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Committee will be informed at this point in the meeting of any planning applications which have been deferred or withdrawn and so will not be discussed and determined at this meeting.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

Apologies were received from Cllr’s Burton, Cross and Sharp

The minutes relate to the meeting of the Planning Committee on 8 November 2023.

The minutes from the previous meeting held on 8 November 2023 would be agreed at the following meeting.

The chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances will be dealt with under agenda item 8(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.

Mrs D Johnson declared a personal interest in;

-       Agenda Item 5 – EWB/21/01376/OUT – as a member of West Sussex County Council, Selsey Town Council and the WSCC appointed member to the Chichester Harbour Conservancy

-       Agenda Item 6 – SY/23/00861/DOM – as a member of Selsey Town Council.

-       Agenda Item 7 – SY/23/01272/FUL - as a member of West Sussex County Council and Selsey Town Council

Mr S Johnson declared a personal interest in;

-       Agenda Item 5 – EWB/21/01376/OUT – as the Chichester District Council appointed member to the Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Outline Application (with all matters reserved accept Access) for the development of up to 62 no. dwellings and associated access, open space, ponds, footpath and cycleway.

Refuse

Mr Bushell presented the item, members of the Committee had undertaken a site visit on Monday 20 November 2023. He drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included an amendment to the red line defining the application site and gave a verbal update explaining that the Local Plan submission date following reg 19 consultation stated on page 24 paragraph 7.24 had been pushed back to early 2024.

Mr Bushell outlined the site location, which adjoined the settlement boundary of East Wittering to the east and south of the site. He highlighted the proximity of the site to the recent Stubcroft Farm.

Mr Bushell detailed the proposed access arrangement which included the installation of a new 50m footpath from the site which would provide access to the bus stop on Bracklesham Lane.

Mr Bushell showed the proposed layout, which he reminded the Committee, was indicative. The layout did not include any open play areas, instead a new footway/cycleway was proposed which provide direct offroad access to the existing recreation ground.

Mr Bushell explained surface water drainage proposals which had been submitted as part of the application. He highlighted areas of ‘tanked permeable paving’ which would flow into the SUDs basin where water would be released into the existing ditch network through a controlled flow system.

Mr Bushell showed the Committee that the site was at 100% of flooding according to the Climate Change flood risk map.

Mr Bushell went through the reasons for refusal as set out in the report.

Representations were received from;

Cllr Brian Reeves – East Wittering & Bracklesham Parish Council 

Mr Carey Mackinnon - Objector

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Regarding the addition of sewage as a reason for refusal; Mr Bushell acknowledged concerns raised by the Committee, and drew their attention to page 39, paragraph 8.29. However, he advised against including it as an additional reason for refusal as at recent appeals the Planning Inspector, despite acknowledging concerns, will not apply any weight to the matter as it is the responsibility of a separate statutory undertaker.

Mr Bushell confirmed that some of the existing hedgerow would be removed to create the required visibility splay.

Regarding the loss of agricultural land; Mr Bushell acknowledged the concerns raised but advised the Committee against included this as a reason for refusal.

Mr Bushell provided further explanation of the Climate Change flood risk chart, which showed the area of Clappers Lane as being at 100% risk of tidal flooding.

Following a vote; the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to refuse.

Resolved; refuse, for the reasons set out in the report.

*Cllr Potter joined the meeting at 9.58 and abstained from the vote.

Removal of existing utility room - replace with enlarged room. Replace existing garage with enlarged garage

Permit

Mr Mew presented the item. He gave a verbal update informing the Committee that the Local Plan submission date (page 55) had been pushed back to early 2024. Mr Mew drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included; an additional representation; amendments to the report at paragraphs 3.4 and 8.13; an addition to the report and; an amendment to Condition 3.

Mr Mew outlined the site location which was within the Selsey Settlement Boundary.

The Committee were shown the proposed elevations of the garage and extension. Mr Mew noted that the garage roof would appear different to the images shown as clay tiles would be used on the roof instead of slate.

Representations were received from;

Mr John Akerman – Objector

Cllr Tim Johnson – CDC Member (statement read by Cllr Boulcott)

Cllr Steve Boulcott – CDC Member

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Regarding the non-designated heritage asset status of the property; Mr Mew acknowledged the concerns raised; however, he assured the Committee that the conservation officer had reviewed the application and subject to the change in roofing tiles of the garage from slate to clay (which would be secured through condition) raised no objection.

On the matter of reducing the size of the garage; Mr Mew reminded the Committee that they could only determine the application in front of them. He explained the size of the building and potential impact on neighbouring properties had been assessed as part of the application process by officers.

Mr Mew confirmed there would remain a gap between the main property and the garage.

Regarding the use of clay tiles; Mr Mew informed the Committee that the applicant had confirmed clay tiles would be suitable at the proposed pitch.

Following a tied vote; the Chairman used his casting vote to support the report recommendation to permit.

Resolved; permit, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, including the amendment to condition 3 set out in the agenda update sheet.

*Members took a five-minute break

Proposed adventure play ground and zip-coaster structure to existing leisure attraction.

Permit

Miss Bell presented the item. She drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included; an additional representation from Selsey Parish Council; additional consultation responses from CDC Environmental Protection and; additional conditions.

Miss Bell outlined the site location, which was located within the Seal Bay Leisure complex, adjacent to the entertainment complex that currently included a swimming pool, rock climbing and bowling alley. She clarified where the separate parts of the application would be; the zip coaster to the immediate south and the adventure playground to the immediate west.

Miss Bell informed the Committee that a new door would be installed within the entertainment complex to allow access to the zip coaster.

Miss Bell showed the Committee the proposed layout and elevations, the highest elevation would be 13m. 

Representations were received from;

Cllr Steve Boulcott – CDC Member

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Responding to concerns of noise from the new equipment; Miss Bell informed the Committee that officers had considered the issue of noise and following discussions with applicant had agreed the zip coaster could operate between the hours of 8am – 8pm. She advised that it would be unreasonable to reduce the hours further without talking to the applicants first.

Regarding the opening hours of the swimming pool; Miss Snook informed the Committee that there was an ‘Aqua Play Area’ located in the same area as the zip coaster, which was open from 10am – 9pm.

On the matter of a noise assessment being undertaken; Mr Thomson advised the Committee that following discussions with the applicant this was not considered necessary as the proposed equipment was not mechanical or electronic and would only be single occupancy which would only operate between the hours of 8am – 8pm. Mr Thomson provided further detail about how noise assessments were undertaken and the factors taken into consideration, for example if the zip coaster operated until 9pm then a noise assessment would have been required.

Miss Bell clarified the access routes to the site and confirmed that West Sussex County Council had raised no objections as the people using the facilities would already be on site.

Miss Bell confirmed the colour of the zip coaster would be a mixture of red oxide and steel panels on the support.

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 and the additional conditions set out in the agenda update 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.