Notes of a meeting of the Environment and Infrastructure working party held on 15th September 2016 at 10am at Roffey Millennium Hall
Purpose:– one of three working parties appointed as part of co-ordinating a full response to the outline planning application recently submitted for development north of Horsham (DC/16/1677). The application includes housing (up to 2,750 dwellings), a business park (up to 46,450 m2), retail, community centre, leisure facilities, education facilities, public open space, landscaping and related infrastructure and has reserved matters except for access.
Remit:– to put forward comments relating to noise, flooding, green spaces including recreation and sport, internal road design, building design, construction , retail and business.
Working Group Members:- Martin Loates, David Searle*, Ian Wassell*.
*Denotes present
Noise
• Bunds on A264 to buffer new development – what about existing residential area to the south?
• Impact on noise during construction – will this be measured, policed and enforced and will there be time restrictions ie no noise before 8am or after 5pm?
• Noted 381 construction workers on site potentially for 14 years over the full time of the development, mostly living in caravans, how will noise from this group be controlled as they will tend to have a communal outdoor space.
Flooding
• SuDS (Sustainable drainage systems). Use of holding ponds and water loving tree species to manage flooding, however, could water draining into the streams on site create a problem downstream in the town where flooding is already an issue? Note serious flooding in recent years at Hills Farm and Tanbridge Park. Also flooding further along the River Arun for example at Pulborough. Will the proposals move any flooding problems along?
• Concern regarding discharge of water especially during what contaminants and the effect on wildlife habitats in local area, especially Warnham Nature Reserve – site of local value and wealth of wild life.
• Will it affect the designation of the flood plain and as a consequence insurance?
Green spaces
• Need assurance that open spaces that are already in existence, for example the Riverside Walk are preserved within the ethos that they were originated, ie that the walk is not diverted through development. Similarly, footpaths that are being diverted.
• Who will be responsible for green spaces and trees both in the day to day management and long term? Concern that this may fall to the Parish Council but without the resources, both finance and manpower.
• How will proposed facilities fit in with those already in existence in Horsham. Concern that new facilities may impact on the viability of existing leisure centres, multi courts, sport and leisure provision.
• Also concern about community centre and how it impacts on halls, community centres already in existence in Horsham.
• Sports facilities should have non-invasive lighting to protect nearby housing from light pollution.
• Should sports pitches have changing facilities available?
• Concern about who is responsible for maintenance of any recreational facilities.
Internal road design
• Parking – concern that there is sufficient parking provision for residents and visitors.
• Use Secured by Design principals so that group car parking is easily accessible, easy to use, attractive and well lit.
• Parking on the roads discouraged.
• Low level street lighting.
• The proposed new entrance to the development off the A264 will have to be suitable to take traffic currently using the first part of Langhurstwood Road which will be blocked off. This includes significant vehicle movement (including heavy lorries) to Biffa, Viridor and possibly the proposed incinerator proposed for the incinerator site. Does the design take that into consideration?
• How will housing design along the access road allow for noise and vibration from the heavy traffic movements?
• Emergency access to the site appears to be along Wimland Road is this viable bearing in mind the level crossing?
Building design
• Continuity in design and in the Sussex vernacular.
• Good housing mix of different sized housing.
• The sample of building design and materials appears to be sympathetic to local design, but guidance will be sought from the Horsham Society.
• Houses include access points for broadband and TV reception to avoid unsightly satellite dishes or large aerials.
• Bungalows for older people.
Construction
• During the construction period, sufficient temporary car parking for construction workers.
• Concern that workers may travel in several cars to one point and travel forward in one car leaving street in north Horsham with additional parking.
• Adequate tyre washing facilities.
• Noise – see previous.
Retail and business
• Preference for light manufacturing/ industry and offices.
• Provision for sufficient car parking and delivery by lorries.
General points
• How will the development of Gatwick Airport and the proposed incinerator influence this development?
• How can the developer be held accountable for delivering what has been promised in the application?
• Concern that infrastructure is delivered in a timely way so that when houses are built facilities are available as people move into the development.
• Concern raised that if a facility isn’t built the land will be used for more housing.
• Concern about pressure on existing services such as schools, doctors’ surgeries, dentists etc.
Further meetings were not scheduled due to the availability of the working group members. It was suggested that if necessary, the topics and preliminary thoughts of the group could be amalgamated into another working group.
There being no further business the meeting closed at 11.45am.
Notes taken by the Clerk (Pauline Whitehead)
