Agenda item

EWB/18/00753/OUT - South Downs Holiday Village Bracklesham Lane Bracklesham Bay

Redevelopment of the former South Downs Holiday Park with the erection of up to 85 dwellings with vehicular access, Local  Equipped Area for Play, public open space, landscaping, footpath links and other related infrastructure.


Defer for Section 106 agreement then Permit


This application was deferred for negotiations, at the meeting held on 14 November Committee, relating to a reduction in the total number of dwellings, removal of any direct vehicular accesses for dwellings onto Clappers Lane, a reduction in the scale of the buildings at the junction of Bracklesham Lane with Clappers Lane to 2 storey and ensuring any dwellings fronting Bracklesham Lane were set back from the road.


Additional information was reported on the agenda update sheet relating to a correction to condition 3.


The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

·         Mrs S Simpson – Earnley Parish Council

·         Mr J O’Sullivan – East Wittering and Bracklesham Parish Council

·         Mr S Culpitt – Applicant


Mr Bushell presented the item and responded to members’ questions and comments.  With regard to the recent planning appeal at Koolbergen, Kelly’s Nursery and Bellfield Nursery, Birdham (16/00933/OUT) and the planning inspector’s reasons for it being dismissed, Mr Bushell advised that it was not possible to draw a direct comparison between that scheme and this proposal. It was a central tenet of planning that each application had to be treated on its own merits according to the specific circumstances. He drew attention in this regard to the fact that the Kelly’s Nursery and Bellfield Nursery development proposed a disproportionately large number of dwellings adjacent to a service village compared to this application which was for a similar number of dwellings adjacent to a much larger settlement hub. He also pointed out that only a very small proportion of the appeal site was found to be brownfield land where there can be a greater presumption in favour of new housing development, whereas the current application was wholly on brownfield land. 


The current agricultural workers planning application was a separate issue and not for consideration at today’s meeting.  With regard to the Council’s five year housing land supply, Mr Bushell advised that although the Council could demonstrate a supply there was no ceiling on this supply and new housing development would make a valuable contribution to the District’s supply.  With regard to the grade B Oak tree situated within the boundary of the site along Clappers Lane, Mr Bushell confirmed that a further condition could be added to the recommendation to give the tree protection and this was agreed. 


With regard to the timing of the provision of local infrastructure to support larger developments, Mr Frost advised that this was a difficult situation and that ideally it would all be delivered in advance of or in line with development.  Although some infrastructure could be delivered earlier, improvements to roads including the A27 improvements, new schools and school places often involved a longer lead in time.  The Committee was not in a strong position to refuse this application on the basis that infrastructure was not being built early enough.  The proposal’s contribution to the five year housing land supply was a material consideration.  A planning application for a housing scheme was considered to be indicative of its deliverability.


The majority of members indicated their support for this application following the amendments made by the applicant to the proposal since the previous meeting.


Defer for Section 106 agreement with one additional condition (protection of Oak tree) then Permit agreed.

Supporting documents: