Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 June 2017 were submitted and approved and the Chairman was authorised to sign them as an accurate record.

Councillor Murray.

There were none.

Proposed three bedroom dwelling – LANGNEY.

Mrs Caffery addressed the committee in objection stating that the scheme would result in overlooking, increased parking issues and had the potential to exacerbate the flooding issues.

Mr Tinwell addressed the committee in response stating that the scheme had been designed to match the surrounding properties and that this included the materials proposed.  He also stated that parking had been provided on site and it was his aim to support and protect any wildlife located on site.  The Flood Risk Assessment would be adhered to, as would current planning standards.

For the purposes of clarity, and to directly address Mrs Caffrey’s concerns over the accuracy of the planning application, the concerns raised and the officer’s response are detailed below:

a) There were currently two vehicle spaces – there was one?

·         There was one parking space in front of the garage. The garage was considered to provide one parking space and therefore there were two parking spaces

b) There would be four vehicle spaces in proposed development – where? The plans showed two.

·         The existing dwelling benefited from two parking space.  The proposed dwelling was to be served by two parking spaces and therefore there would be four parking spaces overall

c) There were no protected species in the area – there were bats and toads (later not protected but rare)

·         The site lies between two Local Wildlife Sites however, there were no significant concerns with regard to ecology as the ecological assessment was carried out in accordance with best practice and the site offers negligible bat roost potential (please refer to report for more details)

d) The site was not vacant – it had been unoccupied for approximately six months

·         Reference to the existing property’s vacancy or non-vacancy within the application documents could not be located

·         Whether the existing property had been vacant for a short period of time or not was not a consideration relevant to the decision to approve or refuse consent

e) There were no trees or hedges on development site – there were at least two very mature trees on site, which would have to be removed

·         Report states, “There were not considered to be any negative impacts on trees of any significance resulting following development”

·         The Specialist Advisor (Arboriculture) stated the following: “[The] trees would be categorised as C3 under the cascade chart of BS5837, and therefore should not be considered a constraint to this development”

For the avoidance of doubt, there were no concerns over the accuracy of the detail of the planning application.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous)That permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) Time 2) Drawings 3) Development in accordance with FRA 4) Hours of development 5) Matching materials to Goldsmith Close 6) Enhancements implemented in accordance with Ecology Assessment 7) Remove PD windows from flank.

Informative:

A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. To initiate a sewer capacity check to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

Refurbishment of existing bungalow to consist of proposed new utility and swimming pool extensions, conversion of garage to form annexe bedroom and ensuite along with new parking area for 2no. vehicles – RATTON.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of permission 2) The external finishes of the development hereby permitted shall match in material, colour, style, bonding and texture those of the existing building. This applies unless details on the approved plans indicate otherwise 3) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings submitted on 5th June 2017:

- Drawing Number 1714/04 B- Proposed floor plan

- Drawing Number 1714/05 B- Proposed elevations

- Drawing Number 1714/01 A- Site location

- Drawing Number 1714/07 A- Proposed Block Plan

4) The driveway hereby approved must use permeable (or porous) surfacing which allows water to drain through, such as gravel, permeable concrete block paving or porous asphalt, or if the rainwater is directed to a lawn or border to drain naturally 5) The developments approved as part of this application hereby approved shall be used for  purposes ancillary to the enjoyment of 36 Wish Hill, Eastbourne, BN20 9EY as a residential property and shall be used for no other purpose in perpetuity 6) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling house(s) other than that expressly authorised by this permission shall be carried out without planning permission obtained from the Local Planning Authority 7) The vehicle parking area shown on the approved plans shall not be used otherwise than for the parking of private motor vehicles belonging to the  occupants of and visitors to the development hereby approved 8) prior to its installation details of the pool pump equipment shall be submitted including running/operational decibel levels. The details as submitted shall be agreed in writing and be retained as such thereafter.

Application for variation of condition 2 of reserved matters granted 9 June 2015 for the development of the site for 8 dwellings, open space and berth holder facilities following grant of outline planning permission (Ref: 141469); amendments are to paving to public open space, retaining tarmac drive on the north and south sides of the site, reconfiguration to planters in public open space, changes to proposed street furniture, new planting arrangement, re-arrangement of shared access and parking area, and amendments to planting edging in public open space – SOVEREIGN.

Members agreed to defer this item to allow officers to seek further clarification on the proposed drainage arrangements.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That this item be deferred to a future meeting of the committee to allow officers to seek further clarification on the proposed drainage arrangements.

Report of the Senior Specialist Advisor (Planning).

At the Chairman’s request, the committee agreed to defer this item for consideration at the August Planning committee.

RESOLVED:  That the report be deferred for consideration at the next Planning committee.

1)   31 Baldwin Avenue.

31 Baldwin Avenue.  The Inspector dismissed the appeal.

There were none.