Agenda, decisions and minutes

Planning Committee
Wednesday 13 March 2019 9.30 am

Venue: Committee Rooms, East Pallant House. View directions

Contact: Sharon Hurr on 01243 534614  Email:  shurr@chichester.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

289.

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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.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

 

Apologies were received from Mr G Barrett, Mr M Dunn and Mr M Hall.

290.

Approval of Minutes pdf icon PDF 89 KB

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 13 February 2019 (copy to follow).

Minutes:

RESOLVED

 

That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 February 2019 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

291.

Urgent Items

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

Minutes:

There were no urgent items.

292.

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:

Mrs Duncton declared a personal interest in planning applications CC/18/03180/FUL, CH/18/03195/REM, SI/18/02490/FUL and WW/18/03254/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

Mr Hayes declared a personal interest in planning application SB/18/03215/DOC as a member of Southbourne Parish Council.

 

Mr Hixson declared a personal interest in planning application CC/18/03180/FUL as a Member of Chichester City Council.

 

Mrs Kilby declared a personal interest in planning application CC/18/03180/FUL as a Member of Chichester City Council.

 

Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in planning applications CC/18/03180/FUL, CH/18/03195/REM, SI/18/02490/FUL and WW/18/03254/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

Mr Plowman declared a personal interest in planning application CC/18/03180/FUL as a Member of Chichester City Council and as a Chichester District Council appointed member of the Chichester Conservation Area Advisory Committee.

 

Mr Purnell declared a personal interest in planning applications CC/18/03180/FUL, CH/18/03195/REM, SI/18/02490/FUL and WW/18/03254/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.

293.

CC/18/03180/FUL - City Walls Car Park Southgate Chichester West Sussex pdf icon PDF 496 KB

Change of use of land to extend existing adjacent car park increasing capacity by approximately 12 spaces.

 

Decision:

Refuse.

Minutes:

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to an amended location plan and an additional consultation comment received from the Environment Agency.

 

The following members of the public addressed the committee:

 

Mr M Le Selleur – Supporter

Mr A Finnamore - Applicant

 

During the discussion members debated the necessity for further car parking spaces within the city, safety of pedestrians and concerns regarding the proposed application to extend the car park in closer proximity to the city walls.  Members also debated the loss of trees, and whether having another view of the Residentiary Bastion with associated information signage was a positive addition for visitors or would a view of the Bastion from the footpath alongside the school playing fields be more favourable. 

 

In response to members’ comments, Mr Whitty confirmed officers were not concerned with having a shared space for pedestrians and vehicles.  Mr Whitty further commented that a more appropriate position for an information board for the bastion would be nearer to it, on the footpath.  The Tree Officer had also confirmed that the trees which would require removal did not have Tree Preservation Orders, although were in a conservation area, but most were likely to have been self-set and their loss would have limited impact.   

 

In response to further comments from Members’ regarding excavation and whether two parking spaces could be removed from the plan for planting to screen the car park, Mr Whitty drew the committee’s attention to the report which explained a buffer would be required between the car park and the city walls to afford them protection.  If planning permission were granted, this would be required as a condition.  Mr Whitty added that landscaping was a concern and there may not be sufficient space for planting.

 

Recommendation to Refuse agreed.

294.

CH/18/03195/REM - Greenacre Nursery Main Road Chidham PO18 8TP pdf icon PDF 386 KB

Reserved Matters application for details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following approval CH/16/04132/OUT - reuse of previously developed land for residential development of 10 no. dwellings and associated works.

 

Decision:

Permit.

Minutes:

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to consultation responses and the officers’ response to them concerning materials, landscaping, and the removal of permitted development rights to insert roof-light windows, The applicant had also confirmed works to improve the performance of a culvert, details of future ditch maintenance, and a willingness to undertake appropriate landscaping.  

 

During the discussion Members sought clarification as to the provision foraffordable housing, the use of adjacent paddock and responsibility for maintaining the proposed public open space.

 

Officers responded to Members’ question and comments.  Mr Harris confirmed that the development would make provision for three affordable homes with gardens that are modest `but of acceptable size, to be sold at a discounted market value and further reminded Members that on-site provision was to be welcomed given that it  was not a policy requirement for a development of this size and in a rural area.  There was a necessity to maintain access to the adjacent paddock for the owners, which would have low intensity use.  Mr Harris further confirmed that responsibility for the provision and future maintenance of the public open space, would be addressed by way of a legal agreement and it was likely that it would be maintained through a management company. 

 

Recommendation to Permit agreed.

295.

SB/18/03215/DOC - The Orchards Main Road Southbourne Emsworth Hampshire PO10 8JH pdf icon PDF 414 KB

Discharge of condition 12 (foul drainage) from planning permission SB/14/02800/OUT - erection of 157 dwellings with associated access from Main Road, parking, open space and landscaping.

 

Decision:

Permit.

Minutes:

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet identifying the connection into the mains sewer and location of the associated manhole with substitute plans.

 

The following members of the public addressed the committee:

 

Mrs A Tate – Parish Representative

Mr M Evans – Objector (provided information read by Mrs S Seabrook)

Mr J Child – Objector

Mr R Seabrook – Objector

Mr R Reay – Agent

Mr J Brown – Chichester District Councillor

 

The Chairman commented that further to the concerns of the objectors and Councillor Jonathan Brown, in relation water management, information was required from Southern Water and introduced Mr Csatlos, a Senior Project Manager from the company.

 

Mr Csatlos explained his role to provide capacity for new developments.  In addressing the points raised by members of the public whom had addressed the Committee, Mr Csatlos began by explaining that there had been a burst rising main in the previous year due to the unexpected cold weather which had caused operational problems with both water and sewerage infrastructure.  Since this time a number of additional measures had been taken to prevent reoccurrences.  This scheme was to address capacity for the housing development and not operational matters, and similarly at the treatment works the scheme was to deliver infrastructure capacity and not treatment capacity.  Treatment capacity matters are dealt with by way of the local plan level and not on an individual site by site basis, and at site level the capacity is delivered with the understanding that the treatment capacity is already in place.  Mr Csatlos explained that he could not comment with regards to how surface water is being dealt with, but the matter in question concerned foul discharge and he was able to take questions on out flows from the development.  Mr Csatlos further commented that with regards to the lack of information, if that was the perception of Southern Water, he would like to apologise on behalf of the company.  Mr Csatlos added that revision of the modelling criteria was based on defined methods, following recent studies.

 

The Chairman responded that he was not clear of the reasoning for Southern Water delivering a different scheme to that previously agreed, also without consultation, and asked if Mr Csatlos could elaborate as to why this scheme was needed and how it was an improvement.  Mr Csatlos explained that the developer had submitted a section 98 application and following this Southern Water had produced a study and modelling report which outlined what was required.  The modelling report was produced at the beginning of 2016 and the modelling criteria had since changed the LASSO Report and 21st Century Capacity Drainage Report 2017, which had highlighted errors in the previous assessment. The most significant finding was in relation to the misconnection of surface water to the foul system.  The previous calculation for surface water ingress had been 4 metres squared per property, but had since been revised to 1.4 metres squared per property.  The average number of people in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 295.

296.

SI/18/02490/FUL - Woodlands Keynor Lane Sidlesham Chichester West Sussex PO20 7NG pdf icon PDF 316 KB

Use of part of the site for the stationing of 3 caravans for use as ancillary horticultural worker accommodation and their storage off season.

 

Decision:

Permit.

 

Minutes:

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to: an amended description, additional supporting information from the applicant confirming the provision of parking on site, and that the occupation of the caravans was required until the end of November. The update sheet also confirmed that it was not necessary to obtain a contribution to the recreational disturbance scheme, for temporary planning permission, but should an application for a permanent grant of planning permission be made, a contribution would be required at that stage.  An additional condition was recommended that within three months of the date of the decision, there would be the provision of four car parking spaces, an amendment to conditions regarding the use of land for human habitation and storage of caravans which would cease at the end of three years and the land restored to its former condition. Further amendment to conditions required details regarding secure and covered cycle parking to be submitted to the Council for approval, and that the caravans must only to be occupied by a person employed in agriculture, and none of accommodation to be occupied other than between 1 February and 30 November. 

 

The following member of the public addressed the committee:

 

Miss L Santos - Applicant

 

The Chairman confirmed the application was before the committee due to an objection from the Parish Council and noted that there was no representative from the parish. 

 

During the discussion Members debated whether there was a requirement for 18 agricultural workers on the site and if those workers were being taken to other sites.  Members further debated whether the caravans would be visible from the road, if retail sales would take place on the site, and if the lease was four years, the reason for planning permission being sought for three years.  Mrs Stevens responded that officers had no evidence that workers were living on the site and working at other locations, and that it would not be reasonable to have a condition tying workers to this site only.  There were currently two caravans on the site and this would increase to three, there was no indication of retail activity, there was a possibility that ancillary sales could take place, but otherwise an application for a change of use would be required. .  There were permitted development rights for caravans to be on site, and the only reason for requiring planning permission was that they were not being moved during the winter period.   With regards to the four year lease, Mrs Stevens explained that three years is usually the period provided, and with the opportunity to apply for a further temporary period, should the lease be extended, or the business grow or for permanent permission if justified.  In response to a further question, Mrs Stevens responded that the reason for the caravans to remain ‘on site’, was likely to be due to a lack of available storage land, and leaving the caravans on site would be the most economical option.  If there were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 296.

297.

WI/18/02953/FUL - West Winds Itchenor Road West Itchenor PO20 7DH pdf icon PDF 441 KB

Replacement 1 no. dwelling.

 

Decision:

Permit.

 

Minutes:

The following members of the public addressed the committee:

 

Mrs A Trevelyan – Parish Representative

Mr N Ellis – Agent

 

During the discussion Members debated the appearance of a garage positioned forward of the proposed property, the removable of ‘eyebrows’ which were present on the existing property, and concerns regarding external lighting in relation to the Dark Skies Policy.  Mrs Stevens responded that it was recommended to include a condition limiting external lighting to ensure night skies and bats were protected.  Mrs Stevens further clarified that planning permissions had been granted previously with similar policies, but these had now expired.  With regards to the loss of the eyebrow dormer windows, the permitted extensions to the property would also have resulted in their loss, and the proposed replacement dwelling was more sensitive, compared to the design previously proposed, and the eyebrow dormer windows were not included in that extension scheme.

 

Members further debated the application in regards to the Parish Council design guidance in relation to garages forward of dwellings (and it was noted that there are a number within the road), that the Harbour Conservancy had previously requested the removal of permitted development rights and whether external lighting should be conditioned as ‘downward lighting’.  Mrs Stevens responded that officers had considered the removal of permitted development rights and it was thought not to be reasonable to do so in this instance.  Under permitted development rights a single storey extension could be provided to the rear of the property, and it is considered that the plot would be a sufficient size to accommodate this without harm.

 

Recommendation to Permit agreed.

 

298.

WW/18/03254/FUL - Ellanore House Ellanore Lane West Wittering Chichester West Sussex PO20 8AN pdf icon PDF 353 KB

Demolition of the existing property and the construction of a two storey dwelling with basement.

 

Decision:

Permit.

 

Minutes:

Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet amending a condition regarding the necessity to submit and have approved in writing a strategy outlining specific details of sustainable design and construction for all new buildings in order to minimise the impact of the development upon climate change.  A second condition was amended on the agenda update sheet regarding the necessity to submit and have approved in writing a full schedule of all materials and finishes with samples, in order to enable the control of the development in the interests of amenity and visual quality.

 

A member of the public addressed the committee:

 

Mrs J Gleeson – Agent

 

During the discussion members debated the number of storeys, design of the proposed building, the importance of the materials to be used and the potential issue of light pollution from the glazing.  Mrs Stevens responded, explaining the accommodation was arranged over four floors but the application was for a two-storey building with attic rooms having dormer windows, and a basement.  The main part of the building would be constructed of reclaimed brick and reclaimed slate tiles, other parts of the building would be constructed with reclaimed clay tiles, and a mix of timber boarding and reclaimed brick.  There was a condition which requires all building materials to be submitted for approval and therefore officers would have control regarding the quality of the materials and ensure they were of muted tones, which would help settle the building within the landscape.  With regards to light pollution, where there is a length of glazing on the ground floor, it was set back under a canopy which would minimise light pollution and the upper floor the design includes over-hanging eaves.  Mrs Stevens also noted, the Harbour Conservancy had not raised any objections in connection with light pollution or the Dark Skies Policy. Mrs Stevens further explained the floor plans to the Committee and also confirmed that a condition would be included to limit external lighting.

 

Recommendation to Permit agreed.

299.

Chichester District Council - Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters Between 30-Jan 2019 and 21-Feb-2019 pdf icon PDF 167 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 Chairman confirmed he had not received any notifications and there was nothing to report at this time.

 

The Chairman referred the Committee to the item regarding Breach Avenue, Southbourne, and confirmed the hearing had been scheduled for 23 July 2019.  The judge had granted the hearing and had indicated that it had a good chance of success.

 

 

 

300.

South Downs National Park - Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters between 30/01/2019 and 21/02/2019 pdf icon PDF 143 KB

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

Minutes:

The Chairman confirmed he had not received notification of any query from members and there was nothing further to report.

 

In response to a question regarding the South Downs National Park Authority not accepting ‘red-cards’, Mr Whitty confirmed he would investigate this matter.