Lewes District and Eastbourne Borough Councils' logo

Lewes and Eastbourne
Councils

Agenda item

282 Kings Drive. Application ID: 181178

Minutes:

Planning permission for demolition of existing house and associated structures and provision of 85 bed care home with parking, landscaping and highway access - RATTON.

 

This application had been brought back to Committee following deferral to mitigate concerns raised by the Committee concerning size/over-massing of the proposed development and to allow the developer and planning team to liaise on the viability of an alternative development. The applicant had made several alterations to the scheme to address these concerns:

 

·         A reduction of 5 bedrooms in total (85 rooms down to 80)

  • Setting the building into the ground (16m AOD) approximately 2.1m below Kings Drive.
  • Setting the building back from the front by approximately 1.5m to align with the front building line of the adjacent property.
  • Refuse vehicle access and turning details.

The Committee was advised by way of an addendum report, that should members agree to delegate the decision to approve the application to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee, subject to no new issues being raised as a result of the additional consultation, a requirement for a local labour agreement, including monetary contributions towards monitoring, would be attached as a planning condition.  A further representation was received from the occupiers of 284 Kings Drive stating that the development had not been accompanied by a daylight and sunlight impact assessment. Conditions 1 & 4 of the addendum had been updated to reflect this. Conditions 2 & 3 of the addendum were as per the officer’s report.

 

Roland Cottingham, speaking on behalf of the local residents, addressed the Committee in objection, referring to the height, mass and scale of the development stating that it was out of keeping in the area and there were already a number of care homes in the area which were not fully occupied.

 

Councillor Belsey, Ward Councillor, addressed the Committee (from the public gallery) in objection to the application.  He referred to the overdevelopment of the site, raising concern regarding the recent number of the road traffic collisions and the potential for further accidents to occur.

 

 Alison Knight, agent, explained the whole build had been moved back 1½metres and the bay window was in front of the building line. In response to the concerns raised, she referred to the alterations to the scheme, stating that the development would be of economic benefit to the area, providing much needed care facilities for the elderly and frail who reside locally. Although none of the residents would drive cars, she said electric point charging would be provided for visitors and staff. New trees and bird and bat boxes would be installed for the benefit of wildlife. She stated that the scheme had been improved significantly and no objections had been received from statutory consultees.

 

The Committee discussed the application and came to a mixed view.  Discussion included concern regarding the proximity of the proposed development to other care homes and sheltered accommodation in the area. Concern was also raised regarding the insufficient reduction of rooms, lack of parking, excessive footprint, impact on the foundations, surface water drainage, effect on the listed building, absence of turning space and pavement, and the potential for further traffic accidents as vehicles enter and leave the site.  Discussion in favour of the application, praised the applicant for taking on board concerns such as moving the frontage of the building back, reducing its height, the creation of jobs and electric charging points.

 

The Committee were advised that a flood risk assessment had been undertaken and was mitigated in Conditions 4 and 27 of the officer’s report from August 2019, similarly archaeological impacts concerning digging had been mitigated in Condition 22. Furthermore, no statutory objections had been received regarding the movement of vehicles in and out of the site and it had been demonstrated by the applicant that a large emergency vehicle would be able to enter the site.

 

Councillor Murdoch raised concerns regarding vehicular access and egress suggested a left hand turn only. He was advised that Highways did not have any objections to the application.

 

Councillor Murray proposed a motion to approve the application; this was seconded by Councillor Miah.

 

Resolved (by 5 votes for (Councillors Miah, Vaughan, Murray, Diplock and Maxted) and 3 against (Councillors Metcalfe MBE, Lamb and Murdoch)): That the application be delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, subject to no new issues being raised as a result of the additional consultation on the amended drawings, a local labour agreement including monetary contributions towards monitoring, a daylight and sunlight impact assessment and the conditions set out in the addendum.

 

Members noted that if any new material issues arise from the consultation and the daylight and impact assessment, then the application will be reported back to the Planning Committee.  If no new material issues are raised as a result of the additional consultation, the Head of Planning will undertake delegated authority to approve the application.

Supporting documents: