Agenda, decisions and minutes

Planning Committee - Wednesday 10 July 2019 9.30 am

Venue: Committee Rooms, East Pallant House. View directions

Contact: Sharon Hurr on 01243 534614  Email:

No. Item


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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.


The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting, and explained the emergency evacuation procedure. 


An apology had been received from Mr R Briscoe.




Approval of Minutes pdf icon PDF 91 KB

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 6 June 2019 (copy to follow).


That the minutes of the meeting held on 6 June 2019 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.




Urgent Items

The Chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances will be dealt with under agenda item 15 (b).


There were no urgent items.




Declarations of Interests pdf icon PDF 52 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.





Rev J-H Bowden requested that his membership of Chichester City Council was recorded for future agendas.


Mr H Potter requested that his membership of South Downs National Park Authority was recorded for future agendas.


Mrs Purnell declared a personal interest in planning application SY/19/00910/FUL as a member of Selsey Town Council, and SY/19/00910/FUL and SI/19/00892/FUL as a member of West Sussex County.


Mr Barratt declared a personal interest in planning application BO/19/01264/DOM as a member Chichester Harbour Conservancy.


Mr Oakley declared a personal interest in planning applications SY/19/00910/FUL and SI/19/00892/FUL as a member of West Sussex County Council.


Mrs Johnson declared a personal interest in planning application and SY/19/00910/FUL as a member of Selsey Town Council.




BO/19/01264/DOM - The Anchorage, Smugglers Lane, Bosham, Chichester, West Sussex, PO18 8QW pdf icon PDF 170 KB

Erection of a new timber summerhouse.




Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet regarding a change in roof finish from mineral green felt to charcoal capsheet.


During the discussion Members sought clarification regarding ‘Decided Plans’.  Mr Whitty drew Members attention to a table in the report which referenced the approved plans, and explained the condition is set out as it will be worded on the decision notice.  Mr Whitty  explained as this is a committee item recommendation, the label ‘Decided Plans’ does not appear in the report, but will do so on the decision notice.


Recommendation to Permit agreed.



CC/19/01018/DOM - 25 Fishbourne Road East, Chichester, PO19 3HS pdf icon PDF 281 KB

Proposed conversion of existing garage to ancillary accommodation.




Members sought clarification regarding cycle storage. Mrs Stevens responded that   a  secure cycle store could be provided under permitted development and  it would not be reasonable to require a cycle storey via  a condition. 


Recommendation to Permit agreed.




SI/19/00892/FUL - Yeomans, Mill Lane, Sidlesham, PO20 7NA pdf icon PDF 290 KB

Erection of Westholm two bedroom bungalow. Removal of Condition 1 from Planning Permission SI/8/91 to remove the limitation of occupancy.




During the discussion it was confirmed to Members that the dwelling was in the ownership of West Sussex County Council.  Members further debated the preference for the property to remain tied to agriculture, potential flood risk due to the location of the dwelling in flood zone two or three, vehicle access and parking, and the evidence that the dwelling had been appropriately marketed with the current condition of limitation of occupancy.  Mrs Stevens responded that with regards to the flood risk, there was an existing residential use albeit a restricted one, but the use would be no more vulnerable than currently. Mrs Stevens further clarified the location of the access, parking and garage, and confirmed the description included the building as the application is for a variation of condition. 


Recommendation to Permit agreed.




SY/19/00910/FUL - J and B Drinks Trading, 153 High Street, Selsey, Chichester, West Sussex, PO20 0QB pdf icon PDF 414 KB

Change of use from A1 to A4.


Permit (contrary to officer recommendation).


Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet regarding five additional letters of support received since the report was finalised.  The letters do not cite any new comments which have not been previously raised and are therefore addressed within the main report.  Further information on the update sheet confirmed an application had been received and made valid for the change of use of the existing micro-pub to retail.


The following members of the public addressed the committee:


Mr R Dyer – Supporter

Ms H Platts – Supporter

Mr E Sye – Applicant

Cllr J Elliot – CDC Member

Cllr T Johnson – CDC Member (read by Cllr Elliot)


During the discussion Members debated opening times, the application in relation to Local Plan Policy 29, the need for a flexible approach and promotion of economic development, a noise management scheme, and the lack of marketing as required by Appendix E of the Local Plan.   Mrs Stevens responded that the opening hours set out in the report were long, but the applicant did not necessarily intend to use all of the hours and if the application was permitted, a condition could be added to limit the hours.  Mrs Stevens confirmed that a noise management plan had not been submitted with the application but that the submission and approval of a noise management plan prior to first occupation could be required by a planning condition.  Mrs Stevens further explained that with regards to policy the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is supportive of town centres having a range of uses and Planning Policy 29 is in line with that by allowing the flexibility to move away from retail use providing the marketing process has been undertaken, and it has been demonstrated that there is no longer a requirement for on-going retail use.  Mrs Stevens confirmed that she did not have any information regarding the marketing or the impact on the business should a move be delayed whilst the marketing process is completed.


Members further discussed Local Policy Plan 29 in relation to local need as there are currently eight empty units within the area, and that the Ward Members and local people were supportive of the application.  Mrs Stevens confirmed that Policy 29 states the lack of local need must be demonstrated by a marketing exercise and without, it cannot be confirmed that there is no local need, as it has not been tested.  With regards to the opening hours, a consistent approach would be taken with the license to ensure conflict does not exist and Mrs Stevens also explained she understood an application for a licence had been made.


The Chairman commented that there is concern relating to making a decision which is contrary to policy, but with knowledge of the site, which is set-back and less prominent and therefore does not provide an effective retail space, it may be appropriate to make such a decision.  Mr Whitty responded that having a sense from the discussion of how Members are considering  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.


Design Strategy for the West of Chichester Strategic Development Location (Phase 1) pdf icon PDF 186 KB

The Committee is recommended to endorse the approach set out in the West of Chichester Residential Architectural Design Strategy (June 2019) which will inform all the Reserved Matters applications for residential development of the first phase of the SDL (granted outline planning permission ref: 14/04301/OUT).


Endorse with comments – for the developer to further consider a greater range of design and materials in the Design Strategy, to reflect the climate emergency.


The following members of the public addressed the Committee:


Mr Plowman – Parish Representative

Ms P Gaskin – Objector (speaking on behalf of Ms V Briginshaw)

Mr B Ballie – Agent (Designer)

Cllr C Apel – CDC Member


During the discussion Members debated the lack of solar panels, UPVC window frames, whether the design of the dwellings were overly traditional in appearance without having the benefit of period features such as chimneys. Whether modelling new houses on older properties within the vicinity was appropriate, and if the dwellings should be designed for the future with sustainability as a focus.  Members further debatedthe opportunity for construction with green roofs, encouraging walking and cycling, more trees and hedging, and the need to be more aspirational.  Members also sought clarification on the Eastern Square.  Ms Bell responded that the Eastern Square is covered in the eastern character area. The layouts and street scenes shown were illustrative layouts and street scenes, and that there was a substantial amount of new planting and the landscaping which will be covered by the reserved matters elements.  The Eastern Square will have formal planting, and development fronting the open spaces, which the design strategy relates to. 


Ms Bell confirmed that she understood the comments in relation to the climate emergency, which has just been declared by CDC Cabinet, and the environmental elements of the scheme.  Miss Bell explained thatthe over-arching design strategy is required by condition 27 on the outline planning permission, to ensure that design is not just viewed in isolation as part of each reserved matter but to ensure that there is consistency across the whole development.  Condition 28 on the outline planning application requires details of the environmental elements and Policy 40 of the Local Plan and covered electric charging points, energy and water consumption. It is this condition together with the reserved matters application that will consider these elements.  Miss Bell explained that although these elements were not covered within design strategy, this does not preclude them from being included in the design strategy.


Miss Bell further explained that in terms of the design, the developers had created ‘character areas’, with the influence taken from the surrounding areas for the residential areas.  A more modern approach is being considered for the local centre.


Mr Whitty reminded the Committee that this item was not to approve design, but to endorse the strategy for design.  This item would be brought back to the Committee with the reserved matters application for consideration in due course, but by bringing this matter to the Committee at an early stage it allows the issues to be examined.  With regards to the suggestion by some Members for more modern design, the developer was present and had heard the comments, although the authority’s policy does not prescribe the requirement for a modern approach.  The NPPF is clear that whilst ensuring good design, the Committee should not be prescriptive regarding a particular design.  Mr Whitty also confirmed as explained by Miss Bell, there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.


SDNP/10/00893/MPO - The Croft, Bignor Road, Sutton, Pulborough, West Sussex, RH20 1PL pdf icon PDF 642 KB

Request to discharge the s.106 Unilateral Undertaking associated with planning permission SN/11/02662/DOMNP relating to the use of a large outbuilding at The Croft, Bignor Road, Sutton.


Agreement not to seek to defend appeal.


Mr Saunders introduced this application and explained that it was a request to deal with the discharge of a Unilateral Undertaking (UU) and sought approval not to defend an appeal against the non-determination of the application to discharge the UU relating to retrospective planning permission granted in 2011.


Mr Saunders explained that the UU and the conditions of planning permission achieved the same objective of effective control of the use of the building and therefore the UU served no useful purpose, and for these reasons the officer recommendation was to have been to permit the application.  Mr Saunders further explained that before this application could be brought to the Committee for a decision, the applicant had appealed against the non-determination of the UU application and that appeal was due to be heard in November and therefore the decision would now be made by a Planning Inspector. 


Mr Saunders confirmed the matter was brought to the Committee to seek approval to either defend or not defend the appeal against the non-determination of the UU. 


Agreement not to seek to defend appeal.



New charging procedure for water and wastewater connections and network capacity upgrades pdf icon PDF 310 KB

The Committee is recommended to note the change in Ofwat procedure for the provision of off-site water and waste-water infrastructure, connections for the first time and network capacity upgrades affecting new development in the Local Plan area.




During the discussion it was confirmed that the procedure included both water and waste water.  Members further debated the connection of new developments to the sewer.  Miss Bell confirmed that all the strategic sites would be connected to the strategic sewer, and that any new dwellings which are occupied  before the strategic sewer was operational would initially have sewage removed by tankerCosts are funded by the developer with Southern Water.


The Chairman clarified that the Committee were being asked to note the report and that Southern Water were due to attend the meeting, but were unavailable.  Mr Whitty confirmed a representative of Southern Water will attend a future meeting. 


The report was noted.



Chichester District Council - Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters between 16 May 2019 and 21 June 2019 pdf icon PDF 231 KB

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


Mrs Stevens draw the Committee’s attention to three planning appeals. 


18/00798/FUL - The inspector had agreed with the Committee on one point only but dismissed the appeal.


17/03547/FUL – The inspector had disagreed with the Committee’s refusal to grant planning permission and allowed the appeal.


18/01353/PA3Q - The inspector had  dismissed the appeal as the proposed works were too significant to be a conversion.  Mrs Stevens advised that this may not be the case for all future applications concerning similar buildings.



South Downs National Park - Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters between 16 May 2019 and 21 June 2019 pdf icon PDF 223 KB

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


There were no further comments from officers on this item.



Schedule of Contraventions pdf icon PDF 428 KB

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


With regards to WD/SDNP/16/00747/OPDEV Members asked for clarification in respect of a mobile home on site.  Miss Golding confirmed that an enforcement notice had been issued against the occupant. 




Consideration of any late items as follows:

The Planning Committee will consider any late items announced by the Chairman at the start of this meeting 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.