Issue - meetings

All outstanding Reserved Matters for the erection of 73 residential
dwellings with associated parking, landscaping, informal open space and
associated works on Parcel P2.A, pursuant to permission 14/04301/OUT
and approval of the West of Chichester Residential Architectural Design
Strategy (August 2019, ref CB_70_068 Rev J), in compliance with
condition 27 of permission 14/04301/OUT

Defer

Miss Bell introduced the application.

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to an amendment to the drawing numbers in the conditions and drawing plans table shown on pages 58, 59 and 60 of the report to ensure consistency through minor changes, and the deletion of a duplicate drawing.  A further verbal update was provided relating to an amendment to the materials for plot 29, a change to condition 10 also relating to materials, and a recommendation for roadways and parking spaces to be permeable or non-permeable under condition 13, in regards to surface water drainage.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

Mr Julian Joy - Parish Representative

Ms Valerie Briginshaw – Objector

Mr Nicholas Billington – Agent

Mr Richard Plowman – Chichester District Council Member

Mrs Clare Apel - Chichester District Council Member

Mr Adrian Moss - Chichester District Council Member

During the discussion members sought clarification on a number of points.  Regarding the over-arching principles, Mr Whitty responded that both the City Council and the District Council had declared a climate emergency which would be given due weight going forward in decisions taken by officers and Members, but reminded the Committee that planning decisions must be taken in accordance with the adopted Local Plan.  The Climate Emergency would influence the emerging local plan and it was a material consideration to take account of in determining planning applications.  However, the starting point was the current Local Plan and the fact that outline permission had already been granted on this site, it was not reasonable to return to matters which were dealt with at the outline stage.  Mr Whitty added that the developer had recently heard the Committees views on the overall residential Design Strategy and following a number of meetings with developers, officers had been able to encourage them to go further than the developers considered was necessary by the policy.  Mr Whitty advised the Committee, that should the applicant go to appeal, the inspector may consider that they did not need to go beyond the policy, as they had currently agreed.  Mr Whitty confirmed that officers believed they achieved a better result in terms of sustainability than the current policy required.

Miss Bell responded that there was an outline planning permission which included almost forty conditions, a Section 106 agreement and the recommendation before the Committee.  The report also included a number of Discharge of Conditions applications and more had been received since the publication of the report.  All conditions had time ‘triggers’ by when they must be complied with.  Miss Bell clarified that it was possible to consider a reserved matters application on a parcel of land, whilst simultaneously discharging and considering conditions on the outline plan with details reviewed by officers on a continuous basis.  On the matter of sewage, this was dealt with in the outline permission which provided choices, and the developer was required to inform the Council of their decision regarding which option had been chosen.  A  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56