Agenda item

Demolition of existing house and garage and the construction of new house and garage. Amendments to site levels and additional planting.

Permit.

Mr Mew presented the report to the Committee. He drew their attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included; an addendum to the plan on page 125, an addendum to the report at paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 and an amendment to Condition 11.

Mr Mew outlined the site location and explained that the application site was located within the settlement boundary of Bosham and within the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

He explained that there was an extant permission for a replacement dwelling and garage already on the site (BO/18/00806/FUL). This application seeks planning permission to demolish the existing property and replace it with a two storey house and integrated garage.

Mr Mew outlined the proposed elevations and highlighted to the Committee that it was important to note that this application would be 5cm taller than the extant scheme.

The Committee received representations from;

Mr Jeremy Button – Objector

Mr Mark Hayman – Applicant

Cllr Adrian Moss – Ward Member

Cllr Penny Plant – Ward Member (statement read out by Cllr Adrian Moss)

Officers responded to members comments and questions as follows;

With regards to concerns raised regarding potential surface water run off into the neighbouring pumping station; Mr Mew explained that there were a number of measures included within the application to mitigate run off and reduce the risk of flooding to the property including a green roof. He informed the Committee that the Drainage Engineer had reviewed the application and found the mitigation measures to be acceptable. Condition 4 of the report is included to ensure appropriate drainage measures are in place.

With regards to the difference in height that the structure needs to be raised in comparison to the extant permission; Mr Mew explained that the existing permission had a finished floor level of 4.4m AOD, this application has a finished floor level of 4.5m AOD, so there would be a 10cm difference. In addition, Mr Whitty explained that the mass of the building would be greater that the extant permission, however it is a contemporary design.

On the matter of the roof terrace and potential overlooking; Mr Mew confirmed that this issue was secured through Condition 12 of the report.

With regards to light spillage into neighbouring properties; Mr Mew informed the Committee that Condition 24 of the report addressed this issue and stated that no external illumination shall be provided other that what has been approved. He explained that this was to protect both wildlife and the character of the area.

On the matter of retrofitting the property as oppose to redeveloping; Mr Mew explained that due to the location of the property and the flood risk at the site it was more appropriate to redevelop. He drew the Committee’s attention to paragraph 8.30 (p.142) of the report which detailed the Sustainable Design and Construction approach being applied at the site.

On the matter of window heights and the overlooking onto neighbouring properties: Mr Mew informed the Committee that this was secured through a condition withdrawing permitted development rights. The nearest property is 10.8m away and it is not felt that there would be an unacceptable relationship with neighbouring properties.

In a vote the Committee agreed to the report recommendation to permit.

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

*Members took a ten-minute break.

*Mrs Fowler left the meeting at 1.15pm

*Mr Oakley left the meeting at 2pm