Storrington & Sullington Parish Council s1

Storrington & Sullington Parish Council

Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee held in The Chanctonbury Room, the Parish Hall, Thakeham Road, Storrington on Thursday 6th June, 2013, commencing at 7.00 p.m.

Present: Mrs. A. Worthington-Leese in the Chair, Mrs. G. Donnelly, Mr. P. Gilham, Mr. A. Head, Mr. R. Jerman and Mr. D. Roper.

Attendees: 10 Members of the Public.

1. Election of Chairman. Mr. Roper proposed Mrs Worthington-Leese, Seconded Mr. Jerman and AGREED.

2. Election of Vice-Chairman. Mrs. Worthington-Leese proposed Mr. Jerman, Seconded Messrs. Roper and Head and AGREED.

Mrs. Worthington-Leese announced that whilst the minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Parish Council showed Mrs. L. Wheatley as a member of this Committee, she had since decided to stand down and Mrs. L. Younger would now be taking her place.

Mrs. Worthington-Leese expressed her thanks for all Mrs. Wheatley’s help and support over the years, stating that her input would be sorely missed. That said, the reasons behind her decision to stand down were understood.

3. Apologies for Absence. Were received from Mrs. L. Younger (prior engagement). The reason for absence was duly accepted.

4. To Receive Declarations of Interest from Members. Mr. Jerman declared an interest in DC/13/0816.

5. To Approve and Sign the Minutes of the Meeting held on the 9 th May, 2013. The minutes were duly APPROVED as being a correct record of the proceedings thereat and were duly signed by the Chairman.

Matters Arising:

6. Minute No. 280 (e): DC/13/0752 - Land North of Melton Drive, off Fryern Road. The Deputy Clerk had been asked to ascertain from H.D.C. how they had established the housing need figure of 286 for Storrington. The response from Andrew Smith (Housing Services Manager) received was “the 286 is simply the number of people on the HDC housing register who have expressed a preference to live in Storrington. They would not all have a local connection to Storrington. The AiRS survey only flags up those from Storrington who need an affordable home.” Mrs. Worthington-Leese read this out to all in attendance.

Members’ comments had been collated and discussed at the Annual Meeting of the Council held on 29th May. These comments were duly agreed and ratified by all members and a lengthy letter had been sent to the Case Officer listing all the reasons for a STRONG OBJECTION. STORRINGTON & SULLINGTON PARISH COUNCIL 1 Planning and Development Committee 6th June 2013

Minute No. 280 (l): DC/13/0796 - Orchard Gardens. As agreed, Mrs. Worthington-Leese and Messrs. Jerman and Head had viewed the plans for the proposed bin store. Whilst it was noted that the proposed bin store was in close proximity to the seating and kitchen areas, they had no objection, provided that the pitched roof matched those of the main buildings. These comments had been sent to H.D.C. on 28th May.

Mr. Jerman reported that whilst he was on site, he spoke with the Sales Representative regarding who would be responsible for the public car park. He was told that this would be pay and display car park, managed by an Estate Warden.

Minute No. 287 (d): Public Exhibition on proposed new residential development off Water Lane. Members reported that they had attended the exhibition and passed the hand- outs distributed at the event to the Parish Office. The proposals were for a fairly generic estate. The Deputy Clerk had requested that copies of the application be sent to the Parish Office once the information had been uploaded onto their Public Access website, as although this application was not in our Parish, it was on the boundary and we would therefore wish to comment. As of today the application had not been validated by H.D.C.

Minute No. 289 (a): DC/12/2345 – Land North of Oldfield Cottage. The office had been asked to ascertain the latest position regarding the above-mentioned application. H.D.C.’s Case Officer had reported on 14th May that she was still waiting to hear from their Landscape Officer; once this report had been received she hoped to put the application to June’s Committee. As of today, the office was waiting to hear back from the Case Officer for an update.

Minute No. 289 (b): DC/12/2269 – Mill Stream Medical Centre (land to north inc. Bell Acre). Again the office had been asked to ascertain the latest position regarding this application – to date, after speaking with the Case Officer, there was nothing further to report. The office would be in contact with the Case Officer for updates and report accordingly.

7. To consider donation to Storrington Conservation Society for production of Management Plan. Mr. Jerman had received a costing from Storrington Conservation Society of £540 for the production of a management plan for Fryern Hall Grounds (Coppice Park). Members had previously agreed that this was a very worthwhile cause and felt that this quotation was very reasonable, especially considering how much money the Conservation Society had saved the Parish Council by agreeing to undertake their tree surveys for them. With that in mind it was UNANIMOUSLY AGREED to donate the full sum of £540 to Storrington Conservation Society.

8. Planning Applications awaiting Comment – Appendix I.

(a) DC/13/0380: Springwood, Sandgate Lane. Members viewed these amended plans to move the proposed bungalow 1.000 metre away from the east boundary and 1.000 metre further forward in order that the rear wall of the bungalow is as shown on the block plan previously submitted. Members felt that this minor amendment was immaterial and after a short discussion it was AGREED:

That a comment of NO OBJECTION be sent to H.D.C

2 STORRINGTON & SULLINGTON PARISH COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee 6th June 2013

(b) DC/13/0816: 24, Swan Close. Mr. Jerman took no part in these discussions. The plans to drop the curb to the front of the property (off Swan Close) and to drop a kerb to the rear of the property (off Pulborough Road) were projected for members to view. Members felt that the access to the rear would be onto the main Pulborough Road, just opposite the lay-by by the pond, not far from the island in the road and considered this to be dangerous, especially as there does not appear to be room to turn on site. Members also felt that the access to the front would be harmful to the Root Protection Area (RPA) of the TPO’d oak tree. After discussions it was UNANIMOUSLY AGREED:

That a comment of OBJECTION be sent to H.D.C.

(c) DC/13/0869: The Granary, Lower Hurston Barn, Hurston Place Farm. Members viewed the plans for the replacement of windows with glazed aluminium frames. Mr. Head reported that he had undertaken a site visit and said that little of the glazing was visible due to fencing. It was agreed that the proposals would not have a detrimental effect on any neighbouring properties. Members queried why a planning application was needed to replace the windows and asked the office to obtain an answer. After a short discussion it was AGREED:

That a comment of NO OBJECTION be sent to H.D.C.

(d) DC/13/0881: Wild Fortune, Sandgate Lane. Members viewed the plans for the addition of a second storey over existing single storey double garage. Mrs. Worthington- Leese reminded members that a previous application had been submitted for something similar and we hadn’t objected to that one and these proposals were for a slightly smaller addition. Members noted the 14 letters of support. After discussion it was AGREED:

(e) DC/13/0906: Land to the west of Trevellan, Kithurst Park. Mrs. Worthington-Leese reported that a number of objection letters had been received and members had read these in advance of the meeting. She mentioned that an application for 4 detached houses had been submitted previously, which had been refused at Appeal and read out the main reasons for refusal from the Appeal dismissal notice. This application was for 3 smaller bungalows/chalet bungalows. Mr. Jerman said that he thought the proposals would have a huge impact on the South Downs National Park, the hedges/trees were not mature enough to screen the properties, it would set a huge precedent should the development be permitted and that he still considered the proposals as garden grabbing. Mr. Gilham highlighted the fact that the drainage appeared shallow in this location and could cause major problems. Mrs. Donnelly agreed with Mr. Jerman that the proposals would set a precedent and considered it over-development. Messrs. Roper and Head concurred, stating that despite the fact that the application was for one less property, it made no difference. Mrs. Worthington-Leese said that she felt all the reasons the previous application was refused at Appeal remained. A member of the public highlighted the fact that under the previously permitted application for the demolition of Trevellan (DC11/2124) there was a condition regarding the access only servicing one property. The office was asked to look into this and it was confirmed that on the decision notice dated 22nd December 2011 it stated: “Note to Applicant. The applicant is advised that the access is only considered acceptable to serve a single dwelling.” With all the above taken on board it was UNANIMOUSLY AGREED: 3 STORRINGTON & SULLINGTON PARISH COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee 6th June 2013

That a comment of STRONG OBJECTION, listing all of the above-mentioned points should be sent to H.D.C.

(f) DC/13/0940: 20, Rectory Close. Whilst Members viewed the plans for the erection of a single storey rear extension, Mr. Jerman reported that at first glance the application seemed quite small; however after a site visit he had concerns regarding the loss of light to the living area of number 21. The plan showing the gardens was incorrect; as the rear of garden no. 21 was at least a meter shorter than that of no. 22, not the same size and well under half that of no. 20. This would mean that half of no. 21’s garden would have a brick wall as a boundary. As this garden was south facing, these proposals would cut out a huge amount of light to their living area and block their view of the Downs. After discussions it was AGREED:

That a comment of OBJECTION be sent to H.D.C. on the grounds of loss of light to living area of number 21.

(g) DC/13/0947: Hillcote, Heather Way. The plans for extensions to the side and rear were projected for members to view. Mr. Roper had undertaken a site visit and informed members that the property was well screened with mature trees and he did not believe the proposals would be detrimental to neighbouring properties. After a short discussion it was AGREED:

(h) DC/13/0982: Westmead, Hurston Lane. Members viewed the plans for the proposed single storey rear extension. It was agreed that the property was on a big plot surrounded by trees and would not be intrusive to neighbours. After discussions it was AGREED:

(i) DC/13/0999: Moorings, Washington Road. The plans for the proposed alterations were projected for members to view. After perusal it was AGREED:

(j) DC/13/1006: Fryern Park Farm, Fryern Park, Fryern Road. The plans for the construction of a five bay stable block with tack room and wc, storage barn and sand school were projected for all to view. It was felt that this site was large enough and could easily accommodate such proposals, however members expressed concerns that the site would be unsafe, which could result in further applications for living accommodation which the Parish Council could not support. As such, it was AGREED:

That a comment of NO OBJECTION be sent to H.D.C. stating that should any further applications be received for this site, the Parish Council would be unable to support them.

9. Planning Application Decisions – Appendix II. These were duly NOTED.

10. Planning Applications, Comment Summary – since the meeting on 9 th May 2013 – Appendix III. These were duly NOTED. 4 STORRINGTON & SULLINGTON PARISH COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee 6th June 2013

11. Appeals Lodged .

(a) DC/12/1581 – Our Lady of England Roman Catholic Church, Monastery Lane. Appeal lodged against HDC’s refusal to grant planning permission. (b) DC/12/1997 4A West Street. Appeal lodged against HDC’s refusal to grant a Certificate of Lawful Development Proposed. The Parish Council was not notified of this application as it was considered within the current “permitted development rights” as detailed in the Town & Country (General Permitted Development) Order (as amended), and as such, comments from any consultee or neighbour cannot be taken into account.

12. S.106 Monies.

(a) DC/11/2334 – Waitrose Limited . Air Quality Mitigation Payment of £85,000 index- linked and Old Mill Drive Shared Surface Works Payment of £300,000 index-linked. Conditions had been put in that the above amounts will be paid before any development commences and if monies are paid late, interest will be charged.

13. Enforcement Issues.

(a) EN/13/0176- 14, Hawthorn Way, Storrington – balcony railings on single storey rear flat roof. A letter had been received from H.D.C.’s Planning Compliance Officer on 3rd June stating that the investigation into this case had been completed. No breach of planning control had been identified as the development, which had taken place, did not require planning permission as the railings were erected 7 years ago and were therefore deemed lawful under the 4 year rule. In the circumstances no further action could be taken and the case was now closed.

14. Chairman’s Announcements. There were no announcements.

15. Documents for Councillors to Read. There were no documents to read.

There being no further business the meeting closed at 8.15 pm