Agenda and minutes

In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, Councillors of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to declare interests where appropriate.

The following disclosures of interests were made:

The Planning Code of Conduct requires Councillors who have been lobbied, received correspondence or been approached by an interested party with respect to any planning matter should declare this at the meeting which discusses the matter. Councillors should declare if they have been lobbied at this point in the agenda.

The following lobbying declarations were made by Members:- 

Councillors Boxall, Irvine, Joyce, Skudder, P C Smith and Thomas had been lobbied regarding application CR/2016/0955/FUL.

Councillors Guidera, P C Smith, Stone, Tarrant and Thomas had been lobbied regarding application CR/2017/0483/FUL.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 9 October 2017.

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 9 October 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To consider report PES/241(a)of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT

The Committee considered report PES/241 (a) of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services which proposed as follows:

Change of use of amenity land to private garden and the erection of single storey side and rear extensions. (Amended description).

Councillors B J Burgess, Jaggard, P C Smith, Stone, Tarrant and Thomas declared they had visited the site.

The Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application and provided the following update:-

·         Additional representations had been received from the Applicant, objecting to the suggested conditions. In addition an objection had been received relating to the potential impact the development could have on the nearby trees.  To this end, to  ensure the protection of the roots of those trees Condition 6 had been updated, as set below:

6.         Within 3 months of the date of this permission and prior to works to implement the hardstanding, the area of land immediately to the east of the extension in the ownership of the applicant, shall have all loose rubble removed from the excavated area and this shall be replaced with topsoil.  Prior to re-filling the excavated area with topsoil the applicant shall have contacted the Local Planning Authority and shall have arranged for an officer to attend the site to confirm the works are acceptable and all rubble has been adequately removed.

REASON: To ensure the works are undertaken to an acceptable standard to protect the roots of the adjacent trees in accordance with policy CH3 of the Crawley Borough Local Plan.

Mr John Cooban, on behalf of the Three Bridges Forum, and Councillor B J Burgess, who spoke from the public gallery as Ward Member, addressed the Committee in objection to the application, whilst Mr Mohamid Amir, the brother of the Applicant, spoke in support.  Many of the concerns raised reflected those detailed in the report, including, in particular those on the grounds referred to earlier: that the development would have a harmful impact on the nearby trees.  Concerns had also been raised relating to the strip of land which had been bought by the Applicant and which formed part of this application for its change of use.

The Committee then considered the application.  The Committee discussed the issues arising, including the comments made by the speakers and the concerns raised by objectors.

In response to issues and concerns raised, the Planning Officer:

·         Confirmed that the conditions imposed on the previous change of use (as part of CR/2016/0225/FUL) were not complied with prior to the commencement of development and that therefore the application now before the Committee was in part retrospective and sought to regularise the existing works whilst proposing amendments to the existing approval.

·         Emphasised that whilst comments had been received objecting to the sale of the Council land to the Applicant, this was not a material planning consideration and did not form part of the consideration of this application. 

·         Explained that the tiles on the main roof of the dwelling had recently been cleaned and were therefore different to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider report PES/241(b)of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT

The Committee considered report PES/ 241 (b) of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services which proposed as follows:

Erection of 4 two bedroom houses and 2 two bedroom flats (amended plans received).

Councillors Boxall, B J Burgess, Guidera, Jaggard, Portal Castro, Skudder, Stone, Tarrant and Thomas declared they had visited the site.

The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application and the following updates:-

Condition 4 – Correction / clarification

·         north east should read ‘north west’.

·         word ‘building’ should read ‘flats’.

Delete Conditions 5 and 7 as set out in the report and replace as below:

Condition 5

The development hereby permitted shall be set out and implemented strictly in accordance with the finished floor levels shown on drawing 4982 DE 02 Rev F – Site plan and drawing 4982 DE 17 Rev B – Site Section A-A and the surrounding land levels for the gardens and hard surfaces shall remain as specified on the drawings.

REASON: as per original condition.

Condition 7

The development hereby permitted shall be constructed and managed in accordance with the Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) reference 2946 Revision 1, dated August 2017 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON – as per original condition.

Condition 11 - Amendment

At the end of the first sentence, insert words to read ‘hard and soft’ landscaping scheme.

Councillor Stone, who spoke from the public gallery as Ward Member, addressed the Committee objecting to the application, whilst Ms Katie Lamb, Planning Consultant, addressed the Committee in support.  Many of the concerns raised by Councillor Stone reflected those detailed in the report, including in particular, those made on the grounds that the development was out of character with the surrounding area, would have a harmful impact on the local highway, and noise emanating from traffic.

The Committee then considered the application.  In response to issues raised, the Group Manager (Development Management):

·         Explained that in terms of the proposed dark grey colour of materials used for some of the development’s external walls, there was still scope within the conditions to consider the use of lighter materials and finishes, which Officers will note and do.

·         Explained that whilst the development was within an area of Structural Landscaping, the visual contribution of this site to the wider area was considered limited due to it previously being developed.  The loss of this area was not considered to harm the remaining structural landscaping area, and that the development in terms of its layout would protect and enhance the remaining area of structural landscaping.

·         Explained that in terms of concerns raised on impacts on the proposed dwellings from the nearby Tesco Express Store, the Council’s Environmental Health department were consulted on the application and had no objections. It was not considered that the activity of the store would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of future occupiers, and no complaints had been received from the occupiers of the two existing residential flats  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider report PES/241(c)of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/241 (c) of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services which proposed as follows:

Erection of a part single part 2 storey rear extension, erection of a pitch roof on garage and conversion to habitable accommodation and changes to external materials on front facade and roofing (amended description and plans received).

Councillors B J Burgess, Jaggard, Portal Castro, P C Smith and Tarrant declared they had visited the site.

The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application and the following update:-

An amended plan had been received which removed reference to the proposed slate tiled roof and stated that the roof would now be a pantile.  This would then match the colour and texture of the existing roof tiles and be more appropriate to the surrounding area.

Mr Michael Smith addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  A number of the concerns raised were on the grounds of those detailed in the report, including, in particular, the inconsistency of external materials and finishes with the character of the surrounding area, loss of privacy and parking.

The Committee then considered the application.  In response to issues raised, the Group Manager (Development Management):

·         Confirmed the report’s conclusion that the external materials comprising facing brick to match the existing, timber cladding, a matching roof tile and dark grey aluminium window frames, would have an acceptable visual impact on the street-scene.

·         Explained that there was construction activity currently taking place on the site to convert the garage to habitable accommodation under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order (England) 2015, although the proposed plans indicated that this was a part of this planning application.

·         Confirmed that the site also had an attached side garage built along the southern side boundary of the site.

RESOLVED

Permit, subject to the conditions set out in report PES/241 (c).

To consider report PES/241(d)of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/241 (d) of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services which proposed as follows:

Erection of a building comprising two units for B8 (storage or distribution) and ancillary office floorspace, with associated car parking, landscaping, servicing and access arrangements (amended description).

Councillor Boxall declared he had visited the site.

The Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application and the following update:-

Comments had been received from the Ecology Officer to advise that he had no objections to the application, and requested no further conditions.

The Committee then considered the application.  In response to an issue raised, the Planning Officer confirmed that the roof of the proposed premises would be fitted with PV Panels, as shown on the Proposed Roof Plan.

RESOLVED

Permit, subject to:

(i)         A S106 Agreement to secure a Manor Royal contribution.

(ii)        The conditions set out in report PES/241 (d)

Any urgent item(s) complying with Section 100(B) of the Local Government Act 1972.

At the Chair’s request, an Information item on the Consultation with Surrounding Local Authorities as part of the planning process was to be considered as a supplemental agenda item, as the matter had arisen subsequent to the agenda being published.

To consider report PES/241(z) by the Chair of Planning Committee.

The Chair of the Planning Committee will introduce this information item on the process of Consultation with Surrounding Local Authorities.

The Committee is asked to note the details contained within this information item.

NOTE: The Chair has agreed that, although this report and information was not available for at least five clear days before the meeting, there are special circumstances justifying its urgent consideration.

The Committee considered report PES/241 (z) which was introduced by the Chair of the Committee.

The Chair advised that following recent Member enquiries, he felt it would be useful for this information item to be brought to the Committee to further highlight how the process of consultation with surrounding local authorities as part of the planning process occurred.

The Committee discussed matters arising from the report, and in response to issues raised, the Group Manager (Development Management):

·         Emphasised that some specific arrangements had been established to assist neighbouring authorities who wished to speak or be consulted on an application arising from this Authority for example on Gatwick.  Those arrangements, as previously published, were included in the report.

·         Explained that the matters of deciding which authorities should be consulted and how authorities should consult with each other, were set out in a nationally prescribed document (The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015).

Members continued to discuss the information provided, whilst indicating that the information had been very useful, and the Group Manager confirmed that she would be happy to answer any further questions which may arise following this meeting. 

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.