Agenda item

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 the District or County Council to mitigate the impact of the development had been secured and in addition, the mitigation for the Ashdown Forest had also not been secured.

Jenny Forbes, Chairman of Ashurst Wood Parish Council spoke against the application. She noted that there has been no engagement by the applicant with the Parish Council and the application has no affordable housing and a lack of parking provision.

Tony Tillin, Chairman of Ashdown Park Owners Association spoke against the application. He stated the changes to this application made no attempt to address any of the issues of the previous application which was refused.

Michael Comer, resident of Ashbourne House spoke against the application.  He stated that misleading information had been provided by the applicant.

Councillor John Belsey, Ward Member spoke in objection to the application.    He objected to the application as it would over develop a site that is on the edge of a village and there was a lack of parking provision within the site. He concluded that the development was not in keeping with the setting of Ashurst Wood.

A Member thanked the officers for their hard work and expressed concern with three parties sharing a single access point.  He noted the concerns of a speaker and highlighted that there had been little consultation by the applicant with relevant parties, the Council had not been properly consulted.  He agreed with views of other Members on the lack of affordable housing and car parking issues, and he supported the officers’ recommendation to refuse the application.

The Chairman reminded the Committee that they should consider the application using the report pack and agenda update sheet, any letters received directly from developers must be ignored.  Representations should be made using the correct channels.

A Member agreed with the concern of the failure to provide affordable housing.  He expressed unease with the inappropriate delivery of complaints about the application and the failure of the applicant to responsibility engage with the local residents.

A Member stated he supported the refusal of the application.  He noted the design of the dwellings was out of character for a residential setting and queried who owns the ancient woodland. 

The Team Leader confirmed that the application included all the ancient woodland at the rear of the site.  The buffer would protect the ancient woodland as it was not an amenity the residents would have access to.  He noted that the original application did not show the access point correctly because the access road, which already exists on site, had not been included within the red line on the site plan which denotes the site of the planning application and the new plans have rectified this error. He stated the Council had not received an application for the adjacent LIC site.

A Member was also concerned with the inappropriate scale and design of the site, the inadequate provision of parking and queried allocation of recreational space on the site.  The Team Leader confirmed that a communal area had been allocated for recreational use.  

The officers were thanked by a Member for the meticulous report and reminded the Committee that it was a balancing act and she opposed the application due to the lack of affordable housing. 

With no further questions Councillor Walker moved that the Committee move to the Recommendation as set out in the report, this was seconded by Councillor Whittaker, this was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed that planning permission is refused for the following reasons:

1. The proposal fails to provide the required infrastructure contributions necessary to serve the development and the required affordable housing. The proposal therefore conflicts with policies DP20 and DP31 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031 and policy ASW15 of the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan.

2. The proposal fails to mitigate its impact on the Ashdown Forest Special Protection Area. The proposal therefore conflicts with policy DP17 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031.

3. It has not been demonstrated that the level of car parking that is proposed is sufficient to serve the development. The proposal is seeking to put too many units onto the site and this results in a conflict with policies ASW9 and ASW14 in the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan. The proposal also conflicts with policy DP21 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031 and policy ASW21 of the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan.

The Chairman advised the speakers present that the officers have included Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan policies in the reason for refusal.  The officers cannot expand on reasons for refusal if they are similar to those already included, it would be unreasonable to bring in other reasons unless they were material considerations.