Agenda item

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 removed, following consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair.

The Chairman noted that condition 24 was there to ensure the effectiveness of the A23 and the officers would have to wait for Highways England to update them, if appropriate.

A Member and noted that the site would create many more jobs.  He noted the comments received from stakeholders, and Hurstpierpoint and Sayers Common Parish Council. The Parish Council had commented on restrictions for heavy goods vehicles (HGV) exiting the junction of Cuckfield.

Another Member also noted the economic benefits of the use of the site and agreed on the split of uses for Classes B1, B2 and B8, and expressed concern with condition 18.  The Team Leader confirmed that condition 18 related to the remaining balance of 4,965 square metres for B8 usage which had not already been delivered.

A Membernoted that the Parish Councils concerns regarding debris on the highway had been resolved.  However the Parish Council still had concerns with access to the Builders Merchants and Salvage Yard and the movement of HGVs in that area. He welcomed the opportunities for jobs the development would create.  The Team Leader stated that the construction management plan would deal with HGV movement during the construction phase.  Once construction was complete it was the responsibility of the highway authority to place restrictions on the weight of vehicles and the Council cannot control the movement of traffic by a condition after construction has finished, it would not be enforceable.  

A Member supported the development but expressed concerned with the provision of cycle routes in the vicinity of the development.  He commented that cyclists would have to negotiate a busier road and asked for a cycle route connecting Gatehouse Lane to the A2300 roundabout.  The Chairman advised that this was not currently possible.

With no further questions the Chairman took the Members to the Recommendations Chair as detailed in the report and Agenda Update Sheet, this was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed to the recommendation:

Recommendation A

It is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Legal Agreement to secure highway infrastructure contributions and the suggested conditions in Appendix A, or as may be amended in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair.

Recommendation B

Recommend that if the applicants have not entered into a satisfactory section 106 agreement to secure the necessary infrastructure payments and affordable housing by 19th December 2019 then the application should be refused at the discretion of Divisional Leader for Planning and Economy for the following reason:

The proposal fails to provide the required infrastructure contributions necessary to serve the development. The proposal therefore conflicts with policy DP20 of the District Plan.