Agenda item

Application 2017/00700/OUT - Redditch Gateway Land Adjacent to the A4023, Coventry Highway, Redditch - Redditch Gateway Infrastructure Ltd

Report attached / site plan under separate cover.

 

Minutes:

Hybrid application comprising: Outline planning application (with matters of appearance, landscaping, layout, scale and details of internal circulation routes reserved) for the development on a phased basis of 32ha of employment land for business/industrial uses (Use Classes B1, B2, B8). The development shall include: landscaping, parking, associated infrastructure, utilities, drainage (including SUDS) and ground engineering works; and Full planning application for Phase 1 Ground Engineering works, and details of means of access to the site from the A4023.

 

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

 

Mr Leslie Clarke – objector

Mr Leonard Quartly – speaking on behalf of himself and Mr Christopher Eden – objectors

Mr James Cull – objector

Mr Rob Wells – agent for the applicant (accompanied by Mr Alex Morgan and Mr David Brown, co-applicants)

 

RESOLVED that

 

having regard to the Development Plan and to all other material considerations, authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration, following consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee, to GRANT planning permission subject to:

 

a)          the satisfactory completion of a S106 planning obligation ensuring that: 

 

i)            £200,000.00 to be paid on first occupation and held for a period of 15 years from its receipt in the form of a bond and management arrangement to support HGV routing; and

 

ii)           Biodiversity offset scheme for each phase of development and biodiversity monitoring contribution; and

 

b)          the conditions summarised on pages 54 to 57 of the main agenda report, as amended by the Update Report.

 

(Officers provided updates on the respective outcomes following Bromsgrove District Council’s and Stratford-on-Avon District Council’s considerations of the application, Additional Conditions, Procedure, additional comments received from Warwickshire County Council Ecology, a representation received from Councillor A Pulsford (Winyates Ward Councillor), a representation received from Beoley Parish Council and further Officer Comments, as detailed in the published Update Report, copies of which were provided to the Committee and public gallery prior to the commencement of the meeting.  The Recommendation remained as detailed on page 54 of the Committee Report, with an amendment to section b) to read Conditions as summarised on pages 54 to 57 of the main report and as detailed in the Update Report.  On this occasion the conditions had been presented in a summarised form, to adjust the final wording to ensure compatibility across the three Local Authorities and to take into account phasing requirements of the scheme.

 

Officers explained that whilst the hybrid application was being detailed in its entirety, each of the three authorities were being asked to consider their own administrative area and jurisdiction.  The proposed development included land with three Local Planning Authority (LPA) boundaries.  Whilst some of the recommended conditions would be common to all three areas, each authority would be responsible for enforcement of any planning conditions imposed that related to specific areas of the development or issues which were confined or unique to particular parts of the site within the particular LPA, should planning permission be granted by each LPA.  

 

The Committee considered the application which Officers had recommended for approval.  It was noted that building heights would be restricted to between 9m and 21m above development plateau ground level, with lower buildings being sited at sensitive locations in relation to existing surrounding development.  A HGV routing plan had been devised to reduce traffic through sensitive areas, which had been accepted in principle by both Highways Authorities.  Officers from both the Warwickshire and Worcestershire Highways Authorities were present at the meeting to respond to questions raised in relation to traffic modelling and traffic flow.   

 

During the course of the debate it was noted that a number of issues raised were not to be dealt with at that stage and would be considered as reserved matters later in the process.  Redditch Borough Council would continue to be a consultee on phases of reserved matters coming forward.  Members specifically raised the issue of the protection of Ipsley Alders Marsh, which Officers took note of.  The Committee agreed that they wished to be consulted on all future reserved matters, particularly in light of the representations made by members of the public, which included concerns around the impact of air pollution, road safety with the flow of traffic to and from the site and the size of the warehouses proposed.

 

During the consideration of this item it was noted that a Petition containing 35 signatures objecting to the application had been received, which Councillor Prosser confirmed he may have signed.  Accordingly, at that point in the proceedings, Councillor Prosser declared an Other Disclosable Interest and withdrew from the meeting and took no further part in the consideration of the application.)

 

Supporting documents: