Agenda, decisions and minutes

Any apologies for absence which have been received will be noted at this stage.

The Planning Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.

The Chairman thanked Mrs Purnell for her hard work as Vice Chairman and congratulated her on her new Cabinet post. He welcomed Mrs Kilby as the new Vice Chairman and drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure which was displayed on the screens and introduced the officers present.

Apologies were noted from Mrs J Duncton, Mr J F Elliott and Mr L Hixson.

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 11 November 2016 (copies to follow).

Mr Cullen requested that the end time of the meeting be amended from 5.50am to 5.50pm.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 November 2016 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances will be dealt with under agenda item 13 (b).

The Chairman advised that there were no urgent items.

Details of members’ personal interests arising from their membership of parish councils or West Sussex County Council or from their being Chichester District Council or West Sussex County Council appointees to outside organisations or members of outside bodies or from being employees of such organisations or bodies.

Such interests are hereby disclosed by each member in respect of agenda items in the schedule of planning applications where the Council or outside body concerned has been consulted in respect of that particular item or application.

Declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are to be made by members of the Planning Committee in respect of matters on the agenda or this meeting.

Mr Dunn declared a personal interest in respect of application SDNP/16/03667/FUL as a Chichester District Council appointed member of the South Downs National Park Authority.

Mrs Kilby declared a personal interest in respect of application O/11/16/01785/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

Mrs Kilby also declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/16/03119/ADV as a member of Chichester City Council.

Mr McAra declared a personal interest in respect of application O/16/01785/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in respect of application O/16/01785/FUL as a member of Tangmere Parish Council.

Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in respect of application O/16/01785/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

Mr Oakley also declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/16/03119/ADV as an attendee at Friends of Priory Park meetings.

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in respect of application O/16/01785/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/16/03119/ADV as a Chichester District Council appointed member of Chichester Conservation Area Advisory Committee.

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/16/03119/ADV as a member of Chichester City Council.

Mr Plowman also declared a prejudicial interest in respect of application CC/16/03119/ADV as the Chairman of the Friends of Priory Park and withdrew to the public seating area.

(To listen to the speakers and full debate of the planning applications follow the link to the online audio recording).

Planning Applications

The Committee considered the planning applications together with an agenda update sheet at the meeting detailing observations and amendments that had arisen subsequent to the dispatch of the agenda.

During the presentations by officers of the applications, members viewed photographs, plans, drawings, computerised images and artist impressions that were displayed on the screen.

RESOLVED

That the Planning Committee makes the following decisions subject to the observations and amendments below:

Removal of conditions 9 and 11 from planning permission O/11/05283/OUT which require the closure of the Oving Traffic Lights and to retain the junction as it currently functions.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

Mr Frost explained that relevant parties had not received official notification of this agenda item and therefore advised that the item be withdrawn and deferred to the January 2017 meeting.

The committee agreed with this proposal and the item was withdrawn from the agenda.

Rear single storey extension, two storey side extension, front porch and internal alterations.

Permit.

Mr Whitty introduced this application for a rear single storey extension, two storey side extension, front porch and internal alterations. He explained the Committee had received the referral as the applicant is a member of staff.

Members had no clarification questions.

Recommendation to permit agreed.

4 no. non-illuminated sponsorship signs and 4 no. non-illuminated plaques on planter.

Permit.

(Please note Mr Plowman withdrew to the public seating area for the duration of this item.)

Mr Whitty introduced this application explaining that existing signs are situated at the two entrances and the northern end of Priory Park. Additional sponsorship elements were proposed to the two park entrance signs; the two ‘play area’ signs and an existing planter. The agenda update sheet detailed further information clarifying that replacement signs (other than those situated at the two entrances) will be the same size and type.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Dr D Hide – Objector

·       Mr R Plowman - Objector

In response to members questions regarding sponsorship Mr Frost reminded the Committee that the content of the signs was immaterial to the decision making process. Consideration should instead be given to whether the proposed signs will cause greater harm to the character and appearance of the park than the current signs.

Mr Dunn explained that he would abstain from the vote noting his preference for a reduced number of simplified signs located outside the park. Mr Whitty reminded members that it was not within the Committee’s remit to redesign existing signs.

Members considered whether the signs should state ‘sponsored by’ or ‘supported by’. Most members agreed the term ‘supported by’ to be more appropriate.

Mrs Tassell put forward a proposal to defer for redesign by the applicant which was seconded by Mr Dunn. In a vote members did not support the proposal. Members then voted on the officer recommendation to permit which the majority of members supported.

Recommendation to permit with amended condition 2 (signage to state ‘supported by’) agreed.

(Mr Oakley left the meeting and did not return for the remainder of the meeting.)

Creation of a part two storey house with basement and separate carport/garden store.

Permit.

Mr Whitty introduced this application for the creation of a two storey house with basement and separate carport/garden store. He explained that the Parish Council had agreed to remove their objection if the following additional conditions could be agreed:

·       Ground monitoring on neighbouring sites

·       A restriction on access to the south drive

Mr Whitty explained that whilst there would be a condition for ground water monitoring on the application site it would be unreasonable for officers to agree to extend this to neighbouring sites. He also explained that as the developer had a right of access to the south drive it was not possible to add a condition to restrict construction vehicles.

Mr Frost and Mr Whitty replied to points made during the Committee’s debate including:

·       In response to the suggestion that the developer could repair or pay for any damage to the south drive that officers could add an informative to the Construction Management Plan

·       In reference to concerns over the size of vehicles using the south drive there would be a need for construction traffic to use the drive but the majority of traffic was likely to travel down the front entrance of the site

·       In reference to concerns that development of the site could create a greater flood risk the developer would be required to put in place preventative measures but could not be expected to resolve current flooding on neighbouring sites

Recommendation to permit with additional informative (Construction Management Plan to include repair and maintenance of the surface of the existing access) agreed.

Livestock building.

Permit.

Mr Saunders introduced this application which had been withdrawn from the 12 October 2016 Planning Committee to resolve an issue regarding the siting of the proposed building in relation to a protected tree. He explained that the issue had been resolved as the proposed building will now be sited outside the root protection zone. Mr Saunders drew attention to the agenda update sheet containing a revised site location plan.

Members had no clarification questions.

Recommendation to permit agreed.

The Planning Committee will consider the monthly schedule updating the position with regard to planning appeals, litigation and recent planning policy publications or pronouncements.

Mr Frost drew attention to three additional outstanding court matters on the agenda update sheet.

The Committee noted the schedule of planning appeals, court and policy matters.

Tree Preservation Order 83/00653/TPO – 10 no.Oak Trees (Group G1).

Revoked.

Mr Whitty introduced this application to revoke Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 83/00653/TPO for a group of 10 oak trees. He explained that the site was located within the Neighbourhood Plan area and benefitted from an outline planning permission for housing development. The developer had requested revocation of the TPO due to concerns over liability of the trees which were removed prior to the developers involvement with the site.

Miss Golding clarified that there was no time limit on liability for TPO’s. She explained that evidence would be required to carry out any enforcement action relating to the removal of the trees.

Mr Whitty agreed that officers would address members’ suggestions that landscaping on the site should include replacement oak trees within future applications for the site.

Recommendation to revoke agreed.

The Planning Committee is requested to note the performance of Chichester District Council’s Development Management service for the period July 2016 to September 2016.

The Committee received the quarterly update on the performance of the Development Management Service. Mr Whitty explained that additional information surrounding agreed time extensions had been included within the report. He highlighted the key statistics from the period July – September 2016:

·       All major applications were determined within 13 weeks (above the target of 65%)

·       71% of Chichester District Council (CDC) minor applications and 89% of South Downs National Park (SDNP) minor applications were determined within eight weeks (above the target of 65%)

·       86% of other CDC applications and 93% of other SDNP applications were determined within eight weeks (above the target of 80%)

·       13% of appeals were accepted (below the maximum 30%)

Mr Whitty informed the Committee that the Government may change the agreed designation thresholds with proposed targets as follows:

·       In 2017 50% of majors to be determined within 13 weeks and 65% of all other applications to be determined within 8 weeks

·       In 2018 60% of majors to be determined within 13 weeks and 70% of all other applications to be determined within 8 weeks

·       A maximum 10% of appeals to be allowed

In response to members questions Mr Frost clarified that staff receive no performance related pay but are eligible for nomination for the staff award scheme.

The Chairman thanked all those involved in providing planning services.

The Planning Committee will consider any late items announced by the Chairman at the start of this meeting (agenda item 3) as follows:

a)    Items added to the agenda papers and made available for public inspection

b)    Items which the chairman has agreed should be taken as matters of urgency by reason of special circumstances to be reported at the meeting

There were no late items.

There are no restricted items for consideration.

The Planning Committee did not resolve to exclude the press and public during any part of this meeting.