Scaffolding roof at Unit 18a Durban Road, Bognor Regis

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Arun Planning Committee on 24 Jun 2026.

BR/19/26/PLApproved

What was proposed

The application proposed a scaffolding frame with translucent corrugated UPVC roofing within a recessed courtyard of an existing commercial building.

“DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATIONThis application seeks to erect a roof structure consisting of scaffolding and translucent corrugated UPVC roofing within a recess of the existing building. SITE CHARACTERISTICSThe site comprises a recessed 'courtyard' area to the southern side of the existing single-storey brick-built commercial units on site. It is entirely hardstanding and benefits from a lawful, historic, industrial use (formerly B1, now Class E(g)).”

Officer report

Earlier site history

Earlier permission allowed the site and an adjacent unit to operate for light engineering under the former B1 use.

“BR/72/96 granted permission for the use of the site and Unit 18 adjacent, as a B1 (industrial) use. REPRESENTATIONS Bognor Regis Town Council (BRTC) - No objection (10/04/26): - Subject to the development being strictly time-limited and removed upon completion of the works.”

Officer report

What consultees and neighbours said

The Town Council objected to the permanent scaffolding design, while a neighbouring business raised concerns about light, ventilation, drainage access and parking.

“Bognor Regis Town Council - Objection (08/05/26): - The design, appearance, materials and form would result in an unsympathetic and visually intrusive addition to the building and street scene. - The proposals rely on scaffolding construction and associated materials which are not appropriate as a permanent feature.”

“Objection from the neighbouring premises: - Concerns regarding the loss of light and ventilation, in particular, to the kitchen, toilets, and office. - Windows could no longer be opened into the courtyard area. - The site contains a main sewage drain cover serving multiple businesses, which must remain accessible at all times for maintenance or blockages. - Concerns regarding additional parking pressures from an additional business unit.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent was listed as the public speaker for the application.

Members considered the proposal

Officers explained the structure’s limited visibility and commercial setting, and members raised no comments before the vote.

“The Planning Team Leader introduced the application, describing it as a scaffolding structure forming a covered route. He explained that the structure was located within the red line boundary shown on the plan, with the wider land ownership outlined in blue. The scaffold structure itself was identified as the pink shaded area within that red boundary and clarified that it did not include the grey area shown to the front.”

“The Planning Team Leader noted that, while the structure was functional in appearance, it would be largely screened from public view by an existing roller shutter door, with only limited views of the roof projecting above. He further advised that the site was located within a commercial business park setting, where the character of the area was not considered sensitive.”

Minutes

The vote

A councillor proposed approval, another seconded it, and the committee then voted to approve the application conditionally.

“The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Partridge and seconded by Councillor Blanchard-Cooper.”

“That the application be APPROVED CONDITIONALLY.”

Minutes

The permission conditions

Permission required the development to start within three years, follow the approved plans and meet the stated biodiversity exemption requirements.

“Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). 2The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:”

“This planning permission is de-minimis as the development does not impact an onsite priority habitat and the development impacts less than 25 square metres of onsite habitat that has a biodiversity value grater than zero and less than then 5 metres in length of onsite linear habitat.”

Officer report

Sources

  • Arun Planning Committee minutes, 24 June 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Arun's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Arun
Date
Wednesday 24 June 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Approved
Public speakers
The agent
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

40 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →