Agenda item

DM/19/4538 - Land at Long Meadow, Station Road, Sharpthorne, East Grinstead, RH19 4NY.

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 dropped curb may be necessary due to the footpath being the only pedestrian walkway along that road. He noted that the footprint of the application was large. He told the Committee that there was a need in the West Hoathly parish for smaller houses and that this application was not included in the Neighbourhood Plan. He suggested that the development could potentially have an adverse effect on the water levels of the surrounding area and would suggest further ecological protections were put in place.

 

Tim Rodway spoke in favour of the application.

 

The Chairman addressed the points which had been made by the speakers, noting that the application contained a condition (3) which addressed the prospect of flooding, and water drainage; there were ecological and landscaping conditions which addressed these issues.

 

The Planning Application Team Leader noted that this application had been to the Planning Inspectorate and the only reason for refusal was due to the process of collecting SANG monies for Ashdown Forrest, and therefore the rest of the application had been deemed acceptable.

 

A Member noted that the application had been before the Planning Inspectorate and highlighted page 92 of the agenda which confirmed that the SANG issue has been resolved. He considered that the previously discussed topics of flooding, traffic control and the footprint of the application had been addressed.

 

The Chairman took Members to the recommendation to approve, proposed by Councillor Walker and seconded by The Vice Chairman, which was agreed with eight Members in favour and one abstention. 

 

RESOLVED

 

A

 

That planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a satisfactory signed planning obligation to secure the required level of SAMM and SANG contributions and the conditions listed in Appendix A.

 

and

 

B

 

That if the applicants have not submitted a satisfactory signed planning obligation securing secure the required level of SAMM contributions by 7 May 2020, then it is recommended that permission be refused at the discretion of the Divisional Lead for Planning and Economy, for the following reason:

 

'The application fails to comply with policy DP17 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031 in respect of the required mitigation by way of a financial contribution to the Ashdown Forest Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) Strategy.

 

Supporting documents: