Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 November 2016 were submitted and approved and the Chairman was authorised to sign them as an accurate record.

Councillor Taylor.

There were none.

Development of 7 residential units and 16 car parking spaces, located on 2 adjacent sites in Fort Lane: SITE A - Unit 2, located on east side of Fort Lane & SITE B - located to rear of 2 - 6 Myrtle Road, west side of Fort Lane, comprising: 4x 2 bed terraced houses, 1x 3 bed house (Site B) 1 x 2 bed houses (Site A). (REVISED SCHEME WITH AMENDMENTS TO ORIGINAL PROPOSAL)– DEVONSHIRE.

Two additional representations had been received which were not reflected in the committee report.

One letter of objection drew attention to the issues associated with high levels of on street parking in the area surrounding the development.

A further representation expressed concern about a loss of amenity as a result of the proposed development, that the existing rear passageway between the site and Myrtle Road be retained, and that car parking and waste storage be provided in the proposed development.

These issues were dealt with in the committee report.

Ms Weeks addressed the committee in objection stating that the parking issues would remain despite the reduction in the scale of the development and the increase in parking spaces.  Ms Weeks felt that the regeneration of the industrial units would be more appropriate.

Mr Benyahya addressed the committee in support stating that the residents in neighbouring streets were in favour of the development and that the amended scheme, with the additional parking, would be sufficient for the new development.  Mr Benyahya felt that the regeneration of this area would remove the antisocial behaviour in Fort Lane.

Mr Seath, agent for the applicant advised that the industrial units were now empty.  There were often problems with deliveries to units and staff parking on the site.  Fly tipping and antisocial behaviour had become an issue and it was anticipated that the scheme would greatly improve the area for all the neighbouring residents.

Members discussed the application and whilst they were in favour in principle, there were some concerns about the future removal of the obscure glass.  The committee was advised that this could be dealt with by the Enforcement team.

RESOLVED:  (By 4 votes to 1 with 2 abstentions) That permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) Development within 3 years 2) Development in accordance with approved plans 3) Areas of waste storage to set out on approved plans prior to occupation 4) Parking and turning areas provided prior to occupation 5) Details of cycle parking approved and occupied prior to occupation 6) Details of a) site investigation and b) remedial works provided prior to commencement of development 7) Details of a verification report demonstrating implementation of remediation prior to occupation 8) Development to be monitored and maintained in accordance with remediation measures approved 9) Contamination to be reported to Local Planning Authority 10) Obscure glass to be retained permanently 11) Parking to be retained permanently for residents and users 12) Working hours – Monday to Friday 8-6, Saturday 8-1 13) PD rights  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Outline application for the development of a medical centre with all matters reserved except access (revised scheme) – OLD TOWN.      

A petition of objection signed by 485 signatures, 48 letters of objection and 15 letters of support were received during the first round of consultation.  During the second round of consultation two letters of support and no letters of objection had been received.

A further objection was submitted by Moore Planning on 25^th November 2016 on behalf of the Victoria Drive and Eastbourne Ladies Bowls Club. The objections reinforced their earlier comments and were summarised as follows:

·    The loss of playing field space was considered inappropriate.

·    The applicant’s assessment was considered to be insufficient in demonstrating why the loss of the playing field was justifiable as only Bowling facilities were assessed in the application enclosures, not all playing fields across the town.

·    The loss of playing fields without adequate assessment were not permitted by Eastbourne Borough Council policies.

·    In the interests of the wider community, the application should be refused.

Mr Moore addressed the committee in objection stating that the scheme was not acceptable in principle as the site was designated as a playing field and development on this site was contrary to Council policy.  Mr Moore also felt that there was insufficient information available regarding the development.

Mr Henty addressed the committee in objection stating that the bowling green was important for the local community, which hosted many County tournaments.  Mr Henty also referenced the petition objecting to the medical centre signed by 485 people.

Dr Gaffney addressed the committee in support stating that the nearby surgery was no longer fit for purpose and that a new medical centre would be able to cater for a large number of residents and provide specialist clinics to cater for changing patient requirements.

Mr Weis addressed the committee in support stating that it was essential to be able to provide the right services of the right quality for the residents of Eastbourne that were DDA compliant.   Community facilities away from hospitals were increasing in demand and a medical centre would provide this vital service.

David Onions, agent for the applicant, addressed the committee in response stating that the current scheme was an outline application at this stage to establish if the site was suitable.  The aim was to improve facilities for residents. 

The committee was advised that the land was privately owned and that a notice to quit had been served to the Bowls Club.  The landowner did not intend on granting a licence to bowl after 2017.

RESOLVED: (By 5 votes to 2) That subject to a S106 Legal Agreement regards the Highway issues and Local Labour Initiatives, permission be granted and be subject to the following conditions: 1) Time 2) Drawing 3) Reserved matters 4) Materials 5) Access construction 6) Parking provision 7) Detailed surface water drainage 8) Foul water drainage 9) SuDS management and maintenance plan 10) No unauthorised infiltration of surface water 11) Infiltration  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

There were none.

1)   2 Upland Road.

2)   4 Nuthatch Road.

3)   15 Hartfield Road.

1) 2 Uplands Road.  The appeal was dismissed by the Inspector.

2) 4 Nuthatch Road. The appeal was dismissed by the Inspector.

3) 15 Hartfield Road. The appeal was dismissed by the Inspector.

RESOLVED: That the appeals be noted.