Agenda item

Joseph Swift, Senior Planning Officer, introduced the application which sought outline planning permission for 35 dwellings and the detailed consideration of access only. He drew attention to the Agenda Update Sheet which included additional representations, further information on Flood Risk and Drainage as well as an additional condition 16.

The Senior Planning Officer, then took members through the proposal, highlighting the changes to the existing taped access, with the proposal also having a footpath access. No objections had been received from WSCC Highways subject to conditions. An indicative plan was shown to members on how the scheme could potentially be laid out to create a spacious edge of village development. Photos were then provided of the site and its surroundings with the case officer confirming that it was only the principle and access being considered at this stage and that the proposed public benefits of this allocated site were considered to outweigh the less than substantial harm to the setting of the nearby Heritage Assets. Therefore, the proposal is recommended for approval in accordance with Recommendation A and B as set out within the report.

Cllr Chris Hotblack, Ardingly Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Timothy Hughes, spoke in objection to the application.

Mr David Port, spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Guy Dixon, Applicant spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman confirmed that the principle of development has been established through its allocation in the Site Allocations DPD and that the Committee is looking only at the outline application with the remainder of the application to be brought forward at the detailed reserved matters stage.

Members raised the issue of housing mix on the site and asked for affordable housing and bungalows.

The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the housing mix would be subject to consideration at the reserved matters stage.

A Member raised concerns that the development will lead to greater suburbanisation, that there isn’t adequate landscaping to the western boundary of the site and the deceleration lane has been removed into the site.

The Chairman confirmed that some of the concerns are for reserved matters and that West Sussex County Council Highways have not raised an objection.

A Member noted that the principle has already been established and exclaimed that he disagrees with experts at West Sussex County Council. He expressed great sympathy with the public speakers and asked whether the affordable housing provision will be either 10 or 11.

The Head of Development Management replied that it was originally proposed to have 10 affordable housing units however it has been negotiated up to 11.

A Member suggested that the application be deferred so that matters including the housing mix could be considered, however, the Head of Development Management reminded Members that such matters were not for consideration at this outline stage.

The Chairman noted that no Member wished to speak so moved to the recommendation, proposed by Cllr Trumble and seconded by Cllr Hatton, which was approved unanimously.

RESOLVED

Recommendation A

That planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Legal Agreement/or legal undertaking to secure infrastructure contributions and Affordable Housing and the Ashdown Forest Mitigation Payments and the conditions set in Appendix A and in the Agenda Update Sheet.

Recommendation B

That if the applicants have not submitted a satisfactory signed S106 Legal Agreement/or legal undertaking securing the necessary infrastructure, affordable housing and Ashdown Forest mitigation payments by the 9th May 2023, then permission be refused at the discretion of the Assistant Director for Planning and Sustainable Economy, for the following reasons:

1.    'The application fails to comply with policies DP20 and DP31 of the Mid Sussex District Plan in respect of the infrastructure and affordable housing required to serve the development.'

2. 'The proposal does not adequately mitigate the potential impact on the Ashdown Forest Special protection Area (SPA) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and would therefore be contrary to the Conservation and Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, Policy DP17 of the Mid Sussex District Plan 2014-2031 and Paragraph 180 of the National Planning Policy Framework.'