MINUTES of Planning Committee Meeting. 19 May 2010
Church Hall 7:00pm
Present: Mr Field (Chairman), Mrs C Ranjbar, Mrs E Smart, Mrs Pound, Mrs T Tull, Mrs Kennedy and Mr A Harland, Mr A Malir and Mr C Bond
Mr J Paul (Clerk). Mrs M Whitehead (CC), Mrs L Goldsmith (CC), Mr D Seaman (Architect), Ms S Lawton Hastoe, Mr S Irving (CDC); Ms J Gallifent (Hastoe)
Seven members of the public.
1 Apology for absence. All Councillors present
2. Minutes of the planning meeting held 7 April 2010. Mr Harland proposed and Mrs Smart seconded that the minutes be signed as a correct record. All Councillors agreed.
3. Matters arising from the above minutes. None
4. Declarations by Councillors of personal interests. None
5. New Applications
5.1 SI/10/00852/FUL. School House, Keynor Lane. Provision of 5 affordable (non-market) residential units on the Sidlesham School campus with 2 of these units provided by the adaptation of the existing school house. O.S. Grid Ref. 484655/97778
This application generated heated interest from people mainly recently associated with the School, a large sign was erected on the highway in Highleigh Road and pickets were present at the school gates on days previous to the planning meeting. A copy of one letter of objection to CDC was received by the PC. In order to present an informed view at the meeting the Parish Council invited senior representatives of the County Council. District Council and the Housing Association to attend. Four members of the public against the application attended the planning meeting.
Mrs Goldsmith explained the history of the school house and how over the last decade or so unsuccessful attempts were made to utilise the house for key workers or school use due to lack of interest or prohibitive costs. Finally in 2006 the WSCC Education department declared it surplus to their needs and discussions started on the future of the house and garden. Mr Irving explained this culminated with the proposals to develop the house and garden for social housing held in perpetuity for Sidlesham associated people who have priority. If there are no high qualifying Sidlesham people, accommodation would be offered to those with less qualification.
The Chairman first asked the experts to respond to each of the points of objection listed in an anonymous flier circulated to some properties in the parish. The Chairman then invited the members of the public to make presentation or ask questions about the application with responses from the experts present:-
1. Concerned about noise nuisance for school and occupants of the social housing.
A. Mr Seaman explained that an additional cavity wall was planned between the house and the school, insulation would be far in access of semi-detached housing and greater than the education building regulations of 55 dB insulation. Hastoe were prepared to have this as a permission condition from CDC.
2. Concern for privacy of children due to windows overlooking playground.
A. Mr Seaman explained that the current first floor window would be blocked, a window on the first floor would have obscure glass in a fixed shut frame, the only other windows on that side would be Velux roof lights.
3. The plans illustrated a new access provided for the residents and teachers to the front playground.
A. Yes, old entrance near to corner closed therefore safer and agreed so with WSCC Highways.
4. Did the development encroach on the school boundary?
A. No, it was contained within the house and garden area of the house belonging to the County Council.
5. At the eastern end of the plot there was a piece of land with a drainage ditch.
A. The corner near the large tree belongs to WSCC Highways. Mrs Goldsmith agreed to discuss with Highways the possibility of inclusion in the curtilage. Mr Seaman agreed also to raise this as it could potentially be included in the plot and work specified to maintain the drainage.
The Chairman then asked for discussion and the views from the Parish Councillors.
• The school store adjacent to the house is ugly, could it be made better?
Mr Seaman agreed it could but to date no proposals had been made to consider it.
• The plans were described as very innovative and that it was an opportunity to give five local families a home.
• Additionally the plans were described as exceeding expectation and the Council was pleased that solar heating was proposed.
• One minor but important point was raised that the Victorian coping bricks on the wall should be retained on the rebuilt better visibility wall.
The Chairman then asked the Parish Councillors to vote for or against the application. The voting result was nine for and none against. A response to be made to CDC of no objection but with a request for the sound insulation to exceed the education standard of 55dB and to ask for the retention of the coping stones.
5.2 SYSI/09/03084/FUL. Grass Verge Opposite Ferry Farm House Chichester Road Selsey. A shared surface path for walkers and cyclists from Pagham Harbour to Selsey Manor Road Roundabout. OS Landranger references SZ85609630 to SZ86059435 Timber construction boardwalk to be used to provide access across pumping station frontage and timber access bridge to be provided across one ditch. Full specifications to be supplied prior to construction.
O.S. Grid Ref. 485642/96197 Parish Council conclusion no objection.
5.3 SI/10/01663/COU. 7A Cow Lane. Retrospective application for the stationing and storing of 13 mobile homes within the horticultural holding for horticultural workers employed on the holding.
O.S. Grid Ref. 484843/973805. Parish Council conclusion no objection but to request a right of residence restriction and that accommodation be limited to the benefit of the current business.
5.4 SI/10/01835/REM. The Fairways, Brimfast Lane. Replacement of existing dwelling with 1 no. 4 bedroomed cottage.
O.S. Grid Ref. 485544/100063 The Parish Council concluded that the site would benefit greatly from development but would best be served by the submission of a new full application. Reasons being;-
• There is doubt over the timely fulfilment of conditions of site clearance stipulated for the outline permission.
• The dimensions of the proposed house are not as the outline permission.
• The area of the site given on the application is incorrect.
• The PC is informed that the access path does not form part of The Fairways curtilage but is owned by the neighbouring property, with a right of access to The Fairways.
5.5 SI/10/01768/FUL. Mr And Mrs Parker Longacre, Highleigh Road. Replacement dwelling (Single).
O.S. Grid Ref. 484483/98007
PC conclusion no objection.
6 CDC Decisions since last PC planning meeting
6.1 SI/10/00086/FUL. 86 Fletchers Lane. Demolition of existing house and erection of replacement dwelling with associated garage and boundary wall. PERMIT
6.2 SI/10/00254/DOM. Church House, Church Farm Lane. Outdoor sunken swimming pool. PERMIT
6.3 SI/10/00134/COU. Hillfield Car Sales. Unit 1 The Forge Lockgate Road. Use of premises for vehicle preparation prior to sale comprising mechanical repairs and servicing and valeting (no body work or paint spraying of vehicles). REFUSE
“CDC considers the premises suitable for B1 use (but) considered the B2 use proposed would be harmful to the amenity of neighbouring and nearby residents and the rural character of the area due to disturbance from noise and other emissions, general activity, and consolidation of existing on-road parking that occurs in Lockgate Road….would be contrary to policies CC6 and NRM10 of the South East Plan 2009 – 2026 and policies BE11 and RE14 of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999.”
It was reported to the Parish Council that a ‘Mattress Recycling’ organisation had set up in the buildings. The Clerk was asked to ascertain whether all licenses etc for waste disposal and environmental health were in place.
6.4 SI/10/00013/DOM Mr And Mrs T Franks. 24 Chalk Lane Sidlesham. First floor front and rear extensions. PERMIT
7 Planning Correspondence Enforcement informed the PC that lights at the Salliota site were now permission compliant.
8 AOB Car sales see bi-monthly meeting
Meeting ended 8.00pm