Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 7 March 2023

(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 7 March were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

There were no declarations of interest.

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 and was noted.

Ward: Southwater North

Applicant: Churchill Retirement Living

The Head of Development & Building Control reported that this application sought permission for the erection of 36 two-storey retirement living apartments and six retirement cottages, including a Lodge Manager's office, communal facilities, a guest suite, parking and landscaping.  The existing access off Worthing road would be upgraded and resurfaced. There would be 25 parking spaces for the dwellings.

The presenting officer clarified that the pedestrian crossing referred to in paragraph 6.26 of the report had the potential to include a refuge island, which could be secured through the Legal Agreement, if Councillors considered this necessary and appropriate.

Since publication of the report, an addendum had been circulated and published advising of an additional condition regarding the standard time implementation of three years. The addendum also advised that two further objections had been received.

The application site was located within the built-up area of Southwater, north of the village centre.  It comprised the former sales and servicing area for Roundstone Caravans, which had vacated the site.  The vehicular access provided access to the Park Homes site to the east.

The Parish Council were broadly supportive but had a number of concerns.  There had been 11 representations from neighbouring residents objecting to the application (including the two mentioned in the addendum), and five representations in support.     

The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.   A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to aspects of the application.

Members considered the consultees’ responses and the officer’s planning assessment, as set out in the report.  There was concern that proposed on-site parking was insufficient and would result in overspill parking into busy neighbouring streets, and they were not convinced that the older average age of residents would signify fewer vehicle users. 

With regards to road safety, Members agreed that a crossing with refuge to access the bus stop would be essential, and that WSCC should be asked to consider a pelican crossing instead, and other improvements such as yellow lines to prevent nearby on-street parking should be explored.  It was therefore proposed and seconded that the application be deferred.  The motion was carried.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/22/0096 be deferred:

(i)      so that WSCC can explore options for further pedestrian improvements to the Worthing Road, such as yellow lines, a pedestrian crossing and a refuge island; and

(ii)     so that the applicant can consider the provision of more disabled and visitor parking spaces.

Ward: Southwater South and Shipley

Applicant: Frontier Estates Limited

The Head of Development & Building Control reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of warehouse buildings and redevelopment to provide seven employment units for a range of employment uses.  Ancillary offices, yard areas, parking and landscaping were included in the application.  Access would be from the existing entrance at the north end of the site.

Since publication of the report, an addendum had been circulated and published setting out amendments to five of the conditions, which had been agreed following discussions with the applicant.  In addition, condition 35 could be removed as the revised conditions included control of fixed plant and equipment.

The application site was located within Southwater Business Park, an established business park comprising several large business units, within the built-up area of Southwater.  The site had been unused since the current owners ceased operations in 2018.   

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been no representations from members of the public.  A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the consultees’ responses and the officer’s planning assessment, as set out in the report.

Members weighed the benefits to the local economy against their concerns that the proposed hours of operation, including for delivery and despatch, would have a detrimental impact on neighbouring amenity, given the proximity of residential homes, including those built in recent years.  It was noted that HDC Environmental Health had also objected to the proposed unfettered hours of operation. Members supported the HDC Environmental Health recommended hours of delivery and despatch. Members also sought better pedestrian and cyclist access to units 2 and 3. 

Following comments regarding the condition of the Mill Strait roundabout, it was agreed that an Informative would be added to the decision notice requesting options for improvements and repairs to the Mill Straight roundabout be explored. 

 RESOLVED

That planning application DC/22/0302 be granted subject to the conditions as reported, with amendments to the following conditions:

(i)      Condition 33 to be amended in line with the Environmental Health Officer’s recommendations, so that no despatch or receipt of deliveries shall take place from the site except between: 

Monday to Friday 7.00am – 8.00pm;

Saturday 7.00am – 6.00pm;

Sunday/Bank Holidays none

(ii)      Condition 21 to be amended to secure safe pedestrian and cycle access to units 2 and 3.

Ward: Southwater South and Shipley

Applicant: Reside Developments Ltd

The Head of Development & Building Control reported that this outline application sought permission for up to 73 new dwellings (C3 use) and retention of existing farmhouse building (Woodfords), associated public open space, landscaping, drainage and highway infrastructure works, including a new vehicular access from Shipley Road. 

Since publication of the report, an addendum had been circulated and published setting out further information on water neutrality in response to the public re-consultation on the water neutrality report, which had received 27 additional objections. The recommendation had also been amended to take into account the need for updated ecology surveys because those submitted for the site almost three years ago would soon require updating.

The application site was located to the east of Shipley Road, approximately one mile south of the centre of Southwater.  The site boundaries were mostly mature hedgerows and trees and there was an area of ancient woodland about 40 metres from the site.  There was some development north of the site, which ran close to Shipley Road.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been 49 representations objecting to the application in addition to the 27 received in response to the re-consultation.    

One member of the public spoke in objection to the application and the applicant and the applicant’s agent both spoke in support.  A representative of Shipley Parish Council and a representative of Southwater Parish Council both spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the consultees’ responses and the officer’s planning assessment, as set out in the report. 

Members considered whether the reason for refusal of application DC/20/2564, on the grounds of insufficient information in relation to water neutrality, had been overcome.  They considered the evidence and proposed measures in the applicant’s Water Neutrality Statement, and discussed the extent to which these could be enforced or achieved.  Members discussed the importance of ensuring that the Water Neutrality Statement was legally robust and deliverable, and they were concerned that proposals to offset water-use by retrofitting properties in Crawley Borough would be difficult to monitor as such measures could be reversed.

It was therefore proposed and seconded that the application be deferred.  The motion was carried.

A question was also raised regarding the technical viability of the quoted storage capacity of water harvesting systems outlined in paragraph 3.5 of the addendum.

It was also requested that the speed limit on Shipley Road, which was currently 60mph, be reviewed in the light of new WSCC guidance. 

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/21/2180 be deferred in order to:

(i)      seek legal advice regarding the monitoring and enforcement of the water neutrality off setting measures.  Reassurance required that measures are in place and enforceable in perpetuity;

(ii)      review the speed limit on Shipley Road in light of new WSCC guidance; and

(iii)     seek technical guidance on rain water harvesting (e.g. can they be installed in the roofs of the dwellings).

Ward: Southwater North

Applicant: Nr Niall Keelaghan

The Head of Development & Building Control reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a two-storey 3-bedroom detached dwelling, with a single integral garage, three off-street parking spaces and access via the driveway for 36 Warren Drive.    

The application site was located within the built-up area of Southwater and was part of the side/rear garden of the host property, which had a garden larger than most of the neighbouring sites.

The Parish Council objected to the application. There had been 25 representations objecting to the application, and a report on behalf of the neighbouring property. One letter in support had been received.    

One member of the public spoke in objection to the application and a representative of the Parish Council also spoke in objection to it. The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the consultees’ responses and the officer’s planning assessment, as set out in the report.  Members discussed the proposed parking and access arrangements and were concerned that the parking spaces on the application plan would be impractical for daily use and lead to additional on-street parking.  They also noted the proximity of the access to the neighbouring property’s front door.  They were concerned that highway safety was compromised by inadequate parking arrangements and access.

It was therefore proposed and seconded that the application be refused.  The motion was carried.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/22/1878 be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed access is considered inappropriate and of poor design, resulting in a detrimental impact on residential amenity and safety, contrary to policies 33 and 40 of the HDPF (2015).