Agenda and minutes

Members and officers must declare any pecuniary or personalinterest in any business on the agenda. They should also make declarations at any stage such an interest becomes apparent during the meeting. Consideration should be given to leaving the meeting if the nature of the interest warrants it. If in doubt, contact Democratic Services before the meeting.

6.1        In accordance with the County Council’s Constitution, including the Code of Conduct as well as the Code of Practice on Public Participation in Planning and Rights of Way Committees, the following declaration was made in relation to the lobbying of members regarding the following item:

·        Item 4, application for a Definitive Map Modification Order, DMMO 15/21:- the Chairman confirmed that all Committee members had received the lobbying email from Mr Chris Hedley, circulated on his behalf on 5 June 2024 by the Clerk to the Committee [Note: see also Minute 9.3, below].

6.2     In accordance with the County Council’s Constitution, including the Code of Conduct, Cllr Ian Gibson declared personal interests in the following items:

·        Item 4, Definitive Map Modification Order, DMMO 15/21:- because he is a member of the British Horse Society (BHS) and their Access Field Officer has made a representation on the application.

·        Item 5, Development Management Annual Report 2023:- in reference to the enforcement issue in Mid Sussex, paragraph 2.12 of the Committee report, because Cllr Gibson is the Cabinet Member for Sustainable Economy and Housing at Mid Sussex District Council, which includes enforcement as part of that portfolio.

6.3        No other declarations of interest were made.

The Committee is asked to confirm the minutes of the meeting held on
24 April 2024 (cream paper).

7.1     The Committee resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 April 2024be approved and that they be signed by the Chairman.

Items not on the agenda that the Chairman of the Committee is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency by reason of special circumstances.

8.1     There were no urgent matters.

Report by the Director of Law and Assurance.

The Committee is asked to consider and determine the following application:

DMMO 15/21 – Definitive Map Modification Order application to modify the definitive map and statement for Chichester by adding a bridleway from Smugglers Lane to the southern termination of FP 2952, in the parish of Bosham.

DMMO 15/21 – Definitive Map Modification Order application to modify the definitive map and statement for Chichester by adding a bridleway from Smugglers Lane to the southern termination of FP 2952, in the parish of Bosham.

9.1     The Committee considered a report by the Director of Law and Assurance, including amendments as per the Agenda Update Sheet (copies appended to the signed minutes) that contains a response received from Bosham Parish Council.  The Committee was advised that this does not affect the recommendation in the Committee report.  The report was introduced by Naomi Taite, who outlined the details of the application and the key points. 

9.2        A written statement was read out by the Clerk on behalf of Sean Overend and Sara Morton, local residents.  OS 1/25000 map (1935-61) labels the route as "FP" (footpath).  The first Definitive Map (1963) did not include this route as a public right of way at all.  OS 2000 1/50000 map (c.1918) [Note: this was tabled for members of the Committee] shows the route as a narrow dashed way (footpath), as a connection to the ferry to West Itchenor, not as a road, and unsuitable for horses or vehicles.  The ferry embarkation points move to the west at high tide and to the east at low tide (the latter shown on the tabled map).  The 1932 Rights of Way Act Survey map shows no coloration for the claimed route, unlike other public roads.  If access to the ferry is relied on as supporting a higher use then it follows that FP 2952 is incorrectly identified as a mere footpath between the two embarkation points.  It could be argued that the claimed route was always assumed to be part of FP 2952, so that a statement [Note: it is understood that this is a reference to the Definitive Statement] saying the road between the northern and southern ends of FP 2952 was a highway does not assist the application.  There is uncontested evidence that the ferry – which was, at one time, only a rowing boat, and which has only carried cycles in the last 20 years - was never used for carrying goods or horses and it was for foot passengers only, suggesting the access path was likely only a footpath.  Evidence of a carter in Itchenor (1890s-1910s) suggests that goods destined to and from Itchenor were transported overland, not via the ferry.  This does not support the suggestion that the claimed route to the ferry (or FP 2952, as it is now known) had a higher status, nor that the route was ever “an ancient vehicular highway”.  Many of the maps presented (e.g. Yeakell and Gardner 1778, Greenwood 1825, and some early OS maps) do not definitively prove public rights, as they often depicted both public and private routes. The 1” OS map (1813-19) has a line across the northern end of the claimed land.  The Tithe Map evidence is inconclusive; the applicant provided only a black and white copy, making  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report by the Head of Planning Services.

The Committee is asked to note the following report:

Development Management Annual Report 2023

10.1 The Committee considered a report by the Head of Planning Services.  The report was introduced by James Neave, Principal Planning Officer.

10.2   The Committee raised the points below and responses or clarification was provided by the Planning Officers, as noted below.

Hydrocarbons planning applications

Points raised –

·        Clarification was sought as to whether the hydrocarbons (oil and gas) applications were included within the ‘major developments’ data?

·        Confirmation was sought about the number of hydrocarbons applications considered in 2021 and 2022 (April 2021 – March 2022). 

Response –

·        Hydrocarbons applications are included within ‘major developments’ in Table 1, but separate data is shown in Table 2 regarding the speed at which they were decided. 

·        There were two oil applications for the Wood Barn Farm, Broadford Bridge oil site in 2022, determined in May 2022. The Decision Notices were issued 3 days after the agreed extension of time due to staff sickness, although the applicant was content with this.  There have since been a further two applications for this site determined in March 2024.

Compliance and Enforcement

Points raised –

·        In seeking to understand the full scope of the work of the County Planning Team and to place significant emphasis on this part of the planning process so as to give the public confidence, it was queried how many formal enforcement cases are currently open; how many were closed in the last year, and how many new cases were opened?  It was suggested that the information that is provided by District and Borough Councils at their Planning Committees could form the basis of future reporting on this.

·        It was queried how many joint enforcement and compliance cases are being looked at with the Environment Agency?

·        Public confidence is not helped by retrospective planning applications, meaning enforcement matters are put on hold for the duration that the application is determined.

·        Clarification was sought on the matter referred to in paragraph 2.12 of the Committee report.

·        Confirmation was sought that the Council does currently only have the one Planning Compliance Officer.

·        The UK imports much of its gas and oil, despite having natural resources [Note: this was an observation, not requiring a response].

Responses –

·        In relation to all the data sets requested, this information was not to hand.  Planning Services can provide this information to the Member and will ensure this information is included in reports to the Committee in future.  In doing so, officers will consider the work of other authorities, in order to benchmark and follow best practice.

·        The matter referred to in paragraph 2.12 of the Committee report is a joint enforcement matter with Mid Sussex District Council regarding land to the east of Dan Tree Farm, north of Bolney, relating to both County (waste) and District planning matters. 

·        The County Council only has one Planning Compliance Officer, although other officers do get involved, particularly the current Interim County Planning Team Manager.  Previously, the County Council had four officers working on compliance and enforcement; this has reduced due to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10.30 am on Tuesday,
3 September 2024 at County Hall, Chichester.

Report by the Head of Planning Services, Director of Law and Assurance and Assistant Director (Highways Transport and Planning).

The Committee is invited to ask about planned agenda items and to note the following report:

Current Planning Applications, Current Definitive Map Modification Orders (DMMOs), Town and Village Green Applications (TVGs) and Public Path Orders (PPOs) under investigation.

11.1       The Committee noted that its next scheduled meeting would be held at 10.30 am on 3 September 2024 at County Hall, Chichester.

11.2       Officers advised that applications that may be ready for determination at the 3 September Planning and Rights of Way Committee include planning applications: WSCC/028/21 Rock Common Quarry, Washington; WSCC/037/23 Brookhurst Wood Landfill Site, Warnham, and WSCC/007/24 Staplefield Wastewater Treatment Works, plus a Town and Village Green application: TVG 31/52 at Nutham Lane, Cedar Drive and Easteds Lane, Southwater.  It should be noted that the scheduling of all applications may be subject to change.