Agenda and minutes

None.

None.

The Minutes of the Committee meetings held on 1 and 20 August 2019 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman and Vice-chairman.

None.

Steve Ashdown, Team Leader for Major Developments and Investigations introduced the report for outline application for the development of the former sewage treatment works to provide up to 325 dwellings (use Class C3) with associated access, landscaping and associated infrastructure.  He confirmed that the site is within the built up area of Burgess Hill, with the Northern Arc scheme to the east, north and west of the site. All matters were reserved except for the access.  The previous outline planning approval expired in June 2019 and had included access arrangements and relocation of the gypsy traveller site.  He informed the Committee that the travellers’ site had now been relocated south of the road to the waste transfer station and the access road had been completed so were not included in this application.  As previous application has timed out, no further reserved matters can be submitted, hence a new outline application is necessary.  He noted that there could be three phases to the development with access from the newly realigned access road, and it was noted that the internal spine road had been completed.  The parameter plans show that the dwellings will mainly be two storey, although there will be some three storey elements and this reflected that which was consented previously.

The officer stated that the principle of development has been accepted and is in line with the District Plan. Highways matters had been addressed by the previous application (and works completed) and other outstanding matters, such as drainage, could be dealt with via condition. The application was in accordance with eth Development Plan and there were no material considerations that indicated a decision should be made contrary to the adopted policies. 

The agenda update sheet was highlighted, including an email from the applicant detailing issues with condition 8 on landscaping.  The officer confirmed the land was within ownership of the applicant and officers feel that the landscaping of this part of the site should be secured to make the landscaping consistent with what has already approved.  He noted that discussions were on going with the applicant on the width of the strip of land and requested that the Committee agree that the officers secure this by adjusting the wording of condition 8 with the approval of the Chairman and Vice-chairman.  He highlighted that the applicant was concerned with West Sussex Highways’ request for £325,000 towards improvement works on the A2300.  Officers have asked West Sussex Highways for the justification, and the Team Leader referenced the requirements of the CIL Regs and the NPPF that ensure the contributions must be relevant, necessary and proportionate to make the proposal acceptable.  He noted that if the contribution need not meet these requirements then that contribution would be removed from the Section 106 contributions. With reference to the Community Leisure Officer’s request for, £327,000 to provide off-site play provision in Burgess Hill, he noted that the application will provide play space on the site and condition 2 does secure this. The request  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Steve Ashdown, Team Leader for Major Developments and Investigations introduced the report for an employment development comprising up to 40,695 square metres (class B1(B), B1(C), B2 and B8) with ancillary offices, car parking and associated infrastructure, with the access to be determined. He noted that the Agenda update Sheet included Appendix B as it was not published with the report.  He highlighted that the site had a previous outline permission for a similar development that was approved under 13/01618/OUT but time lapsed in November last year, this is material consideration that should be given significant weight.

He informed the Committee that approximately 9,000 square metres of floor space had already been permitted under the previous application, consisting of a g Class B8 warehouse for DPD, with a second unit under construction for Roche. The application is seeking approval for the remaining balance of the original application.  All other matters would be reserved, except for the access from Cuckfield Lane which has already been constructed along with completed works to the roundabout and provision of a bus stop and footway on the A2300.   The site has been allocated for commercial development and is part of the wider Northern Arc proposal allocated in the Development Plan. He confirmed that most of the works on the trees, in the original application, had been undertaken and some matures trees have been retained.  He noted that trees adjacent to the A2300 were outside the scope of this application and should not be removed.  The Team Leader confirmed the same parameters as the previous application with a maximum ridge height 15 metres above ground level, some approved landscaping had already been completed but the developer ran out of time in the planting season. This would be completed in the next planting season.  He highlighted that the condition 18 on the agenda update sheet restricts the B8 floorspace to be provided.  This reflects the amount already approved under pervious application and this is remaining balance of that provision. He confirmed the site was allocated for commercial development and the previous application had been approved. There have been no objections from statutory bodies; drainage details, acoustic, the management of deliveries to the units can be controlled by conditions which would be covered by the management plans for each phase of the site.  He highlighted that the agenda update sheet detailed a recent email from the applicant and the main issue raised is condition 24, suggested by the highway agency, which restricts floorspace until the duelling works on the A2300 is completed (anticipated by 2021).  He confirmed that the applicant was concerned whether the Highways England was referring to works on the A23 junction, but as the Highways England have made the request the Council cannot simply ignore it..  It was noted that the application was subject to a S106 Legal Agreement and as such should Highway England indicate before it completion that the condition is not required that there was the potential for it to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Steve King, Planning Applications Team Leader introduced the report for a new build development consisting of 54 units following the demolition of all existing site buildings at the EDF Energy site.  The site is outside the built up area of Ashurst Wood but is allocated for residential development in the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan and is reflected in the more recent District Plan.  He highlighted that the agenda update sheet detailed a further letter of objection, the Council’s ecological officer had no objections, and that a letter of support from applicant had been sent directly to the Members of the Committee.

He noted that the previous application for 71 dwellings was refused in March 2019 and is now subject to an appeal.  The application before the Committee would provide 15 x 1 bed units and 39 x 2 bed units, 67 car parking spaces, the buildings would be 3 and 4 storeys high.  Access would be via the existing access from the main road and there is no affordable housing in this development.  A 15 meter buffer would be provided to the ancient woodland at the rear of the development.  The Team Leader confirmed that the land has been allocated for residential development and the principle complies with the development plan.  He noted that a key issue is the character and design of the buildings and how the development fits onto the site.  It was confirmed that the site is within the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan (AWNP) and the principle of the development is acceptable and this application seeks to overcome the reasons why the previous application was refused. 

He highlighted to the Committee that the scheme is well designed in itself but in officers view was seeking to put too much development onto the site and this resulted in a significant shortfall of car parking compared to the Neighbourhood and District Plan standards. He advised that in officers view there was no adverse impact from the proposed development on the wider AONB and the site is well enclosed.  The Team Leader confirmed that Council policy seeks to provide 30% affordable housing unless this makes a site unviable.  The applicant has advised it is not viable to provide any affordable housing on this site.   The Team Leader advised that the applicant’s financial information had been independently assessed and the result of this indicate that the site could provide some affordable dwellings and therefore the lack of any provision is not justified.      He confirmed the highway authority has no objections, but officers considered that the level of parking proposed was not adequate to serve the development.  The officers’ advised that as this was a self-contained site the car parking needs generated by the development should be accommodated on site because it was not desirable to have on street parking on the A22 and there were no alternatives to park in the immediate vicinity. He also advised that as there was no completed legal agreement with the application no infrastructure contributions to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

None.