Agenda item

Planning Application CR/2016/0962/ARM - Phase 3B, Forge Wood (NES), Crawley

To consider report PES/242 (a)of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services.





The Committee considered report PES/242 (a) of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services which proposed as follows:


Approval of reserved matters for Phase 3B for 151 dwellings and associated works pursuant to CR/2015/0552/NCC for a mixed use neighbourhood (amended description and amended plans received).


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


·         Following concerns it had raised regarding drainage on to the M23 motorway, Highways England had since confirmed that it had no objection to the revised details received  and acknowledged the condition 16 submission will deal with the site wide drainage strategy and management  and there were detailed conditions on the reserved matters for the bund and fence along the motorway..

·         In respect of road noise, late comments had been received from the Council’s Environmental Health Department about the noise modelling report.  In response, the Applicants had advised that those comments would be taken on board for the detailed proposals for noise mitigation under condition 34 and they were confident that the noise barriers would provide for the necessary mitigation together with the specific measures for the houses. This was consistent with the approach taken for Phases 3A and 4A.

·         Delete Condition 12 as set out in the report and replace as below:


Condition 12

Prior to first occupation, the following windows on the residential flats shall be glazed with obscured glass as shown on the approved plans:

Plot 129 south elevation

Plot 130 south elevation         

Plot 134 south elevation

Plot 135 south elevation

Plot 136 south elevation

Plot 148 west elevation

These windows shall thereafter be permanently maintained in accordance with the agreed details.

REASON: To protect the amenities and privacy of future occupiers in accordance with policy CH3 of the Crawley Borough Local Plan 2015 -2030.


Ms Laura Humphries, the Agent, addressed the Committee in support of the application.


The Committee then considered the application.  In response to the issues raised, the Principal Planning Officer:

·         Confirmed that the amended plans now showed an increased provision of visitor car parking spaces throughout the scheme, especially in the areas of the flats.

·         Explained that in terms of those dwellings where there was a 20m separation distance of habitable room window to window relationship, these dwellings were affordable housing, and whilst the amended plans had endeavoured to ensure that the separation distances were compliant with the Urban Design UPD’s minimum requirement of 21m, it had not been possible to revise this any further due to physical constraints of the layout.

·         Advised that with regard to the 26 dwellings that did not meet the garden size standards, some were private dwellings whilst others were affordable. (Garden sizes were set out as guidance not policy)

·         Explained further that the scheme had now been amended and redesigned to a point where the additional rear garden space for these dwellings could not be achieved without resulting in harm to the aesthetic urban environment, the public realm and soft landscaping. 

·         Indicated that given the location of the site and surrounding open space, the relationship to the sports and play facilities in Phase 4 to the north and the proximity to the nearby woodland, it was considered that the development in this sub phase would benefit significantly from the range of additional open space provision.

·         Advised that because permitted development rights had been removed in terms of all site dwellings, any occupier who wished to make improvements / extensions would first need to seek planning permission and the resultant garden size would be taken into account in the determination of those applications.

·         Clarified that the use of the word “requested” in the second line of Informative 5 was appropriate as it was an Informative and not a Condition / Obligation.




Approved, subject to the conditions set out in report PES/242 (a), and the updated Condition 12 above.

Supporting documents: