application could be determined at this meeting.

In response Councillor D. J. A. Forsythe stated that with all due respect to Officers, he personally thought it was unfair to ask Members to come to a conclusion at tonight’s meeting. Members needed to understand the contents of the documents, in order to be able to ask specific questions. In his opinion the application should be deferred, enabling Members to look at the detail in order to ask legitimate questions.

The Council’s Legal Advisor informed Members that should they defer the application, then the applicant could appeal to the Planning Inspectorate for non-determination. As stated earlier, Members could receive the Officers detailed report and presentation, the comments from the Public Speakers, and then ask questions of Officers.  If Members were still of the opinion that they could not make an informed decision, and that further information was still required, Members could then debate deferring the application and the reason(s) for a deferral.

Having listened to the concerns raised by Committee Members, the comments  from Officers and the Council’s Legal Advisor; the Chairman requested that the Planning Case Officer presented their report and presentation.