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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.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 all present to the meeting and read out the emergency evacuation procedure. He explained that due to a technical fault the meeting would not be recorded or livestreamed on the Council website.

Apologies were received from Cllr’s Burton and Sharp

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 17 April 2024.

Following a vote, the minutes of the meeting held on 17 April 2024 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

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

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.

There were no declarations of interest made.

Retention of existing outbuilding for use as residential annexe.

Permit

Miss Haigh presented the report. She drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included; an update on the Local Plan which had now been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination and an additional comment from WSCC Highways who had responded to confirm there were no transport grounds to resist the application.

Miss Haigh outlined the site location which was within the Broadbridge Settlement Boundary and highlighted 47 Williams Road, which the proposed outbuilding would be ancillary to.

Miss Haigh explained how 47 Williams Road was comprised of two flats, the proposed outbuilding would be linked to the ground floor flat. She detailed the parking arrangements and confirmed that one parking space would be retained. Officers did not consider the loss of parking to be detrimental as there was a lot of on street parking within the vicinity.

The Committee were shown the elevations and floor plan.

Miss Haigh informed the Committee the proposed conditions would mean any alternative use of the outbuilding, such as tourist accommodation would require a separate planning application to be submitted.

There were no representations.

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

On the matter of whether a hedge could be installed to replace the timber fence; Miss Haigh explained the fence had been previously installed to delineate the parking arrangements for the two flats. The fence was not part of the application and advised it would not be reasonable to request its replacement.

On the matter of nitrate mitigation; Miss Haigh explained that as the building was ancillary to the main dwelling nitrate mitigation was not required. In addition, the applicant was not required to submit any drainage plan for the same reason. Drainage for the scheme would be dealt with under building regs.

Miss Haigh assured the Committee that if the building was reported as being used for tourist accommodation it would be in breach of the proposed conditions and could be investigated by the enforcement team.

Following a vote, the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to permit.

Resolved; permit, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

Application for the Approval of Reserved Matters following Outline Planning Permission O/11/05283/OUT (as varied by O/18/02326/FUL) - relating to the site layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for 13 dwellings - Variation of Condition 1 of Reserved Matters approval O/19/01983/REM (as varied by O/22/02344/REM) for position changes to Plots 4, 7 and 8 alongside alterations to Plot 13

Permit

Mr Bushell presented the report.

Mr Bushell outlined the site location and reminded the Committee that the original application had been for 13 new homes, he confirmed construction on site was underway.

The Committee were shown a site layout of the 13 properties, Mr Bushell highlighted the individual plots; 4, 7, 8 and 13 which were the subject of the application. He explained plots 4, 7 and 8 were applying for a slight change in their positioning, whilst the design for plot 13 had been varied slightly.

In addition, to the proposed plot variations, Mr Bushell explained the application also sought to change the approved landscape plan. He drew the Committee’s attention to the report which explained that due to biosecurity risks associate with the Oak processionary Moth, the applicant was not able to source the agreed Holm Oaks and proposed to replace them with a mixture of both deciduous and evergreen trees as detailed at 3.4 (page 25) of the report.

The Committee were shown the proposed landscape layout and where the replacement trees would be located.

Representations were received from;

Miss Natalie Fellowes – Agent

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Responding to the request that the management company continue to water the new trees after planting and completion of the construction works; Mr Bushell agreed this was a reasonable request and additional wording could be included within Condition 9.

Responding to concerns of screening between the new development and Shopwhyke Manor; Mr Bushell acknowledged the concerns but reminded the Committee the issue had already been considered and accepted as part of the previous reserved matters application. The new scheme had been reviewed by the Tree Officer, who was content with the proposal and had no objection. The Council’s Environment Officer had requested that four additional English Oaks be included within the replacement scheme, and these were also shown.

Regarding the issue of potential light spillage from first floor windows into the curtilage of Shopwhyke Manor; Mr Bushell acknowledged comments made but explained that this issue had already been considered when the original application was approved, and the amended proposals showed only very minor changes to the position of the dwellings. In addition, the separation distance between Shopwhyke Manor and the new development was much greater than that required by the Council’s design standards.

On the matter of Ash Die Back; Mr Bushell confirmed that if any Rowan did get Ash Die Back, the condition on the recommendation meant that the developer would be required to replace them.

Responding to a request for a Tree Preservation Order to be placed on the wooded area to protect future biodiversity; Mr Bushell advised this was not necessary the land fell within the proposed Strategic Wildlife Corridor which was included within the submitted Local Plan. In addition, Mrs Stevens explained that whilst any formal request for a TPO would be reviewed and considered by the Council, it would only consider the amenity value of the trees and not biodiversity.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 231.

Replacement dwelling, outbuildings, swimming pool and associated works -variation of Condition 2 of planning permission WI/22/01278/FUL - to include the addition of a summer house outbuilding and vary permission in line with drawing nos. 242.0.001 (Rev 02), 242.3.004 (Rev 03), 242.3.103 (Rev 01) & 242.3.212 (Rev 01) - (Variation of conditions 2 & 4 of Planning Permission WI/22/02618/FUL to vary the outbuildings to include garden store and pergola to existing pool house, installation of condenser units to the flank elevations and allow changes to the Tree Protection Plan.

Permit

Miss Haigh presented the report. She drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included an update on the Local Plan which had now been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination.

Miss Haigh also gave a verbal update informing the Committee that since the publication of the report a further third-party objection had been received.

Miss Haigh outlined the site location and explained the application sought to vary the conditions of a previously approved application. She detailed the proposed amendments and variations to the approved Summer House, Pool House, and storeroom.

Miss Haigh explained the proposed amendments to the Tree Protection Plan for oak tree T23. Although not located within the application site the roots did spread into the site which is why the protection plan was required.

Representations were received from;

Mr Tim Steer – Objector

Mrs Kerry Simmons – Agent

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Addressing concerns over damage already done to T23; Miss Haigh informed the Committee that the Tree Officer had been out to assess the tree, however, because of damage already done to the roots, it was not considered suitable to apply a TPO at this time due to its current amenity value and long-term survival. Miss Smith explained a formal request could be made at some point in the future if the tree survived but at this time a TPO was not advisable.

As the tree was located outside the application site, Miss Smith explained any future action against the damage would be considered as a separate civil matter and not involve the Council. She referred to the objector who had explained in his representation they had put the applicant on notice.

On the matter of construction parking at the property; Miss Haigh informed the Committee that parking was located at the rear of the property. She explained this had been considered and agreed through condition as part of the original application, she advised there was no reasonable evidence to suggest that this should be moved to the front of property.

Regarding damage to T23; Mrs Stevens further advised that whilst the damage was regrettable, it was not a material consideration and was not a reason to refuse the application.

Mrs Stevens confirmed there were no planning enforcement cases open on the site.

Following a vote, the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to permit.

Resolved; permit, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

*Cllr Cross left the meeting at 10.30am and did not vote

*Cllr Burkhart left the meeting at the conclusion of the item

*Members took a 10-minute break

Incidental domestic greenhouse.

Permit

Miss Haigh presented the report. She drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included; an update on the Local Plan which had now been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination and an additional comment from the Parish Council confirming that they had withdrawn their original objection.

Miss Haigh outlined the site location and detailed where the greenhouse would be located. She confirmed the site was currently under construction.

There were no representations.

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Miss Haigh explained the greenhouse could not be built through permitted development as the site was located within the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Following a vote, the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to permit.

Resolved; permit; subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

1 no. 3 bedroom detached dwelling with detached garage to supersede previous full planning approval for 1 no. 4 bedroom replacement dwelling with detached garage (under SDNP/18/01390/FUL). (Variation of condition 6 of permission SDNP/22/05832/FUL- alternative surface water drainage).

Approved

Mr Saunders presented the report, Mr Kier, Drainage Engineer was also in attendance. Mr Saunders drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included an additional comment from West Sussex County Council Lead Local Flood Authority confirming they had no further comments.

Mr Saunders outlined the application site, which was located within the Singleton Conservation Area, he highlighted the sites proximity to the river Lavant and Singleton Cricket Ground.

Mr Saunders showed the approved site plan for the new dwelling which was currently under construction. He detailed the revised drainage scheme and confirmed it had been reviewed by the Drainage Engineer who raised no objection, in addition no objections had been received from either the LLFA or the Environment Agency.

There were no representations.

The Committee had no comments or questions.

Following a vote, the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to approve.

Resolved; approve, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

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

REPORT TO FOLLOW

The Committee agreed to note the report.

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

REPORT TO FOLLOW

The Committee agreed to note the report.

The Planning Committee is asked note the schedule update of planning enforcement notices.

Mrs Archer presented the report.

Following a vote, the Committee agreed to note the report.

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.

There are no restricted items for consideration.

There were no part two items.