Decisions

            (Prior to consideration of this item, Councillors Brooks and Mrs Hamilton had declared a personal interest and remained in the meeting and took part in the debate and vote.

In taking part in the public speaking process, Councillor Coster declared a prejudicial/pecuniary interest as a member of his family had part ownership in a property near by.  He stated that he would leave the room during the debate and vote.) 

Demolition of the existing structures & redevelopment to provide a new 66 bedroom care home (Use Class C2) arranged over two storeys together with associated access, car and cycle parking, structural landscaping and amenity space provision, Former Poultry Farm, Land West of Yapton Road, Middleton on Sea          

Having received a report on the matter, the officer’s written report update was circulated at the meeting which detailed:-

·         Additional objections received since publication of the agenda and relevant new points addressed

·         Additional representation of support not raising any new points

·         Further comment from the agent

·         Recent appeal decision relating to a site 2.5 miles away in Climping

·         Need for Extra Care development

·         Additional ecology response

·         Change to Conclusion section of the report to note that the S106 Agreement was required to be completed by 31 March 2020 due to the adoption of the Community Infrastructure Levy on 1 April 2020

·         Amendment to Plans Condition and amendment to pre-commencement conditions

·         Further comment from County Highways regarding access width

·         Tree Preservation Order

The Planning Team Leader presented the detail of the report and advised that this application followed on from Planning Application M/45/16/PL which had been granted approval for 13 dwellings.  This new application was for a 66 bedroom care home and, whilst it was recognised that the building would be higher and cover substantially more of the site, officers considered that it was acceptable.  He informed the meeting that the Council’s Engineering Services Manager was in attendance to provide responses to queries Members might have in relation to drainage/surface water issues.

In participating in a lengthy debate, Members expressed serious concerns around the proposal which centred on:-

§  The potential for an increase in traffic, together with the nature of Yapton Road which had a blind bend

§  Proposal not sympathetic or complementary to the locality and was considered to be out of character with the surrounding area.  It was also felt that it was overdevelopment and, due to its height, it was out of scale with nearby existing properties.  It would therefore have an adverse impact.

§  Danger to the TPO trees – Members were assured that the Tree Officer was satisfied that the trees could be retained if the details the applicant had submitted were adhered to. 

§  Parking provision was considered to be inadequate and any overflow would then have a consequential detrimental impact on nearby roads.  Officer advice was given that the car parking provision was in accordance with the Council’s Parking Standards SPG (Supplementary Planning Guidance).

§  Ditch structure would be compromised and clearance of the ditches would disturb the root balls of the trees, which would cause damage

§  Detrimental to the environment due to loss of hedgerows and would have a negative impact on biodiversity, particularly the high level lighting would have an adverse impact on bats

§Built on flood risk land.  The Engineering Services Manager advised that there was a ditch alongside the southern boundary which would need remediation and that the site was not within Floor Zone 2 or 3 but yet to establish how it would drain.  Over wintering monitoring would have to take place and, as and when that became available, a full drainage proposal would be put forward and form part of the conditions.

§  Non-compliance with Local Plan policies

§  No need in the area – the Group Head of Planning highlighted that the Council had commissioned a housing needs study as part of its preparation of the Local Plan and that included specific needs for specialist accommodation for older persons.

On being put to the vote, the Committee did not accept the officer recommendation to approve and it was then proposed and seconded that the application be refused.  Prior to going to the vote on this, the Committee discussed the reasons for refusal that should be put forward and, having taken advice from the Group Head of Planning, then

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.  The proposals are considered to be an over development and adversely affect the visual amenities of the locality by virtue of them being out of character in scale and density in conflict with policies D DM1 and D SP1 of the Arun Local Plan and policies in the NPPF.

2.  The use of the proposed access will result in damage to the protected Ash Trees by virtue of the proximity of vehicle movements to them leading to their loss contrary to policy ENV DM4 of the Arun Local Plan.

                        EP/148/19/PL – Application for variation of condition No. 2 imposed on planning permission EP/52/18/PL relating to amended internal layout & external appearance of plots 4, 5, 6 & 7 and alterations to external layout and landscaping, Scorton, 9 Lime Tree Close, East Preston

            Having received a report on the matter, together with the officer’s written report update detailing an additional objection received,  the Planning Team Leader explained that this application sought to vary a condition to convert the roof space to additional living space, with additional windows which were considered to be acceptable.  No additional car parking provision was being proposed within the site and a street survey had been undertaken by the applicant which indicated that that would be acceptable.

            In discussing the proposal, Member comment was made that the Council had recently adopted its own Parking Standards SPD, which would not be complied with in this instance.  Concerns were raised that the overflow parking would spill onto the road, which was felt to be unacceptable due to its layout and that it could be described as a country lane; there were a number of pinch points; and it was a busy bus route.

            The Group Head of Planning advised that it had been established that additional parking provision could not be accommodated within the site and the applicant had therefore provided evidence about the car parking in the area.  There was sufficient on street parking in the area which would allow a degree of flexibility.  When the development was completed under its current approval, what was being proposed could be implemented anyway under Permitted Development.

            Members expressed the view that the new policy relating to parking should be supported.

            The Group Head of Planning provided advice that the Committee was required to make reasonable decisions and had to take account of what the applicant might do in the future.  The proposals could be implemented under Permitted Development once the dwellings were occupied.

            On being put to the vote, Members did not accept the officer recommendation to approve and, having been duly proposed and seconded, considered that the application should be refused as it did not adhere to the Council’s Parking Standards SPD and was clearly in breach of it.

            The Committee then

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reason:-

The lack of additional car parking provision will result in increasing road congestion adversely affecting highway safety in the area in conflict with policy TSP1 of the Arun Local Plan and the Council’s Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document (January 2020).

To authorise the Council entering into a Contract for the supply of gas to the Council’s to the Council’s corporate and housing sites from 1 April 2020 for a term of up to three years, renewable annually and to regularised authority for the previous agreement ending 31 March 2020.

The Cabinet

            RESOLVED – That

(1)  The appointment of the Council’s existing gas supplier until 31 March 2020 be approved;

(2)  The appointment of the Council’s new gas supplier procured through the Crown Commercial Services Framework agreement for the supply of energy and ancillary services, for a term of up to 3 years, renewable every 12 months be approved;

(3)  Retrospective delegated authority be given to the Group Head of Corporate Support to enter into the current contract;

(4)  Delegated authority be given to the Group Head of Technical Services to enter into the contract commencing on 1 April 2020.

Cabinet resolved on 23 July 2018 to market the disposal of freehold land at London Road, Bognor Regis for redevelopment to include student accommodation, whilst retaining public car parking.  In line with the Cabinet resolution, progress has been made on this proposal and a preferred bidder has been selected.

Since the original decision, there has been a further proposal made that the re-development allow for the re-provision of public toilets.  As this was not part of the original decision made in July 2028, the Cabinet is being asked to approve the extension of the proposals to include this further element.

The Cabinet

            RESOLVED

            That the proposals agreed by Cabinet on 23 July 2018 (Ref: C/008/230718) relating to the Council’s freehold land at London Road, Bognor Regis be extended to include the re-provision of public toilets.

This report informs Cabinet of the findings of a public consultation exercise to review the existing Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) which expires in March 2020 and recommends to Cabinet options for a new PSPO to be effective from 1 April 2020.

The Cabinet

            RESOLVED – That

(1)  Option 2 be adopted for the provision of a new Public Spaces Protection Order;

(2)  Option 2 contains the following restrictions and requirements at all times.  The order and geographical areas are as set out in Appendix B of the report:

(a)  Alcohol Restriction

No person shall refuse to stop drinking alcohol or refuse to hand over any container believed to contain alcohol when required to do so by an authorised Officer

(b)  Anti-Social Behaviour

All persons are prohibited from behaving in a way which causes or is likely to cause nuisance, harassment, alarm or distress to a member or members of the public

(3)  The new Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) is implemented and effective from 1 April 2020; and

(4)  A sum of £10,000 is allocated for the promotion and signage of the agreed PSPO.

The Committee received the Quarter 2 performance outturn for the Corporate Plan performance indicators for the period covering 1 July to 30 September 2019.  It was explained that this report was being submitted to Members later than normally scheduled as result of the snap General Election held on 12 December 2019.  

The Group Head of Policy provided some background to the report and 2020 Vision programme in place.  Behind the three Council Priority themes of Your Services; Supporting You; and Your Future sat a series of targets that were measurable with the performance of these targets being reported to the Council’s Corporate Management Team (CMT) every quarter and to this Committee and Cabinet every six months and at year end.

There were 11 Corporate Plan indicators and six were measured at Quarter 2.  The report set out what indicators were not achieving their target; were behind target; were achieving their target; and over achieving the target.  Each of the thresholds and categories of performance for each indicator was outlined to the Committee and set out in the Appendix to the report with CMT providing their comments and where remedial action was required.

It was outlined that the Director of Place, with support from CMT, was recommending the Committee to consider recommending to Cabinet to amend the target figure for indicator CP10 [Total Rateable Business Value for the Arun District] from £91m to £99.138 m with effect from Quarter 1 in 2020.  If approved, Cabinet would then make this a recommendation to Full Council to amend this target.  The Committee was being requested to support this amendment to this target figure and to note the Council’s overall Quarter 2 performance against the targets of the Corporate Plan.

The following questions were asked by the Committee:

·         On CP11 questions were asked about the Government’s proposals to introduce weekly food waste collections and if this was being introduced in 2021/22, was the Council proposing to get rid of weekly waste collections?

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Dr Walsh responded confirming that WSCC were looking at introducing a trial of food waste collections in the Arun District, based upon a trial recently undertaken at Mid Sussex District Council.  It was explained that the area this trial would cover needed to be very carefully considered in terms of having a wide range of demographics.  The results of this pilot project would inform how such a project would be extended to whole of the District. 

·      On CP11, the comment was made that it would have been beneficial to have had the appropriate Director present at the meeting so that a more in-depth explanation could have been provided in terms of why this indicator had been failing.  What was the Council doing to address this?  Had this been down to the withdrawal of recycling credits by WSCC? 

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Dr Walsh, explained that WSCC had withdrawn its recycling credits from every Local Authority, nothing could be done about this action.  The Group Head of Policy confirmed that she would raise this issue with the Director of Services so that a written answer could be provided.

·         On CP11, could the Council look at renewing stickers for recycling bins to improve recycling levels so that the public were aware of all new items that could be recycled.  It was explained that this had happened but accepted that the Council could do more to engage the public, through use of Arun Times and social media platforms. 

·         On CP11, mention was made of the Council’s decision to increase the target last year.  Did the Council receive any accreditation for rubbish that was taken to a recycling centre as this could impact figures?   It was explained that WSCC would take the credit for this and so it did impact figures.

·      Further questions were asked about the new WSCC Food Waste trial and whether this would add to the Council’s recycling rates - this would then assist the Council in getting to achieve the increased rate.  Councillor Dr Walsh explained that this would have an improving effect.

·      On CP11, to boost recycling rates could more work be done by junior officers to provide updates on social media to pass information onto the younger generation.

Councillor Dr Walsh confirmed that the Council had now adopted a Digital Strategy and so this work would be taking place.

·         On CP11, would the food trial include the recycling of nappies? Councillor Purchese explained that the trial would include all ‘smelly’ waste including hygiene products, not just food.

·         Concern was expressed over the varying provision of recycling bins over the District and could this be addressed.  Councillor Purchese confirmed that this would be looked at when the Council came to retender its contract.

The Chairman then reminded the Committee of the proposal to amend the target figure for indicator CP10 [Total Rateable Business Value for the Arun District] from £91m to £99.138m with effect from Quarter 1 2020.He explained that this would be a recommendation to Cabinet on 9 March 2020 who would then make a recommendation to Full Council on 18 March 2020.

            The Committee

                        RESOLVED

That the Council’s Quarter 2 Performance against the targets for the Corporate Plan Indicators as set out in this report and Appendix A be noted.

            The Committee also

                        RECOMMEND TO CABINET ON 9 MARCH 2020

That the target figure for Indicator CP10 [Total Rateable Business Value for the Arun District] be amended from £91m to £99.138 m with effect from Quarter 1 2020.

The Budget Monitoring Report sets out the Capital, Housing Revenue and General Fund Revenue budget performance to the end of December 2019.

The Cabinet

            RESOLVED – That

(1)  That the report in Appendix 1 be noted; and

(2)  It be noted that the overall performance against budget is currently on track