Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Fairhurst.

To approve the minutes of the last meeting of the Planning Committee and receive the minutes of the last meeting of the Site Viewing Working Party.

RESOLVED that:

a          The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 29 September 2022 be approved a true record and signed by the Chairman; and

b          The minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 8 December 2022.

There were no declarations of interests relating to matters on the agenda.

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

Proposal:      Change of Use of land and woodland (retrospective) as a wedding and events venue, including retention of permanent ancillary buildings and structures, the erection of removable structures (including marquees and temporary facilities), and the use of the land as a campsite in association with events.

Additional Information

(Viewed by the Site Viewing Working Party)

Proposal:      Change of Use of land and woodland (retrospective) as a wedding and events venue, including retention of permanent ancillary buildings and structures, the erection of removable structures (including marquees and temporary facilities), and the use of the land as a campsite in association with events.

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

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

1)                  written deputations submitted by Professor Raper, Mr and Mrs Phillips, Mr Knappett, Ms Scott, Ms Barwick, Mr Ford, Ms Barnett, Ms French, Ms Meredith, the applicants’ agent, County Councillor Quantrill, Councillor Payter, and Dr Austin, on behalf of the Chichester Harbour Conservancy;

2)                  Appendix I of the report which summarised representations received; and

3)                  updates to the submitted report.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

A.                  Mr Hicks, who highlighted the issues set out in the written submission objecting to the proposal submitted by Mrs Scott.

            (Mr Hicks failed to complete his deputation in the allotted time)

B.                  Mrs Phillips read out the written submission submitted by her and her husband objecting to the proposal and referred to an additional incident, not set out in the written submission, which involved a speeding vehicle.

C.                 Mr Knappett read out his written submission objecting to the proposal. When making his deputation Mr Knappett revised the number of potential guests referred to in the sixth paragraph of his written submission from 200 to 250;

D.                 Professor Raper, who on behalf 40 objectors to this scheme highlighted the issues set out in his written submission objecting to the proposal.

(Professor Raper failed to complete his deputation in the allotted time)

E.                  Dr Austin, who behalf of the Chichester Harbour Conservancy highlighted the issues raised in his written submission objecting to the proposal and in particular drew attention to the following issues:

                        i.                     Natural England believed their assessment covered the SSSI;

                       ii.                    Natural England considered that breeding birds were not a designated feature of the SSSI and was not therefore closely considered by Natural England in their response to the application;

                      iii.                    the Natural England review did not consider the planning application under consideration by this Committee and was a standalone review;

                     iv.                    argued that the proposal would not have a limited impact on the ANOB and the effects on the ANOB had been downplayed; and

                       v.                    requested the Council to issue a Stop Notice, if it was minded to refuse the application;

            In response to a question from a Member of the Committee, Dr Austin advised that the impact of the proposal needed to consider the satellite images of site and the long term impact of the proposal on the wood. He advised that he would prefer not to have the management of the wood dependent upon profits.

F          Mr Morris, who on behalf of the applicants, highlighted the issues raised in his written submission supporting the proposal. He requested  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.