Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 25^th April 2017

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 25^th April 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/15/1992 – Councillor Brian Donnelly declared a personal interest in this item because his wife played tennis at Steyning Tennis Club.

DC/16/2915 – Councillor Brian O’Connell declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item because he lived adjacent to the application site.  He withdrew from the meeting during determination of the application. 

DC/16/2522 – Councillor Brian O’Connell declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item because he lived adjacent to the application site.  He withdrew from the meeting during determination of the application. 

Councillor David Jenkins was appointed Vice-Chairman for the purposes of the meeting. 

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive

The Chairman announced that Aidan Thatcher, Head of Development, would be leaving the Council shortly.  He thanked him for all the support he had given to Councillors on planning matters and wished him well in his new role.

The list of appeals lodged, appeals in progress and appeal decisions, as circulated, was noted.

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of the squash club and the erection of a building of nine flats with associated car parking.  Matters for consideration under this outline application were the principle of development, access, and layout of the building and parking spaces, with all other matters reserved for future determination. The access off Greyfriars Lane was shared with Storrington Tennis Club and neighbouring residential properties.

The applicant had indicated that the building would be designed in brick, with a glazed, lightweight third-storey set in from the lower levels of the building.   

The application site was located within the built-up area of Storrington and included a private members squash club with changing facilities, gym and club room. Storrington Community Centre and Museum were to the north, Storrington Tennis Club to the west, a Grade II Listed Building to the east, and a car park used by the squash club and tennis club to the south. 

Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  Fifty-five letters of objection and one letter of comment had been received.  Two members of the public, including the Chair of Steyning Tennis Club, spoke in objection to the application.   The applicant and the Manager of the squash club both addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; character and appearance; neighbouring amenity; and the impact on the highway.  The applicant had advised that the facility was no longer financially viable and a commuted sum towards improvements to leisure facilities in the District, and off-site affordable housing, had been proposed.

Members noted concerns regarding the narrow access road, in particular with regard to disruption during construction and its impact on the adjacent tennis club.  Whilst concerns regarding ownership of land along the site boundary with the tennis club was not a planning matter, Members were concerned that the current parking arrangements, where the areas used by the two clubs were not clearly demarcated, did not allow the parking need generated by the squash club to be accurately measured, thus making predictions of the traffic and parking impact of the proposal hard to determine.

Members concluded that the ten parking spaces proposed in the outline application could be insufficient for the nine proposed units, and there was insufficient flexibility within the site to amend the layout to provide additional parking should the proposed housing mix require more parking spaces.

Members concluded that the ten parking spaces proposed in the outline application could be insufficient for the nine proposed units, and there was insufficient room on the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item PCS/126

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for an extension to the campsite of 50 additional tent/caravan pitches, for seasonal use between 1st March and 30th September, and the regularisation of the access track along the boundary of the site and of the washing facilities in the north-west corner. 

The application had been deferred by the Committee in March to allow for a more comprehensive Location Plan to be submitted and for further discussions with the applicant regarding the use of land under the applicant’s ownership for seasonal camping (Minute No. PCS/190 (21.03.17) refers).  The applicant had also submitted a revised Site Management Plan.

The application site was located outside the built-up area on the north of Wheatsheaf Road, surrounded by open countryside with some sporadic residential development, to the north of Wheatsheaf Road. 

Members were referred to the previous report which contained details of relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal.  

One member of the public, the applicant and the agent all spoke in support of the application.  A representative of the parish council spoke in objection to it.  Councillor Brian O’Connell, who had declared a personal and prejudicial interest, addressed the committee in objection to the application.  He then withdrew from the meeting and took no part in its determination. 

The applicant had met with Local Members and agreed that land to the north of the site, including Field 3 and Spinning Woods, would not be used for overnight camping, and had agreed to erect a fence along part of the boundary to protect the amenity of nearby residents.  The recommended conditions had been amended to reflect this. 

The applicant and Local Members had also discussed a proposed requirement that the total number of pitches on the formal camping areas and seasonal areas should be restricted to a maximum of 200 at any one time.  Such a restriction would require a legal agreement to ensure the applicant would not continue to benefit from Permitted Development Rights, and because the camping areas owned by the applicant included land outside the application site.

After considering the potential impact of the proposal on the surrounding area, Members concluded that securing a restriction on the total number of pitches to 200 was in the interests of the amenity of nearby residents and of the surrounding countryside setting.

The Vice Chairman requested that the Parish Council’s request, that the public footpath which crossed Field 2 of the site should be re-routed to avoid conflict between walkers and users of the campsite, be considered during determination of the application.

RESOLVED

(i)      That a legal agreement be entered into to restrict the number of pitches on land in the applicant’s ownership to 200 at any one time.

(ii)     That on completion of (i) above, planning application DC/16/2915 be determined by the Head of Development.  The view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the retention of two untreated timber bridges that crossed a pond to the north-east of the site. One bridge connected the eastern and western fields, and the other connected the western field to an island.  The application had been deferred by the Committee in March to allow it to be considered at the same time as planning application DC/16/2915 (Minute No. PCS/110 (21/03/17) refers).  

The application site was located outside the built-up area on the north of Wheatsheaf Road, surrounded by open countryside with some sporadic residential development.  The site was used as a campsite and for agriculture.

Members were referred to the previous report which contained details of relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal. 

The applicant and the agent both spoke in support of the application.  Councillor Brian O’Connell, who had declared a personal and prejudicial interest, addressed the committee in support of the application.  He then withdrew from the meeting and took no part in its determination. 

The officer’s planning assessment indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; landscape character of the site and the surrounding area; and the amenities of nearby residents.

Members considered the bridges to relate sympathetically with the surrounding countryside.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/16/2522 be granted for the reasons as reported.