Agenda item

            (Councillor Woodman left the meeting at the start of this item and did not return.)

1 Public Speaker

Chloe Jolley – Objector

Erection of block of 5 garages. This application is in CIL Zone 4 (zero rated) as other development.

            The Interim Head of Development Management presented the report. After the public speaker was heard, the presenting officer was invited to respond to comments made where he stated that the comment regarding the access becoming a through-road was unfair, conditions could be implemented to manage any unauthorised commercial uses and should these be breached, the Council would take measures to ensure the conditions were met. He also confirmed for members that the comments relating to land ownership were a civil matter and not one for the committee to address.

Members raised the following points during the debate, a suggestion was made by the Interim Head of Development Management that a further condition could be added to address the Surface Water drainage concerns, which was supported by Councillor Wallsgrove. Further clarity was sought regarding the access through-road and concern was raised regarding the potential for the garages to be used commercially. In response to the comments made regarding the previous application that had been refused it was clarified that the current application was for 5 garages a reduction of 2 from the previous application. It was also reconfirmed that should members be minded to approve the application they would not be providing the applicant with any form of legal ownership over the land permission. Reasons for refusal were discussed of which the number of garages were raised as a concern, the Group Head of Planning advised members of a similar application that had been refused on the grounds of noise and disturbance from vehicles coming and going, with the subsequent appeal having been allowed there should not be an automatic assumption that these would be sufficient with this application.

            The officer recommendation was proposed by Councillor Partridge and seconded by Councillor Wallsgrove; the vote was LOST with all members unanimously voting against the application.

            It was then proposed by Councillor Bower that the application be REFUSED due to an over intensification of garages in a domestic area. The presenting officer suggested some stronger wording for members to consider as an appropriate refusal reasoning. “The proposed garages by reason of their excessive number, siting and close proximity to the host and neighbouring residential properties and the significantly increased vehicular activity and disturbance will result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the residential amenities of existing neighbouring residential occupiers in conflict with policies D DM1 and QE SP1 of the Arun Local Plan, Arun Design Guide and the NPPF.”

This was formally proposed by Councillor Bower and seconded by Councillor Lury.

            The Committee

                      RESOLVED

That the application be REFUSED due to the proposed garages by reason of their excessive number, siting and close proximity to the host and neighbouring residential properties and the significantly increased vehicular activity and disturbance will result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the residential amenities of existing neighbouring residential occupiers in conflict with policies D DM1 and QE SP1 of the Arun Local Plan, Arun Design Guide and the NPPF.