The Chairman announced that after consultation with the Committee the new start times for the Committee would be 13:30pm for the remaining meetings of this municipal year.

Members and Officers are reminded to make any declarations of pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this agenda and are reminded that they should re-declare their interest before consideration of the item or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

Members and officer should make their declaration by stating :

a) the application they have the interest in

b) whether it is a pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial

c) the nature of the interest

d) if it is a prejudicial or pecuniary interest, whether they will be exercising their right to speak to the application

The Chairman declared a personal interest in item 15 [R/227/20/PL Laundry, 38 Oakhurst Gardens, Rustington BN16 3AN] as a member of Rustington Parish Council.

Cllr Mrs Yeates declared a prejudicial interest in item 14 [P/1/21/PL Land at Summer Lane, Pagham] as she knew one of the applicants.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 February 2021.

Councillors Coster and Mrs Pendleton wanted it clarified, that in Minute 456 [SD8 – Ford Strategic Site Allocation, Masterplan Document Endorsement Report] in the last paragraph the name of the road should read Horsemere Green Lane and not Horsemere Road. It was also mentioned that the direction of the road referenced in the minute should state a direction of north-east, not east. 

The Minutes of the meeting held on 3 February 2021 were then put to the vote and approved by the Committee, it was also agreed that the Chairman would sign the minutes as soon as practicably possible.

2 Public Speakers

          Alistair Smith - Objector

          Jennifer & Anthony Moore – Applicant

Rear single storey extension for new kitchen and living area, internal alterations, new and adjusted windows and doors, part replacement roof structure with 2 x conservation roof lights to the main building, re-covering of main roof and partial re-build of the detached garage with replacement pitched roof. This application affects the character & appearance of the Arundel Conservation Area & may affect the setting of listed buildings.

The Planning Officer presented his report including matters detailed in the update report. This was followed by two Public Speakers and response to comments made was provided by the Planning Officer.

On turning to the debate, one member spoke and stated that he was pleased with the actions that had been taken by the applicant, neighbour and officers to resolve the previous disputes that had been raised.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

2 Public Speakers

          1 – Wendy Corney - Objector

          2 – Jeremy Farrelly – Agent

Outline planning application with some matters reserved (Layout, Scale, Appearance and Landscaping are to be determined as reserved matters) for the construction of 10 No. dwellings & the creation of a new vehicular & pedestrian access on to Hook Lane. This application is a Departure from the Development Plan.

The Planning Officer presented his report including matters detailed in the update report. This was followed by Public Speakers and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including how many of the houses would be affordable and what would the section 106 advantages be for this application. Concerns were raised regarding both entrances for this application, the impact on the landscape, road safety and traffic flow through Oving Road to join the A27.

The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

4 Public Speakers

1-    Cllr Alan Smith – Aldwick Parish Council

          2 – Stan Woolhead - Objector

          3 – Danielle Delaney – Applicant

          4 – Tom Hayes - Supporter

Single storey rear extension and loft conversion with enlarged rear dormer window and two modest front facing dormer windows. Alterations to fenestration, Canopy to side elevation, Planter and replacement handrail to roof terrace.

The Planning Officer presented his report including matters detailed in the update report. This was followed by Public Speakers and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including concerns regarding the dormer windows at the front of the property and did these comply with the Council’s design guide as well as concerns raised relating to the impact on the street scene, the glass obscurity at the back of the property as well as discussion in reference to these windows being non-openable.

The Planning Officer and the Group Head of Planning both provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

On further discussion regarding the windows at the back of the property it was then proposed and duly seconded that a condition be added to the application to ensure that the dormer windows at the back of the property were to be non-openable and fully obscured glazing.

The Planning Officer then presented Members with the new condition to be added to the recommendation and this was that the rear dormer hereby approved shall have non-openable and fully obscured glazed windows to be installed prior to the first use of the rooms the windows shall be retained as obscured glazed and non-openable in perpetuity, in line with DDM1 and DDM4 of the Local Plan

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report, report update and subject to the conditions outlined.

1 Public Speaker

          1 – Mr Occleshaw – Applicant

Erection of 1 No. 4 bedroom detached dwelling with detached carport (resubmission following BN/46/20/PL). This site is in CIL Zone 3 & is CIL Liable as new dwelling & is a Departure from the Development Plan.

The Planning Officer presented his report. This was followed by a Public Speaker and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including the reasons for the refusal and whether these were both consistent with previous approved applications and strong enough in face of an appeal, access issues and width of the drive, the nature of the built up area boundary, support for this application from the parish council, no objections from neighbours, the generous garden to house ratio and the carbon negative nature of the application. The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

In response to the Chairman asking for advice in terms of the committee going against the officer recommendation, the Group Head of Planning clarified that in order to make a lawful decision the committee would need to be very specific as to why they wanted to disagree with the officer’s recommendation and, in order to approve the application, would need to reference the specific policies and material considerations. The Arun District Council Solicitor added that it would be departure from the development plan and that this would also have to be detailed in the reasons as well.

On the Chairman’s casting vote

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be REFUSED as detailed in the report.

(Chairman called an adjournment to the meeting at 16:34pm and the meeting resumed at 16:50pm)

2 Public Speakers

          1 – Cllr Roger Wetherall – Kingston parish Council

          2 – David Sawers - Objector

Demolition & erection of 1 No. dwelling. This application is in CIL Zone 4 and is CIL Liable as new dwelling.

The Planning Officer presented his report. This was followed by Public Speakers and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including the impact of the design on both the road and Greensward facades, the design moving the building line nearer to the Greensward and the detrimental effect this might have, whether the style of design was in keeping with the pre-existing road architecture and whether the proposed materials were appropriate for the setting. The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be REFUSED as the proposed dwelling by reason of its increase in rear projection and alien materials will have anunacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area in conflict with policies D DM1and D SP1 of the Arun Local Plan and policy KPNP7 of the Kingston Neighbourhood Plan.

(Cllr Blanchard-Cooper declared a personal interest in this item as a Member of Littlehampton Town Council)

3 Public Speakers

          1 – Cllr Freddy Tandy – Littlehampton Town Council

          2 – Adrian Bradford – Objector

          3 – Gareth Giles – Agent

Change of use of existing single dwelling house (C3) to an 8-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (Sui Generis).

The Planning Officer presented his report. This was followed by Public Speakers and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including parking concerns, one Member asked if a Parking survey had been completed in the area recently, the majority of the debate concentrated on the parking issues that could be presented with a House of Multiple Occupation (HMO) of this size being approved with only 2 parking spaces at the rear of the property included in the application an additional concern with the parking spaces at the rear of the property was that would this leave sufficient open-space for a HMO of this size. Member’s asked for clarification on the open-space concern and the Planning Officer advised that the size of the Garden inclusive of the 2 parking spaces was sufficient and not a valid refusal reason.

Further debate followed, and the Chairman expressed that the Committee were in a difficult position with this application.

The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all further points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

1 Public Speaker

          1 – Graham Nicolls - Agent

Full Planning application incorporating permitted change of use of part of the existing office (A2 Professional & Financial Services) & use to form 2 No. dwellings (C3 Dwelling houses) on the two upper floors (resubmission following LU/107/20PL). This site is in CIL Zone 4 (Zero Rated) as flats.

The Planning Officer presented his report. This was followed by Public Speakers and response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then turned to the debate on the application where a number of points were raised including the permitted development rights that the applicant had without the approval of this application and the external space available once converted to flats was a concern.

The Planning Officer confirmed that there were balconies proposed in the application to allow for further external space and that it should also be considered that the coastal promenade was close to the location.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

No Public Speakers

Application under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Regulations) 2015 for the change of use of single dwelling house to 2 No. residential apartments & associated external alterations. This site is in CIL Zone 4 (Zero Rated) as flats.

The Planning Officer presented his report to members.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised around the issue of parking. These included whether the Council was contravening its own parking standards and risked creating potential parking issues and access difficulties for larger vehicles. It was noted that where the council’s parking standards had previously been applied, these had been rejected by a planning inspector. The creation of off-street parking would have involved part-removal of a flint wall, a characteristic of the area. Proximity to both bus and train options and public parking spaces was considered sufficient mitigation for approval. The possibility of car-free development, no car conditions on occupants and residents permit parking were mentioned as topics for possible future discussion.

Concerns were also raised about the foundations of the current extension and whether each apartment had a designated garden.

The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

(Cllr Mrs Yeates declared a prejudicial interest in this item and left the meeting before discussion of the application and Cllr Mrs Hamilton declared a personal interest in this item during the debate as member of Pagham Parish Council)

1 Public Speakers

          1 – Cllr David Huntley – Ward Member

Material change of use of land from agricultural use to use for open space. This application is in part a Departure from the Development Plan, affects a Public Right of Way & is in CIL Zone 5 (Zero Rated) as other development.

The Planning Officer presented his report including matters detailed in the update report. This was followed by one Public Speaker and a response by way of clarification was provided by the Council’s Solicitor.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including if this application was approve then the landowners would have two approved applications to pick from, one member raised that the proposed change of use of the land was contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the local plan TFP1 and the Arun Local Plan and for these reasons highlighted the refusal reasons were clear. Clarification was sought with regard to what effect would approving this application have on the current approve application.

The Council’s Solicitor and the Group Head of Planning both provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be REFUSED as detailed in the report and report update.

[Cllr Bennett declared a personal interest in this item as a member of Rustington Parish Councillor]

4 Public Speakers

          1 – Cllr Peter Warren – Rustington Parish Council

          2 – Emily Scott – Agent

          3 – Peter Cleveland – Supporter

          4 – Cllr Terry Chapman – Ward Member

Demolition of existing laundry building lean to & shed, construction of a ground & first storey accommodation building housing 3 No. sheltered housing flats & construction of a single storey laundry building including upgrade of associated clothes drying area & surrounding landscaping. This site is in CIL Zone 5 (Zero Rated) as sheltered housing.

The Planning Officer presented his report including matters detailed in the update report. This was followed by Public Speakers and a response was provided by the Planning Officer.

Members then took part in a full debate on the application where a number of points were raised including concerns over the amenity space, an unacceptable overlook for the neighbours and the distances documented versus the Arun Design Guide acceptable distance. There was also a concern raised regarding the trees that would be planted to create a visual screen and could consideration be given to fast growing trees.

The Planning Officer provided members with answers to all points raised during the debate.

The Committee

          RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY as detailed in the report and report update subject to the conditions outlined.

(Cllr Mrs Pendleton had left this meeting at the start of this item).

          The Committee received and noted the appeals list within the agenda.