Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 21^st March 2017

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 21^st March 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/16/1866:  Councillor John Blackall declared a personal interest because he lives on Haglands Lane.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive

There were no announcements.

The list of appeals lodged, appeals in progress and appeal decisions, as circulated, was noted.

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for a variation of Condition 1 of previously approved application DC/16/0871, which related to permission DC/10/1314 for 146 dwellings on the site. 

This application sought to amend the layout of plots 76 to 126 (Phase 2) by replacing the 51 dwellings for over 55s with 62 market dwellings.  The additional 11 units would include four affordable housing units.  The 62 houses would comprise: nine 2-bedroom; 33 3-bedroom and 20 4-bedroom houses.  A 2-bedroom flat above the village shop was also proposed.  The application also included improvements to bridle paths in the area and traffic calming in Storrington Road.

With this proposal, together with previous minor material amendments, the overall development of permission DC/10/1314 would comprise 159 dwellings, including 123 open market dwellings, 16 affordable units and 20 local worker units, a village hall and shop, a pre-school facility, community workshops/studio, sports pitches, changing rooms, a cricket pitch and pavilion, a children’s play area, access roads, open space and landscaped areas.  

The site was located outside the built-up area of Thakeham, east of Storrington Road and north-east of Abingworth Hall Hotel.  There were dwellings to the west, though the main village lay to the north, separated from the site by fields.  There was agricultural land to the north, south and east, with boundaries edged by hedgerows and trees. Construction work connected to previous permissions had commenced on the site.

Details of relevant government and council policies, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. Relevant planning history, which included other minor material amendments to DC/10/1314, was noted by the Committee.  The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee.

The Parish Council supported the application.  Thakeham Village Action objected to the application, and a further 81 letters of objection had been received.  There had been three letters of support. One member of the public, representing Thakeham Village Action, spoke in objection to the application.  A representative of the applicant and a representative of the Parish Council both addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were:  the housing mix; appearance and layout; the amenity of nearby and future residents; the impact of the flat above the shop; and highways.  The principle of development had already been established, and it was noted that additional community benefits and affordable housing would be secured through a legal agreement. 

Members concluded that the additional dwellings would not have a significant detrimental impact on the overall development and the proposed housing mix reflected local need.

RESOLVED

(i)      That a legal agreement, in the form of a Deed of Variation, be entered into to:

(a)     secure the collection of all benefits previously secured under the previous consents relating to permission DC/10/1314; and 

(b)     secure the additional affordable housing and additional contributions and measures, including improvements  ...  view the full minutes text for item PCS/117

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of a bungalow and erection of four 3-bedroom semi-detached houses, which would have three storeys, with a bedroom and en-suite built into the roof.  The design included gable ends, pitched roof, brick and timber cladding.  There would be two parking spaces for each dwelling and an additional visitor space.  

The application site was located within the built-up area of Henfield, set back from the public highway of Lower Faircox, surrounded by properties of varying size and appearance oriented at various angles to the site. 

Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee.  The responses from statutory external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  Sixteen letters of objection had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.  

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were:  the principle of development; character of the dwellings and visual amenities of the street scene; the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; and parking and traffic. Members noted concerns regarding access to the site and its impact on the amenity of nearby residents. 

The scale of the proposal in relation to the plot size and proximity of adjacent gardens and neighbouring properties were discussed.  Members concluded that, whilst the principle of development on the site was acceptable, the proposal would lead to overdevelopment of the site and would harm the character and visual amenities of the surrounding area.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/17/0411 be refused for the following reason:

01     The proposed development would be of a scale, mass and bulk that would appear as a prominent addition within the context of the site and surroundings, which given the number of units proposed, would result overdevelopment of the backland site. The proposed development would therefore result in harm to the character and visual amenities of the townscape, and would not relate sympathetically to the built surroundings, contrary to Policies 32 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for a temporary rural workers dwelling, the erection of an agricultural building and alterations to access.  The application had been considered by the Committee in December 2016 when it had been deferred to allow for additional information to be supplied by the applicant regarding: the particular location within the site chosen for the agricultural barn; and clarification on the business plan (Minute No. DMS/81 (20.12.16) refers).

The application site was located in a rural location on the northern side of Haglands Lane, where it was a country lane with hedgerow and trees, not far from Old Haglands, a Grade II Listed Building to the west. 

Members were referred to the previous report which contained details of relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal. Three further letters of objection had been received. One member of the public and two representatives of the Parish Council all spoke in objection to the application.  An associate of the applicant, the applicant and applicant’s agent all addressed the committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the additional information that had been supplied by the applicant that sought to justify the proposed location of the barn, and expanded on the proposed business plan.  Members also noted further information supplied by the applicant in response to concerns raised by the Parish Council. 

Members discussed the proposal in the context of concerns regarding the scale and location of the barn and viability of the scheme.  The Council’s Agricultural Advisor gave expert opinion in support of the proposed scale and location of the barn, and on the soundness of the business plan.  Members concluded that the scheme would put the agricultural land to good use and would not have a significant detrimental impact on the surrounding area.

Members were advised that Condition 2 would be amended to reflect the date of approval, so that the three year consent for the temporary workers dwelling would commence on the date of the decision.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/16/1866 be granted subject to the conditions as reported, with Condition 2 amended thus to reflect the date of the decision to grant permission:

‘The temporary workers dwelling hereby permitted shall be removed and the land shall be restored on or before the 26 April 2020 to its former condition as grassed agricultural land unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.’

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for a detached two storey 4-bedroom house, with a ridge height of 7.4 metres.  The proposal included a new access onto Clays Hill.

During the application process, the application had been amended, with the access recited to allow for improved visibility splays; a balcony removed; external materials amended; and the application site increased in size.

The application site was located within the built-up area of Steyning on the southern side of Clays Hill, and comprised part of the garden area of Crimond and the neighbouring property Whindene.   Crimond, which was accessed from Maudlin Lane, was above the application site and a two storey house, Hill View, lay to the east.

Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  Twenty-five letters of objection had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application and a representative of the Parish Council also spoke in objection to it.  The applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were:  the principle of development; character of the area; amenities of neighbouring properties; trees; and highway considerations.  Whilst Members acknowledged concerns regarding the visibility splays, the Highway Authority had raised no objection and Members concluded that the application could not be refused on road safety grounds.

In response to concerns regarding the impact of construction vehicles and the removal of spoil from the site, it was agreed that Condition 5 be strengthened to require a Construction Management Plan to include arrangements for the disposal of waste soil.

Members considered the scale and character of the proposal and its relationship to the surrounding area. It was agreed that Local Members would be consulted on materials affecting the external appearance of the dwelling. 

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/16/1088 be granted subject to the conditions as reported, with the following amendments:

Condition 5 to be amended so that arrangements for the disposal of spoil from the site are included in the Construction Management Plan;

Condition 6 to be approved in consultation with Local Members.