Members had visited the site which was situated within the town and development boundary of Bexhill behind residential properties fronting Eastwood Road, Little Common Road and Chandler Road.  The site was of an irregular shape and measured approximately 0.27 hectares with vehicular access between Nos. 14 and 16 Eastwood Road.  The site was previously used as employment space for a print works.  Permission was previously granted to provide 14 dwellings on the site, with access parking and drainage.

The proposal was to vary a number of conditions relating to planning permission RR/2018/2052/P namely to raise the rear gardens by approximately 0.6m to reduce the amount of excavation material to be taken to landfill.  Consideration was given to updated information received which was circulated to Members prior to the meeting.

The Committee considered the comments submitted by the Lead Local Flood Authority who was satisfied that the flood risk could be managed effectively.  They also heard comments from the local Ward Member who expressed a number of concerns.  The discussion focused on overlooking issues e.g. height of retaining walls to the neighbouring properties, contaminated materials not being excavated and the potential health effects on residents, as well as surface water drainage.

Councillor Langlands moved the motion to refuse (full planning) and this was seconded by Councillor Thomas.  The motion was declared CARRIED (11 for / 1 against).

Members considered that raising the garden levels of the new properties would increase overlooking, due to the relative increase in levels compared with existing neighbouring gardens and the taller walling and fencing, attempting to mitigate this would impact outlook and amenity of neighbouring properties, as a result of taller and more imposing fence panelling. This would unacceptably harm neighbouring residential amenities. Members also considered that the proposed retaining walls, which include ‘weeping holes’, would increase the risk of contaminated surface water flooding onto the boundary footpath and into neighbouring gardens.  Therefore, the Committee considered that the application should be refused.

DECISION: REFUSE (FULL PLANNING)

REASONS FOR REFUSAL:

1.               The proposed amendments will raise the level of the rear gardens by approximately 600mm. Such a change will increase garden levels relative to existing neighbouring residential properties increasing overlooking.  Furthermore, the proposed solution to mitigate this would result in taller and more imposing walls and boundary fencing which would negatively impact on the outlook and amenity enjoyed by those neighbouring properties.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy OSS4 (ii) of the Rother District Local Plan Core Strategy.

2.               The retaining walls required to facilitate the proposed raised garden levels will include ‘weeping holes’ which, now that contaminated material is being retained on site, will allow for an increased risk of contaminated surface water running onto the alleyways and access passages surrounding the development and into neighbouring residential gardens.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies OSS3 (viii) and OSS4 (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan Core Strategy and Policy DEN7 of the emerging Development and Site Allocations Local Plan.

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK:  In accordance with the requirements of the Framework (paragraph 38) and with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and clearly setting out the reasons for refusal, thereby allowing the Applicant the opportunity to consider the harm caused and whether or not it can be remedied as part of a revised scheme.