Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 17 October 2017

(Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to committeeservices@horsham.gov.uk at least 24 hours before the meeting.  Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 17 October 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/17/2025 – Councillor Nigel Jupp declared a personal interest because he knew the directors of the development company and the original site owner.  He was also a West Sussex County Councillor for Southwater Parish.

DC/17/2111 – Councillor Jim Sanson declared a personal interest because he knew one of the public speakers.

DC/17/2107 – Councillor Nigel Jupp declared a personal interest because he knew the family of the owners of the site.

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 a variation to conditions 18 and 22 of outline permission DC/14/2582 for a development of up to 193 dwellings.  The variation would allow occupation of 20 dwellings in advance of completion of highway works (newly designed access from Mill Straight and construction of a toucan crossing).  

The application site was located southwest of Mill Straight, adjacent to the southern boundary of Southwater. The proposed variation related mainly to the eastern boundary of the site where 20 dwellings had been completed and highway works, including the construction of a new roundabout off Mill Straight, were ongoing.

Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The consultation response from the Highway Authority, as contained within the report, was considered by the Committee.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been 13 letters of objection.  The applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council and a Local Member for Southwater both spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issue for consideration in determining the proposal was the impact of the occupation of up to 20 dwellings before completion of the permitted highway works, which would be facilitated by the use of temporary four-way traffic lights opposite the site until the works were completed, which was scheduled for mid-December 2017.  

Members discussed concerns regarding pedestrian and driver safety, and were concerned that the mitigating measure of having manually controlled traffic lights for one hour twice a day during peak hours, as set out in Condition 28, would not sufficiently mitigate the queuing traffic and detrimental impact on drivers and pedestrians.  

After careful consideration Members concluded that, on balance, the proposal was acceptable subject to an amendment to Condition 28.

RESOLVED

(i)      That a modification, by way of a Deed of Variation, be made to the legal agreement attached to permission DC/14/2582.

(ii)     That on completion of (i) above, planning application DC/17/2025 be determined by the Head of Development. During determination Condition 28, as set out in the report, to be amended so that the temporary traffic controls referred to in the condition are to be manually monitored and manually controlled daily during the hours of 7.30 – 9.30 and 15:30 – 18:30.  The view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for works along Robell Way, including: realignment of the southern kerb line and widening of the footpath; resurfacing of the road and footpaths; the introduction of areas of soft landscaping; traffic calming to slow vehicles at the entrance of Robell Way; yellow lines to restrict parking; bollards to protect the grass verge; and two streetlights.  

The application site was located southwest of Water Lane in Storrington and was a private roadway and access to the Water Lane Trading Estate.  It would also be the vehicular access for a new residential development of 98 dwellings that had recently been approved.  The new dwellings would replace a number of industrial units to the southwest of Robell Way.

Details of relevant government and council policies and relevant planning history, as contained within the report, were noted by the Committee. The consultation response from the Highway Authority, as contained within the report, was considered by the Committee.

The applicant had been in discussions with local businesses and submitted amended plans in response to concerns regarding the impact of the proposal on access for larger vehicles.

The Parish Council raised no objection. Twelve letters of objection had been received, including one since publication of the report.  One member of the public spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the need to protect the functions of this Key Employment Site; the narrowing of the carriage way; the impact of the proposed changes on the access for large vehicles; and the appearance of the road.

Members discussed the current traffic issues along Robell Way and considered that concerns regarding access for larger vehicles when manoeuvring into Robell Way and accessing the industrial units had not been satisfactorily addressed.   Members therefore concluded that the item should be deferred to allow for further discussion between the applicant and stakeholders.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/17/2111 be deferred to allow for the applicant and stakeholders to continue discussions with a view to addressing concerns regarding access. 

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a single storey five bedroom dwelling with a planted flat roof and roof terrace, in the eastern corner of the site.  It would be built into the ground by approximately 1.5 metres, giving the building a height of 1.8 metres above ground level.  A large metal grain store would be removed. The wider site would be for grazing and a ha-ha to the west of the dwelling was proposed.  Two parking spaces and a tractor store were proposed.  The applicant cited paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) relating to new dwellings of ‘exceptional quality or innovative nature of design’ in support of their proposal. 

The application site was located outside the built-up area west of Duke Hill and was an open field, which a public bridleway crossed diagonally.  There were hedges and trees on the boundaries with a mature tree line along the western boundary.  Thakeham Manor was approximately 60 metres north of the site. There were a number of agricultural buildings, including dwellings, approximately 100 metres to the southeast.  

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 supported the application and had reiterated their strong support for the proposal.  Five letters of objection, from three households, had been received.  The applicant and the architect 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 principle of development; the design and how it related to paragraph 55 of the NPPF; whether it would enhance the immediate setting; how it related to the characteristics of the local area; the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and users of adjacent land; and traffic and parking.

Members noted the amendments that had been made in response to the Design South-East Review Panel, which reduced the building’s scale, re-orientated it and improved landscaping, and concluded that the proposal was in accordance with paragraph 55 of the NPPF.  It was noted that permitted development rights had been removed under Condition 15, in the interests of visual amenity.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/17/2107 be granted subject to the conditions and reasons as reported.

Item removed from the agenda.

Item removed from the agenda.