YAPTON PARISH COUNCIL

PLANNING COMMITTEE

28 August 2007 – At a meeting of the Planning Committee held in Yapton & Ford Village Hall.

Present: Mr Faulkner (Chairman), Mr Andrews, Mr Jones and Mrs Wallbridge.

Also Present: District & Parish Councillor Mr Haymes, Mr Tansley (Clerk of the Council) and 75 members of the public.

Apologies for absence were received from Parish Councillor Mrs Barnes and County Councillor Mrs Freeman.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

1. Mr Haymes in his capacity as a member of the Arun District Council and its Development Control Committee declared a prejudicial interest and took no part in the discussion and subsequent voting on the planning applications under consideration.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

2. The Planning Committee had before them and considered the following planning applications:-

Y/67/07/	Proposed single storey rear extension & alterations.	39 Goodhew Close Yapton
Y/70/07/	Crematorium with associated car parking, memorial garden and landscaping – Resubmission following application Y/78/06/. (Departure from the Development Plan).	Land north of Ryebank Rife Opposite Bilsham Corner West of B2132 Bilsham Road Bilsham

3. Resolved – That with regard to Planning Application No Y/67/07/ the following observations be made to the District Council:

a) the proposal for lantern roof lights rather than the usual velux windows could be intrusive for neighbours and out of character with neighbouring properties;

b) the proposed rendering on the side elevation could necessitate the owner going outside his boundary to paint and maintain the property.

4. With regard to Planning Application No Y/70/07/, the Chairman invited comments from members of the public present at the meeting.

5. A number of members of the public spoke and outlined their concerns and strong feelings about the proposed development as well as detailing some of the contradictions in the re-submitted planning application from Mercia Crematoria Ltd. From the reaction to the comments expressed it was clear that there was unanimous opposition from those present at the meeting to the latest planning application.

6. Resolved – That the Parish Council re-affirm their strong objection to the proposal for a crematorium at Bilsham on the following grounds:

i) The site is outside the development area. It does not accord with the Local Plan (Policy GEN2)

No truly independent corroboration of ‘need’ for a crematorium at this location or indeed elsewhere in Arun has been provided by the developer. What evidence that has been provided is from “interested parties” and in the case of the Institute of Cemetery and Cremation Management (an organisation which represents the cremation industry), a report which has been specifically commissioned and paid for by the developer.

Contrary to what has been stated in the application, the two existing crematoria at Chichester and Worthing are not operating at capacity. In the case of Chichester, the crematorium is reported by the operators to be presently running at 35% capacity and that at Worthing, where one of its two chapels has been temporarily closed for re-furbishment, even so is reported to be “not close to full capacity”.

The site proposed is on agricultural and undeveloped land which is part of the open countryside and which should be protected (Policy GEN3) (Local Area Policy 12).

Siting on greenfield land would create a precedent and further development would be difficult to resist (Policy GEN2).

ii) There are significant highway issues close to the site (Policy GEN4)

a) The Comet Corner junction with the A259 road has long been considered a hazardous junction where urgent highway improvements are needed to improve safety and reduce the risk of serious accidents. The need for such improvements has already been recognised and strongly supported by the Cabinet of the District Council itself.

The problems at Comet Corner are caused by the staggering of the two junctions on either side of the A259 road and the volume of the traffic using the main Bognor Regis to Littlehampton Road. As a result it is a particularly dangerous manoeuvre for any vehicles seeking to cross over from either the Yapton or Middleton direction or simply to join the A259 to travel east or westwards. There are rarely sustained breaks in traffic on the A259 road and this is often coupled with a build-up of vehicles queuing for some distance along the B2132 Yapton Road which inevitably leads to driver frustration and impatience.

Turning right from the A259 road into Yapton Road across the steady flow of traffic is also similarly extremely hazardous. A funeral cortege coming from the Littlehampton direction would regularly face this problem.

The impact of additional vehicles created by the new housing development for Policy Site 6 at Bersted and Felpham will further significantly increase the pressure on the A259 road. The planned Bognor Regis Relief Road will ease the traffic flow through Felpham village but there will be no such relief for Yapton and Middleton residents who, will be faced with having to negotiate an increased volume of traffic on the A259 road at Comet Corner.

The forthcoming opening of the Materials Recycling Centre at Ford will also impact on the number of heavy goods vehicles using the A259 road.

Funeral corteges and others attending services at the crematorium as well as visitors to the memorial garden would still further increase traffic on the A259 and B2132 roads, exacerbating the already recognised problems at Comet Corner, adding to the existing congestion through the village centre and increasing the risk of serious accidents on both roads.

b) In Yapton itself there are existing pressures on the main road through the centre of the village. The County Council has already identified the need for further traffic calming measures to be undertaken as a result of a series of traffic accidents immediately to the west of the village shops.

c) Mercia’s own Planning Statement states that as well as being close to a bus stop, the site is “accessible by a range of transport modes, in terms of reasonable distance for walking and accessing public transport”. The chosen location at Bilsham however is regarded as a small hamlet with very few houses having close access to the public footpath. The outskirts of the main village of Yapton itself is some 500 metres away and there is no highway footpath link between this area and the proposed site. Street lighting along this rural section of road is also intermittent and in parts non existent. There was a fatal accident some 2 years ago at nearby Bilsham Corner along the B2132 road where there is no footpath.

d) The Barnham – Felpham Safe Cycle route which includes the B2132 Yapton Road is protected from any development which precludes its use as a safe cycle route (Policy GEN15).

e) A plan to intensify the use of the agricultural land surrounding the site by planting salad crops will increase numbers of distribution vehicles needing to access an adjacent site off the B2132 road.

f) A County Council Officer has cited the overall increase in traffic from the proposed development as “inconsequential” but is an extra 30,000 (minimum) vehicle movements a year insignificant? The plan is for an average of 24 cremations a week but there is no upper limit and this could easily double to 40+ a week. (Worthing Crematorium averages 60 cremations a week and Chichester 46 a week). Extra traffic movements of 60,000 a year could then be expected. Highway safety should be paramount. No further development should be permitted pending improvements being carried out at Comet Corner (Policy GEN8).

g) The proposed voluntary contribution of £42,120 towards highway improvements at Comet Corner is irrelevant since the overall cost of the project was estimated last year at in excess of £1.2 million and the resources to cover the balance of funding needed have still to be identified (Policy GEN8).

h) There is inadequate provision for parking at the crematorium; overspill parking on the narrow and winding rural Bilsham Road would be extremely hazardous and unacceptable (Policy GEN12).

iii) There is concern that the crematorium will cause pollution of the environment (Policy GEN34)

The operation of the cremator could cause toxic emissions including harmful mercury deposits into the atmosphere and on to the surrounding agricultural land where crops are grown. Added to this vehicles visiting the site will cause traffic fumes increasing the harmful effects on the ozone level.

iv)The site is in a low lying area and is prone to flooding (Policy GEN11)

The site has been identified as in an area prone to flooding by the Environment Agency. It is sited next to the Ryebank Rife.

v) The development would have an adverse impact on nature conservation in the locality (Policy GEN29)

A biodiversity study of the area has identified the nearby Ryebank Rife as a rich habitat for a good selection of aquatic and vascular plant species. Many species of birds and insect live in the area and these could be disturbed by any development. Some specialist mammals (including near extinct water voles) and amphibians depend on these.

vi) The proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on the character of the rural landscape (Policy GEN27)

There is at present no development on the western side of the B2132 Road, north of Comet Corner. Any development would be out of keeping with the completely rural aspect of the area.

vii) An overriding need for a crematorium at this location has not been demonstrated

Demographic forecasts for West Sussex indicate that population increase will be greatest in the Mid Sussex area. The evidence that there is now an overriding need for a crematorium at this location has not been made by Mercia Crematoria Ltd and what evidence that has been provided is weak, open to challenge and uncorroborated by independent report.

A Parish Meeting was held in December 2006 to discuss the previous planning application submitted by Mercia Crematoria Ltd. The meeting was attended by some 86 residents. The meeting, which was a representative group of the whole community of Yapton, was unanimously and strongly opposed to the application. This remains the case as was demonstrated by the attendance of 75 members of the public at the latest meeting of the Planning Committee.

It is the Parish Council’s firmly held view that there is no evidence of need, demand or support locally for a crematorium in Yapton.

CHAIRMAN