Agenda item

Steve King, Planning Applications Team Leader introduced the application which seeks the demolition of the car sales office and workshop and the erection of a part 2, part 3 storey building comprising 8 apartments with 8 parking spaces. ‘Amended plans received 11 November showing a revised design of the proposed building and one additional flat (9 in total)’.

He noted that the site is in the built-up area of East Grinstead with single story buildings on the south east side and the remainder given over to hard standing. The business left the site several years ago and there is an extensive planning history. Permission was granted for residential use in 2017 but this has now lapsed. There have been two refused applications which have been dismissed at appeal and a further appeal is ongoing. The proposed new block would cover the majority of the site. There are high level windows on the south east elevations but the design would not cause overlooking or a loss of daylight to properties on Moat Road due to the stepping back of the top floors. He confirmed that it is the Officer’s opinion that the benefits in terms of a residential scheme in a sustainable location outweighs the loss of business floor space, and he noted that a prior, albeit lapsed proposal for a residential redevelopment of the site had been accepted in the past. He also noted that the design makes good use of the site and the layout has overcome past reasons for refusal. There will not be significant harm to neighbouring amenities and there is no objection from the Highways Department. The parking arrangements will include electric car charging points and there will be solar panels on the roof. 

John Escott spoke in support of the application.

A Member sought clarification on why this was not a car free development, although he was pleased to see that electric charging points had been included, and that there was a reduced number of spaces available. He was also pleased to see solar panels included in the design.  The Chairman noted that the site is situated on the outskirts of the town centre which is why parking is allowed. The Planning Applications Team Leader also confirmed that this site had a design challenge with regards to underground cabling which has led to the under-croft solution which makes best use of the site and is an acceptable level of parking provision.

Members commented that the new proposal was an improved design, noting that it adds to the Council’s five-year housing land supply and makes good use of a brownfield site. A Member requested that sufficient space such as a pavement was allowed for around the perimeter of the site to give space between the adjacent buildings. Members discussed past contamination issues on surrounding areas and it was confirmed that conditions 5 and 6 covers this.

The Chairman took Members to a vote on the recommendations as set out in the report. This was proposed by Councillor Walker seconded by Councillor Sweatman and agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the following recommendations:

Recommendation A

It is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Legal Agreement to secure infrastructure contributions and Ashdown Forest mitigation and the conditions set in Appendix A.

Recommendation B

It is recommended that if the applicants have not submitted a satisfactory signed planning obligation securing the necessary infrastructure payments and Ashdown Forest mitigation by the 10th March 2022, then it is recommended that permission be  refused at the discretion of the Divisional Lead for Planning and Economy, for the  following reasons: 

1. 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 and policy EG16 of the East Grinstead Neighbourhood Plan.

2. The proposal fails to provide the required infrastructure contributions necessary to serve the development. The proposal therefore conflicts with policy DP20 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031.

The meeting adjourned between 5.40pm and 5.45pm.