Agenda item

Susan Dubberley, Senior Planning Officer introduced the full planning application for 237 dwellings, 30% affordable with associated informal open space, SUDS attenuation features and a locally equipped area of play.  She noted that the application site is part of a wider development where consent was granted in 2012 for 480 units; phases 1, 2 and 3a are occupied, phase 3b is at advanced stage of construction and some are occupied.  A full application was required as the previous outline planning permission had time lapsed. The application provides for the remaining balance of the previous consent, with the addition of a further extra 33 units.

She drew Members’ attention to the Agenda Update Sheet and highlighted the additional conditions concerning photovoltaic panels and  the play area.  The development has a perimeter block arrangement retaining some trees and the hedgerows. There are 470 allocated spaces and 73 visitor spaces, mixed housing types split across two-character areas, urban and rural.  She highlighted the concerns raised by Sussex Police regarding natural surveillance and the remedial works to mitigate their concerns.

The Chairman read a submission from Mr Glyn Wells, local resident  who opposed the application. 

Ms Jackson, agent for the applicant spoke in favour of the application.

The Chairmen reminded the committee that the principle of development had  already been established, the original application was time lapsed and the additional 33 units would increase the  total number above the previously consented 480. 

Members discussed the design of the buildings and noted that highways had no objections.  They expressed concern over the lack of grey water storage,  sustainable heating, disruption of ground water levels and that the road would not be adopted and how the upkeep of the roads would be managed. 

The Senior Planning Officer noted the additional condition in the update sheet would enable the addition of photovoltaics to aid  compliance with future Building Regulations,  the developer is using a fabric first approach, the Design Review Panel and Urban Designer were content, and  remediation works on drainage had been completed. She advised that Highways have no control over the adoption of the roads, the decision was for the developer and the earlier phases not been adopted.

The Chairman confirmed that the adoption of the roads was not a matter for the Committee to consider.

Members discussed the process of approving the  Section 106 agreement, parking provision,  the impact of noise from the railway, suggested future proofing the site for installation of EVCs and noted the lack of sports facilities on the eastern side of Burgess Hill.

The Senior Planning Officer confirmed the details of the Section 106 agreement were on page 26 and included the delivery of affordable housing and contributions to other services including sports provision.  She confirmed the application met Highway standards for parking provision and page 55 detailed the process to approve a soundproofing scheme prior to construction.

As there were no further questions the Chairman took Members to vote on the recommendations outlined in the report and the amendments as detailed on the Agenda Update Sheet.  This was proposed by Cllr Trumble and seconded by Cllr Coote and was approved. 

RESOLVED

Recommendation A

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

Recommendation B

It is recommended that if the applicants have not completed a satisfactory signed planning obligation by the 24th May 2022, then it is recommended that permission be refused, at the discretion of the Divisional Leader for Planning and Economy, for the following reason:

'The application fails to comply with policy DP20 of the Mid Sussex District Plan in respect of the infrastructure and affordable housing required to serve the development.'