Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Thursday, 6th February, 2020 7.00 pm

New regulations came into effect on 4 April 2020 to allow Councils to hold meetings remotely via electronic means. As such, Council and Committee meetings will occur with appropriate Councillors participating via a remote video link. Public access to the meetings is via a live stream video through the Mid Sussex District Council’s YouTube channel.

Venue: COUNCIL CHAMBER

Contact: Email: committees@midsussex.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

To receive apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Pulfer, Councillor MacNaughton, and Councillor Coe-Gunnell White.

 

2.

To receive Declarations of Interest from Members in respect of any matter on the Agenda.

Minutes:

The Chairman declared a non pre-determined interest in Item 7 DM/19/3292 as he was a part of the Cabinet Grants Panel at the time the grant was approved however the grant was for a different design and he comes to the meeting with an open mind to hear the representations of Officers, Public Speakers and Members of the Committee.

3.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16 January 2020. pdf icon PDF 209 KB

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 16 January 2020 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

4.

To consider any items that the Chairman agrees to take as urgent business.

Minutes:

The Chairman had no urgent business.

5.

DM/19/3123 - Bridge Hall, Cuckfield Road, Burgess Hill, West Sussex, RH15 8RE. pdf icon PDF 814 KB

Minutes:

The application was introduced by the Chairman, who noted that the application seeks full planning permission for the demolition of existing dwelling at Bridge Hall, Cuckfield Road and erection of 40 new dwellings with new access created onto Cuckfield Road. He said the application was previously reported to the planning committee on 28th November 2019 where Members resolved to approve the application subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 legal agreement to secure the required affordable housing and infrastructure contributions. He noted that the application is before the Committee as there has been a change in relation to the infrastructure contributions that are being sought by the County Council. Having reassessed the application and having regard to the outline consent that exists on the site, the County Council have reduced the infrastructure monies that they are seeking. All other aspects of the planning application remain the same as was presented to Members on 28th November 2019.

 

The Members agreed that the Local community infrastructure contribution secured through the Section 106 agreement could be used towards the refurbishment of the storage shed at Ansty village recreation ground as requested by the Parish Council and detailed at page 12 of the agenda.

 

The Chairman took Members to the recommendation to approve, proposed by Councillor Walker and seconded by The Vice-Chairman and this was agreed unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

That planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a S106 Legal Agreement to secure affordable housing and infrastructure contributions and the conditions set out in appendix A.

 

6.

DM/19/4538 - Land at Long Meadow, Station Road, Sharpthorne, East Grinstead, RH19 4NY. pdf icon PDF 352 KB

Minutes:

Steve King, Planning Applications Team Leader, introduced the application which sought approval for the erection of 2 No. detached dwellings with garages at Long Meadow Station Road Sharpthorne East Grinstead, with access via Station Road. He noted that the principle of development complied with policy DP6 in the Mid Sussex District Plan as the proposal was for a development of less than 10 dwellings on a site that adjoins the built-up area boundary. The Planning Application Team Leader spoke about the application including, the ancient woodland to the north of the application, the fact that the application falls outside of the built-up area as defined by the District and Neighbourhood Plan. He noted the application included a 15m buffer between the gardens and the ancient woodland. The Planning Application Team Leader noted that this site has had previous applications, the most recent of which came before the Planning Committee June 2018, this was refused, and had since been appealed, the appeal was refused on the grounds that the process for the collection of the monies for Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) was not satisfactory. He explained to Members that the planning history of the site was an important material planning consideration and that Members should have regard to the views of the Planning Inspector who determined the last appeal on the site.

 

He explained that the Planning Inspector had found the previous scheme, which was the same as the one before the planning committee, to be acceptable apart from the method by which the Council had sought to mitigate the impact on the Ashdown Forest, a European protected site.

 

He explained that as the site lies within 7km of the Ashdown Forest there is a requirement to mitigate the impact of residential development on the Ashdown Forest. Payments are made for Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG) and Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM). On the previous application the Inspector was not satisfied with the Councils method for collecting monies to mitigate the impact of the development on the Ashdown Forest.

 

He explained that at the time of the appeal, SANG money was classed as being money for an infrastructure project. The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations prevented the Council from pooling more than 5 contributions towards infrastructure projects. As such the Council sought to secure the SANG monies via a planning condition. The Inspector did not consider this approach to be correct.

He explained that the CIL Regulations had now changed and the pooling restriction no longer applied. Therefore the SANG money could be collected via a section 106 legal agreement. As such the sole reason for the Inspector dismissing the appeal had been overcome and therefore the application was recommended for approval.

 

Parish Councillor Ken Allfree, Jay Shipway and Jess Smashfold, spoke against the application.

 

Councillor Paul Brown, Ward Member, spoke against the application. He said that the access road required further consideration, as it had a limited view and that a revised protocol for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

DM/19/3292 - St Francis Sports and Social Club, Colwell Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, RH16 4EX. pdf icon PDF 676 KB

Minutes:

Joseph Swift, Senior Planning Officer, introduced the report and stated that the site falls within the built-up area of Haywards Heath and that planning permission had been previously granted for a larger community building. He said that the application is for an erection of an extension to an existing building to form a new community hall, similar to the previously submitted application, with ancillary facilities and parking, on land to the south of Southdowns Park, Haywards Heath. The site presently consists of a swimming pool building, tennis courts and sports pitches. He told Members this had changed from the previously approved application due to cost, and due to the elevation of the site.

 

Mike Barber, agent and architect of the building, spoke in support of the application.

A Member noted that he had visited the site, and whilst he had concerns regarding the amount of traffic and on street parking for the surrounding area, he believed that this improvement to the community centre would outweigh these effects for the surrounding community. He also asked if these facilities would be for just the local community or available to all residents.

 

The Chairman noted that these facilities would be available to all those who wanted to use them via a membership and the NHS.

 

A Member noted that the stakeholders of the centre were all residents of Mid Sussex and there were strong links with the resident’s association.

 

The Chairman took Members to the recommendation to approve, proposed by The Vice Chairman and seconded by Councillor Phillips and this was agreed unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

That permission be approved subject to the conditions out in Appendix A.

 

8.

DM/19/5083 - 63 Church Lane, Copthorne, Crawley, West Sussex, RH10 3QQ. pdf icon PDF 106 KB

Minutes:

The Chairman introduced the application, noting that the application was before committee as the agent is an elected Member for the Copthorne and Worth Ward. He said the proposed development is considered to comply with the requirements of Mid Sussex District Plan policies DP21 and DP26, and the relevant provisions of the

NPPF.

 

A Member noted that whilst there were no issues in terms of the application, his concerns were that the road the application is on can be very busy, with a high amount of on street parking, he hoped that the application would not result in this worsening if approved.

 

The Vice Chairman agreed and noted that there should be an agreement regarding this.

 

The Chairman explained that the only option was to include an informative requesting that Church Lane be kept free from obstruction during the implementation of the planning permission.

 

The Chairman took Members to the recommendation to approve the application with the suggested informative, proposed by the Vice Chairman and seconded by Councillor Phillips, which was agreed unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions outlined at Appendix A and the addition of an informative requesting that Church Lane be kept free from obstruction during the implementation of the planning permission.

 

9.

Questions pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 10.2 due notice of which has been given.

Minutes:

None.