Welcome to the large text version of Birdham Parish Council website. If you are here by mistake please follow this link to return to the standard layout.
Welcome to the dyslexia friendly version of Birdham Parish Council website. If you are here by mistake please follow this link to return to the standard layout.
Welcome to the Non Styling version of Birdham Parish Council website. If you are here by mistake please follow this link to return to the standard layout.

Planning Matters 7th June 2016

The following planning applications and delegated decisions have just been received. Any representation should be received at CDC by the 28th June 2017. APPLICATIONS BI/17/01382/FUL - Mr Paul Hughes Plot 12... read more »

Birdham Parish Council > Minutes > Minutes of Council of the 19th July 2010

Minutes of Council of the 19th July 2010

Birdham Parish Council

Minutes of the Meeting of the Council

held on Monday 19th July 2010

at 7pm in Birdham Village Hall

Present:      Cllr Meynell (Chairman), Cllr Mrs Parks (Vice-Chairman), Cllr Tilbury, Cllr Mrs Barker, Cllr Ms Huskisson, Cllr Mrs Leach, Cllr Mrs Cobbold

Apologies: Cllr N Way

Absent: Cllr Churchill

In attendance:         The Clerk, Cllr P Montyn (WSCC & CDC) and six members of the public.

35-10 Declarations of Interests

The Chairman declared a prejudicial in Planning Application BI/10/02569/DOM as he is the applicant’s agent.

36-10  Urgent/Additional items notified to the Chairman or the Clerk prior to the meeting.

There were none.

37-10 Minutes of the meeting held on the 21st June 2010

.Resolved: that the minutes of the 21st June 2010 be signed as a true and accurate record.

Proposed by Cllr Parks and seconded by Cllr Tilbury

38-10   Matters arising from the Minutes

i) Land Bequeathed to the council – The Clerk reported that he had received a copy of a letter written by our solicitors to the Bolithio Way Solicitor demanding responses within 1 week or be reported to the Law Society. This had produced a response albeit an excuse blaming the Land Registry Office delays. Our solicitors have been instructed to write requesting the dates that applications had been made to the LRO. Nothing further has been heard at this point.

39 -10 Clerks’ Report:

i) The Clerk had received a document from WSCC which gives good advice and guidance on producing a Local Winter Management Plan. During the summer recess he would give some consideration to the document to determine what information and action needed to be dealt with prior to the onset of winter. This document was produced as a recommendation from the ‘Snow Summit’

ii) A document entitled ‘Transforming Youth Services Review’ has been received which makes for some very interesting reading. It would appear that a number of ‘departments’ would be transferred into one single entity which would have a requirement to work closely with other agencies to maximise resources.

iii) WSCC Trees and Woodlands Officer – Julie Bolton had emailed requesting that we try to find a replacement tree warden for Birdham.

It was resolved that an advertisement should be placed on the web site.

iv) No reports have been received from CDC.

v) Reports from Members of WSCC/CDC

Cllr Montyn reported that both the WSCC and CDC were working extremely hard to ensure that budgets matched the expected reduction in funding levels. It did mean that fewer services would be available of a non-statutory nature but that statutory service levels should not deteriorate.

On the subject of Youth Services this had come before the Scrutiny Committee of WSCC and had been referred back to the originating department for more work as no conclusion had been reached.

There was to be a public consultation carried out by CDC on the subject of public conveniences and possible closures of some.

It was confirmed that the current work on the LDF had been suspended pending further information from Central Government, but the number of houses required and being produced was not that different from the proposed LDF.

The sewage works at Apuldram are a cause for concern but, as yet no statutory authority had confirmed that there was a problem.

Cllr Tilbury said that Birdham Parish Council had written expressing the Councils concerns about services levels currently in force at Apuldram Sewage Works and the likelihood of the works being able to deal with projected numbers of new build that had been proposed in the LDF.

Cllr Tilbury also posed the question ‘did the Local Plan remain in force whilst the LDF was suspended’ Cllr Montyn answered that this was indeed the situation.

40-10  Affordable Housing

The Chairman invited Cllr Tilbury together with CDC Officer Sam Irving to give a presentation on the subject of affordable housing as it affected Birdham. Cllr Tilbury briefly outlined the work of the Council on the subject of Affordable Housing and then handed the floor to Sam Irving the CDC Rural Housing Enabler.

Mr Irving went on to describe the type of housing and the need in Birdham. Currently there are sixty families on the housing list and thirty one with priority needs. A review is currently underway to determine the accurate numbers. There is also encouragement for those who are in larger properties who may no longer require a large property to downsize thus freeing up some larger properties.

So far of the eighteen sites that have been appraised in Birdham seventeen have been discounted as unsuitable. So far one site, to the west of Crooked lane, has been identified. Working with Hyde Martlet it is proposed that thirteen homes will be build on this site with a rural design and style, they would also be a mix of sizes to reflect the requirement of the Parish.

As the development would be on an exceptional site none of the properties would or could ever be sold and would be occupied by families from, or had a connection to, Birdham.

Mr Irving produced drawings and designs for a comparable site in West Wittering and went on to say that CDC were keen to acquire the site and would be going to consultation in due course. He also requested in principle support from the Parish Council to pursue this course of action further.

Resolved to support, in principle, the development of the site to the west of Crooked Lane, for Rural Housing.

Proposed by Cllr Tilbury and seconded by Cllr Huskisson.

Members of the public raised concerns about the track leading to the site. Mr Irving said that so far investigations had suggested there were no problems that could not be overcome and that the Statutory Authority have provided indicative and favourable comments but, that other options may have to be considered.

41-10  Planning matters including CDC decisions:

The Chairman repeated his declaration of interest and left the room leaving the meeting in the control of the Vice Chair Cllr Mrs Parks.

Applications

BI/10/024383/FUL Land south of Seldens, Bell Lane, Birdham

Cllr Mrs Cobbold declared a personal interest in this application as she is a neighbour of the applicant.

This is an amended application following the refusal of the Development Control Committee (South) to allow the previous application for this site BI/10/00321/FUL. After considerable discussion, and against the recommendation of the Officer, the Committee refused the previous application because  “The proposed stables, by reason of their nature, siting and smell arising, would be detrimental to the reasonable amenity of adjacent residential properties, and would therefore be in conflict with policies BE11 and RE6 of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999”. It was clear at the time that the Committee had considerable sympathy with the arguments put forward by the owner of the property to the north east, Mr Grist.  The Committee stated that the prevailing wind from the south west would mean that the urine and manure smells from this development would be blown directly towards the adjacent property. If the stables had existed before the property this would have been acceptable, as the property owner would have known the risk, but in this case the stables were being built many years after the property and it was therefore unreasonable. Policy RE6 also refers to objections concerning the closing of the rural gap on the west side of Bell Lane which this development would cause.

This amended application attempts to deal with this situation by new planting between the stables and the house. It appears to us that this will make no difference at all to the matters of concern to the Committee and the Council therefore maintains its OBJECTIONS stated in its responses of the 24th February and the 8th March, including those on drainage.

BI/10/02561/FUL & BI/10/02560/LBC Lippering Farm, Birdham

Lippering Farm and the adjacent barn which is the subject of this application are Grade II listed buildings outside the Birdham Built-Up Area and within the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. As such, Policies RE4, BE4 and BE5 are particularly relevant here but also T1 and RE14 (part 3) because of the nature of the proposal. The views of the Conservation Officer are particularly relevant here too.

We have visited the site which is immediately adjacent to the main Lippering Farm house. The barn is accurately described in the application and its exterior will be altered  by the insertion of some extra and some replacement doors and windows and a double course of brickwork to raise the roof. We are satisfied therefore that there will be no visual intrusion into the AONB nor any interference with the setting of the listed Farmhouse itself.

The applicant is sensitive to the architecture and history of the barn and accepts that the additional doors and windows will have to be designed to the highest conservation standards. We assured ourselves that pvc will not be used for any of these. Internally, the beam structure of the existing roof will be maintained. The raising of the floor level, to avoid flood risk, means that the roof will be raised but the plan is to strip the existing roof, raise the walls by two courses of brickwork and then put back the roof structure with new felt and battening but using the existing Welsh slates, replacing any broken ones with the same type. We do not believe that these additional brick courses will detract from thearchitectural integrity of the building. We are satisfied that the quality of the alterations can be secured by conditions where necessary, in consultation with the Conservation Officer. We recommend that the entrance doors should be of suitable obscure glass as they face directly towards the main entrance to the Farmhouse and an adjacent conservatory.

The Local Plan has a presumption in favour of holiday accommodation and we believe that this development satisfies Policy T1 in that it is appropriate to its location and causes no environmental harm. There is plenty of parking space and the extra traffic using the slightly difficult exit onto the main road at this point would not be a problem since it will be one or two cars only.

We would wish there to be a condition that this development cannot be sold separately from the main Farm house.

The Council has NO OBJECTION to this application.

BI/10/02559/FUL Teals, Lock Lane, Birdham

These revised plans differ very little from those previously submitted and upon which the Council has already commented. Some amendments have been made to the first floor windows and although the Council continues to feel that the architectural millinery of this application is still a little excessive it raises NO OBJECTION to these revisions.

BI/10/02615/DOM Land south of Manhood End Farm, Birdham

We were provided with no site history with this application but it appears that the planning permission granted in 2000 (00/02704/REM) was allowed to run out and new permission was sought in 2006 (06/03232/FUL) and granted on the 22nd September 2006 with a condition that work should start within three years. The applicant claims that work started on the site on the 17th September 2009, five days before the expiry, or alternatively that the laying of a water main and the provision of access constituted a start at an earlier date. The Parish Council expressed doubts about this development in 2006 as it lies outside the Built-Up Area for Birdham and within the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but these doubts were not considered sufficiently material by the Planning Authority. The present application is for an amendment to the porch and a 50mm increase in the exterior dimensions of the building to accommodate better insulation. Our interpretation of Policy RE4, paragraphs one and five, continues to differ from that of the Authority but we can find no grounds, in view of past decisions, to object to these present amendments. The Council raises NO OBJECTION.

BI/10/02569/DOM Broomfield, Lock Lane, Birdham

Note: The applicant’s Agent is the Chairman of Birdham Parish Council. He has at no point been involved in any discussion on this application.

This is an application to replace a redundant caravan in a field owned by the applicant but to the rear of an adjacent property and to replace it with an open fronted storage facility with a footprint of 34.85 square metres and 2.5 metres maximum height under a green roof. It will be shielded visually from the property Trade Winds by the existing 3.2 metre high hedge which will be extended to provide the same protection to Willow End. Obviously the maintenance and height of these hedges must be secured by condition. Similarly, to protect the amenity of the neighbours, we would like to see a condition which would preclude any noisy engineering work being carried out in the store.

The Council has NO OBJECTION to this application.

BI/10/02410/FUL Houseboat “Coot Club”, Chichester Marina, Birdham

This is a retrospective application for the replacement of the houseboat “Coot Club” at Chichester Marina. The replacement is 9.4 square metres larger than the boat it replaces ad 280mm higher because it is on pontoon floats.

We note that the Site Plan shows the site extending from the boat onto the adjacent bank of the Canal. From previous applications and discussions with Premier Marinas, who are the lessees of the Canal at this point from West Sussex County Council, we know that there is some dispute as to whether the houseboat owners have any rights on the bank other than access.

The new houseboat is to a standard design ad we are satisfied that the location causes no problems , that the materials are acceptable in the context of the other boats on the Canal and that no loss of amenity will occur for other boat owners or residents in nearby properties.

The Council therefore raises NO OBJECTION to this application.

It was Resolved that the Clerk be instructed to forward the decisions of the Council to the Planning Department of CDC.

Proposed by Cllr Tilbury and seconded by Cllr Parks

CDC Decisions

BI/10/01704/FUL Mr Cal Leach Houseboat Iris Chichester Marina Birdham

Replacement of existing 2 bed houseboat with newly built 2 bed houseboat.

PERMIT

BI/10/01871/DOM Mr And Mrs M Oliver The Moorings Westlands Estate Birdham

Part demolition of garage and construction of two storey side extension and first floor extension, over existing flat roof of dwelling. WITHDRAWN

BI/10/01107/DOM Mr W Ahern The Old Poorhouse Alandale Road Birdham

Single storey extensions to existing single storey dwelling on 0.10 ha site and erection of carport. PERMIT

BI/10/01660/FUL Mr & Mrs L. Van Rooyen Creek Cottage Westlands Estate Birdham

Demolition of existing house and construction of a replacement dwelling. PERMIT

BI/10/02247/DOM Mr Stephen Martin 3 Whitestone Farm Cottages Main Road Birdham

Two storey side extension and single storey rear extension. PERMIT

BI/10/02327/DOM Mr S Scott Old Cottage Row Hundredsteddle Lane Birdham

Erection of a single storey summerhouse. PERMIT

42-10 Correspondence:

i)             A letter has now been received from Mr Harding of Birdham Pool Marina in response to the Clerks letter concerning the dilapidation of the Birdham Tidal Mill.

ii)            A letter from the Chichester District Association of Local Councils notifying this Council of the Associations continuity.

It was resolved that the Chairman should attend all future meetings as Birdham Parish Council representative.

43-10 Reports:

i)      Play area and playing field – The Clerk reported that the work to fencing around the play area had been carried out by Knights Fencing as have the repairs to the slide.

RoSPA had also carried out a safety inspection on the play area and have indicated that some work needs to be carried out but, is not of immediate concern. This could be carried forward to 2011/12 budget for consideration.

ii)     Village green and pond – Although training has been carried out and a full survey was made on the pond the results and recommendations have not yet been received. Emails and telephone calls have been made but, the promised report has not yet been received.

RoSPA, as part of their contract with the Parish Council have also carried out an inspection on the pond. Again no immediate action was required but, some recommendations where made which should be carried out at the appropriate time.

iii)    Police and Neighbourhood Watch – PCSO Ann Bromley gave her apologies and asked that the Clerk deliver her report.

44-10 Finance:

A financial paper had been prepared by the Clerk and was circulated to Councillors. This showed:

Balances held at Bank: £50552.83

Designated Funds: £25746.04

Creditors: £1480.02

Resolved: To accept the financial report.

Proposed by Cllr Tilbury and seconded by Cllr Parks.

The Clerk requested that his salary be placed on a standing order with the bank.

Resolved that the Clerks salary be paid by standing order.

Proposed Cllr Meynell seconded Cllr Huskisson

45-10 Web Site

Deferred

46-10 Reports from Councillors attending meetings

Cllr Cobbold reported that she had attended a presentation of Medmerry

Cllr Tilbury showed a plan of the dykes and new rifes that the Environment Agency are planning for the Medmerry area

47-10 Public session:

There were none

48-10 Items for inclusion on the Agenda for the next meeting

There being no further business to be dealt with the meeting closed at 9.06 pm

Signed ___________________________   Dated ____________________

Chairman