Rother District Council s5

Rother District Council

PLANNING COMMITTEE

14 August 2008

Minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held at the Town Hall, Bexhill-on-Sea on Thursday 14 August 2008 at 9.30 am.

Committee Members present: Councillors B. Kentfield (Chairman), C.N. Ramus, (Vice Chairman), P.R. Douart, M.S. Forster, Mrs J.P. Gadd (ex-officio), G.E.S. Hearn, Mrs S.I. Holmes, Mrs J.M. Hughes, P.G. Lendon, Mrs W.M. Miers, R.E. Parren, D.W.L.M. Vereker and Mrs D.C. Williams.

Other Members present: Councillors A.E. Ganly (in part), C.R. Maynard (in part) and Mrs S.M. Prochak (in part).

Advisory Officers in attendance: Head of Planning, Development Control Manager, Team Leader (West) Development Control and Democratic Services Officer.

Also present: 16 members of the public and a member of the local press.

PL08/27. MINUTES

The Chairman was authorised to sign the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 17 July 2008 as a correct record of the proceedings.

PL08/28. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Mrs B.A. George.

DECISIONS TAKEN UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

PL08/29. PLANNING APPLICATIONS

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 3 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 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 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 shown in Appendix A attached hereto.

PL08/30. PLANNING OBLIGATIONS

RESOLVED: That in relation to the applications below:

a) the Interim Solicitor be authorised to prepare a Planning Obligation under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in respect of the matters indicated; and

b) power be delegated to the Head of Planning, exercisable upon execution of the Obligation to the satisfaction of the Interim Solicitor, to grant permission subject to the conditions stated.

(1) RR/2006/2441/P PENHURST NORTH END AND HIGH RIDGE, PENHURST LANE

DEMOLITION OF TWO EXISTING DWELLINGS AND REPLACEMENT WITH A SINGLE TWO STOREY DETACHED FAMILY DWELLING INCLUDING DORMER WINDOWS AND PROVISION OF THREE CAR PARKING SPACES

Panaphur Charitable Trust

Statutory 8 week date: 25 July 2008

RESOLVED: That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Obligation to extinguish rights to re-build the cottages and a single dwelling only on the site, the decision be delegated to the Head of Planning to grant full planning permission, subject to the following conditions:

1. CD1A (Standard time limit)

2. CD9H (External materials – Insert A (a), Insert B (a) (Reason as for CD9G Insert a)

3. The external weatherboard cladding shall be of timber feather edged type only painted white and thereafter maintained in that condition unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: as CD9G Insert a)

4. CD6B (Foul and Surface water details)

5. The existing roadside hedge shall be retained at a minimum height of not less than 1.5m. In the event of the hedge dying, being removed or becoming seriously damaged or diseased a replacement hedge of similar species shall be planted unless the Local Planning Authority gives consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure that the development does not detract from the character and appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1 (iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan 2006 and policy S1(j) of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011.

6. CD7T (Bin/Recycling provision). Insert b).

Reason: Insert b).

Note: ND7 (S106 Planning Obligation) – Extinguish rights to rebuild and single dwelling only on the site

REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The proposed development is for a replacement dwelling of an appropriate size design that will not adversely affect the character of the area and therefore complies with Policy HG10 and GD1 of the Rother District Local Plan (March 2006).

View application/correspondence

(2) RR/2008/1492/P ICKLESHAM WEATHERCOCK HOUSE, WINDMILL LANE

REPLACEMENT DWELLING AND DETACHED CARPORT.

Ms V Greenwood

Statutory 8 week date: 16 July 2008

RESOLVED: That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Obligation to extinguish the rights to rebuild the existing dwelling, the decision be delegated to the Head of Planning to grant full planning permission, subject to the following conditions:

1. CD1A (Time limit)

2. CD9H (Materials) [Insert a – details] [Insert b – building]

3. CD6B (Drainage details)

4. CD8M (Restriction on Permitted Development)

Reason: Countryside reason.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension to the house as constructed or any other external alterations or additions, including the insertion of any additional windows, shall take place without the grant of a further permission.

Reason: To ensure that the quality and finish of the property is appropriate to the size, scale and design of the property which is being accepted as an example of innovative contemporary architecture having regard to Policy GD1(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan and Policies S1(f)(j), EN2 and EN3 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011.

6. Prior to any development on site the existing property shall be demolished and all materials removed from site. There shall be one dwelling only within the site shown edged in red on the approved plan.

Reason: To enable the local planning authority to regulate and control the development of land and prevent the construction of residential dwellings within countryside locations in accordance with Policy HG10(i) of the Rother District Local Plan.

REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The larger replacement dwelling has been critically assessed having regard to Polices GD1 and HG10 of the Rother District Local Plan and Policies S1, EN2 and EN3 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011. The replacement dwelling, while of a greater size and contemporary style, will make a positive architectural contribution to the locality than the plain two storey dwelling existing at present which contributes nothing to the character of the area. It can therefore be justified in terms of the exception in Policy HG10 and its visual impact upon the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty will not be any greater than that of the existing two storey property.

View application/correspondence

PL08/31. ENFORCEMENT MATTERS

The following enforcement matter was reported:

1) Pett – Stonewalls, Cliff End, Pett Level – Erection of wall in excess of 2 metres in height.

RESOLVED: That the matter be deferred for a site inspection.

PL08/32. APPEALS

Members noted the monthly report on Appeals which had been allowed, dismissed or lodged since the Committee’s last meeting. It was noted that the Head of Planning was in the process or reviewing the Report on Appeals and Enforcement Notices and would report back to the Committee.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

PL08/33. HIGH HEDGES - HG/08/001 - Battle Sunnyrise - Reduce hedge height to 11 m above ground level, excluding Scots Pine Trees within the hedge

A complaint had been made under the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 about a high hedge situated on land to the north of Sunnyrise, North Trade Road, Battle. The complainant had alleged the hedge in its present state blocked out light to the adjacent gardens and dwellings. Given the condition of the trees, it was considered a reduction in height to 11 m, just over 50% of the total height of the tree, should be possible without killing the trees. The trees would then be 8 m above ground level of the Sunnyrise site and approximately the same height of the roof line of the development.

RESOLVED: That the Interim Solicitor be authorised to issue a Remedial Notice under section 69 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 in relation to the hedge between Sunnyrise, North Trade Road, Battle and land immediately to the north of this site as referred to in the report and take any other steps necessary including legal action under section 75 and direct action under section 77 of the Act.

PL08/34. DATE FOR SITE INSPECTIONS – Tuesday 9 September 2008 at 8.30am departing from the Town Hall, Bexhill.

CHAIRMAN

The meeting closed at 13.28 pm pl080814.cmt

PLANNING COMMITTEE 14 AUGUST 2008 APPENDIX A

(RO = Reversed by Officer; RM = Reversed by Member)

RR/2008/1769/P BEXHILL 17A EVERSLEY ROAD

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE STOREY SHOP. ERECTION OF BLOCK OF 3 FLATS WITH TWO SHOPS/A1 ON GROUND FLOOR.

Mr Dunn

Statutory 8 week date: 11 August 2008

DECISION: REFUSE (FULL PLANNING)

1. The site is restricted in area and the proposed development constitutes over development of the land in terms of the mass of the building and its near total site coverage. The mass of the building, combined with its close proximity to the rear windows of adjacent flats in Eversley Road and St Leonards Road, would harm the residential amenities of the respective occupiers by creating an enclosed and oppressive outlook and loss of light. The proposed development is contrary to Policy GD1(ii)(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.

2. The proposed number of residential units is excessive, being mindful of the restricted site area, and constitutes an over development of the land. Furthermore, the amount of floor space within each unit is restricted and in the case of Unit 2 (studio), falls below an acceptable standard. The proposed development is contrary to Policy GD1(i) of the Rother District Local Plan.

3. The proposed development does not make adequate provision for accommodating bins for the storage and recycling of refuse within the site. The proposed development is contrary to Policy S1(i) of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011 and paragraph 20 of PPS1.

4. The proposal does not provide for adequate parking facilities within the site which would result in additional congestion on the public highway causing interference with the free flow and safety of traffic and would therefore be contrary to Policy TR3 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011 and Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.

View application/correspondence

RR/2008/1770/H BEXHILL 17A EVERSLEY ROAD

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE STOREY SHOP

Mr C Dunn

Statutory 8 week date: 11 August 2008

DECISION: REFUSE (CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT)

1. The local planning authority has considered Government advice, relating to ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’, contained within PPG15 at paragraphs 4.27 and 4.29. It is considered that the proposal conflicts with those provisions of PPG15, in that it would allow demolition of a building within a Conservation Area where acceptable and detailed plans for any redevelopment of the site have not been granted. Moreover, no appropriate scheme has been provided for an interim reclamation and screening/landscaping of the site pending suitable redevelopment proposals.

View application/correspondence

COUNCILLOR C.N. RAMUS IN THE CHAIR

RR/2008/1866/P BEXHILL PICARDY, 1 HOLMESDALE ROAD

CHANGE OF USE FROM ANCILLARY SUMMERHOUSE/ HOME OFFICE TO OFFICE.

Mr A Green

Statutory 8 week date: 19 August 2008

DECISION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING)

1. CD1G (Temporary permission) [Insert b] [Date – 3 years] Amend – replace ‘land’ with ‘building’

Reason: a. [Insert – Use] Policy GD1 and S1(f)

2. CD8K (Personal Permission) [Insert – Mr Andrew Green] 3 years

Reason: To prevent a general business use from operating in the building, which may have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy GD1(ii) of the Rother District Local Plan, and Policy S1(f) of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011.

3. The use hereby permitted shall only be carried out in the building between the hours of 08:30 and 17:30 Monday to Friday.

Reason: To preserve the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy GD1(ii) of the Rother District Local Plan, and Policy S1(f) of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011.

4. The use shall be limited to a maximum number of four people working in the building at any time.

REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The current operation does not have a significant detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or represent a significant increase in traffic generated to the site. As such the proposal meets the objectives of Policies GD1(ii) and EM6 of the Rother District Local Plan, and Policy S1(f) of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011.