Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting

Contact: Julie Hollands 

Media

Items
No. Item

PL20/22.

Minutes

To authorise the Chairman to sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 16 July 2020 as a correct record of the proceedings.

Minutes:

Subject to the following addition in respect of RR/2017/457/P – Fairlight – Former Market Garden, Lower Waites Lane,the Chairman was authorised to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 16 July 2020 at a later date as a correct record of the proceedings:

 

Refusal Reason (3) be reworded as follows: “The proposed development is in an area of unadopted roads, some without pavements, which would discourage more sustainable walking and non-car modes of transport, provides for no electric car-charging points and fails to take the opportunity to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to Policy SRM1 of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy.”

PL20/23.

Apologies for Absence and Substitutes

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Councillor A.E. Ganly.

 

It was noted that Councillor J. Barnes was present as substitute for Councillor A.E. Ganly.

PL20/24.

Withdrawn Applications

The Head of Service Strategy and Planning to advise Members of those planning applications on the agenda which have been withdrawn.

 

RR/2019/1659/P – SEDLESCOMBE – PGL PESTALOZZI

Minutes:

It was noted that the following application was withdrawn from the agenda:

 

·        RR/2019/1659/P – Sedlescombe – PGL Pestalozzi

 

PL20/25.

Disclosure of Interest

To receive any disclosure by Members of personal and disclosable pecuniary interests in matters on the agenda, the nature of any interest and whether the Member regards the personal interest as prejudicial under the terms of the Code of Conduct.  Members are reminded of the need to repeat their declaration immediately prior to the commencement of the item in question.

Minutes:

Declarations of interest were made by Councillors in the Minutes as indicated below:

 

Bayliss             Agenda Item 9 – Personal Interest in so far as she was the local Ward Member.

 

Coleman          Agenda Item 9 – Personal Interest in so far as he had frequented the premises when it was a Public House.

 

Courtel            Agenda Item 9 – Personal Interest in so far as he was the local Ward Member and lived in the road adjacent to the site.

 

Curtis               Agenda Item 9 – Personal Interest in so far as he had frequented the premises when it was a Public House.

 

Prochak           Agenda Item 7 – Personal Interest in so far as her husband is Chairman of the local Campaign to Protect Rural England who made comments on the application.

 

Thomas           Agenda Item 9 – Personal Interest in so far as he had frequented the premises when it was a Public House.

 

 

PL20/26.

Planning Applications - Index pdf icon PDF 117 KB

Minutes:

Outline planning permissions are granted subject to approval by the Council of reserved matters before any development is commenced, which are layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping.  Unless otherwise stated, every planning permission or outline planning permission is granted subject to the development beginning within three years from the date of the permission.  In regard to outline permissions, reserved matters application for approval must be made within three years from the date of the grant of outline permission; and the development to which the permission relates must begin no later than whichever is the later of the following dates: the expiration of three years from the date of the grant of outline permission or, the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matters to be approved.

                       

In certain circumstances the Planning Committee will indicate that it is only prepared to grant or refuse planning permission if, or unless, certain amendments to a proposal are undertaken or subject to completion of outstanding consultations.  In these circumstances the Head of Service Strategy and Planning can be given delegated authority to issue the decision of the Planning Committee once the requirements of the Committee have been satisfactorily complied with.  A delegated decision does not mean that planning permission or refusal will automatically be issued.  If there are consultation objections, difficulties, or negotiations are not satisfactorily concluded, then the application will have to be reported back to the Planning Committee or reported via the internal-only electronic Notified ‘D’ system by means of providing further information for elected Members.  This delegation also allows the Head of Service Strategy and Planning to negotiate and amend applications, conditions, reasons for refusal and notes commensurate with the instructions of the Committee.  Any applications which are considered prior to the expiry of the consultation reply period are automatically delegated for a decision.

 

RESOLVED: That the Planning Applications be determined as detailed below.

PL20/27.

RR/2020/599/P - Battle - Firtree Cottage - Land to the rear of pdf icon PDF 477 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

DECISION: REFUSE (FULL PLANNING)

 

RESOLVED: That, subject to being satisfied evidentially, the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to ISSUE THE APPROPRIATE ENFORCEMENT NOTICE and take any other steps necessary including legal action under Sections 179 and 181 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

 

REASONS FOR REFUSAL:

 

1.     The site is within the countryside outside any defined development boundary, as defined in saved Policy DS3 of the Rother District Local Plan (2006). The application has been assessed against the Council’s policies for Gypsy and Travellers (G&T); together with the Government’s Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPTS). The Council’s requirement (under Policy LHN5 of the Core Strategy) to identify a further six permanent pitches to be provided between 2016 and 2028 to meet the identified need has been satisfied by the sites allocated under Policies GYP1 and BEX3 of the Development and Site Allocations Plan (DaSA). The application site is not an allocated site and being outside areas allocated in the Development Plan, does not accord with paragraph 25 of the PPTS. Determining the application on its planning merits, the use of the site as a G&T site causes harm to the character and appearance of the rural area, and the proposal conflicts with Policies OSS4 (iii), RA2 (iii) (viii), RA3 (v), LHN6 (ii), and EN1 (i) of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy, Policies DEN1 and DEN2 of the Rother DaSA, saved Policy DS3 of the Rother District Local Plan (2006) and paragraph 172 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

2.     The development represents a visual intrusion of caravans, vehicles and other external domestic paraphernalia in a rural, countryside setting which considerably harms the character and appearance of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, contrary to Policies OSS4 (iii), BA1 (i), RA2 (viii), RA3 (v), EN1 (i) (v) and LHN6 (ii) of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy, Policies DEN1 and DEN2 of the Rother District Council DaSA, paragraphs 170 and 172 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy H, paragraph 25 of the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites.

 

3.     The site lies within an unsustainable countryside location where occupiers of the development are highly reliant on private motor vehicles and are not able to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling to access local services and facilities. The development is contrary to Policies PC1, OSS3 (v), SRM1 (vii), LHN6 (iii) and TR3 of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy and paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seek to minimise the need to travel and to support the transition to a low carbon future.

 

4.     The development is located within 15m of an ancient woodland, contrary to standing advice produced by the Forestry Commission and Natural England. The development would result in the deterioration of an irreplaceable habitat, an ancient woodland, by way of increased disturbance, lighting from the caravans, compaction of the ground where the  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL20/27.

PL20/28.

RR/2019/2289/P - Bexhill - 92 London Road pdf icon PDF 548 KB

Minutes:

RM

DECISION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING)

 

The Committee had visited the site as part of their site inspections.  The proposal was for a substantial rear three storey extension, which would extend across a large part of the yard at the back of the property, and the change of use of the ground floor to Class A2 Financial and Professional Services and the second and third floors to 10 self-contained flats. 

 

Up until June 2019, the property was trading as a Hotel/Public House.  The property was now empty and boarded up.  It was located on the northern side of London Road, close to the King Offa Way (A259) and Combe Valley Way (A269) junction and was surrounded by commercial and residential properties.

 

Members heard from the Applicant’s Agent who outlined the history and proposed development of the site, as well as the local Ward Members who were present at the meeting and were both in favour of supporting approval of the application.

 

Members discussed the acceptability of the proposal, the unsuccessful marketing of the property as a Hotel/Public House or community venue by the Marketing Agents and in weighing up all the issues, including the lack of a current 5-year supply of land for housing, considered that the development proposed would regenerate the area and significantly improve the gateway to Bexhill.  The current site was considered an eyesore and the majority of Members felt that redevelopment was appropriate and would significantly enhance the location.  It was felt that attractive small office space and 10 flats within the town would be in demand and that the development was sustainable and in an accessible location within walking distance of local amenities and transport links.  Therefore the Committee granted full planning permission subject to the inclusion of relevant standard conditions (delegated to officers to consider).   

 

Councillor Curtis moved the motion to approve (Full Planning) and this was seconded by Councillor Coleman.  Resolution voted on – the motion was CARRIED (9 for / 4 against).

 

CONDITIONS:

 

1.     The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In accordance with section 91 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

 

2.     The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and details:

Drawing Nos: 5912-19-EX1; 5912-19-EX2; 5912-19-EX3; 5912-19-EX4; 5912-19-2-B; 5912-19-3-B; 5912-19-3; 5912-19-4-B; 5912-19-3B; 5912-19-6; 5912-19-LBP-D

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

3.     Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted, a detailed scheme for sound insulation within party walls and floors between the commercial and residential units, designed to achieve a sound insulation value of 5dB better than that required by Approved Document E performance standard for airborne sound insulation for floors and walls of purpose built dwelling-houses and flats, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be installed  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL20/28.

PL20/29.

Revision to the Planning Scheme of Delegation and Other Related Changes pdf icon PDF 242 KB

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Head of Strategy and Planning which detailed proposed changes to the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to remove the ‘Notified D’ process and enhance the weekly list. 

 

The proposed changes were mainly a consequence of new legislation and resource issues within the Planning Department.  As part of the Rother 2020 efficiency programme, the planning application process had been subject to a lean and demand review which had identified small process and software improvements.  However, recruitment of planning professionals was still a significant issue for the Council and as a result of under resources, a back-log of work had accumulated which had been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

All applications were subject to a rigorous validation progress.  Members were advised that, at present, 43% of applications were incomplete.  Delays were generally caused by applications not being submitted with the correct information.  To try to reduce the volume of invalid applications, officers were in the process of contacting and working with all local agents.

 

The report detailed the current procedure of the ‘Notified D’ process which was introduced in the early 1990s and considered no longer fit for purpose.  The Council’s Constitution stipulated a 2-phase delegation system to officers, as follows:

 

·       Phase 1 – simple delegation on non-contentious proposals and processed within the statutory 8-week determination period.

·       Phase 2 – complex and resource intensive process, which inevitably resulted in a request for an extension.

 

Since inception, the ‘Notified D’ reports had become increasingly complex which was over burdening the Planning Department with additional work and proved little benefit to the decision-making process.  It was considered that an enhanced weekly list issued to Councillors performed the same function more efficiently and allowed Members to discuss and call-in applications. 

 

After discussion, Members approved the removal of the ‘Notified D’ report and insertion of an enhanced weekly list and agreed that the Council’s Constitution be amended accordingly.  It was also agreed that from the week following the statutory publicity period (and before the close off period for calling in applications), case officers would be required to advise Members of the direction of travel e.g. the intended recommendation (approval or refusal) of each application where Members requested that information and the new system be reviewed in six months from the date of implementation.  

 

RESOLVED: That:  

 

1)     the officer scheme of delegation in respect of the Planning Service be amended by the removal of the ‘Notified D’ report process and the insertion of an enhanced weekly list process as set out in the report;

 

2)     the Council’s Constitution be amended accordingly;

 

3)     from the week following the statutory publicity period (and before the close off period for calling in applications), case officers would be required to advise Members of the direction of travel e.g. the intended recommendation (approval or refusal) of each application where Members requested that information; and

 

4)     the system be reviewed in six months from the date of implementation.

 

 

 

PL20/30.

Appeals pdf icon PDF 125 KB

Minutes:

Members noted the report on Appeals that had been started, allowed or dismissed since the Committee’s last meeting, together with the list of forthcoming Hearings and Inquiries.

 

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

PL20/31.

To note the date and time for future Site Inspections

Tuesday 8 September 2020 at 8:30am departing from the Town Hall, Bexhill.

Minutes:

Tuesday 13 October 2020 at 8:30am departing from the Town Hall, Bexhill.