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

No 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.

The following lobbying declarations were made by councillors:

Councillors Ali, Burrett, Hart, Jaggard, K Khan, Y Khan, S Mullins and Mwagale had been lobbied but had expressed no view on application CR/2022/0055/FUL.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 7^th March 2023.

The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 7March 2023 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Chair then called for the Committee to take a brief adjournment to allow for councillors to break their fast with Iftar.

To consider report PES/412aof the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/412a of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:

Erection of 3 warehouse units (Use Class B8), associated external plant, car/HGV parking, site access, internal roads, boundary security fencing and hard/soft landscaping.

Councillors Ali, Burrett and Jaggard declared they had visited the site.

The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application, which the Committee had previously resolved to permit at its meeting on 20 July 2021.  The application had sought permission for three buildings for storage and distribution use at a vacant site within the Manor Royal Employment Area, however had since been affected by Natural England’s Position Statement on water neutrality and therefore required further consideration.  The addendum report set out that the development’s water usage would be considerably greater than prior to development as the site had been vacant. Mitigation measures were proposed in order to achieve water neutrality through a combination of on-site water efficiency measures (fittings and rainwater harvesting system) and off-site offsetting measures (through the Crawley Homes Water Neutrality Retrofit Programme). 

The Committee was informed that several corrections and clarifications to report PES/412a were required as follows:

·         The second line of paragraph 5.38 should read ‘informatives 1,2,3 and 8’.

·         The second line of Condition 6 in relation to the PV Panel Glint and Glare Assessment was to be amended to be dated July 2021.

·         The second line of Condition 12 was to be corrected to read ‘and not for any otheruse as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended), without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority’.

·         The first line of Informative 5 was to be amended and should read Sussex Police.

The Group Manager then gave details of the various relevant planning considerations as set out in the report.  Whilst the planning considerations and conclusions in the original report (Appendix A to report PES/412a) remained valid, the fundamental changes were to the proposed conditions as the development was substantially complete.  The recommendation was therefore to delegate the decision to permit the application to the Head of Economy and Planning subject to the conclusion of consultation with Natural England on the Appropriate Assessment, the conclusion of the S106 Agreement, and the conditions set out in the report.

Hannah Swainston, the Agent (Quod), spoke on behalf of the applicant in support of the application.  Matters raised included:

·         The scheme would bring forward economic growth to Manor Royal and the town.

·         Whilst the water neutrality solution had proven lengthy, it was now envisaged the  proposal would result in a high quality scheme, offering employment in a key area with local benefits being developed through an Employment and Skills Plan.

·         Financial contributions secured through S106 Agreements would assist in improving cycling and public transport infrastructures.

The Committee then considered the application.  Committee members raised several queries, to which the officers provided the following clarifications:

·         Further information was requested regarding water neutrality and the off-setting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider report PES/412bof the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT.

The Committee considered report PES/412b of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:

Erection of 60 dwellings including associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure works (amended plans and documents received).

Councillors Ali, Burrett, Jaggard and Mwagale declared they had visited the site.

The Principal Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application, which sought permission for a development of 40 one and two bedroom flats and 20 three and four bedroom houses with associated infrastructure.  In terms of the affordable units, of the 60 dwellings proposed, 24 were affordable and therefore the level of provision complied with the 40% criteria.

The Committee was informed that several corrections and clarifications to report PES/412b were required as follows:

·         The sixth line of paragraph 5.58 should read ’15 – 16m’.

·         The eight line of paragraph 5.58 was to be corrected to read ‘with balconies facing west’.

·         The sixth line of paragraph 5.64 was to be amended and should read ‘stores for theflats are also shown’.

·         The figure of £18,047 to be added to the Air Quality Mitigation contribution amount within paragraph 5.95.

The Officer then drew the Committee’s attention to the first pages of the report which identified the plans and drawings which had been considered as part of the application.  The Committee was advised that amendments to the following drawing references were required:

The Committee was then provided with details of the various relevant planning considerations as set out in the report.  Since the publication of the report, the CBC Refuse and Recycling Team had confirmed that house collections would be maintained at ‘front of residence’.  The Team had also requested that the bin store for Block 2 be enlarged and the Committee was informed that this was to be secured via condition.

The Officer informed the Committee that the Ecology Officer had requested several additional conditions, along with additions to the S106 clauses, in order to secure the various measures documented in the ecological report.  Those new conditions concerned:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider report PES/430 of the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to CONFIRM.

The Committee considered report PES/430 of the Head of Economy and Planning which sought to determine whether to confirm the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) – Oak Tree at 22 Lowe Close (05/2022) – with or without modification for continued protection, or not to confirm the TPO.

Councillor Burrett declared he had visited the site.

The Group Manager (Development Management) provided a verbal summation of the application, which related to an oak tree located in a residential garden in Broadfield. In October 2022 the tree was protected under a six month provisional TPO, which the Committee was now requested to confirm.  The tree was considered to be visually prominent and to be a large and attractive specimen making a significant contribution to the public visual amenity of the area.

The Officer updated the Committee that consent for a reduction in the tree height and crown radius by a maximum of 2 metres was granted in February 2023 given the concerns of the objector to tree encroachment/shading and it was now understood that these works had been undertaken. 

The Committee then considered the application including the representations received.  It held the opinion that the imposition of a TPO did not prevent necessary/justifiable works from being undertaken subject to an application being made to the Council. The Committee therefore unanimously agreed that the TPO should be confirmed without modification.

RESOLVED

Confirm, without modification.