Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

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.

No declarations of interest were made.

In respect of Agenda Items 6 and 7 (Planning Applications 2014/368/FUL and 2014/369/FUL - Ipsley Court, Berrington Close, Ipsley, Redditch) Councillor Baker’s role as County Councillor for Ipsley was noted.

In respect of Agenda Item 8 (Planning Application 2015/003/FUL – 324 Evesham Road, Crabbs Cross, Redditch), Councillor Andrew Brazier declared that he had a biased view of the Application as a Local Ward Councillor, as detailed in Minute 80 below.  

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 11^th February 2015 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair, subject to an error in the printed minutes being noted, in respect of the  meeting date, which should be 2015 and not 2014 as stated.

To note Update Reports (if any) for the Planning Applications to be considered at the meeting (circulated prior to the commencement of the meeting).

The printed Update reports relating to the various Planning Applications were noted.

To consider a Planning Application for a proposed second floor extension.

Applicant:  Parklands Care Home

(Report attached – Site Plan under separate cover)

Proposed Second floor extension

Applicant:  Parklands Care Home

Councillor Brandon Clayton, local Ward Councillor and Mr Brian King, Agent for the Applicant, addressed the Committee under the Council’s Public Speaking rules.

RESOLVED that

having regard to the Development Plan and to all other material considerations, Planning Permission be GRANTED, subject to appropriate Conditions to be agreed between Officers and the Applicant.

(Members were reminded that this matter had been considered at the previous meeting of the Planning Committee on the 11^th February 2015.  Officers reported, however, that due to an administrative error, the standard invitations to the Committee meeting had not been issued in accordance with protocols and it had therefore been necessary for the Committee to re-consider the Application to allow for full participation in consideration of the matter.. 

Having considered all of the information provided, Members were of the view that the proposed extension would have minimal impact on the Green Belt and would provide improved facilities for the two bedrooms already situated on the second floor.  The Committee was therefore minded to grant Planning Permission subject to appropriate Conditions.)

To consider a Planning Application for the creation of an additional 2 bedroom apartment in the roof of Ipsley Court (Plot 40).

Applicant:  Mr Barney McElholm

(Report attached – Site Plan under separate cover)

Creation of additional two bedroom apartment (Flat 40) in roof.

Applicant:  Mr Barney McElholm

The following people addressed the Committee under the Council’s public speaking rules:

Mrs Hazel Hill – Objector

Ms Jane Benanti – Objector

Miss Donna Savage – Applicant’s Agent.

RESOLVED that

having regard to the Development Plan and to all other material considerations, Planning Permission be GRANTED, subject to the Conditions and Informative detailed on Page 13 of the Agenda report.

To consider a Planning Application for a proposed two storey building to contain 4 no. appartments (Plots 41, 42, 43, 44).

Applicant:  Mr Barney McElholm

(Report attached – Site Plan under separate cover)

Proposed two storey building to contain 4 no. apartments

(Plots 41, 42, 43 and 44)

Applicant:      Mr Barney McElholm

The following people addressed the Committee under the Council’s Public Speaking rules:

Mr Steve Williams – Objector

Mrs Sue Nicholls – Objector

Councillor Juliet Brunner – Ward Member

Miss Donna Savage – Applicant’s Agent

RESOLVED that

a decision on this matter be DEFERRED to the next scheduled meeting of the Planning Committee in order for Officers to seek further clarification in relation to proposed distances from existing developments and organise a Site Visit for Committee Members.

At the conclusion of this matter, the Chair adjourned the meeting for people to leave the public gallery and allow for a 5 minute comfort break.

To consider a Planning Application for the demolition of an existing garage and side lean-to, erection of a rear two storey and single storey extension, installation of shop front.  Change of use of building to mixed use showroom (A1), Office (B1) and Storage (B8).

Applicant:  Mr Malcolm Dyson

(Report attached – Site Plan under separate cover)

Demolition of existing garage and side lean-to,

erection of rear two-storey and single-storey

extension and installation of shop front. 

Change of use of building to mixed use showroom (A1),

Office (B1) and storage (B8).

Applicant:  Mr Malcolm Dyson

The following people addressed the Committee under the Council’s public speaking rules:

Mr Steve Higgitts – Objector

Mr John Close – Objector

Mr Carl Portman – Objector

Mrs Elizabeth Mitchell – Applicant’s Agent

RESOLVED that

having regard to the Development Plan and to all other material considerations, Planning Permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

“The proposed development by reason of its design and visual impact would be harmful to the area and therefore contrary to policy BBE13 of the Borough of Redditch Local Plan no. 3.”

(Having considered all of the information provided and comments from the public speakers, Members expressed concerns that the design and uses proposed by the Applicant would have an unacceptable visual impact in the middle of a residential area and were of the view that the proposed development would be better situated in a commercial setting.  The Committee therefore considered that the proposal was not appropriate and refused the Application for the reason stated in the Resolution above.)

(During consideration of this matter, Councillor Andrew Brazier declared that he had a biased view as a local Ward Councillor for Crabbs Cross and therefore withdrew from the meeting and took no part in debating the Application or voting thereon.)

To consider a report proposing the long term protection of a locally listed building considered to be of positive benefit to public amenity and a heritage asset in the wider public interest and therefore worthy of control in order to aim to achieve its retention in the longer term.

Report and Appendices attached)

The Committee considered a report which proposed the long term protection of a locally listed building which was considered to be of positive benefit to public amenity and a heritage asset in the wider public interest.  Members approval was sought to control the future development of the building by way of an Article 4 Order to remove permitted development rights relating to demolition. 

The Committee noted the procedures undertaken subsequent to receiving an application for the prior approval of the demolition of the building on the 20^th November 2014 and the Article 4 direction being made on the 5^th December 2014.

Officers provided clarification on various matters including maintenance responsibilities, and confirmed that they were working proactively with the owners of the site to find the best solution for the building to be brought back into use.

RESOLVED that

the Article 4(1) Direction at Appendix 1 to the report and its attached plan be confirmed without modification.

(Having withdrawn from the meeting during consideration of the previous Item on the Agenda, Councillor Andrew Brazier was not present and took no part in consideration of this matter.)