Issue - meetings

            Public Speaker:        Walberton Parish Council, Supporter

                                                Cllr Dendle, Ward Member, Supporter

                                                Dandara, Applicant

            WA/48/19/RES – Approval of Reserved Matters following outline permission WA/22/15/OUT comprising 400 new homes (incl. affordable), 360sqm of retail space (A1 to A3), 152sqm of community space (D1 to D2 & including retention & refurbishment of 12sqm ‘Old Smithy’), demolition of remaining buildings to Arundel Road along with public open space, LEAP, MUGA, allotments, car & cycle parking, drainage & associated works.  This site also lies within the parish of Barnham & Eastergate, Land to the East of Fontwell Avenue, Fontwell Avenue, Fontwell

            The Committee received a comprehensive presentation from the Principal Planner on the detail of the application and explained why it was being recommended for refusal for the four reasons outlined in the report.

            In response to the representations heard, a Member question was asked that if the application was refused would it mean going back to the beginning, with the potential for costs for the Council and the applicants, and whether, if it was deferred, it could still be refused in the future?  The Group Head of Planning advised that there would be costs for the applicant because it would involve either a new or redesigned scheme.  From the Council’s perspective, any appeal could be defended so he was quite comfortable with the recommendation in front of Members.  He confirmed that if the matter was deferred it could be refused in the future. However, he did point out that officers had spent a lot of time with the applicants and there was still not an acceptable scheme on the table and that a refusal would be the best way forward.

            In turning to the debate, Members did express views that the application should not be refused at this time and that the exceptional circumstances of the pandemic had in part contributed to the delays that had been experienced.  The Group Head of Planning advised that, if a deferral was the preferred option, then certainly a time limit for the autumn should be set to make it very clear to the applicants that the proposal would be determined at that time.

            Having been formally proposed and duly seconded, the Committee

RESOLVED

That the application be deferred until the October 2020 meeting pending more work to be undertaken by the applicant on the design of the scheme.

            The Chairman then called a short adjournment to the meeting to allow a comfort break.