Venue: Committee Rooms A & B - Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Email: Democratic.Services@crawley.gov.uk
Minute's Silence for Councillor A Belben
The Committee held a minute’s silence for Planning Committee member Councillor Andrew Belben who had recently passed away.
Disclosures of Interest
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 any councillors who have been lobbied, received correspondence, or been approached by an interested party regarding any planning matter to declare this at the meeting at which the matter is being considered. Councillors should declare if they have been lobbied at this point in the meeting.
Councillors Burrett, Malik, Pritchard, Raja, and Sivarajah had been lobbied on Planning Application CR/2022/0091/NCC – 6 Woodlands, Pound Hill.
Councillor Burrett had been lobbied on Tree Preservation Order Application CR/2022/0596/TPO – Strip of Land off The Ridings, Pound Hill.
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 1 November 2022.
The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 1 November 2022 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
To consider report PES/408aof the Head of Economy and Planning.
RECOMMENDATION to REFUSE.
The Committee considered report PES/408a of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:
Retrospective application for variation of condition 3 (materials) pursuant to CR/2020/0028/FUL for the demolition of existing rear conservatory & single storey extension & erection of a two storey & single storey rear extension, first floor side extension & two storey front extension.
Councillors Ali and Burrett declared they had visited the site.
The Principal Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought permission for a variation of an application condition regarding a change to the colour of the window frames on a residential dwelling. The Officer updated the Committee that the following correction to the recommendation was required:
‘REFUSE for the following reason:
1. The dark grey
The Officer then gave details of the various relevant planning considerations as set out in the report.
James Nayler, the agent, spoke in support of the application. Matters raised included:
· The grey windows had already been installed, so permission was sought for them to be retained. Their replacement at this stage would be costly and time-consuming.
· The windows were not out of character with the streetscene on Woodlands and the surrounding roads as the properties were of a wide mix of styles.
· The variation of the condition which was sought was a minor change.
Satwinder Gill, the applicant, spoke in support of the application. Matters raised included:
· A number of other properties in the local area, including neighbouring houses, had had white windows replaced with anthracite grey windows.
· Neighbours of the property had expressed their support for the installation of the grey windows.
· The development of the property had allowed for upgrades and improvements which had led to an aspirational family home.
The Committee then considered the application. The following points were raised as part of the discussion:
· Generally, it was considered important that applicants follow the conditions attached to any planning permission issued by the Council. It was disappointing that there had been non-compliance with conditions on this occasion (regardless of the nature of the matter).
· The styles of property in the area were mixed. It was hard to pinpoint the nature of the streetscene as there were many visually different houses, so it was therefore difficult to conclude that any one house was incongruous to the local setting.
· Many houses in the local area also had grey windows. However, it was not always clear whether these properties’ windows were installed under permitted development rights, under planning applications, or without planning permission. The Officer confirmed that, generally, if any proposed development sought to use materials that did not match the existing materials, planning permission ... view the full minutes text for item 4.
To consider report PES/408bof the Head of Economy and Planning.
RECOMMENDATION to CONSENT.
The Committee considered report PES/408b of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:
Retrospective advertisement consent for 1x illuminated 48-sheet digital display.
Councillors Ali, Burrett, S Mullins, Pritchard, and Raja declared they had visited the site.
The Principal Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought consent for a digital advertisement display sign on land next to Haslett Avenue East. The application was retrospective as the sign was already erected – however a new application was required as the position and structure of the sign were different to those approved as part of the previous application. The Officer then gave details of the various relevant planning considerations as set out in the report.
Philip Allard, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application. Matters raised included:
· The sign was unable to be built in the agreed position due to the discovery of underground cabling and piping. It was constructed slightly further back than was approved.
· The tree that had been removed from the site during construction of the sign was on private land and was not protected under a Tree Preservation Order.
· The sign had operated in accordance with illumination requirements since it was erected.
John Cooban, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application. Matters raised included:
· The loss of the tree was disappointing. Any unnecessary tree loss should be avoided.
· The original application form stated that no trees were present at the site, which was incorrect. Had the tree been declared, an assessment of its amenity value would have taken place which may have led to its protection.
· The sign should not set a precedent for other large digital displays to be approved and erected across the town.
The Committee then considered the application. In response to a query regarding the height of the sign, the Planning Officer confirmed that the combined height of the display and the structure/stand was approximately 6.5 metres.
Committee members raised safety concerns regarding the positioning of the sign next to a highway, which may be distracting for drivers in what was a high traffic area. The Planning Officer confirmed that, prior to the installation of the current sign, a similarly sized advertisement sign was consented at the site and thus the principle of signage at the site was already established. It was also highlighted that West Sussex County Council was consulted on the proposals and had no objection on highway safety grounds.
In response to queries from the Committee, the Planning Officer confirmed that the brightness of the display was regulated via a condition which established two maximum brightness levels – for daylight hours and for darkness hours – which were set in statute. Some Committee members identified occasions where the display had been too bright for the conditions; the Planning Officer gave assurance that the brightness could be measured and if it exceeded the consented level, it could be reduced to an acceptable level. It was also highlighted that there were ... view the full minutes text for item 5.
To consider report PES/408cof the Head of Economy and Planning.
RECOMMENDATION to CONSENT.
The Committee considered report PES/408c of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:
Chestnut 6790, 6791, 6792, 6797, 6794, 6796, 6795, 6798, 6800, 6799, 6789, 6788, 6824, 6779, 9201, 6719, 6714, 6729, 6738, 6722, 6742, 6713, 6751, 6717, 6746, 6712, 6755, 6724, 6702, 6726, 6733, 6705, 6730, 6787, 6783, 6786, 6753, 6767, 6768, 6704, 6770, 6771, 6772, 6774, 6776, 6775, 6782, 9202, 9141, 9144, 9139, 9138, 9137, 9136, 9135, 9134, 9133, 9132, 9131, 9130, 9129, 9128, 9127, 9126, 9125, 9124, 9123, 9122, 9121, 9120, 9119, 9118, 9117, 9116, 9115, 9114, 9101, 9111, 9140, 9103, 9110, 9108, 7604, 7605, 7606, 7609, 9113, 9112, 7612, 7611, 7610, 7607, 7603, 7602, 7601, 9102, 9107, 9109, 9106, and 0139 - removal of basal/epicormic growth and re-pollard.
Chestnut 6732, 9145 - re-pollard.
Chestnut 6735, 6748, 6769, 9204, 7608, 9105 -
Councillor Burrett declared he had visited the site.
The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought consent for the pollarding of 110 trees along either side of a footpath in Pound Hill. The trees were on a re-pollarding cycle and had become overgrown since the last set of works; they were now causing problems for neighbouring houses and required trimming. Six of the trees were required to be felled.
The Committee then considered the application. Committee members sought clarification on the reasons for felling the six trees, which were damaged or dying and had a limited lifespan. It was confirmed that they were to be replaced with six new horse chestnut trees which would be protected under a Tree Preservation Order. A concern was raised as to whether the dying trees should be replaced with those of the same species as they may be more susceptible to the same diseases. The Officer assured the Committee that they were not aware of any issues present at the site which were specific to horse chestnut trees.
Committee members expressed regret for the removal of the six trees but were supportive of the proposal to plant replacements.
Consent subject to the conditions set out in report PES/408c.
To consider report PES/408d of the Head of Economy and Planning.
RECOMMENDATION to CONSENT.
The Committee considered report PES/408d of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:
Oak – fell.
Councillor Burrett declared he had visited the site.
The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought consent for the felling of an oak tree which was in decline. The base of the trunk was rotting and a controlled felling would prevent any danger of the tree falling in a way that caused damage to nearby properties.
The Committee then considered the application. It was agreed that it was a shame to fell an established tree that made a positive contribution to the amenity of the area but this was necessary for safety reasons. A replacement tree was proposed to be planted and would be protected.
Consent subject to the conditions set out in report PES/408d.