Agenda and minutes

In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, councillors 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 that councillors who have been lobbied, received correspondence, or been approached by an interested party regarding 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 meeting.

No lobbying declarations were made.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 9 March 2021.

The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 9 March 2021 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To consider report PES/361a of the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/361a of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:

Approval of reserved matters pursuant to outline application CR/2018/0894/OUT to consider landscaping, layout and scale in respect of the erection of 185 dwellings and associated car parking and infrastructure.

Councillors Ascough, A Belben, Jaggard, Mwagale, Purdy, and P Smith declared they had visited the site.

The Principal Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought approval of the reserved matters for the application sited between Steers Lane and Balcombe Road, of which the principle of development for 185 units and the access had been previously established by the granting of outline planning permission on appeal.  The Officer summarised the site’s planning history.  The design and layout of the scheme had been significantly revised and was of higher quality than prior proposals at the site due to revisions to the housing mix, improved locations for the affordable and low cost units across the site, improved noise mitigation measures from both road and air traffic, and improved landscaping, amenity green space, and children’s play space proposals.

The Officer then updated the Committee that, since the publication of the report, conditions 3 and 5 and informative 3 had been amended, and a new condition 7 had been added. The amendments provided minor clarifications.

In line with the Council’s Virtual Committee Procedure Rules, a statement submitted in regard to the application was read to the Committee.

The statement from the applicant, Bellway Homes, highlighted matters including:

·       A need for housing in the Crawley area.

·       The proposed scheme’s mix of 1, 2, 3, and 4 bedroom houses and apartments, which included provision of 74 affordable homes.

·       The positive outcomes of discussions between the applicant and the Local Planning Authority, particularly regarding pedestrian connections with the site, urban design, housing mix and access to green spaces.

The Committee then considered the application.  The following matters were discussed:

·       Clarification that the application had been submitted by a different developer to the earlier outline application at the site, following the sale of the land.

·       Concerns regarding noise levels across the site.  It was confirmed that the Council’s Environmental Health Officer originally had concerns regarding the combined road and air traffic noise, but that the tailored design of the amended plans for the proposed development had addressed these concerns as the mitigation measures aimed to protect habitable rooms from noise.  Four rooms across the site were projected to experience noise exceedance; this was deemed an acceptable number on balance.

·       Climate impact; concerns were raised regarding the proposed use of gas boilers within the dwellings.  The Officer confirmed that there was not currently a requirement for newly built dwellings to desist from using gas boilers, nor was there a requirement for all dwellings to include solar panels.  These elements were considered as part of the overall sustainability measures and as such were policy compliant and considered satisfactory.

·       The separation distances and potential for overlooking.  The Officer confirmed that there were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider report PES/361bof the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/361b of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:

Erection of 2 no. commercial buildings; 1 no. commercial building (unit 100) for class B8 and 1 no. commercial building (unit 200) for flexible class B2, B8 and E(g)(iii); along with access and servicing arrangements, car parking, landscaping, relocation of substation and associated works (amended description).

Councillors Ascough, A Belben, Jaggard, Mwagale, Purdy, and P Smith declared they had visited the site.

The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application regarding the construction of two buildings for commercial use in Churchill Court in the Manor Royal business district.  One building was proposed to have a use class of B8 (storage or distribution) and the second building was proposed to have a flexible use class of either B8, B2 (general industrial), or E(g)(iii) (industrial processes) which was to be decided by the building’s occupier.  Three scenarios for car parking provision were outlined, of which one would be employed dependent on the chosen use class.  The Committee was updated that the wording of condition nine had been amended since the publication of the report.

In line with the Council’s Virtual Committee Procedure Rules, a statement submitted in regard to the application was read to the Committee.

The statement from the agent, Quod, on behalf of the applicant highlighted matters including:

·       The sought-after use classes and high quality design of the buildings.

·       The economic benefits of the proposed development, such as the creation of jobs throughout the construction period and beyond, and the generation of local spending.

·       The environmental benefits of the proposed development, such as the buildings’ receipt of BREEAM ‘excellent’ ratings, the installation of solar panels, and the planting of trees at the site.

The Committee then considered the application.  Committee members expressed general support for the proposal, which was hoped would encourage regeneration in the area in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic.  A query was raised regarding the adequacy of cycle links to the site.  It was confirmed that there was a break in the cycle network path that ran adjacent to the site but that this application did not include proposals to join up or upgrade the path – these requests had not been made in consultations with West Sussex County Council’s Highways department or the Crawley Cycle and Walking Forum.  The Officer stated that this may be able to be considered as part of the Travel Plan which formed one of the application conditions.

Also discussed was the manoeuvring space for large heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) at the roundabout leading to the site.  The Officer confirmed that WSCC’s Highways department had been consulted and confirmed the space was sufficient, and swept path analysis drawings had demonstrated this. 

A recorded vote was taken on the recommendation in accordance with the Council’s Virtual Committee Procedure Rules. The names of the councillors voting for and against the recommendation, along with any abstentions, were recorded as follows:

For the recommendation:

Councillors  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.