Agenda and minutes

To receive and record apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Branson and Keast

To approve the minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 5 April 2018

The Minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 5 April 2018 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

There were no matters arising.

To receive the minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 17 May 2018

The Committee received the minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 17 May 2018.

To receive and record declarations of interests from members present in respect of the various matters on the agenda for this meeting.

There were no declarations of interests.

The Chairman to report the outcome of meetings attended or other information arising since the last meeting of the Committee.

The Chairman welcomed the new members to the Committee.

The Chairman reported that the Development Consultation Forum concerning development at Lower Road Bedhampton on 23 May 2018 had been well attended.

The Committee are invited to consider any matters they wish to recommend for site viewing or deferment.

There were no matters to be considered for site viewing and deferment.

To receive requests to make a deputation to Committee.

The Committee received the following deputations/representations:

(1)          Ms Dolan (supporter) – APP/18/00306 – Foreshore at South Hayling, Sea Front, Hayling Island (Minute 9)

(2)          Ms Sheffield (supporter) – APP/18/00306 – Foreshore at South Hayling, Sea Front, Hayling Island (Minute 9)

(3)          Mr Fawcett (objector) – APP/18/00134 – Fair Acre, Church Lane, Hayling Island (Minute 10)

(4)          Councillor Turner (ward councillor) - APP/18/00134 – Fair Acre, Church Lane, Hayling Island (Minute 10)

(5)          Mr Gibbons (objector) – APP/18/00151 – 48 Havant Road, Emsworth (Minute 11)

(6)          Mr Coles (supporter) – APP/18/00151 – 48 Havant Road, Emsworth (Minute 11)

(7)          Councillor Bowerman (ward councillor) - APP/18/00151 – 48 Havant Road, Emsworth (Minute 11)

Proposal:

Continuation with Beach Management Activities on the South Coast of Hayling Island (Ferry Inn to Hayling Island Sailing Club) by recycling beach material to protect Eastoke from flooding. Resubmission of APP/17/00342, this submission is identical in terms of the proposal and mitigation measures to the previous application, and has been re submitted to comply with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, which requires planning applications with Environmental Statements to be treated as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) development.

Associated Documents

Proposal:       Continuation with Beach Management Activities on the South Coast of Hayling Island (Ferry Inn to Hayling Island Sailing Club) by recycling beach material to protect Eastoke from flooding.

The Committee was requested to consider an application which was identical in terms of the proposal and mitigation measures to application APP/17/00342, which was approved by the Committee on 27 July 2017 (Minute 37/4/2017). The Committee was advised that the application had been resubmitted to comply with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation of the Head of Planning to adopt the appropriate assessment and grant permission.

The Committee received supplementary information, circulated prior to the meeting, which:

(a)          included a table that set out the mitigation and likely significant effects of the proposed South Hayling Island Beach Management Plan to advise the Habitat Regulations Assessment; and

(b)          comments received by Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

The Committee was addressed by Ms C Dolan and Ms L Sheffield of the Eastern Solent Coastal Partnership, who recommended that the application be permitted for the following reasons:

(a)          the Environment Agency have approved £3.3 million over the next 5 years to continue to reduce the risk of flooding and erosion at Eastoke;

(b)          the application would reduce the risk of coastal flooding to 1555 residential properties and 170 commercial properties at risk from a 1 in 200 year flood event over the next 5 years at Eastoke, as well as the main road onto the peninsula;

(c)          the application would update the current the current planning permission and in particular

              (i)           seek approval into perpetuity whilst ensuring safeguards are in place to protect the environment into the future; the current permission was due to expire in September 2019.

              (ii)          Extend the boundaries of the current permission to include Ferry Road in the west and HISC in the east. This will open up a new source of shingle for recycling activities from Gunner Point; movement of small amounts of shingle to reduce erosion at the car park at Ferry Rd; as well as the opportunity for HISC to clear their pontoon of excess sand when required; and

              (iii)         Recycling operations would typically be carried out in March and September due to environmental restrictions and as far as possible, to avoid the school holidays.

In response to questions raised by members of the Committee, the officers advised that the applicants could submit variations to the approved scheme in the future to take advantage any advancement in technology.

The Committee discussed this application in detail together with the views raised by the deputees. The Committee considered that the proposal would bring significant benefits to Hayling Island and in that there would be no significant detrimental impact as a result of the implementation of this proposal. It was therefore

RESOLVED that

(A)         as 'competent Authority' for the purposes of an Appropriate Assessment under Regulation 81 of the 2010 Habitats Regulations, the Appropriate Assessment set out in Appendix C  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Proposal:

Variation of condition 3 of planning permission APP/16/00993 to allow for:

1.           First floor west facing bedroom window to be retained with applied obscure film and fitted with a restricted opening but allowing for emergency access (if required)

2.           First floor south facing en-suite window to be retained with applied obscure film

Associated Documents

(The site was viewed by the Site Viewing Working Party)

Proposal:       Variation of Condition 3 of planning permission APP/16/00993 to allow for:

                        1.      first floor west facing bedroom window to be retained with applied obscure film and fitted with a restricted opening but allowing for emergency access (if required)

                        2.      first floor facing en-suite window to be retained with applied obscure film

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation of the Head of Planning  to grant permission.

The Committee received supplementary information, circulated prior to the meeting, which:

(a)          corrected the appendices attached to the published report;

(b)          included photographs submitted by objectors to the scheme showing the site from Church Cottage, St Peter’s Lane;

(c)          an additional representation from a previous objector; and

(d)          recommended additional conditions.

The Committee was addressed by the following deputees:

(1)          Mr James Fawcett, who objected to the proposal, on behalf of the objectors, for the following reasons:

(a)         the proposal did not adequately protect the privacy of neighbours: the film affixed to the windows could be easily removed and windows opened thereby enabling direct overlooking to adjacent properties to the detriment of the amenities of the occupiers. Therefore, the proposal did not overcome the reasons for condition 3 of planning permission APP/16/00993 and was contrary to Havant Borough Design Guide SPD December 2011;

(b)         the fact that the applicants had not complied with condition 3 of permission APP/16/0093 raised concerns that they would not comply with the conditions recommended in the submitted report;

(c)          sufficient reasons had not be given by the Council to support its recommendation to vary its standard requirement for obscured glazing to film;

(d)         the film had been applied to the windows in direct sunlight, which was contrary to the manufactures recommendations. Therefore, there were concerns about the durability of this film; and

(e)         his clients had supported the original application on the understanding that their privacy would be protected using obscure glazing and a requirement that the west facing windows would be fixed shut.

              Mr Fawcett recommended that the Committee enforce condition 3 of planning permission APP/16/00993: the use of obscure glazing and non-opening windows on west facing elevation would protect the privacy of his clients.

              If the Committee was minded to grant permission, Mr Fawcett requested the Committee to consider imposing a condition requiring the planting and maintenance of mature screen between the application site and adjoining properties.

(2)          Councillor Turner, on behalf of an objector and other concerned residents of Northney, supported the case put forward by Mr Fawcett and raised the following additional concerns:

(a)            the proposal would create an undesirable precedent which would make it difficult to refuse further similar applications to the detriment of the St Peters Conservation Area and the character of Northey; and

              (b)         the windows on the west elevation directly overlooked garden areas of adjacent properties.

Councillor Turner recommended that the application be refused for the following reason:

              The proposed [window / windows] on the [.....]  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Proposal:

Erection of replacement detached workshop.

Associated Documents

(The site was viewed by the Site Viewing Working Party)

Proposal: Erection of replacement detached workshop.

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation of the Head of Planning to grant permission.

The Committee received supplementary information, circulated prior to the meeting, which:

(a)          corrected the appendices attached to the published report;

(b)          included a sun path analysis submitted by the applicant’s agent;

(c)          an amendment to recommended condition 2 to reflect the shade analysis referred to (b) above;

(d)          further third-party objection raising concerns about the sun path analysis referred to in (b) above; and

(e)          included a correction to the officer’s report.

The Committee was addressed by the following deputees:

(1)          Mr Gibbons, who, on behalf of the resident at 46 Havant Road, Emsworth, objected to the proposal for the following reasons:

(a)         the size and height of the proposal and design of the roof would be obtrusive and out of keeping with the local area;

(b)         the size, height, bulk and proximity of the proposal would be overbearing and detrimental to the visual outlook and amenities of the occupiers of 46 Havant Road, Emsworth;

(c)          the proposed usage would have a detrimental impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of adjoining properties;

(d)         the proposal was higher than the garage it was proposed to replace; and

(e)         the proposal would adversely affect the light available to the occupier of 46 Havant Road, Emsworth.

(2)          Mr Coles, who, on behalf of the applicant, supported the proposal for the following reasons:

(a)         the proposal was required to enable boats to be stored and maintained inside a building on the site;

(b)         amendments to the size, the roof, location and height of the building and position of dormer windows had been made to overcome the concerns of neighbouring properties;

(c)          the shades analysis had been updated to investigate the concerns raised by an objector. The time of the analysis had been chosen as the objector had indicated this time in his objection;

(d)         the proposal represented an acceptable relationship with 46 Havant Road and other neighbouring properties and complied with Council’s policies and guidelines;

              In response to questions raised by the members of the Committee, Mr Coles advised that:

              (i)           the height of the garage was required to enable materials, such as sails to be stored in an upright position and all maintenance work to be undertaken inside the building. The current work was undertaken inside a tent on the site which had proven too low and resulted in some of the maintenance work being undertaken outside;

              (ii)          although it was preferable to store the sails in an upright position, this was not essential; and

              (iii)         the maintenance work would require the use of some noisy equipment. Every effort would be made to ensure that the use of this equipment would not be detrimental to the occupiers of neighbouring properties

(3)          Councillor Bowerman supported the reasons submitted by Mr Gibbons and submitted the following additional reasons for refusal:

              (a)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

The Committee considered the appointment of the Site Viewing Working Party for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED that

(a)          that the Site Viewing Working Party be constituted with the following terms of reference:

Title:                             Site Viewing Working Party

Membership:               All members (including standing deputies) of the Development Management Committee

Chairman:                   Chairman of the Development Management Committee

Function:                     To inspect sites relating to planning applications, and other matters referred to it by the Development Management Committee and officers and to inspect sites as necessary and request additional information if necessary.

(b)          members of the Development Management Committee (including Standing Deputies) be appointed to the Working Party referred to in (a) above; and

(c)          members appointed to the Working Party referred to in (a) above continue to be members and constitute that Working Party until the first meeting of the Committee after the annual meeting of the Council subject to the members concerned remaining members of the Council during that time.