Issue - meetings

5 Public speakers

Ms Christine Johnson

Mr Tim Kerss

          Mr Timothy Bell

          Mr Nik Smith – Agent

          Councillor Hayward – Ward Member

          Demolition of the existing structures & redevelopment to provide a new 66-bedroom care home arranged over two storeys together with associated access, car & cycle parking, structural landscaping & amenity space provision (resubmission following M/80/19/PL). This application is in CIL Zone 4 (Zero Rated) as 'other development’. Poultry Farm, 87 Yapton Road, Middleton-on-Sea

          Councillor Edwards was invited by the Chairman to ask his question prior to the presentation of the item. He asked based on the report update why were the Committee being asked to review this today, given that West Sussex County Council contributions were still being sought and he was unsure how the Committee would be able to come to a decision while this was still outstanding. The Director of Place advised that his understanding was the unilaterally undertaking that the Council would normally seek is yet to be finalised.  So, his advice was depending on the decision made by Members on this item, it may be a case to include in the recommendation that this unilaterally undertaking is completed before the decision notice was issued. Councillor Edwards was unhappy with this answer as he felt that the Committee should be presented with all the facts prior to making a decision.  

The Planning Officer then presented his report to Members where he advised that further information had been received from the Agent in relation to the basement element of the application where he confirmed that the Ground Floor around the site would remain the same and there would be no area dug into, meaning that the overall height of the building would be reduced by lowering the ridge lines. He went on to explain that this application followed application M/80/19 that had been REFUSED and was now under the appeal procedure. He specified that in terms of this application the footprint, layout and number of bedrooms was the same as the previous refused application, the difference was on the north-western corner of the site where a  basement was proposed to accommodate a plant room, laundry room, changing room,  training room, kitchen and other ancillary rooms. This would allow the roof to be lowered sufficiently so that now the building would be similar to a previously approved application M/45/16PL. In terms of the Ash Trees, like the previously refused application, there is a suitable condition included in the application that meant that the trees would now be protected.

The Chairman then invited the Planning Officer to respond to the comments made by the public speakers.  The Chairman then invited the Director of Place back to respond to Councillor Edwards earlier concerns. He referred Members to page 13 of the agenda that detailed the s106 agreement, the update that Councillor Edwards was referring too states simply that should Members decide to support the application, that it would be normal practice for this action to be delegated to the Director of Place  ...  view the full minutes text for item 337