Chichester District Council
Agenda, decisions and minutes

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Committee Rooms, East Pallant House. View directions

Contact: Katherine Davis or Lisa Higenbottam  Email:  kdavis@chichester.gov.uk or  lhigenbottam@chichester.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

62.

Chairman's Announcements

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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.

Minutes:

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting and drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

 

Mrs Kilby would be arriving later in the meeting.

 

63.

Approval of Minutes pdf icon PDF 105 KB

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 13 September 2017.

Minutes:

RESOLVED

 

That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 2017 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

 

64.

Urgent Items

The chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances will be dealt with under agenda item 16 (b).

Minutes:

There were no urgent items.

 

65.

Declarations of Interests pdf icon PDF 53 KB

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.

 

 

 

Minutes:

Mr Barrett declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/98/02043/OUT as a Chichester District Council appointed member of the Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

 

Mrs Duncton declared a personal interest in respect of applications KD/15/03367/FUL, CC/98/02043/OUT, WR/16/02096/REM, EWB/17/01259/FUL, CC/17/02284/DOM/, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

Mrs Duncton declared a personal interest in respect of applications SDNP/17/02188/FUL, SDNP/17/02189/LIS and SDNP/17/03260/FUL as a West Sussex County Council appointed member of South Downs National Park.

 

Mr Dunn declared a personal interest in respect of applications SDNP/17/02188/FUL, SDNP/17/02189/LIS and SDNP/17/03260/FUL as a member of South Downs National Park.

 

Mr Hixson declared a personal interest in respect of applications CC/98/02043/OUT, CC/17/02284/DOM, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

 

Mrs Kilby declared a personal interest in respect of applications CC/98/02043/OUT, CC/17/02284/DOM, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

 

Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in respect of applications KD/15/03367/FUL, CC/98/02043/OUT, WR/16/02096/REM, EWB/17/01259/FUL, CC/17/02284/DOM/, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in respect of applications CC/98/02043/OUT, CC/17/02284/DOM, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of Chichester City Council.

 

Mrs Purnell declared a personal interest in respect of applications KD/15/03367/FUL, CC/98/02043/OUT, WR/16/02096/REM, EWB/17/01259/FUL, CC/17/02284/DOM/, CC/17/01712/FUL and CC/17/01150/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

Mr Wakeham declared a personal interest in respect of application CC/17/01150/FUL as he had carried out the commercial survey when the dwelling was previously marketed for sale.

 

Planning Applications

 

(To listen to the full debate of the planning applications follow the link to the online recording)

 

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 screens.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the following decisions be made subject to the observations and amendments as set out below:-

 

66.

KD/15/03367/FUL - Land On The East Side Of Plaistow Road, Plaistow Road, Kirdford, West Sussex pdf icon PDF 598 KB

Proposed construction of 54 residential dwellings and associated works.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Application deferred for further discussion with applicant with regard to phasing.

Minutes:

A supplementary agenda had been published correcting a formatting issue that had occurred at appendix 1.

 

The following additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to an amendment to condition 3.

 

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mr T Piedade – Parish representative;

·         Mrs N Goddard – Objector;

·         Mrs L Nutting – Objector;

·         Mr P White – Agent; and

·         Mr J Ransley – CDC member.

 

Mr Harris responded to members’ questions.  With regard to local need and the allocation of the affordable rented housing, priority would be given to locally connected people in the Parish.  There were currently nine households in Kirdford Parish on the Housing Register.  He advised that the affordable rented housing, to be provided during the first phase of the development, demonstrated that there was the ability to make a significant contribution to meeting the current local need.  Officers were not aware of the progress of other housing development sites in the Kirdford Neighbourhood Plan (KNP), but they would make a smaller contribution to the overall housing numbers. With regard to the proposed five-year phasing of the development, it would be likely to be completed 9-10 years into the Neighbourhood Plan period.  With regard to surface water, he advised that a scheme had not been fully worked up.  The site was located on very heavy soil that drained poorly and this was the reason why the indicative surface water scheme was based on the temporary storage of the water in crates under the open space with attenuated flows to the local ditch network.  He advised that the Council’s Drainage Engineer was satisfied that there was a suitable technical solution and that the greenfield rates over the lifetime of the development would not be exceeded and would not result in any worsening of downstream consequences.  Officers would advise the Drainage Engineer of the surface water drainage concerns raised by members and if the application was permitted, the concerns would be addressed during the discharge of conditions.He confirmed that the proposed garages would accord with the minimum requirements in terms of internal dimensions, which could be included in anamended condition. 

 

Mr Harris also addressed a number of the concerns raised by the public speakers relating to the principle of the development and whether or not Kirdford could sustain the amount of housing proposed. He advised that the amount of housing proposed on the site had arisen from Policy 5 of the Local Plan, which had taken into account Kirdford’s capacity to accommodate further dwellings.  Local infrastructure had been taken into account and it was noted that a substantial CIL receipt would be received if the development was permitted, which would address infrastructure needs resulting from the development.  Officers had assessed the application against the requirements of the KNP and were of the opinion that the proposed development was substantially in compliance with it. With regard to the phasing issues, Policy KSS1 of the KNP contained a number of criteria.  It should be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

67.

CC/98/02043/OUT - Warrendell Adjacent To Centurion Way Off Plainwood Close, Chichester, West Sussex pdf icon PDF 482 KB

Outline application for the erection of 21 dwellings with associated vehicular access, parking and landscaping.

Decision:

Defer for a Section 106 agreement then Permit.   If Section 206 agreement not complete within 6 months of resolution then delegate to officers.

Minutes:

The following information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to an amendment to the recommendation to read ‘Defer for Section 106 agreement then Permit.  If Section 106 agreement not complete within 6 months of resolution then delegate to officers’, and officer comment regarding the completion of the Section 106 agreement.

 

Mr Bushell reported the need for an additional condition requiring the dwellings to be no higher than 2.5 storeys.

 

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mrs L Bye – Objector;

·         Mr C Kemp – Objector;

·         Mr C Beazley – Objector;

·         Mr S Jenkins – Agent; and

·         Mr A Dignum – CDC member.

 

The Committee favoured an additional condition setting out the refuse and recycling requirements.

 

A further amendment to the end of the recommendation was agreed with the addition of “…to determine.”.

 

In response to members’ questions and comments, Mr Bushell reported that with regard to the cycleway access, due to engineering difficulties from 1) differences in the site levels at the northern part of the site and 2) the potential loss of significant trees and to avoid a hard engineering solution at the southern part of the site, West Sussex County Council had withdrawn their requirement for a cycleway access from the site onto Centurion Way.  With regard to the gated access from Plainwood Close located north of the site onto Centurion Way, this was not accessible as the land was outside of the applicant’s control.  It was clearly the wish in future that this would be the obvious choice for the cycleway access but it was outside the scope of this application.

 

During the debate members raised ongoing concerns regarding the cycleway situation as they were not convinced that there was an engineering problem in providing a cycleway access onto Centurion Way from the northern part of the site. 

 

It was suggested by Councillor Mrs Tull that some of the Community Infrastructure Levy money that Chichester City Council would receive if the application was granted could be used towards securing a cycleway onto Centurion Way.  

 

A proposal to include an obligation within the Section 106 agreement requiring the applicant to use their “best endeavours” to secure a cycle path from the site onto Centurion Way on being put to a vote was carried.

 

Recommendation to Defer for a Section 106 agreement then Permit with additional conditions (dwelling heights), (refuse and recycling requirements) and an obligation within the Section106 agreement regarding securing of the cycle path onto Centurion Way agreed.   If the Section 106 agreement is not completed within 6 months of resolution then delegate to officers to determine.

 

68.

WR/16/02096/REM - Land South Of Meadowbank, Petworth Road, Wisborough Green, West Sussex pdf icon PDF 316 KB

Approval of the details of the layout of the site, the scale and the appearance of the buildings and the landscaping of the site.

Decision:

Permit.

Minutes:

The following additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to further consultation comments received from Wisborough Green Parish Council, further officer consideration of the amended layout plan and amendment of condition 1 (plans).

 

The Committee favoured one additional condition relating to the provision of electric charging points and the amendment of condition 4 torequire the garages to meet the standard minimum size.

 

Recommendation to Permit with amended condition 1 and condition 4, and additional condition (electric charging points) agreed.

 

(Mrs Tassell left the room and did not return for the remainder of the meeting)

 

69.

EWB/17/01259/FUL - Billy's On The Beach Kiosk, Bracklesham Lane, Bracklesham Bay, Chichester, West Sussex, PO20 8JH pdf icon PDF 331 KB

Proposed decking with ramp and retractable canopy.

Decision:

Defer for a site visit

Minutes:

The following additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to further consultation comments on the revised plans was received from East Wittering and Bracklesham Parish Council, the Council’s Foreshore Officer and the Council’s Estates Manager, an amendment to the application description and amendments to condition 5 and 8.

 

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mr I Grant – Objector;

·         Mrs J Gayfer – Objector; and

·         Mr N Ellis – Agent.

 

Members having noted the concerns raised by the Council’s Foreshores Officer, that the amended scheme would be likely to create greater conflict with vehicles towing boats from the car park through the gate and pedestrians queuing, favoured a deferral of the application to enable a site visit to take place and for further negotiations with the applicant in relation to the matters raised by the Foreshores officer.

 

In response to the Committee’s request that a demonstration of a vehicle manoeuvring a boat should be provided at the site visit, Mr Frost advised that whilst it would not be possible for a demonstration to reflect the new site layout, members would be able to assess the current layout and whether or not what was proposed would be an improvement.

 

Defer for a site visit by members and for further negotiations with the applicant in relation to the matters raised by the Foreshores officer.

 

70.

CC/17/02284/DOM - 54 Oliver Whitby Road, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 3LW pdf icon PDF 440 KB

New front porch.

Decision:

Permit

Minutes:

The following information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to additional and substitute plans, amendments to conditions 2 and 3, further officer consideration.

 

Recommendation to Permit with amended conditions 2 and 3 agreed.

 

(The Committee adjourned for lunch from 12.35pm until 1.00pm)

 

71.

CC/17/01712/FUL - Whyke Lodge Residential Care Home, 115 Whyke Road, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8JG pdf icon PDF 374 KB

6 no. dwellings.

Decision:

Refuse.

Minutes:

The following information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to further consultation comments received from West Sussex County Council Contracts and Performance and further officer consideration.

 

Mrs Stevens drew attention to the inclusion of three additional conditions relating to the timings for the clearance of trees, measures to protect reptiles and the protection of hedgehogs.

 

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mrs N Walsh – Objector;

·         Mr M Stonefrost – Objector;

·         Mr B Hopkins – Objector; and

·         Mrs P Dignum – CDC member.

 

The Committee considered the application and raised a number of concerns regarding the impact that the proposed development of six residential dwellings would have on the residents, which would result in the closure of the residential care home at a time when there was an increasing need for such homes and the resulting disruption to the residents who would require rehoming.

 

Members noted the advice provided by Mrs Stevens during her presentation that the Council did not currently have a policy in the Council’s Local Plan concerning care homes and their protection from an alternative use.  They urged officers to include one in the next review of the Local Plan.  However, having considered a number of the policies contained in the Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework they considered these were relevant to the application as follows: 

 

National Planning Policy Framework:

 

·         With regard to paragraph 7 and the bullet point addressing the social role of development, members were of the view that the care home formed part of the overall provision for the community.

 

·         Paragraph 17 set out the core planning principles.  They considered that bullet points two and three gave a clear indication that steps should be taken to ensure care homes were maintained.  The final bullet point stated “take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to meet local needs”, which in this instance they considered were supported by the information in the agenda update sheet provided by West Sussex County Council Contracts and Performance Team who had raised concerns and also the content of the Chichester in Partnerships Community Strategy 2016-2021 that provided the evidence for the need for this type of facility.

 

·         Paragraph 50 dealt with the requirement to create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities.  Therefore, members were not convinced that there was not support in national policy for the retention of this site as a residential care home.

 

Local Plan:

 

·         Local Plan Policies 3 (the economy and employment provision) and 26 (existing employment sites) dealt with the protection of existing employment sites.  With regard to Policy 26, paragraph 2 stated it should be demonstrated that a site was no longer required and was unlikely to be re-used or redeveloped for employment uses.   Members were of the view that care and residential homes were businesses, and therefore employment sites noting that the Policy did not define what was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

72.

CC/17/01150/FUL - 8 Fordwater Road, Chichester, PO19 6PR pdf icon PDF 113 KB

Demolition of existing building in C2 use and construction of building comprising 4 no. flats with parking and associated works.

Decision:

Defer for a Section 106 agreement then Permit.

Minutes:

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mr K Osterloh – Objector; and

·         Mrs K Simmons – Agent.

 

Miss Bell responded to members’ comments.  Although the footprint would be closer to the street, the proposed development would still retain a significant set-back position.  All the trees on the site would be retained and the amount of green space would be similar to the current amount.  The character and feel of the street, in the settlement boundary, would remain as it currently was and the site was not, in the officers’ opinion, located in a semi-rural area.  Details were provided of the comparison between the existing and proposed building in terms of its footprint, elevations and massing, which would not be unduly different.   

 

Defer for a Section 106 agreement then Permit.

 

73.

SDNP/17/02189/LIS - The White House, The Green, Fernhurst, GU27 3HY pdf icon PDF 355 KB

Stabilise and repair existing stone boundary wall without wholesale rebuilding and to allow re-opening of the footpath.

Decision:

SDNP/17/02188/FUL: Permit.

 

SDNP/17/02189/LIS: Permit.

 

Minutes:

The following additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to further consultation comments received from Fernhurst Parish Council and the Chichester District Council Arboricultural Officer, an amendment to the recommendation as the full and the listed building applications should be determined separately and a full list of the conditions and informatives that related to the listed building application.

 

Recommendation to Permit agreed.

 

74.

SDNP/17/02188/FUL - The White House, The Green, Fernhurst, GU27 3HY

Minutes:

The following additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to further consultation comments received from Fernhurst Parish Council and the Chichester District Council Arboricultural Officer, an amendment to the recommendation as the full and the listed building applications should be determined separately and a full list of the conditions and informatives that related to the listed building application.

 

Recommendation to Permit agreed.

 

75.

SDNP/17/03260/FUL - Wayside Cottage, Bepton Road, Bepton, GU29 0HZ pdf icon PDF 470 KB

Retrospective change of use of outbuilding to holiday let and/or annex.

Decision:

Permit.

Minutes:

The following member of the public addressed the Committee:

 

·         Mr D Hollowood – Objector

 

In response to members’ comments, Mr Saunders drew the Committee’s attention to proposed condition 3 that would require roof windows to be fitted with blackout blinds to avoid any light spoil so that the dark skies objectives of the South Downs National Park were protected.

 

Members favoured an additional condition to control flood lighting following concerns raised about the potential impact of external lighting resulting from the proposed change of use of the outbuilding to a holiday let and/or annex

Recommendation to Permit with additional condition (flood lighting) agreed.

 

76.

Schedule of Outstanding Contraventions pdf icon PDF 131 KB

The Planning Committee will consider the quarterly schedule which updates the position with regard to planning enforcement matters.

Minutes:

The Committee considered and noted the schedule of outstanding contraventions circulated with the agenda, which was presented by Mrs Archer.

 

Crouchlands Farm, Rickmans Lane, Plaistow: The Committee expressed their thanks to Mrs Archer, Mr Hawks and the West Sussex County Council officers for their hard work during the planning appeal process.  Mr Frost advised that the decision for the recently won appeal would be reported to the next meeting of the Committee.

 

77.

Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters pdf icon PDF 155 KB

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

Minutes:

The Committee considered and noted the schedule of planning appeals, court and policy matters that had been circulated with the agenda.

 

The following information was reported on the agenda update sheet correcting the decisions for three appeals (CC/16/03216/ADV, E/17/00237/FUL and EWB/16/03920/FUL) missing from the report.

 

 

 

 

Top of page