Adopted minutes of the Planning Committee Meeting held on the 14th October 2013
Birdham Parish Council
Minutes of the Planning Committee
held on Monday 14th October 2013
at 7pm in Birdham Village Hall
Present: Cllr Grafham (Chairman), Cllr Barker, Cllr Hamilton and Cllr Ayton
Ex-Officio: Cllr Finch (Chairman of Council), Cllr Cobbold (Vice Chairman of Council)
Apologies: Cllr Churchill
In attendance: The Clerk, Cllr Montyn (WSCC & CDC), Cllr Marshall (CDC) and 30 members of the public
P6-13 Declarations of Interests:
Cllr Grafham declared a personal interest in application BI/13/01391/FUL
P7-13 Planning Correspondence:
The Clerk read out a letter that he had received from The Hyde Group dated the 7th August 2013 and his reply dated the 15th August 2013
P8-13 Planning Applications – To be decided upon:
BI/13/02832/DOM Mr R Felton Harbour House 22 Greenacres Birdham
This is an application to renew the extant application BI/10/04721/DOM previously permitted.
The Parish Council raised No Objection to this application.
BI/13/03100/FUL Pinks Four Bell Lane Birdham
This is a retrospective planning application for a replacement extension to an existing railway carriage and the replacement of an existing septic tank.
The Parish Council raised concerns against this application due to reports of untreated waste being discharged into the local ditch system. It is requested that should the application be approved that a site visit is carried out by Building Control or Environmental Health Officers to ensure that the waste digester is operating correctly. The Parish Council would also like to see an enforceable condition placed on the property to prevent the building being used as living accommodation or being sold as such.
With the concerns raised above being satisfied by the PA, Birdham Parish Council would raise No Objection to this application.
BI/13/01391/FUL The Hyde Group Field north west of the Saltings, Crooked Lane Birdham
Members of the public were permitted to ask questions should they wish to do so and a summary of those questions and points are as below;
Old Common Close and Tawny Nursery sites had been agreed therefore the dynamic had changed and the need for an H9 site was no longer a requirement. Equally Hyde had other sites within 2 miles and it would seem that the whole concept is driven by funding.
Strange to want to build in Crooked Lane why not build opposite Pipers Mead?
It was pointed out that the Parish Council had objected previously and could see no reason to change.
Feedback is available that clearly requires care homes not residential.
Traffic build up is a cause for concern. Even the school has raised concerns and commented on the CDC web site. Main concern is the access road is right opposite the school.
Children crossing the road will make things far more dangerous.
Cumulative impact on the Peninsula has become really uncomfortable and has made the locality a less desirable one in which to live.
There should be no more building until such time as the strategic services had been addressed, preventing the flooding and sewage problems that have been experienced in the very recent past.
Look on the web site and measure the response, no one wants it.
The area is on the SHLAA and has an indication of 41 properties.
What happens to vehicles accessing the site when a vehicle is met by another trying to exit the site on a single track lane?
Councillor comments were then added to the debate as under;
Cllr Finch wished to support an H9 site and was annoyed with Hyde for offering only one site. Liked the design, but felt that problems with the access track had not been sufficiently addressed. She said that she would have preferred to have seen this as part of the Neighbourhood Plan.
Cllr Ayton suggested that other sites should have been looked at. The access was the major concern. Flooding had not been properly addressed. There are no longer any places left in the school and the nursery school is increasing in size. He felt the letter from the Head was very powerful.
Cllr Barker said that she agreed with most things that had been said and that nothing had fundamentally changed since June.
Cllr Hamilton was unsure of how many affordable housing sites would be available once the agreed applications were built and asked if we actually need the additional H9 site. She went on to say that at least one authority in Sussex had lost the right to decide planning applications which are now being decided by Government.
Cllr Cobbold said that she was very disappointed that the situation appeared to be against those who could not buy properties and were having problems find accommodation in their own village. The single track aspect did not concern her as she lived in a small community that was fed by a single track road and had experienced no problems. She went on to say that in her opinion the largest impact was on the AONB which should be protected. The design was very good and would have been welcomed anywhere else in the village. To achieve the same number of affordable homes would mean that a larger number of market value homes would have to be built with the increase in problems associated with the development. Any loss to the wider community was negligible whereas building anywhere on the manhood to achieve the same aim would require considerably more buildings and the associated problems they would bring. It was also worth reminding people that the development would be for local people in perpetuity. We should be looking after those people who are perhaps less able to do so themselves.
Cllr Grafham said that he had taken on board all that had been said and the time and trouble that had been engendered by this application. He was very concerned about the access road and the very real dangers that it presented and whilst he accepted that WSCC considered the track as acceptable he felt that just one accident to a child was one too many. He was also very concerned about the impact on strategic services.
This is an application to develop 15 affordable housing units on an H9 Exception site.
The site is outside of the existing SPA and well within the boundary of the Chichester Harbour Conservation Area AONB. The harbour is of national and international importance for nature conservation. It is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a wetland of international importance, a Special Protection Area for wild birds and a candidate Special Area of Conservation. The Harbour is of particular significance for wintering wildfowl and waders some of which are internationally important.
Whilst the Parish Council applaud the redesign it was felt that the access track, both its use during the construction phase and subsequent occupation of the properties, created an unacceptable risk to both children and parents using the school which is almost directly opposite the track access and in addition increases the risk to other road users and pedestrians. It is accepted the risk element during non-school hours and holidays is reduced.
The GM Traffic Consultants in their report dated January 2013 stated at paragraph 1.1.7 of their report they had only carried out a desktop study followed by a site visit on 15th January 2013. Whilst they do not state at what time they carried out the site visit it could be reasonably concluded that it was not during the school drop off times or the end of the school day.
In addition the school has recently added the Nursery School to the campus which has significantly increased the numbers dropping off and picking up at the end of the school day as well as adding a third dimension of very small children who attend the nursery either during the morning or the afternoon sessions only but, not all day.
Whilst Birdham Parish Council continues to recognise the need for affordable housing in Birdham it feels that it must OBJECT to this application for the reason given.
It was resolved to authorise the Clerk to inform DC Planning of the decisions made.
P9-13. Decisions – To be noted.
i) BI/13/00389/DOM Mr S Grant Coppice Barn Church Lane Birdham
Replacement of redundant outbuilding with new studio and games room. PERMIT
ii) BI/13/01683/TCA Mr Bob Hudson West Bell House Bell Lane Birdham
Notification of intention to fell 1 no. Willow tree. NOT TO PREPARE A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER
P10-13 Date of next meeting – TBA
There being no further business to discuss the meeting closed at 8.15pm
Signed ___________________________ Dated ____________________