Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee - Wednesday 17th April 2024 2.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Arun Civic Centre, Maltravers Road, Littlehampton, BN17 5LF. View directions

Contact: Carley Lavender Extn (37547) 

Note: Please note that this meeting was originally scheduled for 24 April 2024 and has been changed due to the Election taking place on the 2 May 2024 and the Council Chamber therefore being unavaliable for meetings. 


No. Item




            Apologies were received from Councillors Blanchard-Cooper and Northeast.


Declarations of Interest

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 Declaration of Interest Sheet set out below confirms those Members who had made a declaration of their personal interest as a Member of a Town or Parish Councillor or a West Sussex County Councillor, as confirmed in their Register of Interest as these declarations could apply to any of the issues to be discussed at the meeting:



Town or Parish Council or West Sussex County Council [WSCC]

Councillor Billy Blanchard-Cooper


Councillor Martin Lury


Councillor Mike Northeast


Councillor Peggy Partridge


Councillor George O’Neill


Councillor Sue Wallsgrove

Barnham and Eastergate

Councillor Bob Woodman




Minutes pdf icon PDF 109 KB

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 March 2024.


The minutes of the previous meeting held on 20 March 2024 were approved and signed by the Chair.


Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency by reason of special circumstances


There were no urgent items for the meeting.


AB/8/24/HH - 54 Torton Hill Road, Arundel, BN18 9HH pdf icon PDF 193 KB


Raised terrace to rear of property


The Principal Planning Officer presented the report with updates from the update report published on the website on Tuesday 16 March 2024 that provided an update following the site visit that took place on 26 March 2024. 


The Chair advised that those members who had also attended the site visit had raised concerns regarding the proximity of the neighbours.  Officers had been to consider including a condition requiring additional privacy screening to protect the neighbours.  The Principal Planning Officer explained the applicant had not accepted this condition, as it would affect their existing sight lines and rights to light and, therefore, was neither reasonable or proportionate to any perceived benefit.  The applicant had agreed to the inclusion of a standard pre-commencement drainage condition.  Officers were also of the view that the provision of additional screen was unreasonable therefore no change had been made to the recommendation.


Members who were present at the visit were then invited to make any additional comments.  The inclusion of a standard pre-commencement drainage condition satisfied members concerns regarding the effect of flood water on neighbouring properties.


The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Partridge and seconded by Councillor Wallsgrove.


The Committee




That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY


Y/1/24/PL - Paddock adjoining Stakers Farm, North End Road, BN18 0DU pdf icon PDF 242 KB


3 Public Speakers


Dilys Lownsborough – Objector

Nick Griffin – Agent

Councillor Amanda Worne – Ward Member


4 No. dwellings comprising 2 x 3-bed semi-detached houses and 1 x 4-bed and 1 x 5-bed detached house with associated car ports, cycle and bin storage, parking, landscaping and internal access road (resubmission following Y/7/23/PL). This application affects the setting of listed buildings, affects the character and appearance of the Main Road/Church Road Conservation Area and is in CIL Zone 2 and is CIL Liable as new dwellings.


            The Team Leader (Development Management) presented the report.  The Council’s Tree Officer, who had a holding objection pending the receipt of further information, had verbally confirmed they were satisfied with the information now submitted by the applicant.


After the speakers had been heard the Team Leader (Development Management) was invited by the Chair to address the Committee to address the comments that had been made.  He advised that this and previous planning applications on this site had been determined on their own merits since 2010.  The impact on the nearby heritage assets was acknowledged by officers.  However, the Council’s Conservation Officer was of the view that the proposal would cause less than substantial harm.  Officers had therefore concluded that the public benefits outweighed the less than substantial harm of the heritage assets.  Listed building consent would be required for alterations to the wall.  The Yapton Neighbourhood Plan stated that development can be acceptable within the built-up development boundary. 


The Team Leader (Development Management) provided details of one further recommended condition requiring that the tree works to be carried out on the site will be developed in accordance with the tree protection information submitted.


The recommendation was then proposed by Councillor Bower and seconded by Councillor Partridge.


            Members then discussed the application where concerns were raised about the impact of the development in the street scene and its density.  Reference was made to the reasons for refusal for the previous application, on page 20 of the report, and the objection comments of the Conservation Area Advisory Panel, on page 22 of the report.


It was considered that reasons 2 and 3 of the previous planning application, Y/7/29/PL, were still valid.  Members concurred with the views of the Conservation Area Advisory Panel.  The density of the development within the site would be out of keeping in the area.  The development would adversely affect the street scene, as would the raised level of the site and roof heights.  As regards the public benefits, it was questioned whether conserving the historic area should be less important than the addition of four dwellings.  Views were expressed that Yapton had been overdeveloped having taken on more than its share of housing provision and the heritage of Yapton as a village. 


            Upon the vote being taken the recommendation was not approved.


            Members then discussed reasons for refusal.  It was considered that reasons 3 and 4 for refusal of planning application Y/7/29/PL, being 3. The development would erode the link between  ...  view the full minutes text for item 781.


LU/300/23/PL - Land at 1 Fort Road, Littlehampton, BN17 7QU pdf icon PDF 169 KB


1 Public Speaker


George Henshaw – Agent


Construction of extension to industrial unit. This application is in CIL Zone 4 (Zero Rated) as other development.


          The Team Leader (Development Management) presented the report with updates from the update report published on the website on Tuesday 16 March 2024.  Additional comments were waited from the West Sussex County Council Lead Local Flood Authority (WSCCLLFA), regarding further drainage information received from the applicant.  If no comments are received, before the end of 24 April 2024, officers will proceed with the recommendation for refusal.   If comments are received and they remove their objection, the recommendation will be amended to approve the application, subject to conditions to be determined by officers. 


The recommendation was then proposed by Councillor Woodman and seconded by Councillor O’Neill.


          Members then took part in a debate on the application where views were expressed that the item should be deferred until the next Committee meeting.  Members were of the opinion that the decision on this application should be determined by the Committee members and not by officers, and to enable members to assess any amended comments received, after the deadline of the end of 24 April 2024, from the Local Lead Flood Authority.  A deferral of this item was proposed by Councillor McDougall and seconded by Councillor Lury.


          The Committee




          That the application be DEFERRED until the next meeting of the Committee to enable consideration of the application after the deadline for comments from the West Sussex County Council Lead Local Flood Authority.


Review of pre-application planning advice fees pdf icon PDF 126 KB


The Group Head of Planning presented the report, which set out the proposed amended fee charging schedule for pre-application submissions, previously reviewed by the Council during 2021.


The recommendation was then proposed by Councillor Lury and seconded by Councillor Patel.


The Committee


          RESOLVED that


i.        the pre-application planning advice fees be amended in accordance with the attached schedule.

ii.       the fee schedule to be implemented on 1 June 2024 after this report is agreed to allow notification to planning agents, changes to the web etc.

iii.     the pre-application advice fees be increased annually (on 1 April) in line with the national planning application fees that will be linked to inflation (capped at 10%).



Accelerated Planning System Consultation pdf icon PDF 147 KB


The Group Head of Planning presented the report.  He explained that the Government consultation sought views on four proposals seeking changes to the planning system.  In particular the proposals included a new Accelerated Planning Service for large scale commercial development  requiring the Council to decide on an application within 10 weeks, otherwise the Council will have to return the planning fee.  This proposal would result in large scale planning applications being refused, especially if no pre-application was submitted, being impractical for officers to obtain consultee comments and resolve any issues within a shorter timeframe.  Officers had raised this issue in their consultation response, as well as concerns surrounding a new way of varying planning applications surrounding the proposed scale of fees.


          Members concurred with the officer responses to the Accelerated Planning System consultation.


The Committee noted the proposals within the consultation and agreed the response to the consultation contained in Appendix 1.


Appeals List pdf icon PDF 51 KB


Members noted the appeals list.