NOTES of a Meeting held at 7.30 pm. Tuesday 3 April 2012 at the Village Centre,
John Lowman (Chairman) Rosemary Burns
Greg Driver David Evans
Rodney Jackson Neil Milton
Dale Mayhew – Dowsett Mayhew Planning consultants
Stephen Hoyles (CLERK to the COUNCIL)
Apologies for absence and declarations of interest: There were no apologies and no declarations of
interest received or notified. The Chairman welcomed Rodney Jackson to the meeting, having replaced Malcolm
Heather after his resignation. The Chairman introduced Dale Mayhew, the Council’s planning consultant, to the
Notes of the Meeting of the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group 6 March 2012:
Item 3.2: It was reported that Hurst Society had decided that they would not be offering proposed housing sites as part
of the Neighbourhood plan process, but would offer comments when the Council published its suggestions.
The Working Group received and accepted the Notes.
Review of key issues: The Group noted the following:
3.1 Neighbourhood Plan – Scoping Report: John Wilkinson tabled a revised version of the Project Control
schedule and noted that while the Housing section was on programme, the sections on Employment and Amenities were
falling behind. It was agreed that he would reschedule the programme to reflect this delay. It was agreed that,
following the resignation of Malcolm Heather, Stephen Hand would lead the section on employment, with Sue Bourn to
assist. It was noted that the section on Amenities would be commenced shortly and the Clerk was due to meet the
Chairman of Community Services Committee to carry out a briefing. A meeting between the Clerk and those leading
the Countryside section was to take place shortly. (Ref: Briefing Note – Neighbourhood Plan – Scoping report 12
3.2 Future housing – public meeting – 26 March 2012: The Working Group reviewed the proceedings
of the meeting and the feedback so far received. The meeting was attended by 82 members of the public, including
representatives of some developers and landowners, and several Parish and District councillors. There were also
representatives from Albourne and Hassocks PC’s. It was noted that very few responses had been received after the
meeting but initial indications and feedback from the discussion tables show that there is broad support for setting
housing targets in the 150 – 200 range. There was also some acceptance of the proposed Chalkers Lane (north )
development of 35-38 homes, and suggestions that the area north of Fairfield recreation Ground could be developed.
There was some acceptance that some housing could be sited at Sayers Common. (Ref: Neighbourhood Plan Meeting
26 March 2012- Housing schedule of comments.)
3.3 Land north of Highfield Drive: The Working Group noted the appeal decision by the Planning
Inspectorate to refuse permission. The main reason given for refusal is the protection of the conservation area of Hurst
Wickham. However, the Inspector’s report stated that the village of Hurstpierpoint had capacity and was suitable for
development. It was noted that three other planning appeals had been determined in Mid Sussex to date this year, in
Cuckfield, Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill. One had been accepted and the others dismissed but only on design and
layout matters. It was felt that the Hurstpierpoint dismissal was the strongest . The Chairman expressed the thanks of
the Council for the work of Dale Mayhew in guiding and representing the Council’s case and leading to a successful
outcome. (Ref: The Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision 22 March 2012 – MSDC ref: 11/01391)
3.4 National Planning Policy Framework: This was published in final form on 27 March 2012. Dale
Mayhew advised that the Framework had led to many areas of uncertainty which would probably be settled on a case
basis. (Ref: NPPF 27 March 2012)
HURSTPIERPOINT SAYERS COMMON PARISH COUNCIL
3.5 Burgess Hill Town Council: The Working Group noted the BHTC response to the Council’s
Neighbourhood Plan proposals and was encouraged by the support for the Parish Council’s position regarding the
Community Sports and Business Park proposals. (Ref: BHTC letter – 20 March 2012)
Planning Consultant: Dale Mayhew updated the Working Group on the exploratory work for the
Neighbourhood Plan following his meeting with MSDC. He advised that the following would need to be addressed by
the Parish Council:
(1) Boundary of the Neighbourhood Plan: this would normally be the Parish boundary, but exceptions could be made,
for example for the area proposed by the Burgess Hill Townwide Strategy. The Working Group agreed that it would be
proposing that the whole Parish area would be included. The new regulations for the preparation of Neighbourhood
Plans were expected on 1 May 2012 and until then no final decision could be made.
(2) Evidence base: The Plan will require a strong evidence base and it is recommended that the Council adopts the
background documents prepared or commissioned by MSDC (see Item 5 of Working Group meeting 6 February 2012).
The Group agreed that this would be appropriate.
(3) Sustainability Appraisal: Until the new regulations are published it is not clear what will be required. However, it
is clear that every policy proposal in the Neighbourhood Plan will require the justification of a comparative appraisal.
The Working Group should give consideration to adopting the Sustainability Appraisal objectives set out in the MSDC
SA document (MSDC November 2011).
(Ref: HP&SCPC letter to Dowsett Mayhew – 9 February 2012)
Vision and Objectives: The Group reviewed the proceedings of the Public meeting 20 February 2012 –
‘Where we live’ and the feedback so far received. The Group was asked to consider the suggested Parish Vision
Statement and Strategic Objectives and the content of the Chapter: ‘Our Parish and its vision’. (Ref: Schedule of
comments on Parish Vision – 21 February 2012; BRIEFING NOTE Chapter 1 – Our Parish and its vision – 26
AGREED: The Working Group agreed to the proposed structure of the Introduction and
Chapter 1 of the Plan.
6.1 Housing targets: The Group considered key housing targets affecting total numbers of new homes for the
Plan period. (Ref: BRIEFING NOTE – Housing targets and sites (provisional review) – 29 March 2012 )
RECOMMENDATION to COUNCIL: The following housing targets are provisionally
adopted, subject to the further responses from the public consultation:
Hurstpierpoint: in the range 130 – 160
Sayers Common: in the range 30 – 40
Total housing targets: 160 – 200
6.2 Housing sites promoted by others: The Group reviewed the schedule of housing sites so far proposed
by others. The intention was adopt a long-list of potential sites from which preferred sites would be selected following
a systematic sustainability appraisal. It was noted that site reference 491A – White Horse, Sayers Common had been
submitted for consideration and this was added to the schedule. The long-list comprised all previous SHLAA (MSDC)
sites as well as those proposed by developers and landowners. At this stage no site would be excluded although it was
noted that the Council had already rejected the Highfield Drive site(Ref: 2) and that decision had been supported by the
Inspector at appeal.
Considerable discussion took place on the merits of proposing a long-list of potential sites. It was noted that the longlist would be subject to a rigorous sustainability appraisal to distil to a small selection of preferred sites to meet the
housing targets. It was agreed that the schedule of sites and the maps for Hurstpierpoint and Sayers Common would be
published on the Council’s website, together with a clear statement that this was a long-list from which selection would
be made. The suggested numbers of dwellings on each site would not be included at this stage (Ref: BRIEFING NOTE
– Housing targets and sites (provisional review) – 29 March 2012; Map Hurstpierpoint – 28 March 2012; Map Sayers
Common – 3 April 2012) )
RECOMMENDATION to COUNCIL: The following list of housing sites from which
preferred sites shall be selected are provisionally adopted for the draft Neighbourhood Plan,
subject to further public feedback and analysis:
HURSTPIERPOINT SAYERS COMMON PARISH COUNCIL & HURSTPIERPOINT
Highfield Drive (Ref: 2)
Trinity Road (Ref: 3)
College Lane (north) (Ref: 173)
Wickham Hill (Ref: 164)
College Lane (east) (Ref: 19)
Brighton Road Nursery (Ref: 72)
Little Park (Ref: 238)
Chalkers Lane (north) (Ref: 35)
Chalkers Lane (south) (Ref: 35A)
Cuckfield Road (Ref: 380)
Kemps (Ref: 13)
Mace garage (Ref: 452)
Kave (Ref: 380A)
Coombe Down (ref: 491)
Sayers Green (Ref: Sayers Green)
White Horse (Ref: 491A)
6.3 Response to MSDC: The Working Group considered the draft letter to MSDC in response to their request
for housing targets and selected sites. (Ref: HP&SCPC letter to MSDC – Housing targets – 4 April 2012)
AGREED: The draft letter to MSDC in response to request for targets and sites, is approved.
Consultation – Public Meeting – 8.00 pm Monday 23 April 2012 : Countryside / Economy +
Employment : This meeting has been planned as part of the public consultation process and was advertised in the
leaflet distributed in January 2012. The 173 businesses in the Parish had each been sent a leaflet ‘Where we live’ 17
February 2012 but we have not received any response and we do not expect a significant attendance from business at
the meeting. It had been decided to combine these two topics in the interests of efficiency even though they do not
appear to be of similar interest. It is proposed that the format for the evening will be as for the meetings of the 20
February and 26 March 2012, with brief presentations followed by round-table discussion groups and feedback.
It was proposed that the publicity for the meeting will be by posters and website, plus email to all those known to be
interested in the Neighbourhood Plan process. After discussion it was agreed that the meeting would be devoted to
countryside issues only and that the consultation on economy/business would be undertaken by smaller meetings
directly with businesses.
AGREED: The Working Group approves the arrangements for the meeting of 23 April 2012.
Next meeting of the Working Group: 7.30 pm Tuesday 1 May 2012.
The meeting closed at 9.56 pm