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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.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 welcomed everyone to the meeting. He drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure which was displayed on the screens and introduced the officers present.

Apologies were noted from Miss N Golding and Mr G McAra.

The Committee were informed that planning application SDNP/16/03667/FUL had been withdrawn from the agenda.

The minutes relate to the Special Planning Committee on 8 September 2016 and Planning Committee on 14 September 2016 (copies to follow).

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 September 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 15 (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 Barrett declared a personal interest in respect of planning applications WW/16/02212/FUL, BO/16/02667/DOM and BI/16/01809/FUL as a Chichester District Council appointed member of the Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

Mrs Duncton declared a personal interest in respect of planning applications WW/16/02212/FUL, TG/16/00444/FUL, CC/15/04201/FUL, BI/16/01809/FUL and BX/16/01196/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

Mr Dunn declared a personal interest in respect of planning application BX/16/01196/FUL as a Chichester District Council appointed member of the South Downs National Park Authority.

Mrs Kilby declared a personal interest in respect of planning application CC/15/04201/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in respect of planning applications WW/16/02212/FUL, TG/16/00444/FUL, CC/15/04201/FUL, BI/16/01809/FUL and BX/16/01196/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council. Mr Oakley also declared a personal interest in respect of planning application TG/16/0044/FUL as a member of Tangmere Parish Council.

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in respect of planning application CC/15/04201/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council. Mr Plowman also declared a personal interest in respect of planning application CC/15/04201/FUL as a Chichester District Council appointed member of Chichester Conservation Area Advisory Committee.

Mrs Purnell declared a personal interest in respect of planning application SY/16/02444/FUL as a member of Selsey Town Council.

(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:

Change of use to allow storage of materials by weed control/salt spreading and artificial lawn installation business (B8) - (variation of condition 8 on permission granted on appeal relating to application WW/102/89).

Delegate to officers then permit.

Mr Bartlett introduced this application referring to an amendment to the description of the planning application as detailed in the agenda update sheet. The application proposed a change of use to allow materials storage.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Mr J Boys – Objector

·       Mr B Hull – Agent

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

·       With regard to members concerns over the hours of operation on site officers had negotiated with the applicant to amend the times of use with the revised times agreed as 07.30 – 18.00 on weekdays and 08.00 – 13.00 on Saturdays

·       Concerns regarding the colour and siting of the outside storage unit could be addressed via a suitable condition

·       That an additional condition could, if considered necessary, be added to prevent the use of fork lift trucks on site

Recommendation to delegate to officers to require details including plans to show the appearance and siting of storage unit with amended conditions 4 (landscape scheme) and 9 (outside storage) then permit agreed. 

Erection of six additional residential dwellings with associated parking, bin and cycle store, landscaping and open space.

Permit.

Mr Bartlett introduced this application by reference to the site location plan, site layout and site elevations. He explained that together with the previously permitted scheme the proposal would provide a total of 166 dwellings with an additional 2265 square metres of open space including 400 square metres of Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP). Inclusive of the previously permitted scheme this addition would bring the total open space for the site to 3564 square metres.

The following member of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Mr R Collett - Applicant

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

·       With regard to members concerns about the practical effects of open space being adjacent to the windows of adjoining residential dwellings, a path and buffer planting would be situated between the dwellings and the open space

·       With regard to members concerns over the size of the open space, the open space proposed would be 1299 square metres over the required provision (inclusive of an equipped play area and benches)

·       The space for a community hall illustrated on the original plans has now been allocated for community open space

·       Concern over the detail of the boundary treatments would be addressed in the conditions

·       That an additional condition would be added to ensure maintenance provision of the sustainable urban drainage system (SuDS) proposals and the open space

Recommendation to permit with additional conditions (a) boundary treatments for the open space, (b) amendment of conditions to secure details of maintenance of the open space and the SuDS agreed.

Variation of Condition 2 (plans condition) of planning permission SY/15/02214/FUL.Amendments to approved plans to include; clear glazing to first floor window to south elevation and change in roof form of single storey extension to west elevation to flat roof.

Permit.

Mr Bartlett introduced this application referring to a number of minor amendments to the report as detailed in the agenda update sheet. The purpose of the application being a variation of condition 2 of permission SY/15/02214/FUL.

The following member of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Ms O St-Amour – on the applicants behalf

Members had no clarification questions.

Recommendation topermit agreed.

Demolition of existing structures, construction of 4 no. dwellings and associated landscape works.

Permit (contrary to officer recommendation).

Mr Bartlett introduced this application by reference to the site location plan, floor plans and site elevations. As outlined in the agenda update sheet proposed reason for refusal number 4 was withdrawn. The application proposed the demolition of existing structures, construction of 4 no. dwellings and associated landscape works.

Mr Bartlett referred to comments received from the Council’s Economic Development team following the publication of the agenda update sheet which expressed concern about the proposal in relation to the applicants marketing of the site for commercial use. 

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Mr M Darby – Supporter

·       Mrs J Ratledge – Supporter

·       Mr P Clements – Applicant

·       Mrs P Dignum – Chichester District Council Member

Some members referred to the Local Plan Policy which advises that applications such as these should demonstrate evidence of marketing for alternative commercial use before a change of use to housing will be considered. Some members suggested the opportunity should be taken to utilise the site for additional housing stock in a sustainable city location.

In relation to refuse storage and collection, members were advised that Lyndhurst Road, the proposed collection point for refuse bins requires a 65 metre walk from plot 1 (35 metres longer than guidance suggests). However, Chichester Contract Services were consulted and had raised no objection to the proposal.

In relation to flood risk the Environment Agency had raised no objections. Mr Whitty explained that the agent had not provided a sequential test and that therefore Policy 42 is relevant which requires the consideration of other sites if there is a risk of flooding.

Mr Frost advised members of the importance of due consideration of the relevant Development Plan Policies. 

In a vote members did not support the officer recommendation to refuse. A proposal was put forward by Mrs Tull to permit the application based on the following reasons:

·       Lack of previous flooding on the site

·       This is not a significant employment site

Mr Plowman seconded the proposal.

Recommendation to permit (contrary to officer recommendation) with appropriate conditions agreed.

(Mrs Duncton left the meeting and did not return for the remainder of the meeting.)

Garage and garden store alternative proposals to approval BO/16/00397/DOM.

Permit.

Mr Whitty introduced this application referring to a number of minor corrections as detailed in the agenda update sheet. The purpose of the application being alternative proposals to approval BO/16/00397.

Mr Plowman asked for clarification of the use of the neighbouring building shown during the officer presentation slides. Mr Whitty explained that the building in question was an outbuilding with no windows facing out onto the site.

Recommendation topermit agreed.

Variation of Conditions 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 20 and 21 of planning permission BI/13/01391/FUL - to vary the wording of conditions in order to allow the development to commence.

Defer for Section 106 then Permit.

Mr Bushell introduced this application by reference to the site plans and a number of photographs. The purpose of the application was to vary the ‘pre-commencement’ requirement of conditions 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 20 and 21 of planning permission BI/13/01391/FUL. Additional minor changes to conditions 6, 8 and 13 were indicated on the agenda update sheet. Mr Bushell explained that the application had been submitted in order to enable a material start to be made on the development of 15 affordable homes for which planning permission expired at the end of November. The proposed works constituting a material start in this instance were a pegging out of the site access road and/or the erection of site perimeter boundary fencing. The Committee were advised that the application was not an opportunity to re-visit the principle of housing development on the site which had already been approved and was only to consider the variations to the conditions proposed.

The Chairman welcomed Mr Dominic Henly, Senior Engineer and Mrs Linda Grange, Housing Delivery Manager to answer questions and provide clarification.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Mr R Bird – Birdham Parish Council

·       Mr A Wilson – Objector

·       Mr D Williams – Objector

·       Mr D Barrett – Objector

·       Miss S Poulter – On behalf of the applicant

Mr Bushell, Mr Frost, Mr Henly and Mr Whitty replied to points made during the Committee’s debate:

·       With regard to members concerns regarding the amendments, officers advised as follows:

o   The addition of ‘no development will take place other than the erection of boundary fencing and/or the pegging out of the access road’ to conditions 6, 8, 13 would allow the development to commence before the planning permission expired by carrying out some minor material works. This did not mean that the developer would not have to meet all the requirements of the existing conditions on the extant 2013 permission. In particular the requirements of the surface water drainage condition (6) would still need to be addressed and approved by the Council before any other aspects of the approved development (save for the pegging out/boundary fencing) were carried out. 

o   The laying of a temporary surface – creating a haul road - to access the site would be added to condition 15 (construction management). Officers further clarified that as with all applications it was the developers responsibility to ensure that they had obtained the correct permission/s to enter land in order to carry out works.

·       With regard to members concerns about mud being deposited on Crooked Lane from construction traffic, a wheel washing condition had been included as part of the requirements of the Construction Management Plan.

·       Officers were aware of the high level water table in Birdham. Percolation testing and winter groundwater monitoring was required by condition 6 to inform the final surface water drainage strategy.

·       Boundary treatment will consist of a combination of close boarded fencing to the housing plots and post and rail fencing around the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

Redevelopment of coal yard to provide 1 no. dwelling and 5 no. tourist accommodation units.

Permit (contrary to officer recommendation).

Mr Whitty introduced this application by reference to site photographs. The purpose of the application was to redevelop the coal yard to provide 1 no. dwelling and 5 no. tourist accommodation units.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·       Mr M Bish – Boxgrove Parish Council

·       Mr R Dollamore - Agent

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

·       There was inadequate evidence to justify the proposed residential dwelling

·       A  condition could be added to restrict the use of the  tourist units to holiday occupation only

·       There was no evidence that the site had been marketed for employment use and so the need for tourist accommodation was presently outweighed by the loss of employment land.

·       With regard to the site’s inclusion in the Boxgrove Neighbourhood Plan the Neighbourhood Plan was at an early stage of preparation and had little weight at this stage

Members thought that there was  a need for additional tourist accommodation in the district. Some members also felt there was a need for smaller properties in village locations within the district.

Members asked for consideration to be given to the level of flint work given the rural setting of the site.

In a vote members did not support the officer recommendation to refuse. A proposal was put forward by Mr Dunn to permit the application based on the proposal being a desirable semi commercial development in a village environment providing much needed tourist accommodation with minimal impact on employment use

Mrs Tassell seconded the proposal.

Permit (contrary to officer recommendation) with the following conditions:

1.     Restricting tourism lets to holiday use only

2.     Requiring tourist units to be available for first use prior to occupation of the main dwelling

Livestock building.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

The Planning Committee will consider the quarterly schedule for the period up to 30 September 2016 which updates the position with regard to planning enforcement matters.

The Committee considered and noted the schedule of outstanding contraventions.

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

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

Mr Cullen requested an update on CH/14/00181/CONMHC, Field West of Five Oaks, Newells Lane, Chichester, West Sussex. Mrs Archer advised that she had carried out a site inspection on 29 September 2016 which will result in prosecution for failure to comply.

Members thanked Mrs Archer for her continued efforts.

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.