Agenda item

DM/20/1647 - East Grinstead Sports Club, Saint Hill Road, East Grinstead, West Sussex, RH19 4JU

Minutes:

Steven King, Planning Applications Team Leader, introduced the application which sought planning permission for a change of use of an agricultural field to a sports field and the erection of a yurt at East Grinstead Sports Club, Saint Hill Road, East Grinstead.

 

Cllr Rex Whittaker, East Grinstead Town Council, spoke in favour of the application.

 

Martin Donaghy, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

 

Clemency Scarfe Beckett, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

 

Simon Curtis, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

 

Bob Shelley, East Grinstead Sports Club, spoke in favour of the application.

 

Richard Leman, Trustee of East Grinstead Sports Club, spoke in favour of the application.

 

Steve Phillips, Chairman of East Grinstead Meads Football Club, spoke in favour of the application.

 

Cllr Adam Peacock, Ward Member, spoke in objection to the application. He expressed his support for the District Council’s aspirations for improving sports pitches in the District however he raised concerns on the harm caused to the neighbouring amenity and the formalisation of the irreversible change from agricultural land, of which sits within the High Wield Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, to a sports field.

 

The Planning Applications Team Leader provided an explanation of the historical and current use of the site. He noted the proposal would not make significant physical changes to the site but highlighted that the main concern of officers is the formalisation of the change of use of the site. He outlined what was proposed in the application and highlighted the main issues to consider and summarised how they had been assessed in the committee report. He outlined that the Committee would have to assess the application against the relevant  development plan policies and material considerations, some of which weighed in favour of the scheme and some which weighed against the scheme, to come to a view on the application.

 

In response to a query from the Chairman the Planning Applications Team Leader highlighted how the site is used currently under permitted development rights. He went through the photographs that showed what was on and around the site at present time.

 

The Chairman and Vice-Chairman stated that they sat on the Planning Committee which refused the previous application in 2011 however they came to the meeting with an open mind to hear the consideration of the committee, officers and public speakers.

 

The Chairman drew attention to the Prime Minister’s promotion of young people engaging more with sporting activities.

 

A Member also drew attention to the Prime Minister’s comments and noted that there is an increasing amount of young people in the town. He mentioned that the field is already being used by the Sports club and Treehoppers so he believed that, with the right mitigations, the change of use would not cause substantial harm. He supported the aim of providing young people with better facilities for outdoor sport. He did not consider it would cause significant harm to neighbouring properties. He believed that the application should instead be approved and proposed a motion to approve the application.

 

The Vice-Chairman noted that the neighbouring properties are newly built and supported the encouragement to get more young people engaging with sports. He did not consider the proposal would harm the amenities of neighbouring properties.

 

A Member expressed his support for the District Council Playing Pitch Strategy and recognised the need for more football pitches within the town. He also expressed the need to be consistent in deliberating planning matters and could not see any difference to the previous application brought before the Committee in 2011. He noted that no noise survey was carried out to see how the noise from the club affects local residents and that the East Grinstead Society recommended refusal to the application. He sought clarification on the final bullet point on P.212 of the Report which refers to other sports being played on the pitch during quieter times.

 

The Planning Applications Team Leader confirmed that the final bullet point on P.212 states that the field will be used at a time when the other sports facilities at the East Grinstead Sports Club are quieter. He added that he had been in discussion with the Environmental Protection Officer officers who haven’t had any complaints with the field under its temporary permitted development rights; the complaints that had been received by the Environmental Protection Officer related to noise at the main facilities during events and musical performances. The Planning Applications Team Leader advised that whilst there had not been a noise survey supplied with the planning application, the site has been used for 28 days a year for sporting activities under permitted development rights. Therefore, the Environmental Protection Officer had the benefit of this existing use to draw upon when making his comments on the planning application.

 

A Member recognised the need to all ages to get active and engage with sports however he believed that the need does not overcome the clear policy directive of Paragraph 172 of the NPPF which states that great weight should be given to the protection of National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

 

A Member stated that in his view the proposal would not detract from the character of the AONB. He stated that the need for the facility outweighed any harm to the AONB.

A Member referenced the additional housing East Grinstead has received and highlighted the need to develop more leisure facilities to cope with the increasing demand.

 

The Chairman noted the proposed motion to approve the application and so asked the Planning Applications Team Leader to provide advice to the Committee should it be minded to do so.

 

A Member sought clarification if the motion to approve the scheme was to approve it on a permanent basis or a temporary planning permission.

 

A Member proposed that the motion to approve the application should be for a permanent and not a temporary planning permission.

 

The Planning Applications Team Leader explained that the only construction on the site is the yurt. He explained that as set out in the committee report planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. He explained that when assessing whether a scheme was in compliance with the development plan, this means the development plan when read as a whole. He explained that it is not the case that a planning application must comply with each and every policy in the development plan.

 

The Planning Applications Team Leader advised that great weight should be given to conserving the natural beauty of the AONB as required by planning policy and the NPPF. He outlined that there was support in policies DP24 and DP25 of the District Plan for improved leisure facilities. He also advised that the need for additional pitch provision was a material planning consideration that weighed in favour of the application. He advised that on balance officers did not support the application for the reasons that were set out in the committee report. He advised that the Committee would have to balance any adverse impact on the appearance of the AONB, if they considered there was harm to the AONB, against the positives of the improved facilities. He added that the Committee could condition that there couldn’t be any physical works to the site.

 

Cllr John Dabell proposed to move to approve the application and  Cllr Emma Coe-Gunnell White seconded the proposal.

 

The Planning Applications Team Leader confirmed the conditions regarding the times, dates and hours of use of the site as well the ecological condition proposed by the Ecology Adviser. He added that the Committee could include a condition that if the site ceases to be used for sporting activities then the yurt would be removed, and the use of the field would revert back to agricultural. He referred to P.212 of the Report as the conditions there would form the basis of conditions regarding the times of use for the approval.

 

The Chairman explained to Members that the vote was for a permanent planning permission to be granted subject to appropriate conditions on the basis that the committee did not consider that there was an adverse impact on the AONB by permanently formalising what was already taking place on the site. The Chairman took Members to the recorded vote to approve the application, carried out by the Legal Officer and the application was approved with nine votes in favour and two against.

 

Councillor

For

Against

Abstain

G Allen

Y

 

 

R Cartwright

Y

 

 

E Coe-Gunnell White

Y

 

 

P Coote

Y

 

 

J. Dabell

Y

 

 

R Eggleston

 

Y

 

A. MacNaughton

Y

 

 

G. Marsh

Y

 

 

C. Phillips

Y

 

 

M. Pulfer

Y

 

 

D. Sweatman

Y

 

 

RESOLVED

 

That planning permission be approved subject to conditions regarding the times of use of the field, ecology, floodlighting any other such condition that the officers feel appropriate, wording of which to be approved by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman.

 

Supporting documents: