MSDC/HS/5
MID SUSSEX
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
FRAMEWORK
SMALL SCALE HOUSING ALLOCATIONS
DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
LAND AT COVERS TIMBER YARD, BURGESS HILL
Statement by Mid Sussex District Council
January 2007
MSDC/HS/5
LAND AT COVERS TIMBER YARD, 107 FAIRFIELD ROAD,
BURGESS HILL
STATEMENT BY MID SUSSEX DISTRICT COUNCIL
1.0
Introduction
1.1
The following statement explains the background and justification for the District
Council’s decision to include land at Covers Timber Yard, Burgess Hill within the
Small Scale Housing Allocations Submission Document CDMS5. This Document
details the housing requirement for Mid Sussex over the period 2006-2016, that
derive from the West Sussex Structure Plan, and explains how the District Council
considers this can be met.
1.2
The background to the overall housing requirement for Mid Sussex and the ways in
which the District Council considers this can be met are examined in the Council’s
Position Statement relating to Housing provision CDMS34.
The following
paragraphs should therefore be considered against this background.
1.3
Table 1 of the Submission document estimates the number of dwellings that could
come forward on previously developed sites over the period 2006-2016. (This table
has subsequently been updated in the Council’s Housing position statement). The
majority of these sites will be unidentified or ‘windfall’ sites. However, the District
Council has included some previously developed sites in the Document. These
sites could come forward for development over the plan period without being
allocated and would be considered on their merits in accordance with relevant
planning policies. However, the District Council believes that their specific allocation
for housing will encourage them to come forward for development during the Plan
period, and in some cases help to bring about changes that would be of wider
benefit.
1.4
The District Council considers that for the reasons outlined below, the site at Covers
Timber Yard, Burgess Hill is suitable for allocation for housing and can make a
contribution to the housing provision to be found on previously developed land.
2.0
Site Description
2.1
The site is approximately 0.36 hectares in size and is currently in commercial use as
a Timber and Builders Merchant Yard and consists of several buildings and an open
storage area for building materials. The yard is accessed from Fairfield Road and is
bordered on all sides by residential properties.
2.2
The site is located in a predominantly residential area of Burgess Hill to the north of
the town centre. It is within walking distance of the town centre and public transport
and has local shops nearby.
3.0
Existing Policy Designations
3.1
In the Mid Sussex Local Plan 2004 CDMS36 the site falls within the built up area
boundary of Burgess Hill. There are no further policy designations on this site.
4.0
Relevant Planning History
4.1
A number of applications have been submitted on this site. An application for 14
dwellings (BH/143/93) was approved in 1995 but was never implemented. In 2000,
an application to extend the opening hours (00/01099/FUL) was refused and
dismissed at appeal. Following enforcement action, a retrospective application in
2005 (BH/05/2303/FUL) for external racking for the storage of building materials
currently at the eastern part of the site and on the south-eastern and north-eastern
boundaries was refused. In 2006 an application (06/00493/FUL) was approved to
provide external racking in the yard area for the storage of building materials.
5.0
Principal Issues
5.1
A number of specific issues have been identified for examination and these are
considered below.
5.2
This site lies within the built up area of Burgess Hill as defined in the Mid Sussex
Local Plan 2004 CDMS36, and is previously developed land. As such there is no
objection to new residential development in principle.
Government policy as
expressed in PPS3 Housing CDNat10 aims to promote more sustainable patterns of
development and make better use of previously developed land. Opportunities for
development on previously developed land should generally take priority over the
development of greenfield sites.
Should the allocation precede the South East Plan and the proposed Burgess Hill
Masterplan?
5.3
Burgess Hill Town Council are concerned about the accumulative impact of
fragmented development on the town’s infrastructure. The Town Council wants to
see development in Burgess Hill delayed to allow consideration of all sites as part of
the preparation of the Town Wide Plan. An explanation of the scope and context for
the Town Wide Plan is set out in position statement CDMS63.
5.4
Objectors consider the release of the site is premature pending publication of the
‘town wide master plan’ and the South East Plan.
Although the principle of
development at this site is accepted, awaiting the approval of the South East Plan
and the preparation of a statutory Development Plan Document for Burgess Hill
would delay a decision on whether the site should be allocated for development. It
is therefore important that the allocation is confirmed promptly, and not deferred, in
order that this site can be promoted for housing and delivered to help meet the
Council’s housing requirement in the period to 2016.
Should the site be retained for employment purposes?
5.5
This site was identified in the Urban Potential Study (page 160) CDMS21 as being
suitable for a residential redevelopment. The site is inappropriately located with
regards to its current commercial use and there has been a history of complaints
from local residents with regard to deliveries, highways and hours of activity. The
Council contends that allocation of this site and the successful relocation of its
current use to a more suitable location will bring about a change that would be of
wider benefit to the community as a whole.
What effect would the loss of the existing use have on associated travel
requirements?
5.6
Covers supply both the trade and non-trade customer and it is considered that the
vast majority of people using Covers to purchase building material are likely to use
motor vehicles. Therefore, the loss of this site to another location would have little
impact on the overall need to use motor vehicles to use the facilities at Covers
Builders Merchant, regardless of its location. In addition, the site is poorly located
for its current commercial operations and WSCC Highways state that the narrow
Fairfield Road is unsuitable for use by commercial vehicles. Allocation of this site
would promote a sustainable residential development in a sustainable location with
realistic transport alternatives to the use of the car.
Infrastructure
5.7
Throughout the consultation process, concerns have been expressed about the
ability of the infrastructure of the town to support further significant housing
development. Particular areas of concern are; the local road network, the sewerage
system (particularly the capacity of local pumping stations and the treatment works
at Goddards Green), surface water drainage, water supply, capacity of local GP
medical practices and school capacity.
The Council contends that these
infrastructure issues are being addressed and this is detailed over the following
paragraphs.
5.8
The Council’s policies for the provision of infrastructure are set out in the Mid
Sussex Local Plan (Policy G3) CDMS36 and detailed guidance is set out in the up to
date Supplementary Planning Document ‘Development and Infrastructure’, adopted
in February 2006 CDMS19. The proposed policy for the site makes provision for
necessary infrastructure requirements to be addressed at the time a planning
application is submitted.
Other services will be sought through financial
contributions in accordance with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document.
Sustainability - Access to services
5.9
The site is in a sustainable location and is well located in relation to the town centre
and other key facilities and is well served by public transport. It is 900m from the
town centre and approximately 1.5 km from two mainline railway stations (Burgess
Hill and Wivelsfield) and 150m from local shops. It is 850 m from Sheddingdean
Primary School and 1.6km from Oakmeeds Secondary School.
The Triangle
Leisure Centre is 1.9 km (1.4km walking distance) from the site.
5.10
The ease of access to services and facilities was reflected in the Council’s
Sustainability Appraisal Report May 2006 CDMS7 (pages 123 – 124) where the site
impacted positively on the majority of the social objectives and those environmental
objectives which seek to minimise car use.
Access, roads and alternative means of travel
5.11
Access to this site would be from Fairfield Road and the Highways Authority has
stated that this will need to meet minimum WSCC standards.
The Highways
Authority has also stated that the proposal for 18 units is unlikely to generate
significant levels of traffic. WSCC Highways also state that the narrow Fairfield Road
in unsuitable for it current use by commercial vehicles.
5.12
The site is fairly well served by public transport. The Burgess Hill circular bus service
provides two buses per hour within 150 m of the site (request stop) with direct
services to Burgess Hill Town centre (with further on-going connecting services), the
Triangle Leisure Centre and the Tesco superstore. In addition, the Burgess Hill and
Wivelsfield main-line railway stations are both approximately 1.5km distant from the
site (with regular direct services to London, Gatwick, Brighton, Eastbourne and
Hastings).
Sewerage, surface water disposal and water supply
5.13
The Environment Agency stated at the submission stage consultation that it is not
known whether the existing sewage infrastructure can accommodate the likely
increase in sewage volumes as a result of increased development in Burgess Hill.
Southern Water does not object to the allocation of this site and have indicated that
there is no indication of a lack of foul water sewer capacity in the vicinity of this site.
5.14
For the South East Plan Examination in Public the Environment Agency issued a
document entitled ‘Planning for Water Quality and Growth in the South East’ CDReg7
and CDReg8. This Document detailed locations where development needs to be
restricted as existing wastewater treatment works have limited or insufficient capacity
to accommodate increased housing growth, which in turn brings increased effluent
discharge.
Goddards Green Waste Water Treatment works (GGTW) was not
identified as having insufficient capacity to accommodate significant housing growth
in its catchment area. This site falls within the catchment of the GGTW and therefore,
in principle, further housing can be delivered within this catchment without causing an
adverse impact on water quality.
5.15
With this in mind the key issue is to ensure that improvements to the surface water
and foul water drainage capacity are in place before new housing is delivered. The
Council suggests the addition of policy criterion (f) to require the provision of
adequate foul and surface water infrastructure, prior to the occupation of any
dwellings, which does not cause a detrimental impact to any local watercourses. This
criterion should address the Environment Agency’s representation relating to the
provision of sewerage infrastructure, as well as their comments made in the position
statement ’Sewerage Infrastructure in the catchment of the GGTW’ CDMS54, which
is the waste water treatment works that is likely to be used for any development on
this site.
5.16
In this area, water is supplied by South East Water who have not raised an objection
to the allocation of this site. In addition, the Council has adopted a Supplementary
Planning Document on Sustainable Construction, which will seek water-saving
features incorporated in the designs for development.
Health facilities and school capacity
5.17
The Education Authority has stated that there are sufficient places within Burgess Hill
Schools to accommodate additional pupils generated by the development.
In
addition, development of this site will attract financial contributions towards
educational facilities in accordance with the Council’s Development and Infrastructure
Supplementary Planning Document.
5.18
The nearest health facility to this site is 1.1km distant from the site. In addition, the
Council has recently approved a health centre at the Sidney West site in Leylands
Road, Burgess Hill (560m distant) that will go a significant way in alleviating medical
infrastructure deficiencies that currently exist in Burgess Hill.
Electricity
5.19
During the consultation period it was brought to the Council’s attention that there is a
deficiency in supplying electricity to this site that would require attention if
development of this site was undertaken.
This issue is addressed by way of
criterion (d) that forms part of the proposed policy for this allocation.
Environmental constraints and opportunities
5.20
There is a long history at this site of conflict between the local residents with regard to
deliveries, highways and hours of activity and the allocation of this site and the
successful relocation of the current use would resolve these differences and free up a
deliverable, sustainable, previously developed site for residential use.
5.21
The Environment Agency has indicated that they would expect to see ecological
enhancements in any development of this scale and request that this is included as
policy requirement. In addition, the Sustainability Appraisal makes reference to the
opportunity to include features of biodiversity interest in development of this site.
With this is mind, the Council would expect a development on previously developed
land at this scale to follow the requirements as set out in its Landscape and
Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance, CDMS25 (noting the potential for
landscape improvements at this site). By following the guidance contained within
this Supplementary Planning Guidance, this should address the Environment
Agency’s concern without the need for additional policy criterion.
5.22
The Environment Agency has indicated that the site would be potentially
contaminated following its previous use and redevelopment should be in accordance
with PPS23 and support the inclusion of criterion (c) for a detailed investigation into
possible sources of on-site contamination and the completion of any remedial works
required before any building works commence.
Density
5.23
The Council considers that a medium to high-density scheme is possible for this well
located sustainable site. The policy states that the site could accommodate 18
dwellings, which would equate to a density of 50 dwellings per hectare across the
whole of the site area.
Site Availability
5.24
It is granted that the outline permission for housing at this site has lapsed and that
no further firm proposals have been made by the occupier to relocate the current
commercial use. In addition, the Council would usually seek to resist changes of
use from business to other uses. However, for the reasons as set out in paragraph
5.20, the Council will assist in anyway it can to help relocate the existing use at this
site to a better location to bring about redevelopment as soon as possible and
contend that the specific allocation of this site for housing will encourage it to come
forward during the plan period and will bring about a greater degree of certainty as
to its future.
6.0
Suggested Policy Requirements
6.1
The policy relating to the allocation of this site in the Submission document includes
a number of specific requirements that the Council considers must be addressed if
this site is to be developed for housing. These are in addition to general policy
requirements and contributions to infrastructure, which will apply to all new
developments. Clause (a) relates to the provision of affordable housing, which is
common to all the site allocations, and is considered in the Background Housing
Paper CDMS34.
6.2
Criteria (b) and (d) relate to site-specific issues which are considered in section 5
above. Criterion (c) relates to the provision of a detailed investigation into possible
sources of on-site contamination and the completion of remedial works before
development commences.
Criterion (e) relates to the relocation of the current
commercial use to a more suitable location prior to redevelopment.
6.3
It is suggested that an additional criterion is added (f) to state that development will
be subject to the ‘provision of adequate surface water and foul water drainage
capacity without causing detriment in the quality of any local watercourses’ to
address comments made by the Environment Agency.
7.0
Response to the Representations Received
7.1
The Council received 9 representations for this site of which 8 were objections.
Objections relate to; the inclusion of this site in the Submission Document while
other alternative previously developed sites have not been included; the loss of an
employment site; the allocation of sites which may not come forward within the plan
period due to uncertainty as to whether existing occupiers will leave the site and;
fragmented development that will exacerbate current infrastructure deficiencies.
7.2
The Environment Agency has raised the issue of contamination at this site relating
to its previous use and has also requested an additional policy criterion relating to;
sewage infrastructure and the requirement to provide evidence which demonstrates
that sewerage volumes can be accommodated without detriment to the quality of
any local watercourses; and requesting ‘ecological enhancements’. These issues
are dealt with in Section 5 above.
The issue of infrastructure provision in the
southern part of the District is also addressed in paragraph 4.14 of the Submission
document CDMS5.
7.3
A number of respondents have objected to the inclusion of this employment site,
when other alternative former employment sites have not been included within the
Submission document. The development potential of this site to be delivered within
the plan period was identified in the Urban Potential Study and as stated in the
Submission Document, the District Council believes that its specific allocation for
housing will encourage it to come forward for development during the plan period,
thereby introducing a greater degree of certainty and helping to bring about a
change that would be of benefit to the wider community.
8.0
Conclusions
8.1
For the reasons outlined in the above, the Council considers that this site is suitable
for allocation in the Small Scale Housing Allocations Development Plan Document.
It proposes a number of additional policy requirements as set out in Section 6. It is
considered that its allocation for housing is sound and the Inspector is requested to
confirm its inclusion in the Document.