Agenda item

At this stage in the meeting, Councillors A. Bailes, J. Clarke and J. Robinson left the meeting room.

 

Officers presented the report and in doing so highlighted that the application was for the variation of Condition 25 of planning permission 24/00516/S73 granted in December 2024, as follows:-

 

FROM: No part of the development shall be occupied until the junction of Fox Lane/ Rock Hill has been altered in accordance with the scheme for a roundabout shown on the plan Fox Lane/ Rock Hill schematic ref 7033-SK-005 revision F.

 

TO: No part of the development shall be occupied other than No more than 49 dwellings (of which, no more than 30 shall be for private sale and no more than 19 shall be for affordable housing) until the junction of Fox Lane/ Rock Hill has been altered in accordance with the temporary scheme shown on the plan WSP Drawing 7033-WSP-HGN-00-SK-C-0022-V2 Rev P02. Thereafter, no part of the development shall be occupied other than no more than 365 dwellings (of which, no more than 219 shall be for private sale and no more than 146 shall be for affordable housing) until the junction of Fox Lane/Rock Hill has been altered in accordance with the scheme for a roundabout shown on the plan Fox Lane/Rock Hill schematic scheme ref 7033- SK-005 revision G and ancillary drawings 7033-s278-701 rev C02, 2015804 AGE- ZZ[1]XX-DR-X-0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006 REV C02.

 

Officers drew Members’ attention to the presentation slides, as detailed on pages 61 to 67 of the main agenda pack.

 

Officers highlighted that the proposal before Members tonight did not remove the need for the proposed original roundabout. The roundabout was still proposed as part of the amended condition.

 

Officers referred to page 3 of the Committee Update which detailed additional comments from The Bromsgrove Society and the responses from the applicant, Worcestershire County Council (WCC), Highways and the Planning Assessment and Conclusion.

 

A copy of the Committee Update was provided to Members and published on the Council’s website prior to the commencement of the meeting.

 

Members were informed that principally, the interim scheme involved widening Fox Lane to create an additional short lane. Each lane would be 3m wide. A pedestrian refuse facility would be provided with dropped kerbs either side of Fox Lane. This had resulted in additional capacity. The technical approvals process had involved a detailed design review of the proposals supported by an independent Road Safety Audit Stage 1 / 2.

 

Worcestershire County Council (WCC), Highways and Mott McDonald had been consulted, as detailed on pages 36 and 42 of the main agenda pack. WCC Highways had raised no objections.

 

The current Condition 25 required the roundabout scheme to be in place prior to the occupation of the 50th dwelling. The variation of condition application, before Members, now sought to vary the trigger for the improvement scheme and take a staged approach to enhancing the junction on a temporary basis, then ultimately delivering the roundabout scheme to allow further occupation at the site during this time period.

 

This principally would involve increasing the capacity of the junction by providing a left-turn lane on Fox Lane. The junction would remain as a priority T-Junction but with increased capacity.

 

Officers drew Members’ attention to the Recommendation on page 35 and 51 of the main agenda report and suggested that if minded to grant the planning permission that the Recommendation be amended as follows:-

 

‘b) That delegated powers be granted to the Assistant Director for Planning, Leisure and Culture Services to determine the application following the receipt and completion of a suitable and satisfactory legal mechanism, if required in relation to the following matters:’

 

At the invitation of the Chairman the following public speakers addressed the Committee:-

 

·       Ms. J. Slade, Chairman of the Bromsgrove Society in objection to the application.

·       Councillor N. Price, County Councillor Bromsgrove West, in support of the application.

·       Mr. D. Dixon, Associate Director, WSO, on behalf of Bellway Homes, in support of their application.

·       Mr. G. Anderson, Chief Executive, Bromsgrove District Housing Trust (via Microsoft Teams) in support of the application.

·       Councillor D. Hopkins, Ward Councillor.

 

Members then considered the application, which Officers had recommended by granted.

 

In response to a query raised by one of the public speakers with regard to the public consultation being flawed, Members sought clarity on this.

 

Officers confirmed that the correct consultation had been carried out with the correct time scales and the comments received within those timescales had been included on the public access and further referred to in the Committee Update.

 

Members further referred to the comments made by public speakers on data from WCC, Highways, querying if the most up to date and appropriate data was used for this particular scheme.

 

Officers clarified that the data that had been utilised was in accordance with the guidance provided by the Department for Transport, in that the last 5 year period data could be utilised, so 2024 was a suitable year for the data used.

 

Members further questioned if the data were still suitable, taking into account a causation effect on the possible data and if Officers could expand on the mitigations with the lack of the roundabout now, how effective would the temporary scheme be in managing the extra traffic mentioned?

 

The WCC, Highways Officers stated that the new scheme provided betterment in terms of providing greater capacity at the junction by providing two lanes, compared to the existing junction arrangements. The interim scheme provided greater capacity was more manageable.

 

Mr. G. Nock, Mott McDonald, on behalf of WCC, Highways further added that in terms of data provenance, this would be the same date that was presented to Planning Committee Members in June 2025, with questions being raised, at that particular time, regarding the reliability of the data. The data being used was suitable and his position with regard to thus had not changed. WCC, Highways position regarding the data set was outlined in the Officers report and was a suitable data set for Members to make a decision.

 

With regard to the overall efficiency of the proposed interim scheme, the efficiency could probably best be described in terms of the interim scheme providing some additional capacity by virtue of the additional lane being provided on Fox Lane, with the positioning of vehicles simultaneously side by side on the minor arm. This allowed better use of gaps in the available traffic on the main road, Rock Hill to enter safely and efficiently. The traffic modelling in support of that had demonstrated that there would be reduced delays compared to the existing layout, and in his professional opinion having scrutinized this, was that this would be a localised improvement that would provide betterment in terms of capacity and operational efficiency.

 

Officers further responded to questions from Members with regard to the retaining wall and footpath.

 

Members raised further concerns with regard to the cumulative impact of the other development phases further to the north and other potential applications for the land area in between and the cumulative impact this would have. Members were concerned about the knock-on effect into the surrounding areas and the road network and safety implications, further down the line if this interim solution ends up becoming the enduring solution. Members also expressed some concern that current occupants of the site and a further 365 dwellings being occupied were being asked to live their lives without the convenience of the retail unit that was originally promised to them. Would the provision of the retail unit help mitigate additional traffic?

 

Members further commented that given the information in the Officers report and the weight given by the questions answered by the WCC, Highways Officer and their representative from Mott McDonald, that this was being driven by  networkwide constraints and the need for affordable homes.

 

Officers clarified that a convenience store was planned and not a major supermarket.

 

Further discussions took place on the wording of the Recommendation (b) and the amendment suggested by the Officer at the start of the meeting and as detailed in the preamble above; and the restriction of the occupation of the retail unit.

 

With the agreement of the Chairman, a brief adjournment took place in order for Members to consider the wording of an alternative recommendation.

 

Accordingly, the meeting stood adjourned from 18:50 hours to 19:101 hours.

 

Having reconvened, Members stated that having discussed the recommendation regarding the retail unit, Members had thought that on balance the volume of traffic generated by the retail unit would be less if the retail unit was provided. Members would like the residents at Whitford Heights to have the early benefit of a small convenience store rather than have to wait until the roundabout was completed. So Members were proposing the removal

completely of recommendation (b), and that Members would be minded to grant full planning permission.

 

The Chairman took the opportunity to refer Members to pages 35 and 36 and pages 51 and 52 of the main agenda pack, which fully detailed the recommendations, as proposed by Officers.

 

With the agreement of the Chairman, the Council’s Legal Advisor took the opportunity to ask the Committee to clarify what was being agreed with regard to the alternative recommendation. The Assistant Director for Planning, Leisure and Culture Services also sought clarification from the Committee.

 

Further discussions took place on the proposed recommendation and the proposed alternative recommendation.

 

Following further confirmation and clarification it was

 

RESOLVED that full planning permission be granted and 

 

(b) that delegated powers be granted to the Assistant Director for Planning,

     Leisure and Culture Services to agree the final scope and detailed wording

     and numbering of conditions, as set out in the report.