Agenda and minutes

Members and officers must declare any pecuniary or personalinterest in any business on the agenda. They should also make declarations at any stage such an interest becomes apparent during the meeting. Consideration should be given to leaving the meeting if the nature of the interest warrants it.  If in doubt please contact Democratic Services before the meeting.

1.1    In accordance with the County Council’s Code of Conduct, the following interests were declared:

·         Mr Jupp declared a personal interest in application WSCC/004/19/RW – Rudgwick Brickworks as a councillor for Horsham District Council.

The Committee is asked to agree the minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2019 (cream paper).

2.1    Resolved - That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 26 March 2019 be agreed as a correct record.

Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency by reason of special circumstances.

3.1    There were no urgent matters.

Report by Head of Planning Services.

To consider and determine the following application:

WSCC/004/19/RW       Extension to the restoration of the former claypit, including the remodelling of the existing landform to enable a change of use to agricultural land (permanent pasture), internal traffic management improvement measures and a proposed scheme of landscaping improvements and ecological enhancement.  Rudgwick Brickworks, Lynwick Street, Rudgwick, Horsham

RH12 3DH.

WSCC/004/19/RW     Extension to the restoration of the former claypit, including the remodelling of the existing landform to enable a change of use to agricultural land (permanent pasture), internal traffic management improvement measures and a proposed scheme of landscaping improvements and ecological enhancement.  Rudgwick Brickworks, Lynwick Street, Rudgwick, Horsham,
RH12 3DH.

4.1     The Committee considered a report by the Head of Planning Services, as amended by the agenda update sheet (copy appended to the signed copy of the minutes).  The report was introduced by James Neave, Principal Planner, who gave a presentation on the proposals, details of the consultation and key issues in respect of the application.

4.2     Mr Chris Whitehouse, NextPhase Development Ltd, agent for applicant. spoke in support of the application.  The robustness of the committee report and grounds for refusal were questioned.  The only technical assessment of landscape is the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), submitted as part of the application; this is not acknowledged or referenced in the Committee Report, however, it notes that the impacts on landscape and visual receptors will be temporary and restoration will provide beneficial change including a cohesive landform, an increase in tree cover and improved views.  There is no justification or reason as to how and why the Planning Officer has drawn an alternative conclusion.  Mr Whitehouse stated that the application is restoration and clearly accords with each of the nine criteria for Policy W8 of the Waste Local Plan (WLP).

4.3     Mr James McClean of Restoration to Agriculture (for the landowners, the Harrison family), the applicant, spoke in support of the application.  The project is a gigantic recovery plan for 20 acres of abandoned, former clay pit and restoration of land to agricultural use to sustain existing farming operations.  Only 23,000m³ of the 85,000m³ of inert waste mentioned in the report (25%) will be infill to steep agricultural land, which is dangerous in some weather.  75% of the application deals with topographical changes, ecological enhancements and traffic improvements within the existing extant site, which is where the rest of the imported material will be placed.  The LVIA concludes the final landform will enhance views across the new meadows.  Woodland is already threatened; 16 trees have Ash Die Back and will have to be removed.  Bat surveys and checks have not noted bats in the 20 trees in the current woodland shaw; but mitigation measures and ecological enhancements have been developed anyway.  Contrary to the Planning Officer’s opinion, the applicant will use only the minimum amount of material necessary to achieve the objective; there will be no doming or mounding.  Operations have been conducted for 4-years with no complaints or statutory interventions.  The applicant has worked successfully with the liaison group and local community.  The Parish Council and Rudgwick Preservation Society support the application.

4.4        Cllr Richard Landeryou, Horsham District Councillor for Rudgwick and a Rudgwick Parish Councillor (formerly Chairman during the first three years of the infill of the clay pit), spoke in support of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Report by Head of Planning Services.

To consider and determine the following application:

WSCC/037/19               Proposed Inert Waste Recycling Facility, with new building, hardstanding, car parking, boundary treatment and re-aligned access to the agricultural unit.  Includes variation to approved site landscaping and use of internal spaces within the existing Materials Recovery Facility.  Envirowaste (Southern) Limited, Burndell Road, Yapton, West Sussex, BN18 0HR

WSCC/037/19             Proposed Inert Waste Recycling Facility, with new building, hardstanding, car parking, boundary treatment and re-aligned access to the agricultural unit.  Includes variation to approved site landscaping and use of internal spaces within the existing Materials Recovery Facility.  Envirowaste (Southern) Limited, Burndell Road, Yapton, West Sussex, BN18 0HR.

5.1        The Committee considered a report by the Head of Planning Services, as amended by the agenda update sheet (copy appended to the signed copy of the minutes).  The report was introduced by Edward Anderson, Assistant Planner, who gave a presentation on the proposals, details of the consultation and key issues in respect of the application.

5.2        Cllr Henry Burrell of Clymping Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.  Although it is on the former airfield, the site is in open countryside.  The application meets none of the exemptions in the Arun Local Plan enabling development and fails to take account of Clymping Neighbourhood Plan.  Noise and dust should be independently assessed.  Concern was raised about health hazards and smaller dust particles and distance travelled, as well as lack of controls and the impact from cumulative development including the approved concrete batching plant and new housing.  Cumulative development, including new housing, will also have an impact on traffic and road safety.  The site is not designated in the WLP and so the need is questioned, especially in relation to the approved application for the Arun Waste inert waste plant in Clymping (WSCC/067/15/CM).

5.3        Cllr Amanda Worne, Arun District Councillor for Yapton (including Ford and Clymping), spoke in objection to the application.  The health and safety of residents will be affected and the impact of dust on residents and children using gardens and also local wildlife was highlighted.  It can’t be guaranteed that dust won’t spread - various local areas were noted as a concern, including the villages of Clymping, Yapton and Ford, the nearest residential property which is only 95m distant, the local school and the war memorial which is used for public gatherings.  The doors to the plant will be open for 15 minutes every hour during concrete crushing so it can’t be guaranteed that dust won’t escape.  Road safety concerns were raised regarding the increase in HGV numbers and the recent death of a local motorcyclist on Yapton Road following a collision with a HGV was cited.  Concern was raised about the impact of noise levels - up to 110 decibels (dB) - which is unacceptable.

5.4        Mr Doug Maw, local resident and Parish Councillor for Yapton, spoke in objection to the application.  The site has expanded its use and increased its capacity over the years; originally it was for waste cardboard and tyres and but is now used for hardcore and aggregates and the volume is now proposed to be 60,000 tonnes per annum; this is totally inappropriate in a rural location.  The constant change of use means there is a danger of further change of use being allowed in future.  The impacts of dust on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report by Head of Planning Services.

To consider and determine the following application:

WSCC/050/18/BK        Erection of replacement dwelling, including acoustic bunds along east, west and side boundaries.  Dan Tree Farm, London Road, Bolney, West Sussex, RH17 5QD.

WSCC/050/18/BK       Erection of replacement dwelling, including acoustic bunds along east, west and side boundaries.  Dan Tree Farm, London Road, Bolney, West Sussex, RH17 5QD.

6.1    The Committee considered a report by the Head of Planning Services (copy appended to the signed copy of the minutes).  The report was introduced by James Neave, Principal Planner, who gave a presentation on the proposals, details of the consultation and key issues in respect of the application.

6.2    Mr Alan Potter, specialist on waste planning policy on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.  Mr Potter declared that he recently worked with the County Council on annual reports on construction waste management capacity and the formulation of the current WLP.  The application is compliant with at least five out of nine criteria of Policy W8 of the WLP: it provides clear benefits; involves only material that cannot be recycled or treated and is suitable for the purpose; does not involve unacceptable impacts on natural resources or other environmental constraints, and does not sterilise mineral reserves.  The criterion requiring a genuine need to use waste material is about proposals not being advanced solely on the basis of providing outlets for waste; it should not be construed as a ‘need’.  The bund is not a waste development, it is only being heard as such because of the County Council’s insistence that it is.  The bund may be constructed of material that is not defined as waste.  Regarding criteria for amount of material, the design will minimise the amount used whilst achieving performance in noise mitigation.  The applicant was given no opportunity to demonstrate an identified need for disposal of inert waste.  The County Council itself predicts an exhaustion of recovery capacity in 2019-20, so the assertion that material could be otherwise managed through recovery is not supported by facts.  The application will help meet local needs.

6.3    Mr Peter Radmall, author of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), spoke in support of the application.  Design of the bunds must strike a balance between acoustic mitigation, the natural terrain, ease of construction and proportion of the residential land used.  Local topography is already extensively modified, mainly due to the A23 and there is acoustic bunding immediately to the south so engineered landforms are already characteristic in the area and the bund would not be incongruous.  Earthworks on the A23 have become densely vegetated and are readily assimilated into the landscape; vegetation on the proposed bund will soften the effect.  The current site contributes little to the character of the area.  The development will not affect the vegetated boundaries which already screen the site.  Development will be most visible during construction.  A planting scheme will be agreed.  Regarding the AONB Management Plan, the site has no bearing on settlements or routeways, supports neither woodland nor heathland and is not part of any historic field pattern, so does not impact on the character of the High Weald.  In terms of natural topography, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Report by Head of Planning Services.

To note the following:

Report on Development Management Performance (1 April 2018 – 31 March 2019)

7.1     The committee received and noted a report by the Head of Planning Services on development management performance (1 April 2017 –
31 March 2018).  The report was introduced by Jane Moseley, County Planning Team Manager, who provided a presentation on the work undertaken by the County Planning Team in relation to the determination of planning applications over the past year.

7.2.    During the discussion of the item the Committee raised the points below and clarification was provided by the County Planning Manager, where applicable:

Extensions of time to determine applications

Point raised – How much is the team relying on extensions of time to meet targets?

Response – This information is not included in the report due to a cross over to a new planning system.  However, extensions of time are an accepted mechanism for managing planning applications.

Quality of major developments

Point raised – The figures of 10% of 100% in the section Quality of Major Development in Table 1 of the Committee report was queried.

Response – The County Planning Manager will check the accuracy, but confirmed that the Planning Team is doing well in terms of Quality of Major Development.

7.3    The Committee thanked the Planning Team for its work.

Report by Strategic Planning, County Planning Manager.

To note the schedule of County Matter applications and the schedule of applications submitted under the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 – Regulation 3.

8.1    The Committee received and noted a report by the Head of Planning Services on applications awaiting determination (copy appended to the signed minutes) detailing the schedule of County Matter applications and the schedule of applications submitted under the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 – Regulation 3.

Report by Strategic Planning, County Planning Manager.

To note the report of applications approved subject to conditions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 since the Planning Committee meeting on 26 March 2019.

9.1    The Committee received and noted a report by the Head of Planning Services (copy appended to the signed minutes) applications approved subject to conditions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 since the Planning Committee meeting on 26 March 2019.

The next meeting of the Planning Committee will be held at 10.30 a.m.on Tuesday, 10 September 2019.

10.1  The following scheduled meeting of Planning Committee will be on Tuesday, 10 September 2019 at 10.30 a.m. at County Hall, Chichester.