Demolition of the existing dwelling at 22A Lavant Road and the construction of 4 no. dwellings and associated works.
Defer for S106 then permit.
Ms Stevens presented the report to the Committee. She drew the Committee’s attention to the Agenda Update sheet which included an amendment to the recommendation and additional consultation responses.
Ms Stevens explained that the recommendation had been amended to ‘Defer for S106 and then permit’, as the S106 had not been completed.
The application had originally been presented at Committee in April 2021, at that time the Committee voted to defer the application for further information. Ms Stevens highlighted the additional information which had been requested by the Committee including; the use of nitrate mitigation, amendments to the landscaping scheme (including the retention of an apple tree at the rear of the site) consideration to the housing mix, further advice on fire risk due to the buildings being timber framed and also a consultation with Southern Water.
Ms Stevens informed the Committee that three of the objections received have subsequently been removed following further discussions regarding landscaping at the rear of the site.
The Committee received the following representations;
Mr Paul White – Agent
Officers responded to Members’ comments and questions as follows;
With regards to the inclusion of a condition to control the numbers of vehicles on site; Ms Stevens drew the Committee’s attention to condition 3 of the report, which required that no development could commence until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan had been approved. She agreed that an informative could be included asking the developer to be mindful of the way site workers parked along Lavant Road and to be mindful of local access along the footway. In addition, Mr Whitty explained that whilst an informative could be included, Chichester District Council are not the highway authority and have no enforcement power to prevent inappropriate parking.
On the matter of a potential foul sewage pipe crossing the site, Mr Whitty explained that the response received from Southern Water was a standard response used as a safeguard; it does not mean that there is a foul sewage pipe there; however, an informative would be included to bring the potential issue to the developer’s attention.
With regards to the calculations used to calculate the nitrate mitigation required, Ms Stevens confirmed that the figure of 2.4 people per dwelling was taken from Natural England’s methodology policy for the mitigation of nitrates upon the Harbour. Recent cases have tested this methodology in the courts and it has held up as being correct.
On the matter of bedroom sizes, Ms Stevens explained that there were no policies within the Local Pan on space standards; however, there are National Space Standards that set out requirements for bedrooms, living rooms etc. if there is a material consideration regarding the size of a bedroom the National Space Standards would be applied to ensure that there suitable space is provided
On the matter of waste management and litter generated by site workers; Ms Stevens agreed that this could be included within condition 3 and the Construction and Environmental Management Plan.
In a vote the Committee agree the recommendation to permit with S106
Recommendation, PERMIT with S106 subject to the conditions and informatives listed in the report, as well as the agreed additional informatives.