Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Cartwright, Hussain and Pulfer. 

None.

The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 12 January 2023 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. 

The Chairman had no urgent business.

Katherine Williams, Planning Officer introduced the report which sought planning permission for a new access, dropped kerb and driveway to the front of 2 The Spinney. She highlighted the application had been referred to the Committee as part of the land is owned by Mid Sussex District Council (MSDC). She noted the proposal would reflect the established character of the area and would not have a negative impact on the open character of The Spinney open space to the west of the site. WSCC Highways Authority were consulted on the application and raised no objection on highway safety grounds. The Council’s Tree Officer also raised no objection following the submission of an amended tree protection plan and subject to compliance with the protection measures. 

The Chairman reminded Members the application was before the Committee as part of the land is owned by MSDC. As there were no questions, Councillor Sweatman proposed to move the recommendation, this was seconded by Councillor Eggleston. 

The Chairman took Members to the vote, which was agreed unanimously with 9 in favour.

RESOLVED

The planning permission was approved subject to the conditions outlined at Appendix A.

Steven King, Planning Applications Team Leader, introduced the report which sought full planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings at The Broadway, Haywards Heath and the erection of a replacement building to provide a mixed use development of commercial units and 37 units of Retirement Living Accommodation with associated communal facilities and landscaping. He drew Members attention to the Agenda Update Sheet with further comments from the Tree officer and an additional reason for refusal relating to the impact on existing trees and therefore the proposal conflicts with policy DP37 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031.

The Planning Applications Team Leader went through the key issues of the application in detail. He noted that although the principle of the application was acceptable the design of the scheme was not of the high quality that was sought by national planning policy or the development plan. He outlined that there was harm to the setting of designated and non-designated heritage assets and that the public benefits of the scheme would not outweigh this harm. He also noted the additional comments from the Tree Officer, which resulted in a further reason for refusal. In relation to noise this had been studied in detail. The Planning Applications Team Leader noted that the Councils Environmental Health Officer was satisfied that the amenities of future occupiers of the development would be acceptable in relation to noise. He also noted that the development should not result in undue restrictions being placed on the adjoining business at the public house. Finally, the Planning Team Leader advised that the development did generate a requirement for affordable housing and infrastructure provision. As there was no legal agreement in place to secure the affordable housing contributions or infrastructure contributions, the proposal was also contrary to policy DP20 and this was also a reason for refusal.

The Chairman asked Members if they wished to debate the item, as there were no questions the Chairman drew Members attention to the additional reasons for refusal as set out in the Agenda Update Sheet.

The Chairman took Members to the recommendation, proposed by Councillor Coote and seconded by Councillor Phillips, which was approved unanimously with 9 in favour.

RESOLVED

The planning permission be refused for the reasons set out in Appendix A.

None.