Agenda item - BH2023/01992 - Rottingdean Bowls Clubhouse, 3 Falmer Road, Rottingdean - Removal or Variation of Condition

1.         The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee.

Speakers

2.         Gillian Chapman addressed the committee as resident and stated that they considered condition 3 for sound proofing should exclude the pathway, as the pathway was private land. Condition 4 restricting outside activities at the club should restrict the times to ending at 8pm, not 10pm. It was also requested that inside activities be restricted to finish by 9pm. Jilly Lovett addressed the committee as a resident and stated that the party wall did not belong to club but did belong to the neighbours. It was considered that the extension will block neighbours’ access. The council should have given the covenants to neighbours in 1973.

3.         The Planning Manager stated that the covenant on the pathway was not relevant to this application or a material consideration.

4.         Kim Strasman as the architect sent a speech which was read out by the Democratic Services officer as follows: Condition 1. – List of Approved Drawings: We requested the inclusion of drawing P06C as it was an important drawing showing area of soundproofing. By error, this drawing was left off the list P01 B to P11 issued with the Grant of Planning Permission BH2023/00157 dated 10th July 2023. Condition 3. – Sound Proofing: A scheme for sound proofing has already been provided to the planning authority regarding the southern elevation adjoining Challoner’s Mews. Plan P06C showing the location of the soundproofing and Robust detail E-WT-1 showing a timber frame partition offset by 50mm from the existing flint wall and infilled with mineral wool sound absorbing insulation and clad on the cavity face with sheathing plywood and on the outer face with gypsum-based board of density 8 kg/m2. This detail exceeds minimum standard required by building regulation approved document E. In addition to the above, the bowling club has pledged to remove all electronic hand dryers from the men’s toilets in this location, and details of an air source heat pump have been provided, were it to be used in three or four years’ time when the funding has been achieved and when the building regulations drawings will be prepared. Condition 4. – Hours of use: The proposed variation of the wording to this condition is confusing and has not been written as we requested whereby the original close of activity should be changed from 20:00 hours to 22:00 hours. The original planning application form confirmed the current close of activity to be 22:00 hours. Condition 5. - Requirement of Details of Secure Cycle Parking Facilities: The provision of cycle parking already exists at the club at the base of the ramp and there is a covered storage area within the existing boundaries of the site for when it is raining. Club members are mostly of pensionable age and of the approximate 100 members, two are known to use cycles on a regular basis. The minimum number of 10 cycle racks requested by the planning authority takes no account of the current use, nor likely future use and is not required by the club membership. Condition 6. - Scheme for Protection of Trees: A scheme for the protection of trees was not originally required by the case officer for determining the first planning application BH2022/02786 and was then only requested three quarters of the way through the second planning application BH2023/00157. The city parks officer saw no need for a specialist arboricultural report under application BH2022/02786. (The remainder of the speech was not read out to the committee as the 3-minute time limit had been reached).

Answers to Committee Member Questions

1.         Councillor Shanks was informed that there was another application at appeal, and if the inspector allowed the appeal, they would choose which conditions to attach.

2.         Councillor Earthey was informed that the opening time of 7am was already agreed in the permission granted at the July Committee.

3.         Councillor Sheard was informed that there are bus stops nearby and they ran every 20/30 minutes.

4.         Councillor Theobald was informed that the 10 cycle stands were required by Highways.

Debate

5.         Councillor Shanks considered the application to be a good thing. The councillor supported the application.

6.         Councillor Theobald noted that the bowls club was thriving. The councillor supported the application.

7.         Councillor Earthey supported the application.

8.         Councillor Hamilton expressed concerns regarding the application, however, they now felt it was acceptable. The councillor supported the application.

9.         Councillor Sheard considered the inclusion of cycle parking may encourage younger members.

10.      Councillor Loughran supported the application.

Vote

11.      A vote was taken, and the committee agreed unanimously to grant planning permission.

12.      RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to make a SPLIT DECISION: GRANT planning permission for a variation to conditions 1 and 4 and REFUSE a variation to/removal of conditions 3, 5,