Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2015 were submitted and approved and the Chairman was authorised to sign them as an accurate record.

None received.

None received.

Siting of a vintage AA box together with use of two adjacent parking spaces for the parking of vintage cars – MEADS.

The observations of the Estate Manager, Tourism Manager and the Specialist Advisors for Engineering and Conservation were summarised within the report.

At its meeting on 31 March 2015 the Conservation Area Advisory Group raised no objections.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) Commencement within three years 2) Development in accordance with approved plan 3) Development to be an exact replica of a vintage AA box in terms of design, materials and colour.

Extension of timber decked area on the beach to be used in conjunction with existing Cafe Express and Belissimo Express cafes – DEVONSHIRE.

The relevant planning history for the site was detailed within the report.

The observations of the Specialist Advisors for Conservation and Engineering were summarised within the report.

At its meeting on 31 March 2015 the Conservation Area Advisory Group raised no objections in principle to the extension of the decked areas, however concerns were expressed in respect of the continuous nature of the decking and the impact it would have on the relationship between the beach and the promenade.  The Group were firmly of the opinion that the deck should be separated into sections with wide gaps between them so that the shingle would still be visible right up to the edge of the promenade.  It was also considered essential that good quality materials should be used, particularly for the balustrading; the design of the balustrading should be carefully considered to reflect either the ornate traditional features found along the promenade, or a very modern interpretation.

The committee was advised that the Eastbourne Hospitality Association ‘fully supported the application as it would enhance the town’s tourist economy.  The scheme would offer an enhanced refreshment facility along the seafront and promenade.  The Eastbourne Hospitality Association were pleased access to the beach had been maintained.’

Two further letters of concern were also reported commenting on the following issues:

·         Would lead to the commercialisation of the seafront which would be damaging.

·         Would cut off access to the beach for the length of the new decking.

The committee expressed concern that the public consultation for this application had not yet closed and agreed that this item should be deferred until after the closing date.  The committee felt that the decking area should run down towards the sea rather than along the promenade and asked that whilst the officers were awaiting the closure of the consultation period, they discuss options for increasing the decked area.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That consideration of the application be deferred until after close of the consultation period and to allow officers time to seek amendments/revisions to the scheme (reduce the length along the promenade and extend further into/onto the beach).

Extension of raised terrace to the rear together with the provision of a brise-soleil canopy over – MEADS.  One letter of objection had been received.

The relevant planning history for the site was detailed within the report.

The committee was advised that updated drawings had been received to accurately show the extension / patio as built.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That permission be granted subject to the following conditions:1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordancewith the following drawings received on 19 February 2015:

DWG No. IE-TP01 – Proposed layout and rear elevation

DWG No. IE-TP02 – Proposed Side Elevations

Site Location & Block Plan.

2) The external finishes of the development hereby permitted shall match in material, colour, style, bonding and texture those of the existing building as identified under section 11. Materials, of the submitted application form 3) The privacy screening (fencing) on the raised terrace, hereby approved shall remain as a permanent structure and retained as such thereafter

Erection of mansard roof to provide for four self-contained flats and three storey front/side extension, and alterations to fenestration on building's façade – UPPERTON.  Five objections had been received.

The relevant planning history for the site was detailed within the report.

The observations of the East Sussex County Council Highways Department were summarised within the report. 

RESOLVED:  (Unanimous) That permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1)Time – Commence within 3 years 2) Approved Drawings 3) Samples of Materials – Windows / Roof 4) Hours of Demolition / Construction 5) Tree protection 6) Provision of communal bin store (prior to occupation) 7) Provision of cycle storage (prior to occupation) 8) Retention of 16 parking spaces

Three storey extension to the east side to provide three two-bedroom flats – MEADS.  Nine objections had been received.

The relevant planning history for the site was detailed within the report.

The observations of the Specialist Advisor (Arboriculture) were reported at the meeting.

The observations of the East Sussex County Council Highways Department and Specialist Advisors for Planning Policy and Conservation were summarised within the report.

RESOLVED: (Unanimous) That permission be refused on the grounds that the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site, resulting in an extension with a cramped and awkward relationship with the host building and the boundaries of the site, and a detrimental impact on the outlook of the occupiers of the existing block. The extension, by reason of its scale, siting and design, would result in an intrusive feature that would fail to preserve of enhance the character and appearance of the designated Area of High Townscape Value.  The proposal would also adversely impact the preserved trees on the boundary with Silverdale Road, both through the loss of one tree, the construction process, and future/ongoing pressure for severe pruning. As such the proposal conflicts with policies B2 and D10A of the Eastbourne Core Strategy Local Plan 2013 and policies HO20, UHT1, UHT4 and UHT16 of the Eastbourne Borough Plan 2003 (Saved Policies) and the paragraphs 56, 60, 131 and 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework.The proposal would also adversely impact the preserved trees on the boundaries with Silverdale Road and 30 Compton Street, through the immediate loss of one tree, the potential loss of a further two trees, the construction process, and future/ongoing pressure for severe pruning of remaining trees

Appeal:

Should the applicant appeal the decision the appropriate course of action to be followed, taking into account the criteria set by the Planning Inspectorate, is considered to be written representations.

The committee was advised that an application for an extension to and additional elevated tee at the second hole at the Royal Golf Club, Paradise Drive had been received.

NOTED.