Five domestic garages at Land to the rear of 43 Old Manor Road, Rustington

What was proposed

The application proposed five garages in two buildings for parking and domestic residential storage, accessed through the existing garage compound.

“DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATIONThis application seeks to construct 5 No. garages in two blocks in the rear of a residential plot. Access would be via an existing garage compound to the rear of this plot that is itself accessed from the north side of Campbell Drive. SITE AREA600sqm. TREES1 No. Category C Sycamore tree within and on the southern boundary of 43 & 45 Old Manor Road.”

“The garage compound runs north to south with no throughway, and is accessed by vehicle from Campbell Drive to the south, and a pedestrian access into Laburnum Way to the east. The existing garage compound features three main blocks of garages: a block of 15 to the west of the compound, and two blocks of 5 and 9 garages, respectively, on the east side of the compound. CHARACTER OF LOCALITYThe site is surrounded by residential development of mixed types.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Two earlier garage schemes were refused because of their number, siting, vehicle activity and disturbance affecting nearby homes.

“R/255/22/PL - This was refused for 7 No. garages in this location. This was a delegated refusal due to the number of garages, their siting, and subsequent vehicular activity, resulting in acceptable adverse impacts of residential amenity to both the host and adjoining properties.”

“R/163/23/PL - This sought to construct a block of 5 No. garages in a similar location to that of the current proposal. It was refused at Planning Committee due to detrimental impacts on residential amenity that would arise from the potential increases in vehicular activity and disturbance in proximity to the host and neighbouring properties.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council and consultees raised no objections, while highways, environmental health and ecology comments led to conditions and mitigation.

“OFFICER COMMENTS This application has sought to address these concerns by redistributing the garages into to blocks, incorporating 2.5m acoustic fencing, and isolating access to be from the rear garage compound only. REPRESENTATIONS Rustington Parish Council - No objection: - Expressed concern that the applicant may be proposing to use private land, of which it was understood that he had no ownership rights, as the entrance/exit route to the proposed garages.”

“Environmental Health - No objection. COMMENTS ON CONSULTATION RESPONSES: Noted. Whilst there is a 100% habitat loss that is represented by two sycamores and garden land. This can be replaced with an off site BNG provision. POLICY CONTEXT Within the Built-up Area Boundary. Partially at risk of surface water flooding.”

Officer report

Objections raised

Fourteen nearby occupiers objected over access rights, traffic, parking, flooding, biodiversity, construction, possible commercial use and property impacts.

“Objections from nearby occupiers: - The proposal seeks access over private land. - The applicant has no right of access and would disrupt of rights of access. - The access road is in a poor state of repair. - The proposal will result in additional traffic and endanger pedestrians. - The proposal will result in the displacement of existing parking arrangements. - Concerns regarding biodiversity impacts.”

“For clarity, the following matters that have been raised are not material planning considerations and, cannot be considered as part of the determination of this application: - Land ownership disputes. - Private rights of access. - The disrepair of privately owned land. - Devaluation of property. CONSULTATIONS CONSULTATION RESPONSES RECEIVED: WSCC Highways - No objection: - No visibility concerns at access from Campbell Drive.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Planning Team Leader presented the plans and confirmed that approval remained recommended with updated conditions.

Members’ discussion

Members who attended the site visit supported the recommendation, and a councillor asked how small mammal openings in the acoustic fencing would be checked.

“Before opening the debate, the Chair noted that Members who had attended the site visit had unanimously agreed to support the officer recommendation. The Chair invited any further questions or comments.”

“Councillor Wallsgrove, who had not attended the site visit, asked whether officers would ensure that the small mammal holes required in the acoustic fencing would be checked once installed. The Planning Team Leader confirmed that the relevant condition required the applicant to submit details, and that once installed, officers would inspect the fencing to ensure compliance.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The recommendation was proposed and seconded before the Chair moved to a vote.

“The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Wallsgrove and seconded by Councillor Woodman.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee resolved to approve the application conditionally.

“That the application be APROVED CONDITIONALLY.”

Minutes

Conditions and safeguards

The permission required approved plans, material details, biodiversity enhancements, domestic parking and storage use, and a biodiversity gain plan.

“A Biodiversity Gain Plan has been submitted to the planning authority, and 2. The planning authority has approved the plan.”

“For guidance on the contents of the Biodiversity Gain Plan that must be submitted and agreed by the Council prior to the commencement of the consented development please see the link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/submit-a-biodiversity-gain-plan 7INFORMATIVE: Statement pursuant to Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).”

Officer report