Page 101 - MJC submissions
P. 101

LytleJ,,s:soc�a
                    1809
                    Wealden House, EDF Site,                                              ARCHITECTS
                    East Grinstead
                    Residential Development

                    1.7      The meeting moved onto the points raised by the DRP;

                    1.8      SK confirmed that it was agreed that a scheme of flats was appropriate.

                    1.9      SK noted concerns with the block running close to the eastern boundary.
                             Separation distance vary from 2-3.Sm. Although not an overlooking issue, this
                             relationship should be improved.

                    1.10     DP noted that the DRP found the proposed building heights acceptable. SK had
                             no further comments in this regard.

                    1.11     The internal street was discussed. DP suggested that this could be eased to a
                             minimum 15 metres which should be an acceptable 'front-to-front' relationship
                             and address any perceived overlooking.

                    1.12     In addition, DP proposed to introduce roof terraces and balconies where
                             appropriate in the re-design of the proposed apartment blocks.

                    1.13     It was generally agreed that the comments regarding elevations were highly
                             subjective and DP noted that the scheme was not dissimilar to the scheme at
                             Beacon Heights, nominated for a local design award. DP would review in any
                             case.
                    1.14     SK of the view to discourage access to ancient woodland' i.e. its preservation.
                             Noted that there was already a public footpath through the wood. SK to clarify
                             with council ecologist to confirm views on 15m buffer zone guidance. FT noted
                             that the proposed is a major improvement over the existing situation and this is
                             supported by the latest NPPF guidance. Built form remains beyond the 15m
                             buffer although some permeable road/parking is proposed. A further reduction
                             in this might be part of a revised scheme.
                    1.15     Regarding sustainability, there is no policy requirement. However, a written
                             statement could be provided explaining best practice and how Building
                             Regulations/sustainability is to be applied to the development, with a particular
                             view to energy conservation.

                    1.16     DP presented two sketch options which both demonstrated a reduction in unit
                             numbers. Option 1 - reduced to 64 units and Option 2 - reduced to 57 units.
                             The sketches seek to address the concerns of the DRP by easing relationships
                             between blocks and the boundaries, introducing balconies, reducing
                             parking/hardstanding (including in the woodland buffer), resulting in a lower
                             density scheme. Noted that both were subject to review by the applicant
                    1.17     SK thought that a withdrawal followed by a pre-application might be the
                             preferred approach. DP explained that contractually, this is not an option open
                             to the applicant. Also, DP/FT felt the issues raised could be addressed with the
                             framework of the current scheme a·nd did not require a complete re-design. SK
                             advised that MSDC were open to the possibility of an extension of time/revision
                             of the application if it was believed that there was a prospect of a negotiated
                             outcome that officers could recommend.  It was requested that SK consider an



                    1809_ 4. 1_ 180820-Planning Office Meeting Notes                       Page 2 of 3
   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106