Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning Committee (South

Public Document Pack

Email: committeeservices@horsham.gov.uk Direct line: 01403 215465

Planning Committee (South)

Tuesday, 16th February, 2021 at 2.30 pm via Remote Video Link

Councillors: Brian Donnelly (Chairman) Tim Lloyd (Vice-Chairman) John Blackall Mike Morgan Chris Brown Roger Noel Jonathan Chowen Bob Platt Philip Circus Josh Potts Paul Clarke Kate Rowbottom Michael Croker Jack Saheid Ray Dawe Jim Sanson Nigel Jupp Diana van der Klugt Liz Kitchen Claire Vickers Lynn Lambert James Wright

You are summoned to the meeting to transact the following business

Glen Chipp Chief Executive Agenda

Page No. GUIDANCE ON PLANNING COMMITTEE PROCEDURE 1. Apologies for absence 2. Minutes 7 - 10 To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2020 (Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to [email protected] at least 24 hours before the meeting. Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

3. Declarations of Members' Interests To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

4. Announcements To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive

Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) Horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive – Glen Chipp Corporate & Democratic Services www.hastings.gov.uk /meetings

To consider the following reports of the Head of Development and to take such action thereon as may be necessary:

5. Appeals 11 - 14

Applications for determination by Committee:

6. DC/20/2200 - Brangwyn, Station Road, Henfield 15 - 34 Ward: Henfield Applicant: Mr & Mrs Seet and Patti Gurprashad

7. DC/20/1519 - Hobbits, Stall House Lane, North Heath, Pulborough 35 - 68 Ward: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley Applicant: Mr & Mrs M Skillman

8. DC/20/2234 - Windways, Common Hill, West Chiltington 69 - 82 Ward: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington Applicant: Mr Phil Stevens

9. DC/20/2143 - Storrington Squash Club, Greyfriars Lane, Storrington 83 - 92 Ward: Storrington and Washington Applicant: Mr Jonathan Corby

10. DC/20/1294 - Tea Caddy Cottages, Worthing Road, West Grinstead 93 - 110 Ward: Cowfold, Shermanbury and West Grinstead Applicant: Mr Henry Pannell

11. DC/20/1923 - Little Rock Cottage, Hurston Lane, Storrington 111 - 126 Ward: Storrington and Washington Applicant: Pamela Finch

12. DC/20/1547 - New Spinney, Spinney Lane, West Chiltington 127 - 138 Ward: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington Applicant: Mr & Mrs Saheid

13. DC/20/2322 - Tickletag Farm, Hurston Lane, Storrington 139 - 146 Ward: Storrington and Washington Applicant: Mr P Strudwick

14. Urgent Business Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as urgent because of the special circumstances

Agenda Annex

GUIDANCE ON PLANNING COMMITTEE PROCEDURE

(Full details in Part 4a of the Council’s Constitution)

Addressing the Members must address the meeting through the Chair. When the Committee Chairman wishes to speak during a debate, any Member speaking at the time must stop.

Minutes Any comments or questions should be limited to the accuracy of the minutes only.

Quorum Quorum is one quarter of the total number of Committee Members. If there is not a quorum present, the meeting will adjourn immediately. Remaining business will be considered at a time and date fixed by the Chairman. If a date is not fixed, the remaining business will be considered at the next committee meeting.

Declarations of Members should state clearly in which item they have an interest and Interest the nature of the interest (i.e. personal; personal & prejudicial; or pecuniary). If in doubt, seek advice from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

Announcements These should be brief and to the point and are for information only – no debate/decisions.

Appeals The Chairman will draw the Committee’s attention to the appeals listed in the agenda.

Agenda Items The Planning Officer will give a presentation of the application, referring to any addendum/amended report as appropriate outlining what is proposed and finishing with the recommendation.

Public Speaking on Parish and neighbourhood councils in the District are allowed 5 minutes Agenda Items each to make representations; members of the public who object to the (Speakers must give planning application are allowed 2 minutes each, subject to an overall notice by not later than limit of 6 minutes; applicants and members of the public who support the noon two working planning application are allowed 2 minutes each, subject to an overall days before the date limit of 6 minutes. Any time limits may be changed at the discretion of of the meeting) the Chairman.

Rules of Debate The Chairman controls the debate and normally follows these rules but the Chairman’s interpretation, application or waiver is final.

- No speeches until a proposal has been moved (mover may explain purpose) and seconded - Chairman may require motion to be written down and handed to him/her before it is discussed - Seconder may speak immediately after mover or later in the debate - Speeches must relate to the planning application under discussion or a personal explanation or a point of order (max 5 minutes or longer at the discretion of the Chairman) - A Member may not speak again except: o On an amendment to a motion o To move a further amendment if the motion has been amended since he/she last spoke o If the first speech was on an amendment, to speak on the main issue (whether or not the amendment was carried) o In exercise of a right of reply. Mover of original motion Page 3 has a right to reply at end of debate on original motion and any amendments (but may not otherwise speak on amendment). Mover of amendment has no right of reply. o On a point of order – must relate to an alleged breach of Council Procedure Rules or law. Chairman must hear the point of order immediately. The ruling of the Chairman on the matter will be final. o Personal explanation – relating to part of an earlier speech by the Member which may appear to have been misunderstood. The Chairman’s ruling on the admissibility of the personal explanation will be final. - Amendments to motions must be to: o Refer the matter to an appropriate body/individual for (re)consideration o Leave out and/or insert words or add others (as long as this does not negate the motion) - One amendment at a time to be moved, discussed and decided upon. - Any amended motion becomes the substantive motion to which further amendments may be moved. - A Member may alter a motion that he/she has moved with the consent of the meeting and seconder (such consent to be signified without discussion). - A Member may withdraw a motion that he/she has moved with the consent of the meeting and seconder (such consent to be signified without discussion). - The mover of a motion has the right of reply at the end of the debate on the motion (unamended or amended).

Alternative Motion to If a Member moves an alternative motion to approve the application Approve contrary to the Planning Officer’s recommendation (to refuse), and it is seconded, Members will vote on the alternative motion after debate. If a majority vote against the alternative motion, it is not carried and Members will then vote on the original recommendation.

Alternative Motion to If a Member moves an alternative motion to refuse the application Refuse contrary to the Planning Officer’s recommendation (to approve), the Mover and the Seconder must give their reasons for the alternative motion. The Director of Planning, Economic Development and Property or the Head of Development will consider the proposed reasons for refusal and advise Members on the reasons proposed. Members will then vote on the alternative motion and if not carried will then vote on the original recommendation.

Voting Any matter will be decided by a simple majority of those voting, by show of hands or if no dissent, by the affirmation of the meeting unless: - Two Members request a recorded vote - A recorded vote is required by law. Any Member may request their vote for, against or abstaining to be recorded in the minutes. In the case of equality of votes, the Chairman will have a second or casting vote (whether or not he or she has already voted on the issue).

Vice-Chairman In the Chairman’s absence (including in the event the Chairman is required to leave the Chamber for the debate and vote), the Vice- Chairman controls the debate and follows the rules of debate as above.

Page 4

Original recommendation to APPROVE application

Members in support during debate Members not in support during debate

Vote on original recommendation Member to move Member to move Member to move alternative motion alternative motion alternative motion to APPROVE with to REFUSE and give to DEFER and give amended condition(s) planning reasons reasons (e.g. further Majority in favour? Majority against? information required) Original recommendation Original recommendation carried – APPROVED not carried – THIS IS NOT A REFUSAL OF THE APPLICATION Another Member Another Member Another member seconds seconds seconds

Page 5 Page

Director considers planning reasons

Vote on alternative If reasons are valid If reasons are not valid Vote on alternative motion to APPROVE with vote on alternative VOTE ON ORIGINAL motion to DEFER amended condition(s) motion to REFUSE1 RECOMMENDATION*

Majority in favour? Majority against? Majority in favour? Majority against? Majority in favour? Majority against? Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion to APPROVE with to APPROVE with to REFUSE carried to REFUSE not carried to DEFER carried to DEFER not carried amended condition(s) amended condition(s) - REFUSED - VOTE ON ORIGINAL - DEFERRED - VOTE ON ORIGINAL carried – APPROVED not carried – VOTE ON RECOMMENDATION* RECOMMENDATION* ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION*

*Or further alternative motion moved and procedure repeated

1 Subject to Director’s power to refer application to Full Council if cost implications are likely.

Original recommendation to REFUSE application

Members in support during debate Members not in support during debate

Vote on original recommendation Member to move Member to move alternative motion alternative motion to APPROVE and give to DEFER and give planning reasons2 reasons (e.g. further Majority in favour? Majority against? information required) Original recommendation Original recommendation carried – REFUSED not carried – THIS IS NOT AN APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION Another Member Another member seconds seconds

Page 6 Page

Director considers planning reasons

If reasons are valid If reasons are not valid Vote on alternative vote on alternative VOTE ON ORIGINAL motion to DEFER motion to APPROVE RECOMMENDATION*

Majority in favour? Majority against? Majority in favour? Majority against? Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion Alternative motion to APPROVE carried to APPROVE not carried to DEFER carried to DEFER not carried - APPROVED - VOTE ON ORIGINAL - DEFERRED - VOTE ON ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION* RECOMMENDATION*

*Or further alternative motion moved and procedure repeated

2 Oakley v South Cambridgeshire District Council and another [2017] EWCA Civ 71

Agenda Item 2

Planning Committee (South) 15 DECEMBER 2020

Present: Councillors: Brian Donnelly (Chairman), Tim Lloyd (Vice-Chairman), John Blackall, Chris Brown, Jonathan Chowen, Philip Circus, Paul Clarke, Michael Croker, Ray Dawe, Nigel Jupp, Lynn Lambert, Mike Morgan, Roger Noel, Bob Platt, Josh Potts, Kate Rowbottom, Jack Saheid, Jim Sanson, Diana van der Klugt, Claire Vickers and James Wright

Apologies: Councillors: Liz Kitchen

PCS/50 MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 November were approved as a correct record, subject to the following amendment to the Declarations of Interest:

DC/20/1547: The applicant was a District Councillor and his fellow Ward Members, Councillors John Blackall and Philip Circus, had requested clarification from the Monitoring Officer as to whether or not they ought to declare an interest. It had been confirmed to them that they did not have a prejudicial interest, or any interest that would preclude them from speaking or voting on the application.

PCS/51 DECLARATIONS OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

DC/20/1711: Councillor Nigel Jupp declared a personal interest because he know the applicant. He left the meeting and took no part in the determination of this item.

PCS/52 ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were no announcements.

PCS/53 APPEALS

The list of appeals lodged, appeals in progress and appeal decisions, as circulated, was noted.

PCS/54 DC/20/1519 - HOBBITS, STALL HOUSE LANE, NORTH HEATH, PULBOROUGH

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of a dwelling and erection of a detached 4-bedroom replacement dwelling with detached double garage. The application also included an indoor equestrian arena with 21 stables and hay store, and an outdoor riding arena.

1 Page 7 Planning Committee (South) 15 December 2020

The existing access to the site would remain with an additional access to the new dwelling. Parking for eight cars and four horseboxes was proposed.

The application site was located outside the built-up area in a rural location on the southern side of Stall House Lane, along which there were sporadic detached dwellings. There were established trees and foliage along the boundaries of the site.

There had been no objections to the replacement house and garage, but there had been a number of objections to the equestrian training centre, in particular to the scale of the indoor arena. Parish Council objected to the application. There had been 13 representations from 12 addresses objecting to the application and three letters of support. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application. The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development relating to the replacement dwelling and equestrian use; layout, amount, scale and appearance; landscape and arboricultural impacts; impact on amenity; and highways and access.

Members discussed the scale of the indoor arena and were concerned that there was a potential for intensification of the intended use, which was largely private with elements of commercial use. Members questioned the number of vehicle movements that could be generated and raised concerns regarding access to the site for larger vehicles, both during construction and for horseboxes.

Officers advised that Condition 18 regarding use of the site could be expanded in the interests of amenity and highways impact. It was also agreed that in addition to Condition 8 requiring a Construction Management Plan, an additional condition could be added regarding the size of vehicles accessing the site. Members also agreed that conditions regarding sustainability measures should be expanded.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be delegated for approval, subject to the amendment of a number of conditions to address Members’ concerns.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/1519 be determined by the Head of Development with a view to approval, subject to amendment of conditions in consultation with Local Members, to include: an enhancement of Condition 18; an additional condition regarding vehicles accessing the site; and a review of conditions relating to sustainability measures.

Page2 8 Planning Committee (South) 3 15 December 2020

PCS/55 DC/20/1711 - TOWNHOUSE FARM, COOLHAM ROAD, THAKEHAM

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of three commercial storage buildings and the erection of two 3- bedroom semi-detached dwellings. The site benefited from Prior Approval to convert the existing buildings into four dwellings.

The application site was located outside the built-up area on the west side of Coolham Road in a rural area that included farms, commercial uses and dwellings.

The Parish Council raised no objection to the revised application. There had been two representations objecting to the original application for three terraced properties, but no objections had been received to the amended proposal. The applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members noted the planning history of the site and considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principal of development; the character of the dwellings and visual amenities of the countryside; the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties; and highways impacts.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/1711 be granted subject to the conditions as reported.

The meeting closed at 4.05 pm having commenced at 2.30 pm

CHAIRMAN

Page3 9 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5

Planning Committee (SOUTH) Date: 16th February 2021

Report on Appeals: 03/12/2020 – 03/02/2021

1. Appeals Lodged

Horsham District Council have received notice from the Planning Inspectorate that the following appeals have been lodged:

Date Officer Committee Ref No. Site Lodged Recommendation Resolution Hill Copse House, Hill Farm Lane, Codmore Hill, Application DC/20/1939 16-Dec-20 N/A Pulborough, West Sussex, Refused RH20 1BW Land at Junction of Hill Farm Lane and Stane Street, Application Application DC/20/0636 Hill Farm Lane, Codmore Hill, 21-Dec-20 Permitted Refused West Sussex, RH20 1BW

50 Wantley Hill Estate, Henfield, Application DC/20/2001 08-Jan-21 N/A West Sussex, BN5 9JS Refused White House Cottage, Coolham Application DC/20/1924 Road, Coneyhurst, Billingshurst, 15-Jan-21 N/A Refused West Sussex, RH14 9DH 1 West Wantley Cottages, Fryern Road, Storrington, Application DC/20/2245 20-Jan-21 N/A Pulborough, West Sussex, Refused RH20 4BJ Priory Fields, Monastery Lane, Application DC/20/1710 Storrington, Pulborough, West 20-Jan-21 N/A Refused Sussex

Page 11 2. Appeals started

Consideration of the following appeals has started during the period:

Appeal Officer Committee Ref No. Site Start Date Procedure Recommendation Resolution Roseacre, Stall House Lane, North Heath, Written Application Application DC/20/0411 10-Dec-20 Pulborough, Representation Refused Refused West Sussex, RH20 2HR Plot 10, Land On Eastside of Dukes Hill, Written EN/20/0101 12-Jan-21 Notice served N/A Thakeham, Representation West Sussex, RH20 2LT Pear Tree Farm, Furners Lane, EN/18/0018 Woodmancote, (three Public Inquiry 13-Jan-21 Notice served N/A Henfield, appeals) West Sussex, BN5 9HX Townhouse Farm, Coolham Road, Written Application Application DC/19/1671 Thakeham, 22-Jan-21 Representation Permitted Refused Pulborough, RH20 3EW

Page 12 3. Appeal Decisions

HDC have received notice from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been determined:

Appeal Officer Committee Ref No. Site Decision Procedure Recommendation Resolution Calcot Farm Bungalow, Horsham Road, Appeal Application DC/19/1795 Fast Track N/A Steyning, Dismissed Refused West Sussex, BN44 3AA Downsview Paddock, New Hall Lane, Written Appeal Application DC/19/2034 Small Dole, N/A Representation Dismissed Refused Henfield, BN5 9YJ

Bentons Cottage, Bentons Lane, Dial Post, Written Appeal Application DC/20/0214 N/A Horsham, Representation Dismissed Refused West Sussex, RH13 8NP Land North of Tisserand Farm, Stane Street, Written Appeal Application DC/19/1770 N/A Billingshurst, Representation Dismissed Refused West Sussex

Page 13 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Demolition of existing shop and dwelling and construction of 10.No one- DEVELOPMENT: bedroom apartments with parking forecourt and ten domestic storage buildings to rear with associated bicycle parking and refuse storage. SITE: Brangwyn Station Road Henfield West Sussex BN5 9UP

WARD: Henfield

APPLICATION: DC/20/2200 Name: Mr and Mrs Seet and Patti Gurprashad Address: Brangwyn APPLICANT: Station Road Henfield West Sussex BN5 9UP

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: (1) At the request of Cllr Josh Potts (Local Member for Henfield)

(2) At the request of Henfield Parish Council

RECOMMENDATION: To refuse planning permission, for the reasons set out in this report.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

BACKGROUND

1.1 The application has been submitted following the Council’s refusal of a previous proposal for a similar scheme (DC/20/0885, refused August 2020 – hereafter referred to as ‘the refused scheme’). The refused scheme proposed the demolition of the existing local shop with accommodation above, and the erection of a block of 10no. 1-bedroom flats, set over 3 floors. This scheme was refused for 6 reasons, as follows:

1 Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the existing retail shop is no longer needed or is viable for continued business or employment use, contrary to Policies 9 (part 2) and 13 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 15 Contact Officer: Angela Moore Tel: 01403 215288 Council Housing Needs Assessment (2017), contrary to Policy 16 (parts 1 and 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

3 The proposed building, by reason of its 3-storey form and materials palette; would create a development that would sit at odds with the prevailing form and character of its setting, contrary to Policy 33 (parts 3, 4, and 5) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), the principles of Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), and Policy 12 (part c) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan.

4 The proposed development, by virtue of the combination of the number of flats, resultant shortfall of on-site car parking, and inappropriate access from the roadside to the proposed bin, cycle and storage units; results in an overdevelopment of the site, contrary to Policy 33 (part 8), Policy 40 (part 9), Policy 41 (part 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), and Policy 4 (P4.4) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan.

5 Insufficient noise impact information has been submitted to demonstrate that the 6No. air source heat pumps are acceptable in the proposed rooftop location, contrary to Policy 33 (part 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and Policy 12 (a) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan.

6 Insufficient information (by way of a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit with Designer's response) has been submitted to demonstrate that access to the site for the number of parking bays proposed can operate safely and will not cause harm to the operation and use of the highway network, contrary to Policy 40 (part 9) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 The current proposal seeks approval for a development which is substantially the same as the refused scheme. As before, the development proposes the demolition of the existing shop/residential building on site, and the redevelopment of the site to provide 10x 1-bed flats set over three floors. The site layout plans, elevation plans and floor plans submitted in support of the application are the same as the plans submitted for the refused scheme last year. As such, the description of the proposed development remains as described under DC/20/0885.

1.3 Additional plans and information that has been submitted to support the current proposal, include; a plan showing the elevations and layouts of the 10no proposed bin/cycle storage units; a plan showing site area comparisons with other existing development nearby; a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit; an Energy Statement; and a Financial Statement to justify the loss of the shop.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.4 The site characteristics have not changed since the Officer assessment of the refused scheme was undertaken in August 2020. As such, the site description remains the same as DC/20/0885 – as summarised below.

1.5 The site is located within the built-up area boundary (BUAB) of Henfield, fronting Station Road. Land levels along Station Road fall north to south by about 10m over a 190m stretch. The site incorporates an existing (albeit, closed) retail unit (Station Stores) with integrated 3-bedroom residential accommodation. The site is set back from the road by about 9m, and has a small area of hardstanding for customer parking. The site neighbours Alexandra House to its north, and Homelee to its south. Opposite the site are the rear Page 16 gardens of 2-storey dwellings in ‘Beechings’. The existing retail store/residential building on site is 2-storey in nature, but has two small roof dormer windows on the front and side elevations. The existing building comprises red brick, red roof tiles and white uPVC window frames and is consistent with the prevailing materials along Station Road.

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 STATUTORY BACKGROUND

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.2 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2019)

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF, 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 7 - Strategic Policy: Economic Growth Policy 9 - Employment Development Policy 12 – Strategic Policy: Vitality and Viability of Existing Retail Centres Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 16 - Strategic Policy: Meeting Local Housing Needs Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding Policy 41 - Parking Policy 41 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation

West Sussex Joint Minerals Local Plan (2018) Policy M9 - Safeguarding Minerals

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Obligations and Affordable Housing SPD (2017) Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule (2017)

Parish Design Statement: Henfield Parish Design Statement (2008)  BD3 – Materials  BD4 – Architectural Details  BD5 – Innovative Design

2.3 RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The Henfield Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2031 (Submission Draft) underwent independent examination in March 2020. The Examiner’s final report was published on 11 May 2020, and concluded that the Plan meets the Basic Conditions subject to a series of modifications. All modifications have been accepted by Henfield Parish Council and Horsham District Council, and have been incorporated within the Plan. A Final Decision Page 17 Statement was published by Horsham District Council on 22 June 2020, which recommended that the Plan proceeds to Referendum. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, all referendums have been suspended until May 2021. As such, whilst the Plan is not yet formally ‘Made’, it is considered that the Henfield Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2031 carries significant weight in the plan-making process. The main policies relevant to this application are:  Policy 1 (A Spatial Plan for the Parish);  Policy 3.2 (Development of New and Existing Employment Uses);  Policy 4 (Transport, Access and Car Parking);  Policy 12 (Design Standards for New Development)

2.4 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS DC/20/0885 Demolition of existing shop and dwelling and Application Refused on construction of 10.No one-bedroom apartments with 12.08.2020 parking forecourt and ten domestic storage buildings to rear with associated bicycle parking and refuse storage

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk

3.1 INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

HDC Environmental Health: No Objection (subject to conditions) [Summary]: Recommends conditions: (1) contamination, (2) importation of soil, (3) contamination, (4) CEMP, (5) waste removal, (6) Hours of construction, (7) Acoustic Assessment, (8) external lighting.

HDC Economic Development: Objection [Summary]: Concern raised regarding the loss of the commercial floorspace within this proposal and the lack of evidence to justify the loss. The Financial Statement gives no formal evidence to demonstrate a lack of demand for this shop, nor any indication that the shop has been marketed for sale or to let, to test the demand. There is mention of the impact of Covid-19 on the business, however, this does not mean that the site is no longer viable as a shop or for other commercial use and does not justify the move to residential without testing the demand.

Commercial floorspace remains essential for local business growth local employment. Priority 2 of the HDC Economic Strategy states the need to offer a range of commercial floorspace to ensure that local businesses can start-up, grow and remain. The new ‘E Class’ suggests that this premises could be used for a multitude of commercial uses - not just retail, which could appeal to a wider audience.

Moreover, the Henfield Neighbourhood Plan highlights that proposals resulting in a loss of employment floorspace will be resisted without evidence that the use is no longer appropriate or viable (Policy 3.2.2). Overall, Economic Development objects to this proposal as there is not enough evidence to justify the loss of the commercial unit.

HDC Drainage Engineer: More Information Required [Summary]: No drainage information has been submitted to make any relevant comments or observations.

HDC Waste Collections: Comment Page 18 [Summary]: Request for clarifications on the bin area as communal or individual bin stores. Normally, flats have communal storage, therefore Euro Bins may be needed.

3.2 OUTSIDE AGENCIES

WSCC Highways: No Objection (subject to conditions) [Summary]: WSCC consider this development to be acceptable in highway safety and capacity terms. The site will provide the correct number of car parking spaces for the flats, and a precedent for forecourt parking has already been set in the local vicinity. The 8 proposed spaces will provide EVC facilities as per WSCC parking in new developments policy (Sep 2020), and each dwelling will have a cycle store in the rear garden of the flats. A parking visibility plan and a stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) has been submitted. Trips to and from the site have been verified by using the TRICA national trips rate database. Trip rates resulting from the development would be low, and would not create any capacity impacts. Condition suggested for a construction management plan.

Southern Water: No Objection [Summary]: No objection. Conditions and informatives suggested including: (1) connection to sewers, (2) SuDS maintenance, and (3) foul/surface water disposal.

WSCC Flood Risk Management: More Information Required [Summary]: No FRA/Drainage Strategy has been included with this application. Further information is required to clarify the drainage arrangements. The peak runoff rate and volume should be as close to the Greenfield runoff rate/volume as possible, and if not possible, significant betterment (at least 50% reduction) should be achievable.

Henfield Parish Council: No Objection [Summary]: No objection raised. Specific support given for 1-bedroom properties within the Parish. Although the emerging Neighbourhood Plan specifies 2/3/4 bedroom dwellings on a number of sites, this is to restrict developers from only building 5 bedroom properties, not to preclude the delivery of 1 bedroom units. The NP intention was to highlight the need for a mix of smaller type properties for firs-time dwellings, rather than a focus upon larger homes. The PC would like to emphasise support for the provision of 1 bed as well as 2/3 bed homes. Confirmation given that the car parking arrangements are adequate, and that the scale and massing of the proposed development is in keeping with adjacent properties in Station Road.

3.3 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS 12 letters of representation were received from 8 different households. 6 letters were in objection to the proposed development, and 2 were in support.

A summarised list of reasons for objection is below:  Traffic impact, congestion  Insufficient parking  Poor design and materials  Scale too large  Overdevelopment  Overlooking, loss of privacy  Loss of shop  Noise from heat pumps  Sewage capacity issues

A summarised list of reasons for support is below: Page 19  Shop has been closed since March 2020 with no amenity loss;  New designs are an improvement;  Need for new (smaller) housing;  Area served by busses;  Site can accommodate the scale of the proposal;  Brownfield development is welcomed.

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 Given the Council’s previous refusal of a similar scheme on this site in August 2020 (DC/20/0885), the main consideration in the determination of this application is whether the current scheme now proposes additional supporting information or design revisions that have worked to overcome the Council’s 6no previous reasons for refusal.

Principle of Development

6.2 The site lies within the Built-Up Area Boundary (BUAB) of Henfield, which is included in the ‘second tier’ of settlements outlined in the hierarchy of Policy 3 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF). As a 'Large Village', Henfield is noted as being a settlement that acts as hubs for smaller villages to meet their daily needs, but that also has some reliance on larger settlements to meet some requirements. Policy 3 states that any proposal to redevelop or infill within a defied BUAB is required to demonstrate that it is of an appropriate nature and scale to the main characteristics and function of the settlement. In principle therefore, by virtue of its location and current developed nature of the site; the proposed residential re-development of this site is considered to be acceptable, and the additional residential units that the site would yield, is welcomed.

6.3 Policy 15 of the HDPF seeks to allocate a sufficient quantum of new housing across the Horsham District to meet the identified needs until 2031. In addition to the allocation of large-scale strategic development sites, Policy 15 anticipates 1,500 homes to come forward through Neighbourhood Plan allocations, and an additional 750 to come forward as 'windfall units'. As the site is located within the BUAB of Henfield, it is considered that housing development such as the proposed scheme would contribute to the windfall units required by Policy 15 (part 5), which contributes to the ‘in principle’ acceptability of this proposal.

6.4 The acceptability of the development in overall terms will however, depend on its appropriateness in terms of other development management principles as discussed below.

Loss of Shop

Page 20 6.5 In order to retain a strong, diverse and resilient economy, both the NPPF (para 92) and the HDPF place great emphasis on the appropriate retention and expansion of existing community facilities, commercial premises and employment floorspace. This is re- emphasised at a local level in the forthcoming Henfield Neighbourhood Plan at Policy 3.2.2, where proposals that result in the loss of existing employment sites are resisted, unless justified by ‘compelling evidence’ that the employment use is no longer viable.

6.6 Whilst the location of the existing shop is not in an area that is afforded heightened protection (such as a unit on the high street or in a primary retail frontage), given the presence of the existing local convenience shop on the site, Policy 9 (Employment Development), Policy 12 (Vitality and Viability of Retail Centres), and Policy 13 (Town Centre Uses) of the HDPF are relevant to this application. Given the proposal seeks to remove the existing retail unit and to re-develop the site to a non-employment (residential) use; in accordance with Policy 9 (part 2) and the final paragraph of Policy 13, a proportionate level of information to demonstrate that the premises is no longer needed or viable for retail use, must be provided.

6.7 As with the refused scheme, the loss of the existing convenience shop (Station Stores) without re-provision is still proposed as part of the revised scheme. In support of the revised scheme, a Financial Statement has been submitted by the applicant which explains some context regarding the shop and the circumstances of its owners. The statement explains that the shop was first opened in 1985 and most custom is drawn from the immediate locality and some passing trade. The statement notes that over the past 3 years, commercial activity at the shop has lessened, and the owner now wishes to retire. The COVID pandemic has forced the shop to close since March 2020, although paper deliveries have continued. The statement states that there is ‘extremely poor demand’ for commercial premises in Henfield, and there has been no interest from any prospective purchaser or tenant for the shop (albeit, it does not describe any formal marketing that has taken place).

6.8 The statement concludes by stating that it is ‘not for the current owners to show why they cannot continue to make a living here’, rather, it is for the Council to provide ‘compelling evidence to justify forcing commercial use to continue on the site’. The HDPF policies referenced above are clear that the loss of employment and retail uses will only be accepted where there is evidenced justification to support that loss. The onus is always on the applicant to demonstrate why their proposals should be accepted against such policy.

6.9 The Council’s Economic Development Team have reviewed the submitted Financial Statement, and in light of the lack of information to justify its loss, continue to object to the loss of the shop. As per the requirements of HDPF Policy 9 (part 2), HDPF Policy 13, and Policy 3.2.2 of the forthcoming Henfield Neighbourhood Plan, the Economic Development Team are of the view that in order for the Council to accept the loss of the shop, a proportionate amount of evidence needs to be submitted to demonstrate that the shop is no longer needed or viable. There is no indication that the shop has been marketed for sale or let, therefore it is unknown whether any demand exists for this unit as a retail or other employment use. It is also noted that the shop would now fall under Class F2(a) of the revised Use Classes Order as it is over 1km from a comparable shop and is therefore classed as a local community shop mostly selling essential goods, including food.

6.10 As such, whilst an additional Financial Statement has been received from the applicant to support the revised scheme, which outlines the position of the shop and desire of the owner to retire; this has not sought to provide the proportionate amount of evidence or justification that is required by HDPF Policy 9 (part 2), HDPF Policy 13, and Policy 3.2.2 of the forthcoming Henfield Neighbourhood Plan. It is therefore, considered by Officers that Reason for Refusal 1 placed on the refused scheme (DC/20/0885) has not been overcome, and remains a reason to refuse the revised application.

Page 21

Housing Mix

6.11 An appropriate housing mix is important to ensure new housing contributes to addressing the identified needs of an area. The development proposed 10x 1-bedroom flats. Policy 16(1) of the HDPF states that ‘development should provide a mix of housing sizes, types and tenures to meet the needs of the District’s communities as evidenced in the latest Strategic Housing Market Assessment in order to create sustainable and balanced communities’. The District Council’s recently updated Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA, November 2019) recommends that the mix of housing on new (market) developments should comprise 5% 1-bed, 30% 2-bed, 40% 3-bed and 25% 4-bed homes.

6.12 Whilst this broad mix has been identified by the SHMA across the District, it is acknowledged that it is not always appropriate for all sites to achieve this precise mix. Policy 16 (2) of the HDPF states that ‘the appropriate mix of different housing types and sizes for each site will depend upon the established character and density of the neighbourhood and the viability of the scheme’. The application site is located within the built-up area of Henfield and is an ‘in-fill’ site in an already developed area. As such, in order to achieve a viable development that accords with the local character, and which makes best use of the land available (NPPF 122-123); it is accepted that the recommended SHMA mix in this case will not be wholly appropriate. Notwithstanding this, it is still important that a suitable mix of units is provided to meet identified local needs.

6.13 Despite not being a ‘made’ neighbourhood plan yet, chapter 4 of the Henfield (Reg 16) Submission Plan requires the provision of ‘more smaller housing units (2-3 bedrooms) appropriate for young families and the elderly downsizing’. This is derived from evidence gathered in the Henfield Housing Needs Assessment (AECOM, October 2017) which noted that there was a strong indication that smaller dwellings of 1 and 2 bedrooms are needed to ‘address the increase in the number of solo households, the growth in numbers of the elderly and the need to provide affordable homes for newly forming households’ (para 186).

6.14 As per the previously refused scheme, the development continues to propose a single mix of housing (10no. 1-bedroom flats). The second refusal reason cited in DC/20/0885 refused the proposal on the grounds that the housing mix failed to provide for a sufficient range of units to meet the identified need of the District, as evidenced in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA, 2019) and in Henfield Parish Council’s own Housing Needs Assessment (2017). This was considered to be contrary to Policy 16 (parts 1 and 2) of the HDPF.

6.15 During the consultation period for the current application, Henfield Parish Council confirmed that the proposal for all the accommodation to comprise 1-bed units, is welcomed. The Parish Council made clear in their representation that despite the forthcoming Neighbourhood Plan seeking development to provide primarily for 2 and 3-bed units within the Parish (Chapter 4), the intention of the Plan was not to preclude 1-bed developments, but rather to encourage the development of smaller occupancy units as opposed to larger 4 or 5 bedroom homes.

6.16 As with the assessment of the refused scheme, it is considered by Officers that it would be more appropriate to include both 1-bed and 2-bed units within a development in this location in order to provide a better choice for future occupiers and to better address the identified need. It is considered therefore, that the proposal, by virtue of its single-mix, does not appropriately address the housing needs of Henfield as evidenced in the latest Housing Needs Assessment, and fails to accord with the requirements of Policy 16 (parts 1 and 2) of the HDPF. Reason for Refusal 2 of the previous scheme, has not therefore been overcome, and remains a reason to refuse the current proposal.

Page 22 Scale, Design and Appearance

6.17 Since the revision of the NPPF in February 2019, the Government has sought to raise the importance of good design, and the quality of new developments. Paragraph 127 of the NPPF states that developments should add to the overall quality of an area, be visually attractive, and should be sympathetic to local character and surrounding built environment, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation. Following the revision to the NPPF in February 2019 a suite of design studies and reports have been published which collectively emphasise the importance and value that good design can bring to a place. In September 2019, MHCLG published the ‘National Design Guide’ which sets out how high quality developments can be achieved in practice. In January 2020 the ‘Building Better Building Beautiful Commission’ produced a report which encourages practitioners to ‘Ask for Beauty; Refuse Ugliness; Promote Stewardship’. In July 2020, Homes England published ‘Building for a Healthy Lifestyle’ which is an update to one of the most widely used design tools in England.

6.18 The aims of Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) are in general accordance with the principles of good design set out in the latest national planning policy and design guidance, and sets out the key development principles that all new developments should seek to achieve. In addition, the emerging Henfield Neighbourhood Plan (Policy 12) and associated Henfield Parish Design Statement (BD3, BD4 and BD5) contain design policies and principles which are considered to be relevant in the consideration of this site.

6.19 It should be noted that the revised scheme has not sought to change the appearance, scale or design of the proposed building from that which was previously assessed (and refused) under DC/20/0885. As such, the same layout plans, elevation plans and floor plans have been submitted in support of the current proposal.

6.20 As with the previous assessment, it is acknowledged that the application site is not in a conservation area, and is not located within an area with a particularly strong vernacular of architectural styles. Nevertheless, the prevailing character along the east side of Station Road comprises pairs of semi-detached 2-storey red-brick dwellings, setback from the roadside with parking at the frontage. Several of the existing dwellings along Station Road have features such as chimneys, projecting bay windows and soldier coursing and quoining details, and there is a mixture of gable-end and hipped roofs. Whilst the existing building has two small dormer windows in the roof providing second-storey habitable living space, the perception from the street is that the building is 2-storey, which is consistent with other buildings along Station Road. The height of the eaves of the existing building compliments the eaves of the dwelling to the south (Homelee), and the rooflines are of a similar style.

6.21 The proposed development (which has not changed since DC/20/0885) has sought to make full use of the available plot to create a block of flats containing 10x 1-bedroom flats set over three floors. In terms of scale, the overall width of the building (at 21.2m) increases the width of the existing building fairly significantly, and fills the ‘gap’ that currently exists in the street scene. It is considered that utilising the full width of the plot (save for walkways either side) makes efficient use of the available land without being incongruous with the built surrounds (in accordance with NPPF 123), and as such, the width of the building is not objectionable in design terms.

6.22 The overall height and stepped roof form of the proposed building responds appropriately to the sloping gradient of the street and the adjacent dwellings. However, by virtue of the repeating number and size of windows to the third/roof level, it is considered that the top floor creates a de-facto 3-storey building which fails to relate sympathetically to the prevailing 2-storey nature and character of the immediate surrounds. ‘Buildings and Design’ principle BD4 contained with the Henfield Parish Design Statement seeks for ‘architectural detail to blend with local character’, and whilst innovative design is not Page 23 discouraged, principle BD5 seeks that new developments ‘should have regard to their surroundings’. As such, the proposal is still considered to be contrary to Policy 33 (parts 3 and 4) of the HDPF, and Policy 12(c) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan, as well as the key design principles within the Henfield Parish Design Statement.

6.23 In addition, given no changes have been made to the design or external appearance of the building, Officers still find issue with regard to the proposed materials palette (comprising slate roofing, light coloured render to first and second floors, and light coloured brick to ground floor) which is not considered to satisfactorily relate to the surrounding built environment which is predominantly red brick. In particular the upper floors are dominated by the use of render which is not a material characteristic of the area to the same degree as is being proposed on the building. This in combination with the slate tile roof, would not be sympathetic to the local character contrary to Policy 33 (part 5) of the HDPF, and Policy 12(c) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan. ‘Buildings and Design’ principle BD3 contained with the Henfield Parish Design Statement requires materials to ‘respect materials of adjacent or nearby buildings’ and to ‘reflect the predominant character of the area [including] plain clay roofing tiles and tile-hanging, and red-brown brickwork’. As such, the incongruous material palette proposed, coupled with the concerns identified regarding the 3-storey nature of the proposed building; creates a structure that jars with the surrounding character and built form along Station Road, and fails to sit comfortably within its setting.

6.24 It is acknowledged that balconies on the front elevation are not a feature seen on other buildings in the vicinity, however, the principle of including balconies on the first floor is not objectionable in principle, particularly given the amenity space that they would provide future occupants. In addition, given the distance between the proposed building’s frontage and existing dwellings opposite (in Beechings), it is not thought that significantly harmful overlooking would occur.

6.25 Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that ‘Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area’. Refusal reason 3 of application DC/20/0885 refused the scheme on the basis that the proposed building (by reason of its 3- storey form and materials palette) would create a development that would sit at odds with the prevailing form and character of its setting. The design was considered by Officers to be contrary to Policy 33 (parts 3, 4, and 5) of the HDPF, principles of Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy 12 (part c) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan, as well as principles BD3, BD4 and BD5 of the Henfield Parish Design Statement. Given no changes have been made to the design of the building, the Council must be consistent in its decision-making, and it is not therefore considered that Reason for Refusal 3 of the previously refused application has been overcome.

Amenity Impacts

6.26 As with many changes that occur in urban built-up areas such as this, it is accepted that a level of amenity impact will occur as a result of development on this site. The planning consideration therefore, is how severe this amenity impact is, and whether it is acceptable or not. Policy 33 (part 2) of the HDPF and Policy 12 (part a) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan both seek for all new development proposals to be designed to ‘avoid unacceptable harm to the amenity of occupiers/users of nearby property and land, for example through overlooking or noise’. As with the previous proposal, it is acknowledged that both neighbours adjacent to the application site have continued expressed concerns regarding the proposal, and have again cited several reasons for objection, which include: overlooking, loss of light and privacy, smells/noise from bin stores, and noise form roof-top heat pumps. These concerns are discussed below:

Overlooking/Privacy Page 24

6.27 No changes have been made to the design or layout of the proposal since the previous refusal, so the previously shown 5No. window openings (all bathrooms) on each of the flank elevations, remain. On-site observations show that there are already window and door openings on both flank elevations of the existing building. The northern flank (which currently sits much further form the boundary with Alexandra House than the proposed building would be) has existing windows on the ground and first floors. The existing southern flank is much closer to neighbouring ‘Homelee’ and includes windows as ground and first floors, plus a small dormer window facing south at the second floor. The proposed windows on the southern elevation (facing Homelee) are not considered therefore to result in any significant additional overlooking, and a condition to ensure these bathroom windows are fitted with obscured glazing can be imposed to further lessen the impact. Whilst the northern elevation of the proposed building would move much closer to the boundary with Alexandra House, it is noted that there are no existing openings on the southern flank elevation of this neighbouring dwelling, therefore the inclusion of window openings on the northern elevation of the proposed building would have little direct impact. Notwithstanding this, it is also considered reasonable for an obscured glazing condition to be imposed for the 5No. bathroom windows on this elevation to reduce perceived overlooking.

6.28 Concerns regarding undesirable overlooking towards rear garden spaces have also been raised again by neighbours, owing to the proposed balconies and additional first floor windows at the rear. Whilst the projecting 2-storey bay window elements to the rear help to obscure oblique views to and from the proposed first floor balconies to some degree; it is acknowledged that the perception of overlooking from a balcony is often greater than from a window. Officers acknowledge neighbour concerns, but as per the previous assessment, are of the view that the central positioning of the balconies offers a good separation distance and focuses sight-lines within the site itself, and as such, helps to reduce overlooking opportunities towards neighbouring properties to the north and south. In addition, the balconies are not likely to allow for direct overlooking to the rear elevation of neighbouring dwellings (where privacy is more important); rather they look more towards the rear of the gardens. It is acknowledged that the flank window panes of the projecting bay windows (at first floor) face towards neighbouring dwellings, and whilst it is considered that this could be designed better, the bay windows do not directly overlook the rear gardens spaces of the neighbouring dwellings, but rather, onto the side elevations of the properties themselves. As such, overlooking/impact on privacy is not considered severe enough in this case to warrant a reason for refusal.

Noise

6.29 The plans submitted in support of the current proposal show the retention of the 6no. Air Source Heat Pumps positioned on the flat roof of the building – the same as previously proposed. No noise impact assessment has been submitted, nor any screening shown around the units. Conversely, the submitted Energy Statement states that ‘Ground Source Heat Pumps’ are proposed, and notes that this is in response to the Council’s previous concerns about noise from the Air Source pumps. Five 20m long trenches for these Ground Source Heat Pumps are shown on submitted plan reference 438pp17. Given the submitted plans still show Air Source Heat Pumps (without screening) on the rooftop as before, it is unclear whether the proposal is actually for Ground Source or Air Source units, or both.

6.30 Under the refused scheme, amenity concerns were identified with regard to the elevated location and exposed nature of proposed 6no. roof-top Air Source Heat Pumps. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer advised that the proposed rooftop location (without screening) would require the submission of a Noise Impact Assessment so the noise impact can properly be assessed. The EHO was of the view that due to the number of units proposed, it was likely that additional acoustic screening will be required which is likely to alter the appearance of the rear elevation. The EHO advised that the applicant may wish to Page 25 consider relocating the air source heat pumps to a ground level location where they can be more easily screened and maintained. The absence of a noise impact assessment or any screening around the proposed heat pumps, led to the conclusion that the proposal was contrary to Policy 33 (part 2) of the HDPF and Policy 12 (a) of the draft Henfield NP; and therefore formed refusal reason 5 of DC/20/0885.

6.31 It is unclear from the submission whether the revised scheme proposes Air or Ground Source Heat Pumps (or both), but notwithstanding which type is proposed, the Council are of the view that this type of sustainable energy source is welcomed in principle (and supported by the Council’s sustainable development and climate change policies). However, given the plans still show the heating units on the roof top of the building, and the fact that the applicant has not provided any means to demonstrate that the noise impact of these units would be acceptable in amenity terms (either through the submission of a noise impact assessment or any acoustic screening), it is not considered that Reason for Refusal 5 of the previous scheme has yet been overcome, and the proposal remains contrary to Policy 33 (part 2) of the HDPF and Policy 12 (a) of the draft Henfield NP.

Bin Storage

6.32 As per the previous proposal, the scheme includes the provision of 10 individual bin/cycle storage units located at the rear of the main building (one for each of the 10no units). The location of these stores has not changed, but an additional plan showing the internal layouts and elevations has been submitted. During the previous consultation, neighbours raised concern about associated noise and smells emanating from the bin stores which are positioned close to neighbouring rear gardens. Given the plans show the bins to be fully enclosed with pitched roofs (overall height 3m), and access doors facing into the application site; the likely impact on neighbouring amenity in terms of unacceptable odours and noise is not considered to be significantly harmful.

6.33 The overall layout of the proposed site has not changed from the previous proposal (including the position of the 8no parking bays which utilise the full width of the plot); therefore it continues to be unclear whether there would be sufficient enough space for bicycle access from the main street to these stores, or for bins to be wheeled out the street for kerb side collection if all 8no parking spaces are in use (note, a tree blocks the middle pathway between bays 4 and 5). Whilst the new plan shows that the bin/cycle stores themselves appear to be large enough to contain the required bins and bicycles, access to the stores form the roadside is not practical, and is poorly considered. This raised doubt about the accessibility of the stores; thereby resulting in a development that fails to provide guaranteed and practical storage for bins and bicycles, contrary to Policy 33 (part 8), Policy 40 (part 9), Policy 41 (part 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015). This point formed part of Reason for Refusal 4 of DC/20/0885, and as the overall layout of the site has not changed, it is not considered that this concern has been addressed.

Trees, Landscaping and Ecology

6.34 Aside from some garden shrubs and a grassed lawn to the rear, the existing site does not have any significant soft landscape features. A line of tall conifer trees is located beyond the rear site boundary and are very visible form the site, but would not be affected by the proposed development.

6.35 The proposed layout of the site has not changed since the previous scheme was assessed, and includes the division of the rear of the site into 3 separate spaces, comprising two private gardens for two of the ground floor flats, and a shared amenity space for use by all occupants of the building. As before, 5no new trees are proposed at the rear, and 1no new tree to the front of the site (located between parking bays 4 and 5). The species of these proposed trees is unknown but it is considered that this information could be secured by condition. It is appreciated that the nature of this development (as an infill site) does not Page 26 afford significant opportunity for soft landscaping, and as such, any additional planting is welcomed. No specific details or calculations regarding biodiversity net gain have been provided (as required by paragraph 170(d) of the NPPF), but this can be secured by condition.

6.36 It is not clear how the rear garden spaces would be divided (fencing/hedging etc.), and there are no details of hard landscaping more generally (surfacing, boundary treatments etc.) Whilst it is reasonable to secure these details by condition, it is not considered that the proposed division of space to the rear represents best use of this area, and the Council questions how often the shared space to the rear would be used by future occupants (particularly given the provision of balconies and other private spaces). Notwithstanding these concerns, it is considered appropriate that this matter can be managed by way of condition in the event permission is granted. Whilst the proposed tree to the front of the site is welcomed form an amenity point of view, it is not clear how this will enable people to access the building, or the bin/cycle stores to the rear as it appears the tree blocks the central path.

Highways and Parking Impact

Capacity and Visibility

6.37 As per the previous (refused) scheme, West Sussex County Council (WSCC) as the Local Highways Authority have assessed the revised application, and have re-confirmed that the principle of the application is acceptable in highways capacity and safety terms.

6.38 It was noted during the previous assessment of the refused scheme that a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) was absent, thereby failing to demonstrate that access to the site for the 8no parking bays proposed can operate safely.

6.39 In support of the current proposal, a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit with Designer’s Response has been submitted, and has been assessed by the Local Highways Authority. The RSA identifies that some vegetation which overhangs the footway opposite the property to the south ‘Homelee’ is required to be cut-back, but given this overhangs onto public highway, the Designer’s Response notes that this can be cleared to achieve sufficient visibility. The Local Highways Authority have accepted this conclusion, and now raise no objection to the proposed development. As such, it is now considered that Reason for Refusal 6 has been satisfactorily overcome.

Car Parking

6.40 HDPF Policy 41 states that ‘adequate parking and facilities must be provided within developments to meet the needs of anticipated users’. This is followed by Policy 4 (P4.4) of the forthcoming Henfield Neighbourhood Plan which states that ‘adequate off-road car parking must be provided for all developments in accordance with West Sussex Parking Standards’. As with all planning applications, in the first instance, the total number of car parking space that will be required should be calculated in accordance with the West Sussex County Council Parking Guidance (2019) and should also include appropriate provision for disabled users and electric (EV) charging points. The provision of EV charging points is especially important, and in 2021 the WSCC guidance requires that 33% of the total number of parking spaces are fitted with EV charging facilities (this rises to 37% in 2022). It is proposed that all 8 bays are fitted with EV Charging points, so the minimum requirements for this have been surpassed.

6.41 WSCC Highways have reviewed the parking proposals (which remain unchanged since the previous assessment) and have noted that whilst there is no on-site turning, the proposed parking style (bays along the site frontage) is common in this area, and there is no evidence of a highway safety concern. The WSCC Car Parking Demand Calculator shows Page 27 a demand for 14x spaces, therefore the proposed 8no parking bays results in a shortfall of 6x spaces. Whilst this shortfall is acknowledge, WSCC does not consider that any overspill parking onto the local streets would not result in a highway safety concern. Whilst WSCC have not raised an objection to the shortfall in on-site parking, Officers are aware of the existing parking pressures in this area, particularly at weekends where the local streets are used for parking by visitors to the nearby Downs Link. Given Station Road and surrounding streets are not subject to any parking restrictions (and as such, any driver has a right to park); the shortfall in on-site parking associated with the proposed development is likely to put some addition pressure on parking capacity in the area during popular leisure times (such as weekends).

6.42 The shortfall in on-site parking at this development reduces the parking to a less than 1:1 ratio (8 spaces for 10 flats). Whilst some flexibility of the WSCC calculator can be applied if the site is located in a very sustainable location (close to a variety of services and alternative transport links), this site is not located within central Henfield, and it is considered by Officers that at least a 1:1 ratio of parking to units should be shown as it would be anticipated that at least one of the occupants to each of the 10 flats in this location is likely to be a car owner. As such, despite there being no identified highways safety concern relating to overspill parking onto local roads; Officers are of the view that 10 units providing for only 8 parking spaces for occupants indicates an overdevelopment of the site. This point formed part of Reason for Refusal 4 of DC/20/0885, and as the overall quantum of development and on-site parking provision has not changed, it is not considered that this concern has been addressed and remains a reason to refuse the current proposal.

Cycle Parking/Storage

6.43 As before, the application proposes cycle storage for 10no bicycles which exceeds the WSCC guidance, and is welcomed. As mentioned previously, the restricted access to the storage units from the roadside would prevent/discourage travel by bicycle, which (as before) also leads Officers to conclude that the site is overdeveloped. The poor access arrangements to the storage units is contrary to Policy 33 (part 8), Policy 40 (part 9), and Policy 41 (part 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Drainage

6.44 The Environment Agency’s (EA) online flood maps show that the site is located wholly within Flood Zone 1, meaning that the land is in a ‘low probability’ flood zone. No water courses run through the site, as confirmed by WSCC Flood Risk Management.

6.45 As per the previous proposal, the applicant has not included any detail or design relating to the method of drainage of surface and foul water from the site, or methods of sustainable drainage systems. In this instance, given the natural constraints of the site forming a small plot in an urban area, it is considered that conditions can suitably provide for a drainage strategy that does not increase the risk of flooding at the site or elsewhere.

Climate Change

6.46 Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the HDPF require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions seek to reduce the impact of development on climate change.

6.47 The applicant has submitted an Energy Statement (as required by Policy 36), explaining the methods that are proposed as part of the development to reduce pressure on natural resources and to power the new homes sustainably. In summary, the proposed Page 28 development includes the following measures to build resilience to climate change and reduce carbon emissions:

 Dedicated refuse and recycling storage;  Opportunities for biodiversity gain;  Cycle parking facilities;  8no electric vehicle charging points;  6no Air/Ground-source Heat Pumps;

6.48 In the event that Members are minded to approve this application, it is considered that the above measures would contribute to reducing the impact of the development on climate change in accordance with local and national policy.

Conclusion

6.49 The main consideration in the determination of this application is whether the scheme as proposed has addressed the Council’s 6no reasons for refusal of the previous scheme (DC/20/0888) which was refused August 2020. The provision of a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit which confirms required visibility splays can be achieved is accepted, leading to the conclusion that previous Refusal Reason 6 (highway safety) has now been satisfactorily addressed.

6.50 However, whilst a Financial Statement has been submitted regarding the circumstances of the existing shop and its owners, no formal marketing has taken place to test the demand for this unit, and as such, it is not considered by Officers that Refusal Reason 1 (loss of shop) has been overcome.

6.51 Given there has been no revisions to the proposed quantum or mx of units, or to the previously submitted layout plans, elevation plans or floor plans; it is not considered by Officers that previous Refusal Reasons 2 (mix), 3 (design) or 4 (overdevelopment) have been overcome.

6.52 Finally, it is noted in the submitted Energy Statement that Ground Source Heat Pumps are proposed (with trenches for the Ground Source units shown on the submitted layout plan). However, the submitted plans still show the inclusion of Air Source units on the building’s rooftop. As such, it is unclear which type of units is being proposed, and notwithstanding this, no Noise Impact Assessment has been submitted to demonstrate that the noise output is acceptable, or that any acoustic migration (particularly for the rooftop units) is required. As such, Officers are not of the view that Refusal Reason 5 (noise impact) of DC/20/0885 has been overcome.

6.53 In order to maintain the integrity of the planning system and adopted planning policies, the decision maker is expected to ensure that decisions are issued with an appropriate level of consistency. Unless an alternative decision can be justified through a change in planning policy or the submission of revised plans or supporting information; the decision maker’s past decision is a material consideration of significant weight, and should not unjustifiably be changed. In this case, it has been demonstrated that five of the six previous reasons for refusal have not been overcome, and as such, it is recommended to Members of the Committee that the application is refused, for the reasons set out below.

Page 29 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

Horsham District Council has adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule which took effect on 1st October 2017.

It is considered that this development constitutes CIL liable development. At the time of drafting this report the proposal involves the following:

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

Total Gain

Total Demolition

Please note that exemptions and/or reliefs may be applied for up until the commencement of a chargeable development.

In the event that planning permission is granted, a CIL Liability Notice will be issued thereafter. CIL payments are payable on commencement of development.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended by Officers that the application is refused, for the reasons explained in this report, and as set out below:

Reasons for Refusal

2 The proposed housing mix fails to provide for a sufficient range of units to meet the identified need of the District as evidenced in the latest Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2019) and for the local community as identified in the Henfield Parish Council Housing Needs Assessment (2017), contrary to Policy 16 (parts 1 and 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

5 Insufficient noise impact information has been submitted to demonstrate that the 6No. air source heat pumps are acceptable in the proposed rooftop location, Page 30 contrary to Policy 33 (part 2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and Policy 12 (a) of the draft Henfield Neighbourhood Plan.

Background Papers:  DC/20/0885  DC/20/0200

Page 31 This page is intentionally left blank 06) DC/20/2200

Brangwyn, Station Road, Henfield Kindersleys

e Flo (P Th P i Arde H T se Wyv n r ) a ForOld Business h use onlyCop - not fore distribution to the general public e Old Th wood Vil n R e ai Ad e la rn Poplars The lway Tavern en Oak S sf s ield tab s ¯ le

m 26.0

Gages Car Park R Ho os Q Woodle

lro u e H G Mo m mea B Th inive .1 u 5 ree Co 2 yd a n H nks e G on t edg n ers s LB d n r ifer y The Old a 1a 1 e t t Co-op s row en

2a 2 s s 1 tland El Sub r Wes Uppe Firside 4 S 1 t a

yn Brangw

2 lee 0 Home 22

TA 28 ead TIO est Hom C o IRCOX N bbald LOWER FA

Ca ROAD 1

3 le

s s

t a B 26 4 E EC 7

HI 6

GA NG

N S L Depot DER O

27 SE

7 1 Wheels tt olco ko o ne Iro W i l

4 r

ters u

Cre s

1 Che Bria 1

13 The New Scale: 1:1,250

Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey map on behalf Organisation Horsham District Council of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database rights (2019). Ordnance Survey Licence.100023865 Department Comments

Date 04/02/2021 Page 33MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Demolition of dwelling and erection of a two storey detached 4 bedroom dwelling with detached double garage. Erection of an equestrian arena and DEVELOPMENT: outdoor riding arena together with associated parking. Retention of existing stables and new equestrian facilities Hobbits Stall House Lane North Heath Pulborough West Sussex RH20 SITE: 2HR WARD: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley

APPLICATION: DC/20/1519 APPLICANT: Name: Mr and Mrs M Skillman Address: C/O Agent

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: At the request of the Director of Place.

RECOMMENDATION: To approve the application, subject to the revised planning conditions.

1. ASSESSMENT

1.1 This application was presented at Planning Committee South, 15th December 2020, where members resolved that the application be determined by the Head of Development with a view to approval, subject to the amendment of conditions in consultation with Local Members. Following the committee meeting officers were made aware of having mistakenly misquoted Paragraph 109 of the NPPF when responding to member questions.

1.2 Whilst it is not clear how much weight Members would have attributed to the officers comment in their decision making, to avoid any perception of misdirection and in the interest of accuracy and transparency, following advice from the Council’s Legal Department, Officers are returning this application for re-determination advising members of the correct wording of Paragraph 109. In addition, Officers have revised and updated the relevant conditions referred to in the previous resolution, and these are discussed below.

Highway Matters

1.3 At the planning committee meeting, dated 15th December 2020, Officers mistakenly misquoted Paragraph 109 of the NPPF following comments raised by Councillors, stating:

“the test in the NPPF is there must be a severe impact on Highway Safety in order to refuse an application”

Page 35 Contact Officer: Robert Hermitage Tel: 01403 215382 1.4 The correct phrasing used within the NPPF 109 is:

‘Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.’

1.5 The officer recommendation made in the report presented to the Committee at the 15 December meeting was reached on the basis of the precise wording of Paragraph 109 as quoted above, and the Officer recommendation therefore remains as before. The previous report remains part of the officers assessment and is appended to this report. For the avoidance of doubt WSCC have also stated that the full correct wording of Paragraph 109 was considered in their assessment of the proposal, alongside other material issues, which incorporated the relevant available data at that time. WSCC concluded that the proposal would not have an ‘unacceptable impact on highway safety or result in ‘severe’ cumulative impacts on the operation of the highway network, therefore is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal’.

1.6 As such, Officers remain of the advice that the proposal does not warrant refusal on highways grounds as there is no unacceptable impact on highway safety, and the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would not be severe, in compliance with Paragraph 109 of the NPPF.

Conditions

1.7 At the 15 December Committee, members voted to support a motion to delegate approval to the Head of Development subject the addition and revision of the suggested schedule of conditions in consultation with the local members. These related to:  The addition of a condition to secure the sustainability measures as per paragraph 6.64 of the Officer’s report;  The addition of a condition controlling the movement and routing of delivery and other large vehicles to and from the site, and;  Strengthening the wording of condition 18 to better clarify the agreed use of the site.

1.8 With regards to a condition to secure the sustainability measures referenced at paragraph 6.64, members should note that current local planning policy does not require that all measures suggested by an applicant be secured. In this case Policy 35 (Climate Change) requires that flood storage and green infrastructure, water conservation, and layout/design matters should be secured to mitigate the impact of climate change, whilst Policy 37 sets out a series of further measures to improve the overall sustainability of development where appropriate. These are reflected in conditions 3, 4, 10 and 24 (ecology mitigation and enhancement), 7 (drainage strategy), 15 (landscaping), and 19 (water consumption). An additional condition is now recommended to secure details of the proposed electrical vehicle charging spaces, in accordance with the latest WSCC guidance on parking space provision.

1.9 Paragraph 55 of the NPPF requires that planning conditions must be necessary, relevant to planning and the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects. Having regard to the nature of the development, officers advise that the conditions listed are appropriate to meet these tests in compliance with Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

1.10 With regards to deliveries and movements to and from the site, Officers have considered members’ comments relating to the monitoring of delivery and larger vehicles. Unfortunately, a condition restricting how vehicles use the public highway to reach a development does not meet the tests of being reasonable or enforceable, particularly as this sits outside of the application site boundaries. The applicant has though provided further details of vehicular traffic relating to deliveries and movements of larger vehicles, stating that feedstuff deliveries Page 36 will be made no more than once a week on a light commercial vehicle, and horse box movements will be limited via a similar sized vehicle. In the event that larger horse transporters are needed, these vehicles are equipped with adjustable lowering suspension, meaning there is no need to avoid the route from the A29 under the bridge. Officers are satisfied that these movements corroborate with the submitted Transport Statement, and does not raise doubt with regards to safe use and operation of the highway network as above, in accordance with Paragraph 109 of the NPPF.

1.11 At the December committee meeting, members also questioned whether Condition 18 (formerly numbered) fully limited the proposed use of the site as a private equestrian facility, and requested that this condition be revised in consultation with local members. In response to this, the applicant has reiterated the low intensity use of the site, stating that activity on the site would be limited to the applicant (who lives next to the site at Heathcote) and the head groom who will live on site. The daily operations of the site would be supported by 2 to 3 additional grooms depending on days including the taught lessons (the only ‘commercial’ aspect of the development), resulting in limited daily movements to and from the site. The applicants have confirmed that horses will be bred on the site for the purposes of competition and those that are not of suitable quality would be sold on along with older horses, and that the purpose of the breeding is to breed talented horses rather than for business purposes.

1.12 Officers are satisfied that the activities detailed above accurately demonstrates that the operation of the site would remain within a private use, with the exception of the limited number of taught lessons comprising a small commercial element of minimal impact in terms of traffic movements and activity at the site. These movements to and from the site are accounted for with this use, as per the submitted Transport Statement. It is accepted that horses bred on site but not suited to competition would be sold, however this is not anticipated to be a regular or significant use of the site that would generate regular or high levels of traffic at the site. It should be noted that such sales could take place at any private equestrian facility, and a low level of ad hoc sales would not create a commercial activity. The applicant has further stated that there is no intention to operate DIY livery.

1.13 After careful consideration, and in consultation with the Planning Compliance Team Leader, Officers are satisfied that the scheduled activities secure the private use of the site and can be appropriately enforced to ensure that the use of the site remains private. Condition 18 (now condition 19 below) has been revised to be clear that the site is for private equestrian use by the occupiers of Heathcote (the applicants) and/or the onsite groom only, and that records of the training session times and attendees are to be kept at all times ready for inspection if needed.

Conclusion

1.14 The recommendation to approve planning permission remains as previous reflecting the full wording of Paragraph 109 of the NPPF. Members are advised to consider whether the application of the full wording of Paragraph 109 would have altered the decision previously reached, and whether the revised conditions referenced above acceptable to manage the use, transport movements and sustainability credentials of the development.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 To approve planning permission, subject to the following revised schedule of conditions:

Conditions:

1 Standard Plans Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in full accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning. Page 37

2 Regulatory (Time) Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development, including any demolition works, shall take place until unless the local planning authority has been provided with either: a) a licence for bats and great crested newts issued by Natural England pursuant to Regulation 55 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) authorizing the specified activity/development to go ahead; or b) a statement in writing from the relevant licensing body to the effect that it does not consider that the specified activity/development will require a licence for bats and great crested newts; and c) confirmation of the site registration and a method statement supplied by an individual registered to use a Bat Mitigation Class Licence for Bats (relating to the demolition of the existing dwelling).

Reason: To conserve protected and Priority species and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 and s17 Crime & Disorder Act 1998.

4 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place (including any demolition, ground works, site clearance) until a further badger survey and updated mitigation statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This further survey shall be undertaken to identify whether any Badger activity has changed since the previous surveys were undertaken and whether further mitigation and/or works are required for badgers during the construction phase. The works shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To conserve Protected species and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Badger Protection Act 1992 and s17 Crime & Disorder Act 1998.

5 Pre-Commencement Condition: With the exception of the demolition and removal of existing buildings and any concrete hardstanding no development shall commence until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination, (including asbestos contamination), of the site be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: (a) A pre-demolition preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

The following aspects (b) – (c) shall be dependent on the outcome of the above preliminary risk assessment (a) and may not necessarily be required. (b) An intrusive site investigation scheme, based on (a) to provide information for a detailed risk assessment to the degree and nature of the risk posed by any contamination to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (c) Full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results of the intrusive site investigation (b) and a verification plan providing details of what data will be collected in order to demonstrate that the remedial works are complete.

Page 38 The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Any changes to these components require the consent of the local planning authority.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to humans, controlled waters or the wider environment during and following the development works and to ensure that any pollution is dealt with in accordance with Policies 24 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until precise details of the existing and proposed finished floor levels and external ground levels of the development in relation to nearby datum points adjoining the application site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity and visual impact and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

7 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

8 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved Plan shall be implemented and adhered to throughout the entire construction period. The Plan shall provide details as appropriate but not necessarily be restricted to the following matters,  the anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction,  the method of access and routing of vehicles during construction,  the parking of vehicles by site operatives and visitors,  the loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste,  the storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development,  the erection and maintenance of security hoarding,  the provision of wheel washing facilities and other works required to mitigate the impact of construction upon the public highway (including the provision of temporary Traffic Regulation Orders), details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works,  safeguarding measures to ensure that the works do not pose danger to users of the adjacent Public Footpaths / Bridleways.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area, and in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

9 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a schedule of materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls, windows and roofs of the approved building(s) has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall conform to those approved.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of Page 39 visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

10 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: Prior to the development commencing above slab level, a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy for protected and Priority species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

The content of the Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy shall include the following: a) Purpose and conservation objectives for the proposed enhancement measures; b) detailed designs to achieve stated objectives; c) locations of proposed enhancement measures by appropriate maps and plans; d) persons responsible for implementing the enhancement measures; e) details of initial aftercare and long-term maintenance (where relevant).

The works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To enhance Protected and Priority Species/habitats and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the occupation or first use of the development hereby permitted, a detailed lighting plan illustrating the proposed siting of each external light to be installed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with approved locations detailed on the plan to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the specifications set out in the Lighting Technical Report submitted to the Council on 24.11.2020 (prepared by Designs for Lighting)

The external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan and the submitted Lighting Technical Report unless otherwise agreed to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species), and to protect neighbouring amenity in accordance with Policy 33(2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

12 Pre-Occupation Condition: The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or brought into use until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification that the remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 5(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 5(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

13 Pre-Occupation Condition: The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or brought into use until a scheme for the disposal of horse waste has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing the scheme shall include the following:  Methods and frequency of stable cleaning, storage, collection and disposal methods. Page 40  Detail of the location of storage of stable waste (muck heaps). These should not be located any closer than 30m from any neighbouring residential boundaries.  No burning of waste materials on site, including stable waste.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

14 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of the proposed replacement dwelling, the necessary in-building physical infrastructure and external site-wide infrastructure to enable superfast broadband speeds of 30 megabytes per second through full fibre broadband connection shall be provided to the premises.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable development that meets the needs of future occupiers in accordance with Policies 10 and 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

15 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, full details of all hard and soft landscaping works shall have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include plans and measures addressing the following:  Details of all existing trees and planting to be retained  Details of all proposed trees and planting, including schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers and tree pit details  Details of all hard-surfacing materials and finishes  Details of all boundary treatments (including those to the proposed outdoor arena)

The approved landscaping scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the first occupation of any part of the development. Unless otherwise agreed as part of the approved landscaping, no trees or hedges on the site shall be wilfully damaged or uprooted, felled/removed, topped or lopped without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority until 5 years after completion of the development. Any proposed planting, which within a period of 5 years, dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development that is sympathetic to the landscape and townscape character and built form of the surroundings, and in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

16 Pre-Occupation Condition: No part of the development shall be first occupied until the vehicle parking and turning spaces have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. These spaces shall thereafter be retained for their designated use.

Reason: To provide adequate on-site car parking and turning space for the development, and in accordance with Policy 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015)

17 Pre-Occupation Condition: No part of the development shall be first occupied until electric vehicle charging spaces have been provided in accordance with plans and details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The electric vehicle charging spaces shall thereafter be maintained and remain fully operational unless otherwise agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To provide sustainable travel options in accordance with Policies 35 and 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 41 18 Post-Occupation Condition: Upon the occupation of the replacement dwelling hereby permitted, the existing dwelling indicated on plan H/19/01 shall cease to be used for any purpose whatsoever and within a period of one month thereafter the existing dwelling shall be demolished (including the removal of foundations), all materials arising from such demolition removed from the site and the site of the demolished building restored in accordance with details of landscaping to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The retention of existing buildings together with the new buildings would result in the proliferation of buildings on the site, detracting from the character of the area which would be contrary to Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

19 Regulatory Condition: Other than for a maximum of 5 training sessions (defined as one trainee per session) per week, the stables, sand school, indoor arena and associated outside areas hereby permitted shall operate as a private equestrian facility for the benefit of the occupiers of Heathcote and/or the onsite grooms accommodation and shall not be used for any other commercial purposes (including for the holding of any public events or auctions) or in connection with any form of riding or livery establishment. The owners shall keep a record of all training sessions, dates and attendees at all times for inspection by the Local Planning Authority on request.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and highway impact, to enable the Local Planning Authority to regulate and control the development and in accordance with Policies 33 and 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

20 Regulatory Condition: The dwelling hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

21 Regulatory Condition: No works relating to the construction of the development hereby approved shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

22 Regulatory Condition: No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of any spoil from the site, shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

23 Regulatory Condition: There should be no importation of soil and other fill materials onto the development site unless the soil/fill has been certified as fit for purpose by a competent person and has been subject to analysis by an accredited laboratory to ensure that it is free from contamination.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015). Page 42

24 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no burning of materials or waste on site, including stable/horse waste.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

25 Regulatory Condition: All mitigation and enhancement measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the Ecological Impact Assessment (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, July 2020) as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination. This may include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW,) to provide on-site ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To conserve and enhance Protected and Priority species and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

26 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no exterior lighting/floodlighting unless prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority has been granted by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

27 Regulatory Condition: No plant or machinery that generates, or is likely to generate, noise audible beyond the site boundary to be installed without prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

28 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no use of a PA system or the playing amplified of music at any times unless otherwise agreed to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

INFORMATIVES

Conditions to be Discharged

Please be advised that there are conditions on this notice that will require the submission of details to be submitted for approval to the Local Planning Authority. To approve these details, you will need to submit an "Application for approval of details reserved by condition" with an application form and pay the appropriate fee. Guidance and the forms can be found at www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/applications/paperforms

Ordinary Watercourse Consent

Under the Land Drainage Act 1991, any works (permanent or temporary) that have the potential to affect the existing watercourse or ditch’s ability to convey water will require

Page 43 Ordinary Watercourse Consent. Ordinary watercourses include streams, drains, ditches and passages through which water flows that do not form the network of main rivers.

Importation of Soils

No soils shall be imported within the development site unless the developer has submitted details of the chemical testing and assessment of the soils which demonstrates the suitability of the soils for the proposed use. If soils are to be imported, the assessment shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified and competent person and full details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Background Papers: DC/20/1519

Page 44 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 15th December 2020 Demolition of dwelling and erection of a two storey detached 4 bedroom dwelling with detached double garage. Erection of an equestrian arena and DEVELOPMENT: outdoor riding arena together with associated parking. Retention of existing stables and new equestrian facilities Hobbits Stall House Lane North Heath Pulborough West Sussex RH20 SITE: 2HR WARD: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley

APPLICATION: DC/20/1519 APPLICANT: Name: Mr and Mrs M Skillman Address: C/O Agent

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: More than eight persons in different households have made written representations raising material planning considerations that are inconsistent with the recommendation of the Head of Development.

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission subject to appropriate conditions.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing dwelling (Hobbits), the erection of the following:  a replacement dwelling,  a detached double garage  an indoor riding area with 21 internal stables and hay store (67m by 36m); and  an outdoor riding arena (60m by 20m).

The indoor and outdoor arenas would be predominantly used for private purposes for the keeping, breeding and rearing of competition dressage horses owned by the applicants and their Groom/Head Trainer. The applicants live next to the site, and the replacement dwelling is to be occupied by the Groom/Head Trainer. The proposals state that the facilities will not be a standard equestrian centre with various livery or riding school events, but a bespoke business run by a dedicated trainer. It will include training days where the Head Trainer would

Page 45 Contact Officer: Robert Hermitage Tel: 01403 215382 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

train an individual rider on a ‘one-in one-out’ basis, likely 2 sessions per day and a maximum of five per week.

1.2 The proposed replacement dwelling would be sited approximately 12m forward of the existing dwelling, and would comprise a reduced overall floor area. The replacement dwelling would be one and a half storeys in height, and would host a half-hipped roof with three small dormers to the front elevation, and three larger half-dormers to the rear. The dwelling would be composed of a timber boarded exterior, with plain roof tiles, and a brick plinth. The detached double garage would be set to the front of the dwelling, matching the material composition of the main dwelling.

1.3 The proposed indoor arena would be sited 84m to the rear of the dwelling. The main body of the arena would measure some 67m in width, 36m in depth, including a 4.3m by 21.2m stable area to the side, and a 15.5m by 3.5m hay store to the rear. The arena would host a pitched roof with an eaves height of 3.2m and a maximum ridge height of 9.2m, and would be composed of a horizontal timber weather boarding, sheet roof, and a brick plinth. The arena would include 21 internal stables, a seating area, a feed store, office, tack room, WC, wash bays, laundry room, and an indoor 60m by 20m exercise arena. The exterior forecourt of the building would include parking spaces of 8 cars, and 4 horse box spaces.

1.4 The proposal also includes the creation of an outdoor 60m by 20m sand school between the proposed replacement dwelling and indoor arena, and would be countersunk into the slope, with associated planted boundary hedging and a gated entrance.

1.5 The site would be accessed via the existing access to the site. A new access would be created spurring from the junction to the street to the replacement dwelling, travelling west to east, and to the proposed equestrian areas. The existing access would remain to serve the existing stable building to the north of the site. The proposal also includes associated landscaping works, tree removal, and boundary planting enhancements. The existing ‘U’ shape stable building in the north-eastern corner of the site would remain.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The application relates to a 2.6ha site located on the southern side of Stall House Lane, North Heath. The site hosts an existing dwelling towards the north-eastern boundary to Stall House Lane, in addition to a 6 stable building to the north. The curtilage to the rear / south of the buildings is laid to grass, with sporadic siting of self-seeded wooded areas, and slopes gently towards the south. The boundaries of the site are lined with established trees and foliage, with a single access to the northern boundary from Stall House Lane

1.7 The site is located outside of the built-up area, within a predominantly rural location. Stall House Lane is characterised by sporadic siting of large detached dwellings, set within generous curtilages. The site is surrounded by large open fields and wooded areas. Public Bridleway 2299 travels east to west to the front boundary of the site, and public footpath 2322 travels east to west adjacent to the southern boundary.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

Page 46 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 7 - Strategic Policy: Economic Growth Policy 9 - Employment Development Policy 10 - Rural Economic Development Policy 11 - Tourism and Cultural Facilities Policy 20 - Rural Workers Accommodation Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 28 - Replacement Dwellings and House Extensions in the Countryside Policy 29 - Equestrian Development Policy 30 - Protected Landscapes Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 34 - Cultural and Heritage Assets Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding Policy 39 - Strategic Policy: Infrastructure Provision Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking Policy 42 - Strategic Policy: Inclusive Communities Policy 43 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation

RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

Pulborough Neighbourhood Planning Document The submission draft Pulborough Neighbourhood Plan is out to consultation in accordance with the Regulation 16 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended). The consultation is running for 8 weeks from 5pm 18 November 2020 to midnight 13th January 2021.

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS DC/19/2096 Demolition of dwelling and erection of a two Withdrawn Application storey detached 4 bedroom dwelling with on 06.01.2020 detached double garage. Erection of an equestrian arena and outdoor riding arena together with associated parking. Retention of existing stables and new equestrian facilities DC/16/0745 Construction of replacement stables Application Permitted on 25.05.2016 DC/15/0652 Construction of replacement stables Application Refused on incorporating grooms accommodation 21.05.2015

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

3.1 Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS Page 47 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

HDC Landscape Architect: No Objection (summary) – initial concerns relating to an increased level of activity to the site, though this would be contained by the existing landscape features which can be further mitigated with the reinforcement planting of the boundaries and potentially with the sensitive positioning of the building within the receiving land. The submitted LVIA concludes that the northern and central parts of the site are of a more enclosed character and that as a result there is potential to mitigate the harm arising from the proposals. Following the submission of additional information (relating to level information, rooflights, and planting), these concerns have been addressed and can be adequately conditioned.

HDC Environmental Health: No Objection (summary) – subject to the application of suggested conditions

HDC Drainage: No Objection (summary) – no overall objections to the drainage strategy proposed. The applicant should be advised that any discharge to the local watercourse might require ‘Ordinary Watercourse Consent’,

HDC Arboriculture: No Objection (summary) – none of the internal trees appear to have any especial amenity merit. The tree protective measure put forward in regard to the retained tree stock on the site are compliant with BS 5837 'Trees in relation to design, demolition, and construction - Recommendations' (2012), and are satisfactory.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

WSCC Highways: No Objection (summary) – The Local Highway Authority does not consider that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or result in ‘severe’ cumulative impacts on the operation of the highway network, therefore is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal. Suggested conditions (attached).

Ecological Consultant: No Objection (summary) – the proposal includes suitable details of proposed ecological mitigations and biodiversity enhancements sufficient to determine the application. Suggested conditions (attached).

A Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) has been carried out given the location of the site within 5km of the Mens Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The HRA concludes that the proposal will not have a Likely Significant Effect on the qualifying features of the SAC and that the HRA does not need to proceed to HRA Stage 2: Appropriate Assessment.

Southern Water: Comment (summary) – There are no public foul and surface water sewers in the area to serve this development. The applicant is advised to examine alternative means of foul and surface water disposal. The Environment Agency should be consulted directly regarding the use of a private wastewater treatment works or septic tank drainage which disposes of effluent to sub-soil irrigation.

South Downs National Park: Comment (summary) – the SDNP encourage any new development close to the National Park’s boundary to have a sensitive approach to lighting which conforms with the Insatiate of Lighting Professionals guidance for lighting in environmental zones, and tries to achieve zero upwards light spill in all respects.

Page 48 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

WSCC Flood Risk Management: No Objection (summary) – the site is located within an area of low ground and flood water risk. Works affecting the flow of an ordinary watercourse will require ordinary watercourse consent and an appropriate development-free buffer zone should be incorporated into the design of the development. There are no historic records of flooding on the site.

WSCC Rights of Way: No Objection (summary) – It appears the proposed development will not affect the PROW that runs adjacent to it; however, it should be clearly noted that the access along Stall House Lane at this point also carries a Public Right of Way, Public Bridleway 2299. Should planning consent be granted, the impact of development upon the public use, enjoyment and amenity of the PROW must be considered by the planning authority.

WSCC Minerals and Waste: No Objection (full) – The MWPA would offer No Objection to the application as per the subject line of this email as, while the application site is within a mineral safeguarding area for brick clay, the site area is less than 3ha and so would meet exemption criteria as detailed within the Minerals and Waste Safeguarding Guidance.

Reading Agricultural Consultants: No Objection (summary) – Overall, the proposed replacement dwelling, outdoor arena and indoor arena with facilities are of an appropriate size, and that it would support the equestrian needs of the holding and the business trading as Priory Dressage relocating from rented equestrian facilities to Hobbits. In such circumstances it would be compliant with Paragraph 83 of the NPPF and Policies 20, 26 and 29 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.2 Thirteen (13) letters of representation were received from twelve (12) separate addresses objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:  Loss of wildlife and habitat  Limited and dangerous access from the A29  Increased traffic  No public benefit from the proposal  New dwelling unnecessary  Insufficient passing space for larger and domestic vehicles  Dangerous to pedestrian users  Inappropriate location for commercial use  Inappropriately sized building  Tree felling has already commenced  The proposal goes against the previous approval on the site regarding no further intensification  Adverse impact by way of overbearing  Adverse odour impact  Unsustainable development  Overdevelopment of the site

3.3 Three (3) letters of representation were received from three separate addresses supporting the proposal on the following grounds:  High quality development  A well-needed facility for the area and for the UK  The proposal would support UK equestrianism  No adverse increase in traffic

Page 49 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

3.4 Pulborough Parish Council: Objection (summary) – Pulborough Parish Council objects to the proposal on the following grounds:  Over development  Out of character with the area  Access from the A29 is already recognised as dangerous  Inadequate road access for both cars and horse boxes

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Principle of the Development

Replacement Dwelling

6.1 Policy 28 of the HDPF states that outside the defined built-up areas, house extensions, replacement dwellings and ancillary accommodation will be supported if the development can be accommodated appropriately within the curtilage of the existing dwelling. In addition, replacement dwellings will only be supported on a one for one basis, should not be disproportionate to the size of the existing dwelling, and garages and any new outbuildings should have regards to the dwelling they serve and should be grouped with the house. In addition, replacement dwelling should also have regard to Policy 33 (Development Principles).

6.2 The new dwelling would replace the existing dwelling on a one-for-one basis, and is considered a proportionate replacement in terms of its scale and level of accommodation. The proposed replacement dwelling would occupy a footprint smaller than the existing, sited approximately 12m forward of its existing position. The new dwelling would stand at one and a half stories in eight, hosting a half hipped roof with dormer additions to the front and rear roofslope, front porch overhang, and is indicated to be finished in timber boarding with a brick plinth, plain roof tiles, and a brick chimney to the side elevation.

6.3 The dwelling would be a proportionate replacement to the existing, occupying a smaller overall footprint, and would benefit from a reasonable front and rear curtilage. The dormers to the front and rear would be well-proportioned to the windows they house, and are reasonably set within the roofslope of the dwelling. Furthermore, the dwelling is considered to comprise an appropriate exterior appearance and material composition, which would be well suited for its rural location.

6.4 With this and the above in mind, the principle and design of the proposed replacement dwelling is considered acceptable, subject to detailed considerations below, in accordance with Policies 28 and 33 of the HDPF.

Page 50 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Equestrian Use

6.5 The application site is located outside of the defined built-up area boundary and is therefore considered to be within the countryside. Therefore, the relevant countryside protection policies apply. Further, as a proposed commercial enterprise, establishing the principle of the proposal will be assessed against the following rural economic development policies:

6.6 Policy 10 of the HDPF relates to rural economic development, and states that sustainable rural economic development and enterprise within the district will be encouraged in order to generate local employment opportunities and economic, social and environmental benefits for local communities.

6.7 In the countryside, development which maintains the quality and character of the area, whilst sustaining its varied and productive social and economic activity will be supported in principle. Any development should be appropriate to the countryside location and must:

1. Contribute to the diverse and sustainable farming enterprises within the district or, in the case of other countryside-based enterprises and activities, contribute to the wider rural economy and/or promote recreation in, and the enjoyment of, the countryside; and either a) Be contained wherever possible within suitably located buildings which are appropriate for conversion or, in the case of an established rural industrial estate, within the existing boundaries of the estate; or b) Result in substantial environmental improvement and reduce the impact on the countryside particularly if there are exceptional cases where new or replacement buildings are involved. New buildings or development in the rural area will be acceptable provided that it supports sustainable economic growth towards balanced living and working communities and criteria a) has been considered first.

2. Demonstrate that car parking requirements can be accommodated satisfactorily within the immediate surrounds of the buildings, or an alternative, logical solution is proposed.

6.8 Further, policy 26 of the HDPF relates to development outside of the built-up area, and states that the rural character and undeveloped nature of the countryside will be protected against inappropriate development. Any proposal must be essential to its countryside location, and in addition meet one of the following criteria:

1. Support the needs of agriculture or forestry; 2. Enable the extraction of minerals or the disposal of waste; 3. Provide for quiet informal recreational use; or 4. Enable the sustainable development of rural areas.

6.9 In addition, proposals must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside character and location. Development will be considered acceptable where it does not lead, either individually or cumulatively, to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside, and protects, and/or conserves, and/or enhances, the key features and characteristics of the landscape character area in which it is located, including;

1. The development pattern of the area, its historical and ecological qualities, tranquillity and sensitivity to change; 2. The pattern of woodlands, fields, hedgerows, trees, waterbodies and other features; and 3. The landform of the area.

6.10 Policy 29 of the HDPF relates to equestrian development, and states that development for equestrian related development will be supported provided that:

Page 51 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

1. It can be demonstrated that the re-use of existing buildings on site for related equestrian use is not appropriate; before new or replacement buildings are considered. 2. The proposal would be appropriate in scale and level of activity, and be in keeping with its location and surroundings, and where possible is well related to existing buildings; 3. The proposal should where possible be well related to a bridleway network.

6.11 The applicants propose to operate an Olympic level equestrian training centre, with associated breeding capabilities and livery. The site currently includes an equestrian use, comprising 6 stables to the north of the site for the personal use of the applicant. These stables were approved under application DC/16/0745, and will be retained for breeding, convalescence, and veterinary care.

6.12 The proposed commercial equestrian use would comprise three aspects: an indoor equestrian arena with stabling and other accommodations; an outdoor equestrian arena, and; the aforementioned existing stabling.

6.13 The proposed indoor arena would be sited towards the centre of the site, rear of the existing dwelling, and would host an exercise arena 20m by 60m in size, including 21 stables, each measuring 4.1m by 4.3m. The building also includes the following facilities; toilet, storeroom, four wash bays, office, tack room, rug store, laundry, two feed stores, a hay store and seating area. These facilities are considered appropriate for an equine competition yard. Parking would be provided to the front of the building, comprising 8 parking spaces, and 4 horse box spaces.

6.14 The outdoor arena would be sited between the proposed indoor arena and the replacement dwelling, set within the existing slope (cut in approximately 1m deep), featuring fencing and associated boundary planting.

6.15 The proposed indoor arena would allow for year-round training of horses under cover, with up to five horses being trained at any one time. Both the proposed indoor and outdoor arenas are of a typical size for a training yard.

6.16 No alterations are proposed to the existing stable building north of the site, save for associated landscaping surrounding the building to connect pathways to the proposed arenas. The existing stable block would be used as a fouling box for breeding, and/or as an isolation quarantine area and for veterinary visits.

6.17 The site would be operated predominantly as a private training yard by the applicants and their staff. The applicant has stated that between them and the trainer, they own 20 horses and 3 foals. Therefore, the proposed stables would be occupied by the applicant’s horses, with no commercial livery.

6.18 The applicant has also stated that the proposal would include a small commercial training use, with the maximum number of training sessions being no more than two a day, or five a week on a one-in one-out basis. It is intended that visitors to the site would train with the applicant’s horses, however the applicant has advised that it is not anticipated that visitor’s horses are bought to the site, though the site does accommodate limited horse box parking if this were to take place. In the event that this is to occur and horses are to stay overnight, they will be tended to by the applicant and their staff. Up to 4 members of staff would assist the Head Trainer daily.

6.19 Based on this information, it is considered that the number of vehicle trips to and from the site would likely be lower than the expected 12 movements per day set out in the submitted Transport Statement. This is considering that the trainer and applicants live on and adjacent to the site and will mostly be involved in the daily operations of the site, and that feed for the Page 52 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

horses would be grown on the applicants wider land holding. Conditions are recommended to ensure that the nature and intensity of the proposal reflects that set out in the supporting statements as summarised above.

6.19 The pre-text to policy 29 states that equestrian related development is important to the rural economy, and that development of this nature needs to be of a high quality and appropriate to its location. Whilst the proposed equestrian centre occupies a large area and would be accommodated within a large building, the proposed use of the site would largely fall to the maintenance and training of the applicant’s horses alongside a small number of low intensity training events. Notwithstanding other material planning considerations, this level of primarily private activity at the site is considered to be of an appropriate scale in this countryside location. Furthermore, the use would be well-connected with the existing bridleway network, as bridleway 2299 adjoins the north-eastern boundary of the site.

6.20 In terms of the Council’s Countryside Protection Policy (Policy 26), as above, the proposal would allow for quiet recreational use. Whilst it is appreciated that there would be an increase in activity on / surrounding the site as a result of the development, this would be of a scale commensurate to the nature of the proposed use.

6.21 With regards to rural economic development, the proposal would promote recreation in and the enjoyment of the countryside, generating local employment opportunities. The proposed use is also characteristic of its countryside location, and would facilitate the development of a rural enterprise. Furthermore, the development would promote local tourism, facilitating a rural diversification scheme which would ultimately benefit the local rural economy

6.22 With the above in mind, whilst the development would result in a modest increase in activity within the countryside, the proposal is considered acceptable in principle in terms of its appropriate location, and would generate local employment opportunities and would benefit the local rural economy, in accordance with Policies 10, 11, 26 and 29 of the HDPF.

Layout, Amount, Scale and Appearance

6.23 Policy 32 of the HDPF states that good design is a key element in sustainable development, and seeks to ensure that development promotes a high standard of urban design, architecture and landscape. Policy 33 of the HDPF states that development proposals should make efficient use of land, integrate effectively with the character of the surrounding area, use high quality and appropriate materials, retain landscaping where feasible (and mitigate loss if necessary) and ensure no conflict with the character of the surrounding town or landscape.

6.24 The proposed outdoor arena would be sited to the rear of the replacement dwelling, and the indoor arena sited to its rear within the centre of the site – the site would be connected via a network of pathways and driveways from the street, including a new access off of the existing driveway.

6.25 The outdoor arena would be set within the site’s slope, incorporating fencing and boundary hedging, occupying and area of 60m by 20m – access to the arena would be granted via gates facing south-east, towards the indoor arena. The proposed arrangement is considered typical for an outdoor arena. Overall, no objection is raised with regards to its proposed layout and appearance.

6.26 Officers acknowledge that the proposed indoor arena is large. However, as above, the proposed use and amount of stabling is considered justified. Officers had queried whether the building is required to be this size, and whether there was any scope to separate the indoor arena from the stabling, and re-site them on an alternate location on the site. In response to this, the applicant stated their aspiration to provide an equestrian centre worthy of Olympic-level training. Due to the size of the arena, the roof of a surrounding building Page 53 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

would overhang, which enables the stables to be accommodated under the overhang without reducing the overall arena area. This is the most efficient way of providing the stabling avoiding the need for further structures on the land. In essence, separating the stabling from the arena would not amount to an overly reduced footprint, and would otherwise require additional built form to be located elsewhere on the site. On balance, Officers consider that the proposed arrangement would be less harmful than the alternate.

6.27 Ultimately, the building would comprise a utilitarian appearance and an appropriate construction for the proposed use. Whilst it is acknowledged that the resultant built form on the site is considerable, Officers do not consider that there is warrantable reason to refuse permission on this basis, considering the resultant aforementioned positive economic impacts, and landscaping considerations (detailed below). On balance, the resultant appearance and built form of the development is considered acceptable, in accordance with Policy 33 of the HDPF.

Landscape and Arboricultural Impacts

6.28 Policy 25 of the HDPF relates to the Natural Environment and landscape character of the District, including the landscape, landform and development pattern, together with protected landscapes and habitats will be protected against inappropriate development. The Council will support development proposals which:

1. Protects, conserves and enhances the landscape and townscape character, taking into account areas identified as being of landscape importance, the individual settlement characteristics, and maintains settlement separation. 2. Maintain and enhances the Green Infrastructure Network and addresses any identified deficiencies in the District. 3. Maintains and enhances the existing network of geological sites and biodiversity, including safeguarding existing designated sites and species, and ensures no net loss of wider biodiversity and provides net gains in biodiversity where possible. 4. Conserve and where possible enhance the setting of the South Downs National Park.

6.29 Policy 33(6) of the HDPF presumes in favour of the retention of existing important landscape and natural features, for example trees, hedges, banks and watercourses. Development must relate sympathetically to the local landscape and justify and mitigate against any losses that may occur through the development.

6.30 The site itself comprises an irregular shape, and is mostly defined by vegetated boundaries which to the east merge into adjoining woodland belts. The topography within the site is undulating with a gradual rise of around 2m from the lower ground along the eastern boundary towards the northern and western areas of the site. A group of mixed native species is set within the central part of the site, informally dividing and containing it from the most southern part. Public bridleway 2299 travels east to west to the front boundary of the site, and public footpath 2322 travels east to west adjacent to the southern boundary, both offering public glimpses into the site.

6.31 The application was accompanied with a Landscape Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). The document details the site’s landscape constraints, and details the proposal’s mitigation and enhancement measures. The Council’s Senior Landscape Architect stated agreement that the northern and central parts of the site are of a more enclosed character and that as a result there is potential to mitigate the harm arising from the proposals. No concern was raised with regards to the replacement dwelling.

6.32 Initially, concerns were raised with regards to the size and siting of the indoor arena, though acknowledging that the proposed size is considered appropriate for the required equestrian purposes by the agricultural consultant, and questioning how the development would be accommodated within the landscape. In addition, whilst the development would amount to Page 54 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

an increased level of activity within this location, it was appreciated that the use would be contained within the existing landscape features that would be further mitigated with the reinforcement of planting. Further to initial comments, additional information was submitted to the Council (dated 14.10.2020), including a topographical survey, a landscape masterplan, and an additional statement of the applicant’s Landscape Planner.

6.33 The additional information confirmed that the outdoor arena would be set within the gradual slope to the replacement dwelling, and that the proposed indoor arena would be sited on relatively level ground at approximately 1m (considering the size of the building). It was noted that that some steep slopping will be necessary to the southern west corner of the building. However, this would be localised and planting is proposed within this location which will help soften the change.

6.34 Glimpses into the site would be granted through intermittent planting along the boundaries of the site from the surrounding public footpaths / bridleways. However, as noted with in the LVIA and highlighted by the Council’s Senior Landscape Architect, boundary planting is proposed to be enhanced, and can be controlled by way of condition. The submitted topographical survey detailed the existing levels of the site and the proposed finished floor levels, which demonstrates how the development would be situated within the landscape. The Council’s Senior Landscape Architect has not raised any objection to this arrangement. Therefore, with additional planting and enhancements to the boundary planning, public views of the development would be limited, and would not result in a development that would be perceived as visually adverse from a public point of view. Officers are satisfied that the landscaping enhancements and mitigations can be adequately controlled by way of condition.

6.35 The South Downs National Park is located approximately 2km west of the site (to its closest boundary). The South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) have not objected to the proposal, though have noted that the submitted LVIA did not account for visual impact on the Grade II Listed Folly, Toat Monument, which is sited within the National Park, located some 2.5km west of the site. Upon review, the Council’s Senior Landscape Officer noted that because of the distance between the site and the monument, coupled with the fact that monument is not publicly accessible, an assessment of this impact was not necessary. Furthermore, comments regarding the amount of rooflights and resultant light spill were also made, and their potential resultant impact on the National Park (assessed below).

6.36 The Council’s Senior Arboricultural Officer has commented on the proposal. It was noted that the site is located within an isolated countryside location, and that a small number of trees are to be removed to facilitate construction- none of which are of particular amenity value or of especial merit. The trees to be retained on the site would be subject of appropriate protective measures compliant with the British Standard.

6.37 With the above considerations in mind, Officers are satisfied that the development would result in minor landscape impact, which can otherwise be mitigated against, in addition to an appropriate level of recommended enhancements, all of which can be adequately controlled by way of condition. In addition, the proposed trees to be removed on the site are not of particular amenity value, and their loss would be offset by the planting of enhanced boundary treatment. As such, the proposal is considered to accord with Polices 25 and 33(6) of the HDPF.

Amenity Impacts

6.38 Policy 33(2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that permission will be granted for development that does not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of the occupiers/users of nearby properties and land.

Page 55 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

6.39 The site is located within a relatively isolated countryside location with regards to proximity to nearby neighbouring dwellings, and is predominantly surrounded by open fields with ample boundary planting.

6.40 To the north, the sites northern boundary neighbours Stall House Barn set at a distance in excess of 100m. Heathcote is sited 250m to the north-eastern boundary of the site (the applicant’s property), and to the south, Little Brinsbury Farm is sited some 30m of the southern boundary of the site (some 155m from the southern elevation of the proposed indoor arena).

6.41 Given the separation distance of the site in relation to the nearest neighbouring properties, the proposed replacement dwelling and equestrian use and arenas would not give rise to neighbouring amenity concerns by way of overlooking or overshadowing. Furthermore, whilst the building is large, and would be located some 155m from Little Brinsbury Farm to the south, its northerly siting in relation to the neighbour, coupled with the proliferation of the neighbour’s outbuildings between the dwelling and the proposed indoor arena would not give rise an adverse sense of overbearing. Details relating to lighting impact are assessed below.

6.42 The site is currently utilised as residential curtilage to Hobbits, with a small stable to the north of the site. As such, it is appreciated that the proposed use of the site would likely result in an increase level of activity on the site. However, as previously expressed, movement on the approach roads would not be more than 12 per day including a very light-touch commercial use (up to five appointments a week). Trips and traffic impacts are detailed in the section below, which are not considered excessive given the proposed intended use. Furthermore, the proposed equestrian use of this size not considered out of the ordinary for a countryside location, and coupled with the relatively low traffic expected to and from the site, the proposal is not considered to adversely impact neighbouring amenity.

6.43 With the above in mind, the proposed development is not considered to result in adverse harm to neighbouring amenity, in accordance with Policy 33(2) of the HDPF.

Highways and Access

6.44 Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that transport access and ease of movement is a key factor in the performance of the local economy. The need for sustainable transport and safe access is vital to improve development across the district. Policy 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that development that involved the loss of existing parking spaces will only be allowed if suitable alternative provision has been secured elsewhere. Adequate parking facilities must be provided within the developments to meet the needs of the anticipated users.

6.45 The application was accompanied with a detailed Transport Statement. The statement details that the existing access into the site from Stall House Lane would be retained and utilised for the development. Internal driveways would be created to serve the arenas to the rear of the proposed replacement dwelling, including access from the existing driveway.

6.46 Paragraphs 7.7 onwards of the Transport Statement calculates the proposed trip generation associated with the development is not expected to exceed 12 two-way trips in one day, stating that the data provided represents a worst-case scenario. WSCC Highways have commented on the trip generation, stating that daily peaks trips would be ‘very minimal’. This would not give rise to a significant number of trips that could be considered a highway safety or capacity concern. As the trip data represents a worst-case scenario, it could be expected that the trip generation in reality would be lower than what is presented in the transport statement.

6.47 Access arrangements to the site would remain unaltered from the existing. The site would be accessed via Stall House Lane, which is a narrow country road with passing places Page 56 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

unsuitable for heavy vehicular use. Data provided by WSCC Highways and Sussex Policy confirm that there have been no accidents on the junction of Stall House Lane and Gay Street Lane within the last five years. As the access to the site from the highway would remain unaltered, rural refuse and recycling vehicles and collections would not be impacted. Whilst additional vehicle movements would be generated along Stall House Lane, these would not be of a quantum that would result in highway safety or amenity harm. This judgement has been made based on the understanding that there would be a variety of vehicles potentially accessing or exiting the site including the applicant’s horseboxes and any occasional service vehicles. Given the low number of trips that would be generated for this predominantly private use of the site, therefore, the proposed means of access are considered acceptable.

6.48 Neighbouring concerns relating to highways safety and access from the A29 are acknowledged. Whilst no accidents have been reported on the junction to Stall House Lane and Gay Street Lane, it is noted that numerous accidents have occurred on or nearby to the junction of Gay Street Lane and Stane Street (A29), which is subject to the national speed limit. However, as demonstrated by the proposed worst-case scenario relating to two-way movements to and from the site per day (no more than 12), WSCC Highways Officers do not consider that this would generate an excessive amount of traffic that would cause adverse harm to the use and operation of the wider highway network.

6.49 Given the narrow nature of Stall House Lane, and the clear amenity and highway safety issues that would potentially arise from a more intensive commercial operation of the site, a condition is attached to the number of weekly training sessions conducted on site as part of an otherwise private equestrian facility only.

6.50 Paragraph 6.9 of the Transport Statement details that 15 parking spaces would be provided in total, comprising 3 spaces for the replacement dwelling, 8 for the indoor arena, 4 horsebox parking spaces, in addition to 4 cycle parking spaces. The development is expected to generate parking accumulation of 3 vehicles and 3 horse boxes at any one point. Therefore, the parking arrangements for the development are considered suitable for the proposed use.

6.51 With the above in mind, the proposed access and parking arrangements associated with the development are considered acceptable, and are therefore considered in accordance with Policies 40 and 41 of the HDPF.

Other Matters

Ecology

6.52 An Ecological Impact Assessment was submitted with the application. The report concludes that the site is formed of common, widespread plant species of limited diversity; the habitats which shall be lost as part of the scheme are of low ecological value. The site supports low numbers of roosting, foraging and commuting bats as well as a low population of great crested newts. The avoidance and mitigation measures as detailed will prevent any contravention of the relevant legislation with regards these species.

6.53 The Council’s Ecology consultant has reviewed the submitted survey and, subject to adequate avoidance, mitigation and enhancement measures secured via suggested conditions (attached), does not object to the proposed development on ecological grounds.

Drainage

6.54 The Environment Agency’s (EA) online flood maps show that the site is located wholly within Flood Zone 1, meaning that the land is in a ‘low probability’ flood zone, and has a ‘less than 1 in 1,000 annual probability of river or sea flooding’. A boundary ditch watercourse is sited along the eastern boundary of the site, travelling northwards

Page 57 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

6.55 In order to manage the risks associated with flooding, an attenuation storage (open pond), permeable paving and Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) features are incorporated into the design of the site, draining into the eastern watercourse. The attenuation pond (towards the south-east of the site) will be provided where drainage system will flow into this pond via a conveyance swale south of the indoor riding arena building. These SuDS features will provide runoff treatment to protect water quality in the receiving watercourse system, thereby ensuring that there would be no increase in run-off rates leaving the site.

6.56 The submitted Drainage Statement has been assessed by both WSCC Flood Risk Management team and the Council’s Drainage Engineer, in which both parties are satisfied that the proposed methods of surface water management would meet the requirements of the NPPF (subject to conditions for ongoing maintenance etc.).

6.57 In summary, it is considered that the submitted Drainage Statement and design demonstrates the development proposal can be satisfactorily accommodated without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and is therefore in accordance with Chapter 14 of the NPPF, and Policy 38 of the HDPF.

Lighting

6.58 The submission included a technical lighting report. The report details the proposed use of internal and external lighting, in addition to proposed methods of mitigation to avoid unnecessary light spill. The reports states that during the summer months, training within the indoor arena would have finished by sundown and horses would have been bedded down by this time. No lighting is proposed to the outdoor arena. During the winter, training is expected to cease at 16:00. The proposed indoor arena will require lighting to supplement the natural light penetrating the space, particularly on overcast days. The indoor arena is not likely to be used at night, therefore the lighting system would only need to provide supplementary levels of lighting, rather than full lighting levels after daylight has faded. In order to mitigate sky glow caused by light spill through the rooflights, the internal lighting system within the arena will be controlled by a timeclock to ensure lighting is switched off by a 18:00 curfew.

6.59 With regards to external lighting, the report details the use of ‘warm lighting’ and ensuring luminaires demonstrate superior levels of optical control, ensuring light is focussed only where required and at a low level to reduce the potential for vertical light spill and upward light – the luminaires will be secured to face downwards at an angle for 70 degrees (illustrated in table 1 of the report).

6.60 Further to the submission of the report, the Council’s Ecological Consultant is satisfied that the report conforms to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 with regards to resultant ecological impact. In addition, the Council’s Environmental Health Officers are satisfied that the specifications detailed within the report would not result in adverse harm to neighbouring amenity. However, whilst the contents of the report may well conform to guidance and standards, the exact positions of the lighting have not been illustrated on plan. As such, a condition has been attached below to ensure that the exact details of the location of the lighting is submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority, and that the layout and location of the lighting conforms with the specifications detailed within the submitted technical lighting report.

6.61 With the above in mind, Officers are satisfied that the proposed methods of internal and external lighting can be adequately designed to ensure the reduction of unnecessary light still within this countryside location, thus reducing any perceived impact on the South Downs Dark Night Sky Reserve, through the use of appropriate lighting design and mitigations. Therefore, conditions have been devised to ensure a satisfactory design and mitigations to be proposed prior to their installation.

Page 58 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Climate Change

6.62 Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the HDPF require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions mitigate the impact of development on climate change.

6.63 The applicant has submitted a sustainability statement. The report details a range of sustainability issues, such as: energy and carbon emissions; water conservation; flood risk, surface and waste water management; ecology and biodiversity; waste and pollution, and; materials selection and sustainable construction methods. The report confirms that the development would include the following measures to address climate change impact:  water usage limit of 110l/p/day;  use of ground source heat pumps;  use of ‘A grade’ rated white goods;  use of highly sustainable construction materials;  Construction in accordance with building regulations codes;  Energy efficient LED lighting (including external lights);  Use of permeable surfaces and sustainable drainage systems;  Dedicated refuse and recycling storage capacity;  Opportunities for biodiversity gain (as detailed above) and additional planting;  Cycle parking facilities;  Improved pedestrian and cycle links;  Provision of the necessary infrastructure to supply broadband to the site, and;  Provision of electric vehicle charging points.

6.64 Officers are satisfied that the above listed measures could be put in place to mitigate against any potential sustainability impacts, and can be secured by way of planning condition.

6.65 With the above in mind, the Local Planning Authority are satisfied that through the use of appropriately worded planning conditions, the above measures could be implemented to reduce the development’s impact on climate change. To this regard, the Local Planning Authority does not object to the proposal on these grounds.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

6.66 Horsham District Council has adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule which took effect on 1st October 2017.

6.67 It is considered that this development constitutes CIL liable development. At the time of drafting this report the proposal involves the following:

Replacement Dwelling:

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

District Wide Zone 1 257m2 525m2 -268m2

Total Gain -268m2

Total Demolition 525m2

Equestrian Centre:

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

District Wide Zone 1 2,562m2 0m2 2,562m2

Total Gain 2,562m2 Page 59 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Total Demolition 0m2

6.68 Please note that exemptions and/or reliefs may be applied for up until the commencement of a chargeable development.

Conclusion

6.69 The proposed replacement dwelling would be acceptable in principle, comprising a suitably designed dwelling proportionate in size to the dwelling it will replace, resulting in no adverse impact to neighbouring amenity over and above the existing arrangement.

6.70 The principle of the use of the site as a private equestrian facility for the breeding and training of competition dressage horses, with a small ancillary training element, is considered acceptable and in accordance with rural economic development policies. It is acknowledged that the proposed indoor arena is a large building of commercial scale however its impact on the surrounding landscape would be very limited given its low position within a site and strong boundary screening. The proposed landscape enhancements and mitigations would further offset any perceived landscape harm.

6.71 Given the nature of the proposed use, the impact on the narrow access along Stall House Lane would be limited as the traffic generation from the site would be small. The proposed has demonstrated that the site can be safely access from the highway and includes suitable parking provision. The development is not considered to adversely impact on the amenities of the neighbours whilst ecology, drainage and light impacts can be suitably mitigated.

6.72 With the above in mind, Officers consider that the scale and nature of the proposed use is acceptable in this instance, and recommend that the application be approved subject to the conditions recommended below.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To approve planning permission, subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1 Standard Plans Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in full accordance with the approved plans.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

2 Regulatory (Time) Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Page 60 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

c) confirmation of the site registration and a method statement supplied by an individual registered to use a Bat Mitigation Class Licence for Bats (relating to the demolition of the existing dwelling).

Reason: To conserve Protected species and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Badger Protection Act 1992 and s17 Crime & Disorder Act 1998.

The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Any changes to these components require the consent of the local planning authority.

Page 61 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area, and in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 62 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

The works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To enhance Protected and Priority Species/habitats and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

13 Pre-Occupation Condition: The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or brought into use until a scheme for the disposal of horse waste has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing the scheme shall include the following:  Methods and frequency of stable cleaning, storage, collection and disposal methods.  Detail of the location of storage of stable waste (muck heaps). These should not be located any closer than 30m from any neighbouring residential boundaries.  No burning of waste materials on site, including stable waste.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Reason: To ensure a sustainable development that meets the needs of future occupiers in accordance with Policies 10 and 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015). Page 63 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Reason: To provide adequate on-site car parking and turning space for the development, and in accordance with Policy 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015)

17 Post-Occupation Condition: Upon the occupation of the replacement dwelling hereby permitted, the existing dwelling indicated on plan H/19/01 shall cease to be used for any purpose whatsoever and within a period of one month thereafter the existing dwelling shall be demolished (including the removal of foundations), all materials arising from such demolition removed from the site and the site of the demolished building restored in accordance with details of landscaping to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

18 Regulatory Condition: Other than for a maximum of 5 training sessions (defined as one trainee per session) per week, the stables, sand school and indoor arena hereby permitted shall operate as a private equestrian facility only and shall not be used for commercial purposes or in connection with any form of riding or livery establishment.

19 Regulatory Condition: The dwelling hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained.

Page 64 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

20 Regulatory Condition: No works relating to the construction of the development hereby approved shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

21 Regulatory Condition: No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of any spoil from the site, shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

22 Regulatory Condition: There should be no importation of soil and other fill materials onto the development site unless the soil/fill has been certified as fit for purpose by a competent person and has been subject to analysis by an accredited laboratory to ensure that it is free from contamination.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

23 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no burning of materials or waste on site, including stable/horse waste.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

24 Regulatory Condition: All mitigation and enhancement measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the Ecological Impact Assessment (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, July 2020) as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination. This may include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW,) to provide on-site ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

25 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no exterior lighting/floodlighting unless prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority has been granted by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 65 APPENDIX – ITEM 7 – DC/20/1519 Hobbits

26 Regulatory Condition: No plant or machinery that generates, or is likely to generate, noise audible beyond the site boundary to be installed without prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

27 Regulatory Condition: There shall be no use of a PA system or the playing amplified of music at any times unless otherwise agreed to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

INFORMATIVES

Conditions to be Discharged

Ordinary Watercourse Consent

Under the Land Drainage Act 1991, any works (permanent or temporary) that have the potential to affect the existing watercourse or ditch’s ability to convey water will require Ordinary Watercourse Consent. Ordinary watercourses include streams, drains, ditches and passages through which water flows that do not form the network of main rivers.

Importation of Soils

Background Papers: DC/20/1519

Page 66 07) DC/20/1519

Hobbits, Stall House Lane, North Heath, Pulborough For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public ¯

Scale: 1:5,000

Date 04/02/2021 Page 67MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Erection of 2No. semi-detached double storey dwellings and erection of a DEVELOPMENT: single garage. Creation of off street parking for 4 vehicles. Windways Common Hill West Chiltington Pulborough West Sussex RH20 SITE: 2NL WARD: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington

APPLICATION: DC/20/2234 Name: Mr Phil Stevens Address: Blocques, The Village, Ashurst, BN44 APPLICANT: 3AP

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: By request of Councillor Blackall

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a pair of semi-detached two-storey dwellings on the eastern side of Common Hill, West Chiltington, forward of the principle elevation of Windways. The dwellings seek to match the scale and appearance of the semi- detached pair to the north of the site, 1-2 Whales Cottages, and would be composed of a painted brick front facing the street, with exposed brick facades to the sides, featuring a brick band to the first floor level. The dwellings would host open pitched roof porches to the principle elevation, and single storey rear extension which would be joined at the party boundary. A single detached garage is proposed at the rear of Plot 2, with access via the existing shared driveway with Windways south of Plot 1.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.2 The application relates to the front garden curtilage serving Windways, a detached two- storey dwelling sited on the eastern side of Common Hill. The site slopes gently upwards from the street, incorporating a generous curtilage of approximately 0.7acres, hosting a small pond close to the front boundary. The site is bound by tall and established hedging to the front and side boundaries, and is accessed via a shared driveway serving Windways and Spindlewood.

Page 69 Contact Officer: Robert Hermitage Tel: 01403 215382 2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 16 - Strategic Policy: Meeting Local Housing Needs Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 31 – Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking Policy 42 - Strategic Policy: Inclusive Communities Policy 43 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation

RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

2.2 West Chiltington Parish submitted their Submission draft plan to Horsham District Council on 19 November 2018. In accordance with legislation, the Council is in the process of considering whether the plan meets the Basic Conditions and can progress to Regulation 16 consultation and formal examination.

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS DC/14/0448 Single storey extension to the front of existing Application Permitted annexe and single storey extension to rear on 30.05.2014 DC/13/1680 Replacement of existing garages with one 3-bay Application Permitted garage and felling of 1 x Silver Birch tree subject on 17.10.2013 of TPO WC/92/00 Change of use from rest home to residential Application Permitted Site: Windways Common Hill West Chiltington on 18.10.2000 WC/117/96 Change of use to rest home and erection of Application Permitted single-storey extension on 22.01.1997 Site: Windways Common Hill West Chiltington WC/83/96 Change of use to rest home and erection of Application Refused on single-storey extension 16.10.1996 Site: Windways Common Hill West Chiltington

DC/18/1320 Erection of two dwellings to land west of Application Withdrawn Windways. on 11.09.2018

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

Page 70 3.1 Where consultation responses have been summarised, it should be noted that Officers have had consideration of the full comments received, which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

HDC Arboricultural Officer: (summary) No Objection – I can confirm the details submitted regarding the number of trees in this front garden area to the original property, that is, that none now remain. I consider that this proposal will no ill-effect upon any tree in the area, protected or not.

HDC Conservation: No Objection

HDC Environmental Health: No Objection

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

WSCC Highways: (summary) No Objection – The LHA does not consider that this proposal would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or result in ‘severe’ cumulative impacts on the operation of the highway network, therefore is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal.

Ecology Consultant: (summary) No Objection – subject to the attachment of suggested conditions. The mitigation measures identified in the Ecological Impact Assessment (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, January 2021) should be secured and implemented in full. This is necessary to conserve and enhance protected and Priority Species.

A Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) screening has been carried out that concludes that the development is not likely to result in a ‘likely significant effect’ (LSE) to The Mens SAC, Ebernoe Common SAC or Arun Valley SAC, SPA and Ramsar site, either alone or in combination with other plan and projects.

Having prepared this HRA screening of the implications of the plan or project for the sites in view of those sites’ conservation objectives, the authority can agree to the project under regulation 63 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended).

Southern Water: No Objection

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.2 Seven (7) letters of representation received from six (6) separate addresses objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:  The site accesses on to a very busy road  Overdevelopment of the site  Increased speeding traffic within the area  The development would adversely alter the character of the street  Increased traffic in area  There is no precedent for three storey dwelling in this area  The dwellings would be built forward of the established building line  Unsympathetic development  The dwellings would not be affordable  Unsafe access  Increased traffic within the area  Increased risk of localised flooding Page 71  Impact on local water supply  Adverse amenity harm to neighbours  Insufficient parking provision  Inadequate public consultation has been undertaken  Increased traffic noise within area  Restrictive covenants are in place to the host site as a single dwelling

3.3 West Chiltington Parish Council objects to the proposal on the following grounds:  This is the sort of infill that the Parish Council does not want  The dwellings would be too high (three-storey, not the two-storey suggested by the application); a storey taller than adjacent Whales Cottages. They would dominate the street scene.  There is insufficient room on the site for safe and practical access  The privacy of neighbours would be unacceptably compromised

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Background

6.1 The application forms a resubmission of a previous application that was withdrawn prior to determination (DC/18/1320), and has been re-submitted by the new owners of Windways. The present application is identical in appearance and scale to the previous proposal, save for slight revisions to the rear curtilage of the dwelling facing Windways, and the proposed parking arrangement. Of relevance and note is the presence of an extant planning permission for a single dwelling in the front garden to ‘The Lighthouse’, two properties and some 30m to the south of the site (DC/18/2039).

Principle of the Development

6.2 Policies 2 and 3 of the Horsham District Planning Framework state that the district has a distinctive settlement pattern, which the framework seeks to retain and enhance. Development within the built-up area boundaries is accepted in principle, and that appropriate development, including infilling, within the built-up areas will be prioritised. The site is located within the built-up area of West Chiltington. West Chiltington has been identified as a ‘Medium Village’ under Policy 3 that has a moderate range of services, facilities and social networks with some local employment provision, but with good rail/bus services. Residents are reliant on larger settlements for access most of their requirements.

6.3 Given the location of the site within the built-up area boundary of West Chiltington, the principle of development is considered acceptable, subject to all other detailed material planning considerations as discussed below.

Design and Appearance Page 72

6.4 Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that development proposals should make efficient use of land, integrate effectively with the character of the surrounding area, use high quality and appropriate materials, retain landscaping where feasible (and mitigate loss if necessary) and ensure no conflict with the character of the surrounding town or landscape.

6.5 The proposed dwellings would be sited within the front garden curtilage currently serving Windways, on the eastern side of Common Hill. The pair of dwellings would be sited approximately 15m south of an existing pair of semi-detached dwellings, Nos. 1 and 2 Whales Cottages, reflecting their building line. The dwellings would be set approximately 5m from the boundary to the street, and some 26.5m from the principle elevation of the host dwelling at Windways. The dwellings would be served by the existing access, which is also shared with the neighbouring dwelling to the south, Spindlewood.

6.6 The pair of dwellings would comprise a ground floor area and height comparable to that of Whales Cottages to the north, and each dwelling would include a modest 4m rear ground floor projection. The pair of dwellings would be reasonably spaced from their boundaries, from the street, and from the neighbouring dwellings, thus allowing a reasonable curtilage surrounding to each plot. Whilst it is appreciated that the size of the plots at 330m2-400m2 would be smaller than their immediate neighbours, properties on Common Hill and the immediate surrounding area vary considerably in size. Whilst the majority are appreciably larger than the two proposed, there are some examples of smaller plots towards the crossroads to the north. Critically, whilst the plot sizes are small when placed in this immediate context, given the significant levels of tree and hedge planting along Common Hill the size of the plots would not be readily appreciable other than by occupiers of the site, Windways and Spindlewood. Given their alignment and similar scale and finish to Whales Cottages, coupled with their positioning on the street in relation to its neighbours, it is not considered that proposed dwellings would have a jarring impact on the character of the area.

6.7 In terms of the size of the dwellings, the area is characterised by substantial two storey detached family homes interspersed by smaller scale semi-detached and detached dwellings. Given the presence of Whales Cottages and Bettys-Y-Coed and Oaklyn to the north of the site, the inclusion of an additional pair of three-bedroom semi-detached dwellings of the scale proposed would not be out of character with the mix of dwelling types on Common Hill.

6.8 Concerns raised by neighbours regarding the resultant development forward of the host dwelling are acknowledged. However, whilst the proposed dwellings would be sited forward of an existing large detached dwelling utilising its front garden curtilage, the separation (28m at first floor level), layout, scale and form of the proposal would facilitate an appropriate relationship between the two sites with limited visibility in the wider area. Further still, nearby similar neighbouring development, Oakvale to the north (developed under WC/48/99) and Chestnut Ridge to the south (developed under WC/28/95), have been developed with front and ‘back-land’ development without detrimentally affecting the overall character of the area.

6.9 The proposed dwellings would be composed of painted brick frontage facing the street, with exposed brick to the sides and a brick banding feature. Each dwelling would benefit from a chimney stack to the side elevations, a front porch, and two rooflights to the rear roofslope. The overall design and detail of the pair of semi-detached dwellings is considered sympathetically relate to the immediate neighbour to the north, Whales Cottage, thus would not appear out of keeping within the wider surrounding area.

6.10 A single garage is proposed to the rear of plot two, which would situated to the west of the existing triple garage serving the host dwelling. The lean-to store to the western side of the existing garage would be removed to accommodate the single garage serving Plot 2. The

Page 73 garage would be modest in size, located adjacent to existing structures as to avoid an over- proliferation of outbuildings on the site as a whole.

6.11 Overall, whilst it is accepted that the plot sizes are relatively smaller in comparison to surrounding curtilages, they are not considered to be uninhabitably small, and the proposed design and scale of the development is considered acceptable with regards to it siting on the street and its relationship to the surrounding neighbouring dwellings, and would be reasonably sited within the provided plots. The character of the area, which is largely defined by the extensive vegetation which disguises views of most properties from the street, would remain and the proximity of the dwellings to Windways would not be readily apparent or unacceptably jarring as a result. The proposed materials seeks to replicate the adjacent dwellings at Whales Cottages, as to avoid disturbing the character of the surrounding area. For these reasons the proposal is considered in accordance with Policy 33 of the HDPF.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

6.12 Policy 33(2) of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that permission will be granted for development that does not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of the occupiers/users of nearby properties and land.

6.13 The proposed dwellings would be sited broadly level to the building line of Whales Cottages to the north, set some 15m from its side elevation, and 23.5m from the principle elevation of the host dwelling at Windways. Spindlewood is set approximately 44m to the south east of the rear elevation of Plot 1. The proposed dwellings would not host any windows at first floor level to the side elevations, with first floor windows to the rear and front elevation of each dwelling serving as the primary windows to the bedrooms, bathrooms, and landings. Given the position of the windows to each property, which would not directly look into neighbouring windows, the proposal would not enable any direct overlooking detrimental to the occupants of neighbouring dwellings.

6.14 Any overlooking impact from the first floor to the rear gardens and the adjacent front garden to the rear of the site would be mutual, and would not be unordinary in comparison to existing arrangements elsewhere within the area. Further still, the separation distance at first floor level is approximately 28m, suitable enough reduce any perceived harm of direct overlooking. In addition to this, the location of the dwellings in relations to the neighbours would not result in any appreciable loss of light, outlook or overbearing impact. A condition is attached removing permitted development rights for any roof additions to the dwelling to ensure that amenity impact would not be exacerbated over the presented arrangement.

6.15 Given the separation distances to neighbouring dwellings, it is not considered that the development would result in any appreciable loss of amenity. No amenity harm would arise to the properties on the western side of Common Hill, Nos. 2 and 3 Morris Way (set 39m from the site) by way of overlooking or overbearing, given the satisfactory separation distance.

6.16 With this above in mind, the proposed dwelling is not considered to result in any adverse harm to neighbouring amenity with regards to overlooking, overshadowing, or overbearing impact, in accordance with Policy 33 of the HDPF.

Highways Impacts

6.17 Plot 1 would be served by three parking spaces immediately to the southern elevation of the dwelling. Plot 2 would be served by a garage to the rear of the site (adjacent to the existing garage serving Windways) in addition to drive space that would be utilised for at least two car parking spaces. The existing access to the host dwelling, shared also with Spindlewood, would be utilised and extended to facilitate the access and parking to each dwelling. The site

Page 74 layout and tracking plan (D 1120/516/03) demonstrates that all vehicles for both plots can exit the site in a forward gear.

6.18 No alterations are proposed to the existing access on to Common Hill. As an established access, opening on to a 30mph road from a 4.5m wide access, exiting the site on to the street considered by WSCC Highways officers as appropriate. Safe visibility from the access has been demonstrated, thus the proposal is not considered to result in harm to the safety of the highway network.

6.19 WSCC have noted that 3x parking spaces would be expected to serve each dwelling. The proposal initially incorporated a calculated provision for 4.5x spaces – 1.5x spaces below the expected provision. Following WSCC consultation response, the applicant submitted a revised block plan illustrating 3x parking spaces to plot 1, and 3x to plot 2 (including the garage). WSCC have commented on the revised arrangement, stating the revised plans includes a provision of 5.5 spaces, though raising no concerns with the overall level of provision. Members should note that garages which meet the minimum measurements within the Manual for Streets deliver a provision of 0.5 spaces. Officers do not consider that this 0.5 space shortfall would result in occupants relying on-street parking, as the garage would be able to accommodate a modern car. As such, the parking provision would meet the needs of the two dwellings.

6.20 WSCC have also requested a condition is attached relating to a provision of electric vehicle parking spaces in order to meet local climate change objectives.

6.21 Overall, the LHA are satisfied that previous concerns have been addressed and that the highway safety merits of the scheme have been suitably demonstrated. Therefore there are no transport grounds to resist the application as the residual impacts to the safe operation of the road network are not considered ‘severe’, in line with Policy 40 of the HDPF and paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework, subject to the attached conditions.

Climate Change

6.22 Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the HDPF require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions mitigate the impact of development on climate change. The proposed development could include the following measures to address climate change impact:  Exceeding good or best practice building regulation standards;  water usage limitations of 110 l/p/day;  Use of permeable surfaces and sustainable drainage systems;  Dedicated refuse and recycling storage capacity;  Opportunities for biodiversity gain (as detailed below);  Cycle parking facilities;  Provision of electric vehicle charging points, and;  Provision of necessary infrastructure for high-speed broadband (to facilitate efficient home working).

6.23 With the above in mind, the Local Planning Authority are satisfied that through the use of appropriately worded planning conditions (and development being undertaken in accordance with the latest building regulation standards), the above measures could be implemented to reduce the development’s impact on climate change. To this regard, the Local Planning Authority does not object to the proposal on these grounds.

Page 75 Other Matters

6.24 Neighbouring representation regarding flooding is noted. The site is not within designated floodzone area, and the development is not considered to adversely increase the risk of flooding. Notwithstanding this the Council’s drainage engineer has raised no objection to the proposals and a suitable condition is attached to ensure that details of surface water drainage are submitted prior to the commencement of the development.

6.25 The site currently includes a small domestic pond to the front of the site, and falls within the sustenance zone for bats for the Mens SAC, as well as in in range of the Ebernoe SAC and Arun Valley SAC, SPA and Ramsar site whereby consideration of impact is required. An ecological impact assessment was undertaken on the site. The report provides certainty of the likely impacts on Protected and Priority species and, with appropriate mitigation measures secured, the development can be made acceptable. The Council’s Ecology Consultant has carried out the necessary HRA screening in relation to the above sites which raises no reason to withhold permission on ecology grounds. As such, the proposal would not likely result in significant harm to the ecology of the site or the wider surrounding area, including the above sites and their designated features. Recommendations and enhancements are suggested in sections 5 and 6 of the appraisal, and conditions are attached to ensure that these works are undertaken in strict accordance with this detail, as per the advice of the Council’s Ecological Consultant. As such, no objections are raised on ecological grounds.

6.26 The site is subject to nine Tree Preservation Orders, five of which have been removed by way of planning application, and two died and have since been removed. Two protected trees are in situ towards the rear of the site (north-east) close to the shared boundaries with properties on Nightingales.

6.27 Two existing young willow trees sited to the front of the curtilage would be removed however these hold little amenity value. The hedge to the front boundary facing the street would be maintained. No other trees surrounding the site would be affected by the development. Conditions are attached to secure appropriate protection of existing trees and hedgerows during construction works, and to secure appropriate landscaping within the development. This would be sufficient to ensure the vegetated character of the site and wider streetscene is retained.

Conclusion

6.28 The proposed dwellings would be of an acceptable scale and design having regard to the character of the site and the variety of the character of the wider surrounding area, including their limited visibility in relation to the existing property at Windways in views from Common Hill and surrounding properties. The dwellings would not result in any adverse impact on neighbouring amenity and would not cause any material harm to highway safety. As such, the proposal is considered in accordance with the Horsham District Planning Framework, subject to the attached conditions and informatives.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

6.29 Horsham District Council has adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule which took effect on 1st October 2017.

6.30 It is considered that this development constitutes CIL liable development. At the time of drafting this report the proposal involves the following:

Page 76

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

District Wide Zone 1 243.2 0 243.2

Total Gain 243.2

Total Demolition 0

6.31 Please note that exemptions and/or reliefs may be applied for up until the commencement of a chargeable development.

6.32 In the event that planning permission is granted, a CIL Liability Notice will be issued thereafter. CIL payments are payable on commencement of development.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To approve planning permission, subject to the below listed conditions.

Conditions:

1 Plans list

2 Standard Time Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

4 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a schedule of materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls, windows and roofs of the approved buildings has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall conform to those approved.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

5 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: Prior to the commencement of the development above slab level, a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy for Protected and Priority species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The content of the Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy shall include the following: a) Purpose and conservation objectives for the proposed enhancement measures; b) detailed designs to achieve stated objectives; c) locations of proposed enhancement measures by appropriate maps and plans; d) persons responsible for implementing the enhancement measures; e) details of initial aftercare and long-term maintenance (where relevant).

Page 77 The works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To enhance Protected and Priority Species/habitats and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

6 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of the dwelling, a lighting design scheme for biodiversity shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall identify those features on site that are particularly sensitive for bats and that are likely to cause disturbance along important routes used for foraging; and show how and where external lighting will be installed (through the provision of appropriate lighting contour plans, lsolux drawings and technical specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent bats using their territory.

All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the scheme and maintained thereafter in accordance with the scheme. Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority/

Reason: To allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species) and Policy 31 of the Horsham Development Framework.

7 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of each dwelling, the necessary in- building physical infrastructure and external site-wide infrastructure to enable superfast broadband speeds of 30 megabytes per second through full fibre broadband connection shall be provided to the premises. Reason: To ensure a sustainable development that meets the needs of future occupiers in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

8 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied (or use hereby permitted commenced) unless and until provision for the storage of refuse and recycling has been made for the dwellings or use in accordance with drawing D 1120/516/02 (received 16.11.2020). These facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of recycling facilities in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

9 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied or use hereby permitted commenced until the car parking spaces (including garages where applicable) necessary to serve it have been constructed and made available for use in accordance with approved drawing number D 1120/516/03 (received 16.11.2020). The car parking spaces permitted shall thereafter be retained as such for their designated use. Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

10 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, details of secure and covered cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied or use hereby permitted commenced until the approved cycle parking facilities associated with that dwelling or use have been fully implemented and made available for use. The provision for cycle parking shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

Page 78 Reason: To ensure that there is adequate provision for the parking of cycles in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: No part of the development shall be first occupied until visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 82 metres to the north and 2.4 metres by 105 metres to the south have been provided at the site vehicular access onto Common Hill in accordance with the approved planning drawing D 1120/516/05 (received 16.11.2020). Once provided the splays shall thereafter be maintained and kept free of all obstructions over a height of 0.6 metre above adjoining carriageway level or as otherwise agreed.

Reason: In the interests of road safety, and in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

12 Pre-Occupation Condition: No part of the development shall be first occupied until the vehicle turning space has been constructed within the site in accordance with the approved planning drawing D 1120/516/03 (received 16.11.2020). This space shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated use.

Reason: In the interests of road safety, and in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

13 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling shall be first occupied until an electric vehicle charging facility has been provided for that dwelling. The electric vehicle charging spaces shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the approved detail and remain fully operational, unless otherwise agreed to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To provide sustainable travel options in accordance with Policies 35 and 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

14 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, full details of all hard and soft landscaping works shall have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include plans and measures addressing the following:  Details of all existing trees and planting to be retained  Details of all proposed trees and planting, including schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers and tree pit details  Details of all hard-surfacing materials and finishes  Details of all boundary treatments  Details of all external lighting The approved landscaping scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the first occupation of any part of the development. Unless otherwise agreed as part of the approved landscaping, no trees or hedges on the site shall be wilfully damaged or uprooted, felled/removed, topped or lopped without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority until 5 years after completion of the development. Any proposed planting, which within a period of 5 years, dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

15 Regulatory Condition: The dwellings hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained. Page 79

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

16 Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (and/or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order no development falling within Classes A, AA and B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the order shall be erected, constructed or placed within the curtilage(s) of the development hereby permitted without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and to protect the amenity of the neighbouring properties to the east of the dwellings hereby approved, in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015)

17 Regulatory Condition: All mitigation and enhancement measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the Ecological Impact Assessment (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, January 2021) as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination.

This may include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW,) to provide on-site ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

18 Regulatory Condition: The existing hedge to the western boundary of the site adjacent to the highway shown on plan D 1120/516/02 (received 16.11.2020) shall be retained in perpetuity as such. If the hedge dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased as a result of the development (or associated works) hereby approved, the hedge shall be replaced in the next planting season with another of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Background Papers: DC/20/2234

Page 80 08) DC/20/2234

Windways, Common Hill, West Chiltington

West For Business use only - not for distribution to 1the to 1 2general public Claremont Lismore Chiltington Withington ¯ Common

18 ood 39.4m 1 ew Oaklyn Ridg M O R 19 R to 2 IS 4 W - A ettws Y B d -coe N y I B G a H d Wayside E g T L 3 I VA e N AK r O s G

W A a y L les E 1 a Wh S

1 s tage Cot 2

Rose Croft

Windways P e n g a r t h C

M O Gorse Cerne N Spindlewood

H House Cottage I L 4 L

Tyllian Courtlands

De Swallowfield Rieger Wellers Micawbers

The Gleddings Herongate House Ireton House d o Kingfisher House o w r E e DG t T RI n NU i EST W CH

Scale: 1:1,250

Date 04/02/2021 Page 81MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 9

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee (South)

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Upgrading and re-surfacing of the existing car park, including parking bay delineation, installation of an entrance barrier, and hard and soft DEVELOPMENT: landscaping.

Storrington Squash Club Greyfriars Lane Storrington Pulborough West SITE: Sussex RH20 4HE WARD: Storrington and Washington APPLICATION: DC/20/2143 Name: Mr Jonathan Corby Address: 139 Fentiman Road London SW8 APPLICANT: 1JZ

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: By request of Storrington and Sullington Parish Council.

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission subject to appropriate conditions.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 Planning permission is sought for the upgrading of the existing car park in front of the Storrington Squash Club building (now closed down) and at the side of the Storrington Lawn Tennis Club pavilion. The Storrington Lawn Tennis Club own the existing car park and its members will use it as upgraded. The proposal involves asphalt re-surfacing and parking bay/delivery area delineation, the installation of an entrance barrier with card reader, and hard and soft landscaping. No new external lighting is shown.

1.3 The number of existing parking spaces will remain as the existing arrangement (13 vehicles can be accommodated currently, in total). Each proposed parking bay meets the minimum requirements of 2.4 x 4.8 metres as outlined in Manual for Streets guidance. The parking bays would have at least 6m beyond each space to allow for manoeuvres. The proposed layout includes the provision of an area for deliveries.

1.4 The proposed layout also takes account of an agreement with both Storrington Lawn Tennis and Squash clubs to relocate an existing private right of access on the land, from the east side of the car park to the west side.

Page 83 Contact Officer: Matthew Porter Tel: 01403 215561 1.5 There would be no alterations to the existing private access road leading from Greyfriars Lane to the site. There would be no alterations at the junction point where the private access road adjoins the public highway (Greyfriars Lane).

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The application site is within the built-up area of Storrington. It comprises the tarmacked parking area to the front of the closed Storrington Squash Club building and at the side of the Storrington Lawn Tennis Club pavilion, and is accessed via an existing private access road leading from Greyfriars Lane. Presently there is no demarcation to the parking area, which is currently in a poor state of repair.

1.7 The site is otherwise bounded by residential properties, with the Storrington Community Centre and Museum further to the north. The north and east boundaries mark the edge of the Storrington Conservation Area. The Horsecroft and St Josephs Dominican Convent, Grade II Listed Buildings, are to east and St Marys Parish Church (Grade II*) to the north. The site is within the Storrington historic core archaeological notification area, and the bat sustenance zone of the wider conservation area of The Mens SAC.

1.8 The private access road serves the (closed down) Squash club and the Storrington Lawn Tennis Club, plus residential properties. Greyfriars Lane is an unclassified road that comes to a dead end a distance further south.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 National Planning Policy Framework.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

2.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

2.4 Horsham District Planning Framework (2015): Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development. Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development. Policy 33 - Development Principles. Policy 34 - Cultural and Heritage Assets. Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport. Policy 41 - Parking. Policy 42 - Strategic Policy: Inclusive Communities. Policy 43 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation.

2.5 Storrington, Sullington and Washington Neighbourhood Plan 2018- 2031 (2019): Policy 1 A Spatial Plan for the Parishes Policy 12 Recreation Facilities Policy 14 Design Policy 17 Traffic & Transport Community Aim – Car Parking

2.6 Storrington and Sullington Parish Design Statement 2010.

Page 84 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

2.7 The most recent and relevant planning history relating to the site is as follows: DC/18/0584 Outline Application for the demolition of an Permitted existing squash club facility and erection of a 18-10-2018 three storey building comprising 8 flats (6 x two bedroom and 2 x one bedroom) with 14 associated car parking and landscaping. All matters reserved except for access and layout (amended proposal).

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

HDC Conservation Officer: No objection

HDC Archaeology: No objection

HDC Environmental Health: No objection

HDC Ecology: Recommend Approval

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

Southern Water: No objection

WSCC Highways: No objection Access to the site will be via the existing access off of Greyfriars Lane. The proposed plans do not demonstrate any alterations to the existing access arrangement at the adjoining point with Greyfriars Lane.

The access road leading from Greyfriars Lane to the site is private and doesn’t form part of the adopted highway network. The site internal entrance is to be moved from the eastern to the western side of the site. Given no alterations are proposed where the access adjoin the public highway, the LHA would advise the applicant communicate with the owner of the private driveway in order to obtain permission for the proposed works (including the turning head as this does not seem to fall within the applicant’s ownership boundary).

The private access to the site is narrow and does not allow two vehicles to pass one another. However, the access and the access road are well-established and have been in use serving the squash club, Storrington Tennis Club plus residential access to Ivy Cottage and Smugglers Hut for some time without any evidence of highways safety concern.

This proposal includes the provision of turning head for service vehicles. The proposed plan demonstrates swept path tracking for fire appliance vehicle sized 2.1 x 8.6m. The swept path tracking plan demonstrates a vehicle reversing out the site into the turning head and exiting the site in forward gear. Drawing named ‘Accessing Greyfriars Lane’ demonstrates the fire appliance vehicle overrunning the opposing lane of the carriageway; however it is appreciated that Greyfriars Lane is a narrow lane and due to the lightly trafficked nature of the road with good forward visibility, it is not anticipated that this would cause a highway concern.

Page 85 There are no alterations to the use of the site, therefore this proposal is not anticipated to result in a material intensification of vehicle movements.

The LHA notes that the footprint of the internal access arrangements approved under DC/18/0584 would no longer be accessible should this permission be implemented. The applicant should be aware that they would need to regularise the approval of access arrangements for DC/18/0584.

In principle, the LHA does not consider that this application would result in ‘severe’ impact on the operation of the Highway Network, therefore is no contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal.

WSCC Fire and Rescue Service: No objection

Sussex Police: No objection

Southern Gas Network: No Objection

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.2 Storrington and Sullington Parish Council: Objection (summarised).

Strong objection. Request car park lighting respects Smugglers Hut and particularly the Horsecroft. More detailed and less confusing plans are required. To enlarge the junction of Greyfriars Lane would take out part of the old wall of Smugglers Hut and part of the Listed wall of the Horsecroft, together with a telegraph pole and newish streetlight. The access is inadequate.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.3 Two letters of objection from 2 separate households have been received for this application, summarised as follows:

 Proposed car park layout removes passing space so cars will have to reverse back out into Greyfriars Lane, which is a highway safety concern. Emergency vehicles will be restricted.  Extra vehicles using the access will be intolerable and detrimental to surrounding properties, neighbours plus environment in an outstanding area of beauty.

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Page 86 6.1 The main issues are the principle of the development and the impact on the character and appearance of the townscape and heritage assets; environmental protection and the impact on amenity; parking; and highway safety.

Principle of Development

6.2 The application site is within the built up area of Storrington. The upgraded car park will serve members of the Storrington Lawn Tennis Club, a leisure facility in the manner of a private members sports club. Policy 43 of the HDPF and Storrington, Sullington and Washington Neighbourhood Plan Policy 12 Recreation Facilities supports the upgrade of such facilities in principle, subject to detailed considerations.

6.3 The planning permission for the demolition of the squash club building and replacement flat scheme (DC/18/0584) has not been implemented, although it is intended to be. Whilst the access arrangements serving this scheme would need to be adjusted in response to the proposed car park upgrade, this is not an impediment to securing Reserved Matters approval and its future implementation.

Townscape and Heritage Impacts

6.4 Given the limited potential for below ground disturbance, the Council’s Archaeologist does not consider a programme of archaeological work to be necessary.

6.5 The application site adjoins the Storrington Conservation Area and a number of historic and Listed Buildings are adjacent. The current blacktop car park surface is potholed with evidence of past patchwork repair. The proposed layout would allow for an improved surface finish, albeit now with markings on the land, with soft landscaping. The details of the entrance barrier can be secured by condition. The Senior Conservation Officer confirms the upgraded car park would not have a perceivable impact upon the setting of the Conservation Area or nearby Listed Buildings.

6.6 The proposed layout is therefore considered acceptable having regard to the characteristics of the site and its relationship with the surrounding townscape, as well as statutory tests/local and national planning policy in relation to heritage assets.

Environmental Protection and Amenity, Refuse, Drainage and Ecology

6.7 The proposed layout is for the same amount of parking as existing so there would be no intensification of use to adversely impact upon the amenities of residents, including those adjacent to the private access road nor the car park itself.

6.8 While there is potential for short-term disruption, a tailored Construction and Environmental Method Statement as recommended by the Council’s Environmental Protection Officer would minimise any disruption in order to safeguard neighbour’s amenities, as would restriction on construction work hours, given the sensitivity of the car park location at the rear of properties.

6.9 Details of the drainage disposal of surface water can be secured by condition to ensure the car park is properly drained. Existing bin storage outside the adjacent Storrington Tennis club building is unaffected. No new external lighting is proposed.

6.10 In terms of ecology, as the proposals are focused on an existing area of hard standing, it is anticipated that no protected or priority species will be affected. A net gain for biodiversity would be provision of a bird or bat box within site by condition. The site is also within the wider conservation area of The Mens Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Any significant impacts e.g. lighting, or severance of flightlines needs to be assessed for impacts on Barbastelle bats; however as the ecologist’s HRA screening request is based on lighting Page 87 impact, this is not required as the applicant has confirmed no new external lighting is proposed. The proposal will not therefore result in impacts requiring further ecological consideration.

Parking, Highway Safety and Capacity

6.11 Use of the private access road is well-established. A number of representations have been received raising concerns of the impact of works to the private access road and junction with Greyfriars Lane. However, the proposal does not involve any alterations to the existing private access road nor the junction with public highway. Existing cycle storage outside the adjacent Storrington Tennis club building is unaffected.

6.12 The number of existing parking spaces will remain as the existing arrangement (13 in total), so its upgrade would not generate more trips than the existing use of the site (as a squash club). The proposed layout allows for vehicles to manoeuvre and exit the car park in forward gear with clear visibility of vehicles already on or entering the access road.

6.13 Whilst the access arrangements serving the flat scheme approved under outline planning permission DC/18/0584 would need to be adjusted in response to the proposed car park upgrade, WSCC have confirmed this would not be an impediment to providing sufficient parking provision on site and safe highway site access at Reserved Matters stage.

6.14 West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service has raised no objection. As accessibility along the access road is not worsened compared to the existing situation, the proposal does not raise issues. The Fire service confirmed that as the upgraded car park would remain a tarmacked open space, there is little danger to the public as they could walk away from a fire and there is no risk to a building as there is sufficient boundary space between the car park and any property. If a car were to catch fire, the fire service have said they would be able to attend from the access road.

6.15 West Sussex County Council (WSCC) as the Local Highway Authority does not consider there are highway grounds to resist the proposal and raises no objection. The highway impacts of the development are considered acceptable, and in this respect the proposal accords with HDPF policies 40 and 41 and Policy 17 of the Storrington, Sullington and Washington Neighbourhood Plan (2019).

Conclusion

6.16 In conclusion, the proposal would represent an appropriate form of development that would not result in a significant adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours, the setting of heritage assets, or give rise to a highway safety or capacity concern. The proposals are therefore considered to accord with national guidance and local plan policies and is recommended for approval.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

6.17 Horsham District Council has adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule which took effect on 1st October 2017.

It is considered that this development does not constitute CIL liable development.

Page 88 7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To approve planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1 A list of the approved plans

2 Standard Time Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until the following construction site set-up details have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

i. Details regarding location for the parking of site operatives and visitors, loading and unloading deliveries, and storage of plant and materials and storage ii. Provision of wheel washing facilities (if necessary) and dust suppression facilities iii. Details of how residents will be advised of site management contact details and responsibilities.

The approved details shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental in order to consider the potential impacts on the amenity of nearby occupiers during construction and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

4 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and complies with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

5 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first use of any part of the development hereby permitted, full details shall have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority of:

I. proposed planting schedule II. hard surfacing materials and finishes III. the entrance barrier and card reader IV. provision of a bird or bat box within site

The approved planting and hard surfacing shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the first occupation of any part of the development. Any proposed planting, which within a period of 5 years, dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development that is sympathetic to the townscape character and built form of the surroundings, and in the interests of visual amenity and ecology in accordance with Policies 31, 32, and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 89 6 Regulatory Condition: No works for the implementation of the development hereby approved shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Background Papers: DC/20/2143

Page 90 09) DC/20/2143

Storrington Squash Club, Greyfriars Lane, Storrington

12 to

15 11 to 23 For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public 18 4 Works ¯ SCHO 5 OL LANE

41.8m

Th Little Glebe e Old School HouseComm Schoo St Mary's Cobb G unity l ate & Mu Centre seum Church

eml M Tennis Courts Club r 7 Wa 3 43.1m

Pavilion

Tennis The Horse Croft Courts Iv y Cot tage

6 to

1 Tennis Courts Smugglers Hut St Josephs Abbey

St Joseph's Mews High Gardens 11 2 1

Ashton House

Scale: 1:1,250

Date 04/02/2021 Page 91MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Demolition of existing commercial building and C3 dwellinghouse and DEVELOPMENT: erection of 2No. C3 dwellings. Tea Caddy Cottages Worthing Road West Grinstead Horsham West SITE: Sussex RH13 8LG WARD: Cowfold, Shermanbury and West Grinstead

APPLICATION: DC/20/1294 Name: Mr Henry Pannell Address: Site North of Tea Caddy Cottages APPLICANT: Worthing Road West Grinstead RH13 8LG

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: The application represents a departure from the development plan

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 To consider the planning application

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 The application seeks planning permission for the demolition of an existing dwelling (Building 1) and commercial building (Building 2) and the construction of one 4-bed dwelling and one 3-bed self-build dwelling.

1.3 Unit 1 (3-bed property) would comprise a living room, kitchen/diner and cloakroom at ground floor level, with three bedrooms and family bathroom at first floor level. Unit 2 (4- bed property) would comprise a living/dining room, kitchen, study and hall at ground floor level with an en-suite master bedroom and three additional bedrooms and family bathroom at first floor level. The proposed dwellings would have a height of approximately 9.12m and would include ornamental detailing including quoins, arched sills and lintels, and a pitched roof with front and side facing gables. The palette of materials would include stone, brick, clay tiles and slate.

1.4 A retaining wall is proposed to the front west boundary of the plots adjacent to the old A24. Each dwelling would have associated residential amenity space to the rear which would be shielded by existing trees to the rear of the eastern boundary. Two tandem car parking spaces are proposed to the south side of each dwelling.

Page 93 Contact Officer: Amanda Wilkes Tel: 01403 215521

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.5 The application site lies outside of any defined built up area boundaries and is therefore located within the countryside. Building 1 is a single storey, 4m high dwelling of approximately 55.3sqm. Building 2 is a single storey, 3.9m high commercial building approximately 256.8sqm, which occupies a large area of the site subject to this application. The site lies to the east of the A24, south of the Buck Barn crossroads and extends to approximately 840sqm.

1.6 Land levels across the site fall from west to east by approximately 2.5 to 3m. Land to the rear of the plots is described as rough ground with marshy ground beyond the eastern boundary of the site. There is a line of mature trees beyond the eastern boundary of the site. The site is accessed via a spur road off of the east side of the A24.

1.7 The surrounding area is characterised by a mosaic of fields and open countryside with sporadic built form. 1 and 2 Tea Caddy Cottages are sited approximately 36m to the south of the site, with 1 and 2 Waterloo Cottages and 53 and 54 Sunny Hill Cottages some 130m north of the site. There are also several equestrian and commercial developments nearby. There is a right of way (ROW1842) to the south of 1 and 2 Tea Caddy Cottages which runs to the south east before joining rights of way heading north and south.

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 STATUTORY BACKGROUND

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.2 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4 - Settlement Expansion Policy 7 - Strategic Policy: Economic Growth Policy 9 - Employment Development Policy 10 - Rural Economic Development Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 16 - Strategic Policy: Meeting Local Housing Needs Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 28 - Replacement Dwellings and House Extensions in the Countryside Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking

Page 94 2.3 RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The West Grinstead Neighbourhood Plan (2019-2031) has been through examination and the Examiner published his report of the 9 December 2020. A decision Statement is currently being prepared. Whilst the neighbourhood plan is not yet ‘made’, as a post- examination Plan it carries significant weight in decision making. Relevant policies, aims and objectives are as follows:

Chapter 3 Vision and Strategic Objectives Chapter 6 Housing – Community Aim 2

Policy 4: Green Infrastructure, Existing Trees, Hedgerows, Habitats and Wildlife Policy 6: Broadband Policy 7: Economy Policy 8: Employment

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Government has advised that the referendum required under the Localism Act in order for the Plan to be formally "made" (which requires that more than 50% of people voting agree to accept the plan) cannot be held before May 2021.

2.4 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

DC/12/0886 Ancillary primary accommodation to the main Application Permitted dwelling house (1 Teacaddy Cottages) on 06.07.2012 (Certificate of Lawful Development - Existing)

DC/16/2525 Light Industrial (Class B1) Use for machinery Application Permitted repair business (Certificate of Lawful on 09.01.2017 Development Existing)

DC/18/2244 Demolition of existing Commercial Building and Application Refused on C3 Dwellinghouse, and erection of 2.no C3 14.03.2019 Dwellinghouses

DC/19/0617 Prior Approval for a Change of Use from Light Prior Approval Industrial (Class B1c) to 2 x C3 Dwellinghouses Required and REFUSED on 15.05.2019

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

3.1 INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

HDC Environmental Health: Comment (Summary)

Noise: traffic noise from the heavily trafficked A24, located in close proximity to the application site is very noticeable and should therefore reasonably expect the application to be supported by a noise impact assessment which quantifies and assesses the impact of road traffic noise on residential amenity and, crucially, provides confidence that any mitigation is achievable. No noise survey has been submitted with the application.

Page 95 Contamination: Given the presence of potentially infilled pits immediately beyond the application sites eastern boundary and the light industrial use of the application site, both of which present potential sources of contamination to the development and future occupiers of it, a ground investigation will need to be undertaken to confirm ground conditions on the site and fully quantify the risks from contamination to future site users. This can be secured through condition.

3.2 OUTSIDE AGENCIES

WSCC Highways: No Objection subject to conditions

The proposed plans do not detail the width of the proposed VCOs. The applicant should be aware that a licence will be required for the VCO(s) which must be constructed to a specification agreed with the Local Highway Engineer; a VCO of wider than 6.4m per dwelling may not be granted a licence. Details of proposed access width(s) can be secured via condition.

Vehicular visibility at the proposed accesses has not been demonstrated. Visibility appears restricted in the trailing direction. The LHA would accept demonstration of maximum achievable visibility splays at a distance of 2m back into each access. The splays must intersect land only within the control of the applicant or within the publically maintained highway and must be drawn to the nearside edge of the carriageway in each direction.

Ecology Consultant: No Objection subject to conditions

Southern Water: Comment (summary)

The applicant has not stated details of means of disposal of foul drainage from the site. There is no public foul sewer in the vicinity of the site. The applicant is advised to examine alternative means of foul sewage disposal.

The Environment Agency should be consulted directly regarding the use of a private wastewater treatment works or septic tank drainage which disposes of effluent to sub-soil irrigation. The owner of the premises will need to empty and maintain the works or septic tank to ensure its long term effectiveness.

Parish Comments: West Grinstead Parish Council: No Objections

It is accepted that this would be preferable to the planning consented under DC/19/0617

3.3 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

13 neighbour letters of support received from different households. Supported on following grounds:

 Small development welcomed  Scheme for 2 dwellings fully supported by local residents  Improvement on the existing commercial buildings  Existing access for commercial vehicles isn’t appropriate for lorries  Improves the character and appearance of the area  Improvement on road safety  Existing building is unsightly  No overlooking of 1 Teas Caddy Cottages  Design should be in keeping with existing cottages Page 96

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main issues are the principle of the loss of the existing commercial unit and the addition of new residential accommodation and the effect of the development on the character and the visual amenities of the street scene and wider countryside location; the amenities of the occupiers and adjoining properties; and the impact on existing parking and traffic conditions.

6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and that this should run through both plan-making and decision-taking. In terms of the determination of planning applications this should mean the approval of developments that accord with the development plan without delay, and that where the development plan is silent or relevant policies are out of date, that permission be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, or policies of the NPPF indicate otherwise.

6.3 As the HDPF is now over 5 years old, the relevant policies for the determination of this application must be considered as to whether they are ‘out of date’ (NPPF paragraph 11d). In this case, the relevant policies as set out above are considered to remain in accordance with national policy set out in the NPPF. The Council’s annual target for housing delivery has now risen from the previous 800 dwellings per year set out in HDPF Policy 15 to 920 dwellings per year in accordance with the latest standard housing methodology calculator, however the Council’s latest Authority Monitoring Report (2020) sets out that a 5 year housing land supply at 920 dwellings per year can be demonstrated. Accordingly, as the relevant policies are compliant with the NPPF, and a 5 year housing land supply can be demonstrated, paragraph 11 of the NPPF is not engaged in decision making.

Background

6.4 The applicant seeks planning permission for the demolition of the existing lawful dwelling (Building 1) currently occupied as a 1 x bed bungalow ‘annexe’ as granted by virtue of a Lawful Development Certificate under DC/12/0886, and the demolition of (Building 2) the existing single storey commercial building previously used a machinery repair workshop.

6.5 To ascertain the lawful use of the bungalow, which was confirmed as being a ‘primary ancillary’ dwelling in 2012 under DC/12/0886, statutory declarations have been submitted with the application stating that it has been occupied independently from 1 Tea Caddy Cottage since January 2007 and that Council tax has been paid from 2012. The original occupant vacated the premises on the 14 November 2017 when the applicant (Henry Pannell) purchased the site. The applicant and his family have occupied the bungalow since that time and have continued to pay Council Tax. This information has been verified by LGSS Revenues and Benefits Department during the assessment of this application. It is therefore clear that the bungalow has been used as residential accommodation for a

Page 97 continuous period of 4 years or more at the time of the application and that this is the lawful use of the building as an independent dwelling house.

6.6 The workshop has the benefit of an extant permission for prior approval for its conversion to 2 dwellings as granted on appeal under application DC/19/0617. The lawful use of the bungalow for residential use along with the prior approval granted for conversion of the workshop to 2 dwellings would therefore result in a total of 3 dwellings on the site should the prior approval be implemented (1x residential unit in Building 1 and 2x residential units in Building 2). The application under consideration comprises the demolition of both Building 1 and 2, and as such would therefore result in an overall reduction from 3 to 2 dwellings on site comprising 1 x 3 bed and 1 x 4 bed new build detached dwellings.

Principle of Development

6.7 The site is not allocated for development under the provisions of the Horsham District Planning Framework 2015 (HDPF) or a Neighbourhood Plan, nor is it essential to a countryside location. As such the introduction of new residential development on the site would be considered as contrary to the strategic approach to housing across the District, with significant conflict with Policies 3, 4, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) and thus would represent a departure from established countryside protection policies.

6.8 Policy 3 of the HDPF seeks to locate appropriate development, including infilling, redevelopment and conversion within built-up area boundaries, with a focus on brownfield land. As the site is outside of the built-up area boundary of a town or village it would not meet the requirements of Policy 3 of the HDPF.

6.9 Policy 4 of the HDPF relates to settlement expansion, it is clear at Section 4.1 of this Policy that where development lies outside the settlement boundary it will only be supported where the site is allocated within a Local Plan or Neighbourhood Development Plan. The application site is not allocated in either a Local Plan and there is currently no Neighbourhood Plan for the Parish of West Grinstead and thus the application proposals directly conflicts with this policy.

6.10 Policy 28 of the HDPF relates to replacement dwellings on a one for one basis only, and thus its replacement with 2 new dwellings would not accord with established countryside protection policies. The current proposals for 2 new dwellings therefore constitutes a departure from established countryside protection policies as stated above.

6.11 However notwithstanding this, the presence of a prior approval for two dwellings (within Building 1), which could still be implemented, represents a viable and realistic fall-back position were the current application to be refused. The established fall-back position arising from the approval of the prior approval for 2 dwellings within Building 1 is therefore considered to be a material consideration in the determination of this application.

6.12 A refusal of the current application for two dwellings (comprising 271.6sqm total) would not prevent the introduction of additional residential units on the site, given the existence of the extant prior approval application which would also create two new dwellings on site (comprising 243.6 sqm total). If the prior approval for 2 dwellings were to be implemented in addition to the lawful dwelling (annexe) on site, there would be a total of 3 dwellings within the site boundaries, with a total of 292.5sqm of residential floor space spread across a large proportion of the site, resulting in a cramped and irregular form of accommodation, layout and amenity provision.

6.13 By comparison, the two proposed purpose built dwellings would sit comfortably within the site boundaries, provide both satisfactory separation distance between the units, have generous amenity provision, along with adequate off street parking provision. When Page 98 balanced within the context of the application site and established fall-back position of the prior approval for 2 dwellings within Building 1, it is considered that the proposed scheme for 2 new dwellings represents a more appropriate and satisfactory form of development.

6.14 Policy 9 of the HDPF relates to employment development in the District, it states that redevelopment of employment sites (outside key employment areas, such as the application site) must demonstrate that the site / premises is no longer needed and / or viable for employment use. Whilst the loss of the existing employment use of Building 2 is regrettable, its loss has been effectively granted in principle by way of the Prior Approval consent, therefore this overcomes any conflict with Policy 9.

6.15 It is therefore considered, subject to the detailed considerations above, that refusal of the application on the basis of the conflict with policies 3, 4, 9 and 26 of the HDPF would not be warranted and would not prevent 2 dwelling new houses from being created on the site in addition to the existing bungalow. On this basis whilst the proposed development is considered to be a departure from established policies within the HDPF, officers recommend that the principle of development be accepted, subject to all other considerations as set out below.

Design and Appearance:

6.16 The proposals seek two detached dwellings located within generous woodland plots. The road adjacent to the application site forms an arc and the application site is set down from the road level within a dip, as such the lower and sloping land levels would go some way to accommodate the increased height of the dwellings within the context of the street scene. Both dwellings would have brick elevations, with ornamental detailing including quoins. Unit 1 would have a hipped roof with sills and lintels to the window openings and a rear dormer within the first floor sloping roof. Unit 2 would have front and side facing gables under a pitched roof. The palette of materials would include stone, brick, clay tiles and slate. A retaining wall is proposed to the front west boundary of the plots adjacent to the old A24.

6.17 Within the wider area along the access road and adjacent to the application site, there are three pairs of semi-detached dwellings, comprising Sunnyhill Cottages and Waterloo Cottages to the north of the site and Tea Caddy Cottages to the south. The proposed detached dwellings occupy a similar footprint to the existing pairs of semi-detached dwellings north and south of the site. Although the scheme proposes two storey dwellings as opposed reflecting the single storey development that currently exists on site, the scale and bulk of the proposed two storey dwellings would not appear out of place within the street scene.

6.18 Overall, the proposed scheme is considered to be of a high quality design and appropriate in terms of both scale and mass that sits comfortably within its site. The buildings are not considered to be overly prominent features in the landscape and the dwellings are considered to be acceptable within the context of the wider site and surroundings. In this respect, the development proposals is considered to both represent a significant improvement on the fallback afforded by the Prior Approval consent, and accord with Policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF

Amenity Impacts:

6.19 The proposed dwellings are well separated from the neighbouring dwellings and as such it is not considered that there is no significant or appreciable loss of outlook, overlooking or loss of private amenity arising from the proposals. It is however considered that the blind window openings have been inserted into the southern elevation in order to break up the flank elevation and extent of flush brickwork whilst removing windows as previously proposed in earlier applications for similar proposals. This protects the private amenity of Page 99 no 1 Tea Caddy Close from any visual intrusion that may otherwise have occurred through overlooking.

6.20 Although prior approval has previously been granted for 2 dwellings on site (conversion of Building 2) there was no requirement under the prior approval criteria for noise to be considered and therefore no judgment has previously been made on this matter. The Council’s Environmental Health Department have requested a Noise Assessment Report to demonstrate that the occupiers of the proposed dwellings would not be adversely affected by traffic noise arising from the proximity of the dual carriageway to the west of the application site. Given the established fall-back position arising from the prior approval granted under DC/19/0617 whereby two dwellings could be occupied with no means of noise mitigation beyond Building Regulations, it is considered appropriate to condition the requirement for a scheme of noise mitigation to be informed by a noise assessment. This will ensure occupiers are able to enjoy an appropriate standard of living.

6.21 Notwithstanding the above, in terms of its scale and mass (derived from the height, depth and footprint) of the proposed dwellings and the impact of visual and private amenity are considered to comply with HDPF policies 32 and 33.

Trees and Landscaping:

6.22 The proposals result in an improved relationship with the existing trees on site. The block plan submitted with the application (plan no. 1833.1/02) shows a number of significant trees on the eastern, and part of the northern boundaries of the site which have amenity value but are not subject to any Tree Preservation Orders. There are two large oaks whose trunk diameters at 1.5m above ground were surveyed as 800mm and 550mm. The existing lawful B1 building (Building 2) is situated very close to these specimens and encroaches significantly into the root protection areas (shown as blue dashed lines on the submitted tree plan) of both trees. This drawing also shows that the existing dwelling (Building 1) also encroaches to a considerable degree into the root protection areas of two further oaks outside the site and demonstrates that the proposed dwellings with their reduced footprints and floor area is sited clear of the trees and their root protection areas. This will benefit the trees by improving their access to light and water and allowing their canopies more space. The site is proposed to be laid to grass with hard surfacing to parking areas. Final details can be secure by condition.

6.23 The proposals is therefore considered to accord with Policy 33 of the HDPF.

Highways Impacts:

6.24 The proposal includes parking spaces for four vehicles, two parking spaces for each dwelling. The parking spaces are located in tandem along the southern boundaries of each plot. Each space meets minimum specifications as set out in Manual for Streets (MfS). The WSCC Car Parking Demand Calculator (updated August 2019) anticipates that a minimum of three parking spaces would be required per dwelling, therefore the proposed provision is below the minimum requirement. There is however potential for on street parking without resulting in harm and therefore the number of parking spaces proposed is considered acceptable. It is noted that no visibility splays have been demonstrated and should planning permission be granted the Local Highway Authority (LHA) would wish to see maximum achievable visibility splays at a distance of 2m back into each access. This is secured by condition.

6.25 The LHA does not consider that the proposal for two dwellings would have ‘severe’ impact on the operation of the Highway network, or result in highway safety issues. The proposal therefore accords with the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal. The proposed parking arrangement is commensurate to the size of the dwellings and is considered acceptable in accordance with Policies 40 and 41 of the HDPF. Page 100 Ecology

6.26 The Council’s Ecology Consultants have been consulted and it is confirmed that they are satisfied that there is sufficient ecological information available for determination of the application. The Ecology reports include the Ecological Impact Assessment Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, June 2020) and the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, December 2017) supplied by the applicant. The mitigation measures identified in the Preliminary Appraisal & Ecological Impact Assessment are to be secured and implemented in full. This is necessary to conserve and enhance protected and Priority Species.

6.27 The Council’s Ecology Consultants also support the proposed reasonable biodiversity enhancements, which have been recommended to secure measurable net gains for biodiversity, as outlined under Paragraph 170d of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. It is recommended that the reasonable biodiversity enhancement measures should be outlined within a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy and should be secured by a condition of any consent. Details should also include wildlife friendly fencing.

6.28 Mitigation and compensation measures in respect of non-designated sites (Knepp Mill Pond SNCI and Lancing Brooks SNCI), habitats, bats, breeding birds, and hedgehogs are to be in accordance with best practice. The residual impacts of the development on the identified areas of importance are recorded as being of no likely significant effects, or negligible or non-significant effects within the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment.

6.29 Recommendations for ecological enhancements include the following:

 The use of flowering shrubs as listed within the RHS ‘Perfect for Pollinators’ plant list to provide year-round interest for invertebrates;  Planting of a new native species-rich hedgerows to the southern boundary of the development;  The provision of bird nest boxes to mature trees;  The installation of suitable bat boxes to mature trees;  Use of a sympathetic lighting scheme across the site, with lighting angled down and away from hedge / tree lines and bat boxes;  The use of pale and night-scented species around the site will increase bat foraging potential. Species could include jasmine; michaelmas daisy; and evening primrose;  Use of wildflower seeding within areas of open space where possible.

Climate change:

6.30 Policies 35, 36 and 37 require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions seek to reduce the impact of development on climate change. Conditions are attached to secure the following mitigations:

 Water consumption limited to 110litres per person per day  Refuse and recycling storage  Biodiversity mitigation and enhancement  Cycle parking facilities  Electric vehicle charging points

Page 101 Subject to these conditions the application will suitable reduce the impact of the development on climate change in accordance with local and national policy.

Conclusions:

6.31 The proposed dwellings are located in the countryside on an unallocated site and do not replace the existing dwelling on a one-for-one basis. The proposal therefore falls contrary to Policies 3, 4, 26 and 28 of the HDPF. A material consideration of significant weight is the extant permission for the conversion of the workshop to two dwellings under Prior Approval which forms a viable fallback position for the applicant. The proposal provides for a smaller footprint to the existing B1 commercial building and residential accommodation to be demolished, fewer dwellings on the site (2 as opposed to the permitted 3) and is of an overall layout and design superior to the outcome that the alternative fall-back prior approval consent would provide for. On this basis the proposed development is considered to be acceptable as a departure from the HDPF. Subject to conditions the proposal is appropriate with respect to potential impact on residential amenity and highway safety. In this respect, the development proposals is recommended for approval subject to the conditions as listed below.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

Horsham District Council has adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule which took effect on 1st October 2017.

It is considered that this development constitutes CIL liable development. At the time of drafting this report the proposal involves the following:

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

District Wide Zone 1 271.6 271.6

Total Gain 222.7

Total Demolition 48.9

Please note that exemptions and/or reliefs may be applied for up until the commencement of a chargeable development.

In the event that planning permission is granted, a CIL Liability Notice will be issued thereafter. CIL payments are payable on commencement of development.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To approve planning permission subject to conditions.

Conditions:

1 Plans list

2 Standard Time Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Page 102

3 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence, including demolition pursuant to the permission granted, ground clearance, or bringing equipment, machinery or materials onto the site, until the following preliminaries have been completed in the sequence set out below:  All trees on the site shown for retention on approved drawing number [insert number], as well as those off-site whose root protection areas ingress into the site, shall be fully protected throughout all construction works by tree protective fencing affixed to the ground in full accordance with section 6 of BS 5837 'Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction - Recommendations' (2012).  Once installed, the fencing shall be maintained during the course of the development works and until all machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site.  Areas so fenced off shall be treated as zones of prohibited access, and shall not be used for the storage of materials, equipment or machinery in any circumstances. No mixing of cement, concrete, or use of other materials or substances shall take place within any tree protective zone, or close enough to such a zone that seepage or displacement of those materials and substances could cause them to enter a zone. Any trees or hedges on the site which die or become damaged during the construction process shall be replaced with trees or hedging plants of a type, size and in positions agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure the successful and satisfactory protection of important trees and hedgerows on the site in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

4 Pre-Commencement Condition: With the exception of the demolition and removal of existing buildings and any concrete hardstanding no development shall commence until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination, (including asbestos contamination), of the site be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: (a) An intrusive site investigation scheme, based on the Groundsure Phase 1 Preliminary Assessment, to provide information for a detailed risk assessment to the degree and nature of the risk posed by any contamination to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (b) Full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results of the intrusive site investigation (a) and a verification plan providing details of what data will be collected in order to demonstrate that the remedial works are complete. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Any changes to these components require the consent of the local planning authority.

5 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schemed.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a schedule of Page 103 materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls, windows and roofs of the approved building(s) has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall conform to those approved.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

7 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No building above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall commence until a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy for protected and Priority species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The content of the Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy shall include the following: a) Purpose and conservation objectives for the proposed enhancement measures; b) detailed designs to achieve stated objectives; c) locations of proposed enhancement measures by appropriate maps and plans; d) persons responsible for implementing the enhancement measures; e) details of initial aftercare and long-term maintenance (where relevant). The works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To enhance protected and Priority species & habitats and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

8 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: a) No development above ground floor slab level shall take place until a noise survey across the whole site has been undertaken and a scheme of noise and vibration attenuation and ventilation sufficient to prevent overheating and maintain thermal comfort has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall achieve the habitable room standards as detailed in BS8233:2014 with no relaxation for exceptional circumstances and must include details of post construction validation. b) Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details within 3 months of first occupation, a separate validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that the noise, vibration and ventilation scheme meets the required standards.

All work must be carried out by suitably qualified person and the approved noise, vibration attenuation and ventilation measures shall thereafter be retained and maintained in working order for the duration of the use in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of future occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

9 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, full details of all hard and soft landscaping works shall have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include plans and measures addressing the following:  Details of all existing trees and planting to be retained  Details of all proposed trees and planting, including schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers and tree pit details  Details of all hard surfacing materials and finishes  Details of all boundary treatments

Page 104  Details of all external lighting (including biodiversity bat sensitive lighting scheme with provision of appropriate lighting contour plans, lsolux drawings and technical specifications)

10 Pre-Occupation Condition: Upon the occupation of the building hereby permitted the existing building (BUILDING 1) indicated on plan 1833.1/02 Block Plan / Site Cross Sections shall cease to be used for any purpose whatsoever and within a period of 3 months thereafter the building shall be demolished (including the removal of foundations) all materials arising from such demolition removed from the site and the site of the demolished building restored in accordance with details of landscaping which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to demolition works commencing.

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of each dwelling, the necessary in-building physical infrastructure and external site-wide infrastructure to enable superfast broadband speeds of 30 megabytes per second through full fibre broadband connection shall be provided to the premises.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable development that meets the needs of future occupiers in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

12 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be first occupied unless and until provision for the storage of refuse and recycling has been provided within the side or rear garden for that dwelling. The facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of refuse and recycling facilities in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

13 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling hereby permitted, the parking, turning and access facilities necessary to serve that dwelling shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details as shown on plan 1833.1/02 and shall be thereafter retained as such.

Reason: To ensure adequate parking, turning and access facilities are available to serve the development in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 105 14 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, visibility splays for the access(es) serving the development shall be provided in accordance with details (including details of any planting to be removed) which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once provided the splays shall thereafter be maintained and kept free of all obstructions over a height of 0.6 metre above adjoining carriageway level or as otherwise agreed.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

15 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling shall be first occupied until a fast charge electric vehicle charging point for that dwelling has been installed. As a minimum, the charge point specification shall be 7kW mode 3 with type 2 connector. The means for charging electric vehicles shall be thereafter retained as such.

Reason: To mitigate the impact of the development on air quality within the District and to sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants in accordance with Policies 24 & 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

16 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied or use hereby permitted commenced until the cycle parking facilities serving it have been provided within the side or rear garden for that dwelling. The facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times. The cycle parking facilities shall thereafter be retained as such for their designated use.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate provision for the parking of cycles in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

17 Regulatory Condition: No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed other than that shown on the approved plans submitted in accordance with Condition 9. All such lighting shall be maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

18 Regulatory Condition: All ecological mitigation & enhancement measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in Ecological Impact Assessment (Lizard Landscape Design and Ecology, June 2020) as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination. This may include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW,) to provide on-site ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To conserve and enhance Protected and Priority species and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended, s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species), s17 Crime & Disorder Act 1998 and Policy 31 of the Horsham Development Framework.

19 Regulatory Condition: No works for the implementation of the development hereby approved shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays

Page 106 Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

20 Regulatory Condition: The dwellings hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

21 Regulatory Condition: The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification that the remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 4(b) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 4(b), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

22 Regulatory Condition: The development shall be carried out in accordance with the Finished Floor Levels as indicated on plan no. 1833.1/02 (Site Cross Section) unless alternative floor levels have been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of that phase.

Reason: To control the development in detail in the interests of amenity and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

23 Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (and/or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order no development falling within Classes AA of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the order shall be erected, constructed or placed within the curtilage(s) of the development hereby permitted without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and due to development located within the countryside in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Background Papers: DC/20/1294; DC/19/0617

Page 107 This page is intentionally left blank 10) DC/20/1294

Tea Caddy Cottages, Worthing Road, West Grinstead

m For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public

0.91

Def 53 ¯ 24.1m 54 Sunnyhill Cottages

1 Waterloo2 Cottages

0.91

Pond The Sussex Stud

2 Hill House Farm Tea Caddy Cottages The Lodge

ef D Greenlane Plantation Cattle Grid

Pond

Scale: 1:2,500

Date 04/02/2021 Page 109MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 11

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Retrospective application for the change of use of part of a field to form a DEVELOPMENT: six pitch glamping site with portable toilets and shower facilities. SITE: Little Rock Cottage Hurston Lane Storrington RH20 4FF

WARD: Storrington and Washington

APPLICATION: DC/20/1923 Name: Pamela Finch Address: Little Rock Cottage Hurston Lane APPLICANT: Storrington RH20 4FF

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: At the request of Storrington and Sullington Parish Council

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the change of use of part of an open pasture field belonging to Little Rock Cottage to form a six pitch glamping/ camping site with portable toilets and shower facilities. The site has been operational through the summer of 2020, originally through the ’56 day rule’ under Permitted Development and this application seeks to regularise the continued use of the land for camping/ glamping on a permanent seasonal basis (March to September).

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.2 The site is located in the countryside, around 150 metres from the Built Up Area boundary of Storrington. The site extends to approximately 1.2 hectares and consists of an open field accessed from Hurston Lane via a single vehicular gate. The site lies adjacent to a residential neighbour to the south, separated by small paddocks with grazing fields to the north. There is a public footpath running along the bottom (eastern) end of the site boundary with more fields owned by the applicant beyond. The site falls away at a gradual gradient to the east of the site.

Page 111 Contact Officer: Kate Turner Tel: 2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

2.2 National Planning Policy Framework

2.3 Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion Policy 7 - Strategic Policy: Economic Growth Policy 9 - Employment Development Policy 10 - Rural Economic Development Policy 11 - Tourism and Cultural Facilities Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking Policy 42 - Strategic Policy: Inclusive Communities Policy 41 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation

2.4 RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN Storrington, Sullington and Washington Neighbourhood Plan 2019 Policy 3: Employment Uses Policy 8: Countryside Protection Policy 10: Tourist Accommodation

2.5 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS No planning history on this site

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.2 HDC Landscape Architect: At the time of my visit in December, understandably there were little signs of the glamping activities other than the more permanent structures such as the decking, the pod and shower blocks. These were not considered to be incongruous or cause harm to the character of the receiving landscape.

3.3 The site sits in the landscape character area E1 Parham and Storrington Wooded Farmlands and Heaths of the Horsham District Landscape Assessment 2003. Of note the

Page 112 area is described as having rolling landform of sandy ridges cut by small narrow stream valleys and small mostly well hedged pasture fields with mature hedgerow oaks.

3.4 The site itself is in close proximity to the urban edge of Storrington but it predominantly retains rural qualities and tranquillity albeit influenced by the large number of paddocks that divide the fields and other horsiculture influences but also the adjacent Taglewood cottage and the cluster of farm buildings that can be seen on a more prominent position to the north of the site.

3.5 Key issues identified for this character area are the expansion of horse paddocks, increasing traffic on some minor roads (i.e. increase of activity in the countryside which is separate from the highways assessment of number of vehicles movements).

3.6 The proposals are for the field to be able to accommodate 6 pitches and supporting facilities such as shower rooms, toilets, etc. Considering the site’s countryside location, immediate landscape character and urbanising influences but also the nature of development proposed, the proposals are considered to result in a small increase of activity in the countryside but that the site is capable of assimilating the proposals without unduly harming to the landscape character and visual amenity of the area and therefore comply with HDPF Policy 26.

3.7 It is required however that the applicant considers the use of more in-keeping toilet facilities (rather than porta-loos) and that the showers and any other proposed structures are of high quality predominantly using traditional local materials such as timber. Details of such facilities can be subject to condition should you be minded to recommend the application for approval.

3.8 HDC Environmental Health: No objection, subject to conditions.

3.9 HDC Economic Development: Support, as it will provide additional visitor accommodation within the District and aligns with our Visitor Economy Strategy.

3.10 Our Visitor Economy Strategy highlighted that for us to fulfil our aim of promoting Horsham District as ‘hub and host’ we must be able to provide a wider range of accommodation facilities. The need for a wider range of visitor accommodation within the District, was also emphasised in the Horsham District Hotel and Visitor Accommodation Study (2016). The report indicated that visitor accommodation developers saw one of the District’s strengths to be its large, affluent catchment population due to its proximity to London and wider home counties. Glamping facilities were considered one of the methods of attracting these visitors for ‘short breaks and additional holidays’ (pg.70). The Planning Statement for this application emphasises that this is indeed the case for this facility, as they explain that a large proportion of their guests have come from London.

3.11 The 2016 report also indicated that glamping was rapidly growing in popularity nationally and that the District would benefit from encouraging these developments (pg.88). Therefore, from an Economic Development perspective, additional glamping facilities within the District will build on our range of visitor accommodation, improve our offer to our catchment population and contribute towards attracting more tourism within the District. In turn, this will be a step towards increasing visitor spend within our local area.

3.12 Moreover, as highlighted in our Economic Strategy, one of the challenges we face is the high number of residents who seek work outside of the District’s border. Historically this has meant that we have many ‘out-commuters’ which puts us at risk of becoming a ‘dormitory district’. Therefore, it is important that we support the provision of more local job opportunities; the visitor economy plays an important role with regards to supporting local employment. This proposal indicates that the site currently employs two people with the intention of growing in the future. Page 113

3.13 The site is also within proximity to several local visitor attractions, for example The Pulborough Brooks is just a few minutes away by car. Therefore, the provision of additional visitor accommodation, will also be of benefit to these nearby tourism facilities and support these local businesses and their employees as well.

3.14 Overall, Economic Development supports this application as it will contribute positively to our local visitor economy and rural economy. The glamping site provides additional visitor accommodation within the District, expanding the range that we have on offer and will support local employment as well as businesses. They have also provided evidence of the level of demand for their facility and the positive feedback that they have received from visitors, to demonstrate the viability of their business in this location.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.15 WSCC Highways: The Local Highways Authority does not consider that the proposal would have and an unacceptable impact on highway safety or result in ‘severe’ cumulative impacts on the operation of the highway network, therefore is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 109), and that there are no transport grounds to resist the proposal.

3.16 The proposed use of a 6-pitch camping / glamping site would likely generate a maximum of 2 / 3 two-way trips per pitch per day. Typically, such uses are not huge generators of trips with visitors staying on site once arrived. Weight is also given that the site could benefit from the 56-day permitted development rule on an annual basis. The daily trips generated under the permitted development rights would be no different to the proposed use only they would occurring over 7 months of the year.

3.17 Access to the site is achieved via an existing gated field access from Hurston Lane, an unclassified single track rural road subject to a 30 mph speed limit at this point, though it is appreciated that the speed limit changes to National speed limit (60 mph) immediately north of the site access point.

3.18 Further interrogation of the adequacies of the access point, namely visibility and geometry, could only be substantiated if the proposed would result in a material intensification of use at the site access point. Having regard for the existing use and the benefit of permitted development rights for the proposed use of a limited period, it would be difficult to substantiate this would be the case.

3.19 It is noted that the access is a field access. There would be some highways benefit in formalising this access point with a crossover built under licence to current WSCC specification. I would be minded suggest such a crossover is secured under planning condition. An area of block paving or similar bound surface should also be provided beyond the back edge of the highway boundary within land under the control of the applicant. This would mitigate mud and debris being pulled onto the public highway. The access gate should also be set back a minimum of 5 metres form the back edge of the carriageway to ensure that a vehicle can be fully removed from the carriageway while the gate is opened. Again, it seems reasonable that such a modification could be secured and could be considered within the suggested ‘access’ planning condition.

3.20 Visibility splays have not been formally demonstrated by the applicant, however from a desktop study it does seem that a degree of visibility is available using highway verge. The character of Hurston Lane is such that approaching vehicle speed will likely be slow and infrequent. Again, without a significant intensification of use occurring it would be unreasonable for a full visibility assessment to be requested for scrutiny. It would however be advised that maximum achievable splays, in as much as is under control of the applicant from a 2.4m X distance are secured with plans and details to be provided in the interest of Page 114 highway safety. This would provide a benefit over the exiting situation but may require the cutting back of some vegetation overhanging the public highway.

3.21 A total of 2 car parking spaces per pitch seems to be a reasonable parking requirement for this use. While not formally demonstrated it is clear that such a provision can be accommodated within the site.

3.22 WSCC Rights of Way: No Objection.

PARISH COUNCIL

3.23 Storrington and Sullington Parish Council: Objection:-

3.24 The site was formerly grazing and is very exposed to view. Members consider that the tents toilets etc are intrusive in the landscape and located in an inappropriate position. They introduced noise lighting and human activity to what was a peaceful field.

3.25 Access along Hurston Lane is poor single track and heavily used by walkers horse riders etc not to mention refuse trucks being opposite with sewage farm.

3.26 The toilet and shower block is very poor visual quality and rows of porta loos skip's fire pits barbecues are inappropriate in this location. Modern camping and caravanning sites are managed and maintained to a high standard with infrastructure- built shower toilet blocks on site roads and tracks . This is more of a pop up site and members do not believe there is a case for it to be permanent . Farms we expect to be functional and sometimes unattractive. This is not a farm it is intrusive and unattractive.

3.27 Members consider the glamping site to be detrimental to the amenity of the neighbouring property which is not where the owner lives. To state that the owner lives adjacent to the site is stretching the truth- her property is two or three fields away and although she owns the fields her house is some distance from the site and it is therefore unlikely to cause her any disturbance. Regardless of the commitment to a peaceful quiet site there are no guarantees that this character will continue or can be enforced. Members question that should the application be permitted would that mean the fields would become developed land?

3.28 Should the recommendation be to approve we request that your condition be attached limiting the site to no more than 6 pitches.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.29 Five letter of objection have been received from four households. These are summarised as:-

 Inappropriate development in the countryside  Hurston road is too narrow  Liable to flooding  No screening from the neighbouring property or the road  Lavatories and showers too close to the road  Nigh time noise and disturbance  Too many people on the site  Highways Safety and Increased traffic  Precedent for further development along Hurston Lane  Not suitable for caravans or motorhomes

Page 115 3.30 Five letters of support have been received from local businesses and residents. These are summarised as:

 Very well run site  No further traffic issues since opening  Very peaceful and respects the countryside and wildlife  No problems with noise and pleasure as neighbouring use (keeps horses in adjoining field)  We have had a definite increase in business from the campsite which is a short walk away- there are not enough campsites in the area (The Crown at Cootham)  Increase in visitors from the campsite- direct walks across countryside to the pub- in need of more campsites (The Sportsman Inn, Amberley)  Extra income for local businesses

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Principle of Development

6.1 Policy 7 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) states that sustainable employment development in Horsham District will be achieved by promotion of the District as an attractive place to stay and visit to increase the value of the tourism economy.

6.2 Policy 11 of the HDPF outlines that measures which promote tourism and enhance local cultural facilities, including recreation based rural diversification, will be encouraged. Any development should be of a scale and type appropriate to the location and should increase the range or improve the quality of accommodation, attraction or experiences for tourists, day visitors, business visitors, and residents in the District. Support will particularly be given to proposals which amongst others, are in keeping with their relationship with the urban area and countryside around them and benefit the local economy.

6.3 In addition, Policy 10 of the HDPF supports sustainable rural economic development and enterprise within the District which maintain the quality and character of the area, whilst sustaining its varied and productive social and economic activity. The policy requires development to contribute to the diverse and sustainable farming enterprises within the district or, in the case of other countryside-based enterprises and activities, contribute to the wider rural economy and/or promote recreation in, and the enjoyment of, the countryside.

6.4 In this instance the application falls outside of the existing Built-Up Area and lies within the Countryside. Policy 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) would be relevant and requires development outside the Built-Up Area boundaries to be essential to its countryside location in order to protect the rural character and undeveloped nature of the

Page 116 countryside against inappropriate development. In addition, it must meet one of the following criteria:

6.5 Furthermore, this policy requires that development be of a scale that is appropriate to its countryside character and location and should not lead either individually or cumulatively to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside and protects and/or conserves, and/or enhances the key features and characteristics of the landscape character area.

6.6 Paragraph 83 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should enable: the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business in rural areas, both through conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings; the development and diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses; sustainable rural tourism and leisure development which respect the character of the countryside; and the retention and development of accessible local services and community facilities.

6.7 Paragraph 84 of the NPPF continues that planning decisions should recognise that sites to meet local business and community needs in rural areas may have to be found adjacent to or beyond existing settlements, and in locations that are not well served by public transport. In these circumstances it will be important to ensure that development is sensitive to its surroundings, does not have an unacceptable impact on local roads and exploits any opportunities to make a location more sustainable. The use of previously developed land, and sites that are physically well-related to existing settlements, should be encouraged where suitable opportunities exist.

6.8 The Framework does not impose a blanket restriction on development outside defined settlements. The site is located close to the built-up area of Storrington and is not totally isolated, and so the countryside location does not conflict with paragraph 79 of the Framework. While any occupation of the site would likely to be dependent upon private vehicles on arrival and departure the site is well connected to Public Rights of Way and would provide opportunity for walking and cycling to nearby local services and community facilities in Storrington. These include easy access to Local Convenience Stores and Takeaways in Storrington Centre, The Crown at Cootham, Pulborough Brooks and access to the South Downs. Several letters of support have been received from local businesses including the Crown at Cootham and the Sportsman at Amberley outlining the increased trade the site has brought to them this year- demonstrating the economic benefits of the campsite.

6.9 The Council aims to take a pro-active stance to encourage local tourism within the District and the proposal would make a modest contribution toward the provision of visitor accommodation within the District. There is likely to be a demand for this type of glamping and camping accommodation in this location. The Councils Visitor Study identified a strong demand for this type of accommodation with supply not able to meet demand during spring and summer weekends. The Study states that there is scope for significant expansion of this type of accommodation in rural parts if the District particularly those located in close proximity to South Downs National Park (which lies just the other side of Storrington itself).

6.10 The 2016 report also indicated that glamping was rapidly growing in popularity nationally and that the District would benefit from encouraging these developments (pg.88). Therefore, from an Economic Development perspective, additional glamping facilities within the District will build on our range of visitor accommodation, improve our offer to our catchment population and contribute towards attracting more tourism within the District. In turn, this will be a step towards increasing visitor spend within our local area. Page 117

6.11 The Council acknowledges that there is an ongoing need to enhance the rural economy and this includes maximising visit spending through tourism across the District. This proposal is considered to promote quiet informal recreation and enjoyment of the countryside by being located within easy distance of public footpaths and bridleways allowing access and enjoyment of the surrounding countryside. The nearest Public Footpath runs along the boundary of the site and provides walks through the countryside leading to West Chiltington to the north, Storrington to the south and onwards to Warren Hill and the South Downs.

6.12 The site has been running in the same capacity as is proposed throughout the summer 2020 and is understood to have been a popular location for both local visitors and those from further afield. The site provides a 2 person camping pod (erected throughout the year), a bell tent sleeping up to five and a third glamping yurt that accommodates up to eight. There are then three camping pitches, two tent pitches are one family per pitch up to 6 and one pitch for two people only. This limits the number of people on the site at one time to a maximum of 6 households and there is unlikely to be more than 8 cars on the site at one time. The site is proposed to be seasonal, operating from the school Easter holidays to the end of September, being open throughout the holidays.

6.13 Considering these numbers and due to the current agricultural use on the site it would not be expected to have a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside and there is considered to be no harmful conflict with Policy 26 of the HDPF.

6.14 For these reasons this proposal is considered to comply with HDPF policies 10, 11 and 26 and the principle of development is accepted.

Landscape Impact

6.15 This application has been considered by the Council’s Senior Landscape Architect. The site sits in the landscape character area E1 Parham and Storrington Wooded Farmlands and Heaths of the Horsham District Landscape Assessment 2003. Of note the area is described as having rolling landform of sandy ridges cut by small narrow stream valleys and small mostly well hedged pasture fields with mature hedgerow oaks.

6.16 The site itself is in close proximity to the urban edge of Storrington but it predominantly retains rural qualities and tranquillity albeit influenced by the large number of paddocks that divide the fields and other horsiculture influences, but also the adjacent Taglewood cottage and the cluster of farm buildings that can be seen on a more prominent position to the north of the site.

6.17 The Landscape Architect states that ‘considering the site’s countryside location, immediate landscape character and urbanising influences but also the nature of development proposed, the proposals are considered to result in a small increase of activity in the countryside but it is considered that that the site is capable of assimilating the proposals without unduly harming to the landscape character and visual amenity of the area and therefore comply with HDPF Policy 26’.

6.18 It is suggested that the applicant considers the use of more in-keeping toilet facilities (rather than porta-loos) and that the showers and any other proposed structures are of high quality predominantly using traditional local materials such as timber. Details of such facilities can be secured through a condition (as recommended below).

Design and Appearance:

6.19 HDPF policy 25 requires development to protect, conserve and enhance the landscape and townscape characters across the District, taking account of settlement characteristics and settlement separation. Policy 32 of the HDPF requires new development to 'Complement Page 118 locally distinctive characters and heritage of the district' and 'Contribute a sense of place both in the buildings and spaces themselves and in the way they integrate with their surroundings'. Policy 33 requires developments to relate sympathetically with the built surroundings.

6.20 The application proposes the retrospective change of use the field to site three glamping pods and three tent pitches. The bell tent and yurt sit on decking and the eco pod has a small area of decking to the front. Each glamping unit includes an outside covered area for shade or shelter with bench and table, a bbq and a fire pit and come fully furnished apart from towels bedding and torches. The three tent pitches measure around 10m x10m and each have a fire pit available.

6.21 Given the context of the site and the nature of the proposed development, it is not considered that the proposal would result in harm to the character or setting of the countryside location and is in accordance with Policies 25, 32, and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Amenity Impacts:

6.22 Policy 33 of the HDPF (2015) states that development should consider the scale, massing and orientation between buildings, respecting the amenities and sensitivities of neighbouring properties.

6.23 The site is situated adjacent to a residential property and associated paddocks that are not in the ownership of the applicant. It is noted that this neighbour has not objected to this application. To protect the peace and quiet of the countryside and in the interests of preserving the residential amenity of neighbouring properties, conditions have been added to preclude the playing of amplified music or using any form of amplified public address and the installation of external lighting. The applicants propose some additional planting along the boundary of the field with Tanglewood Cottage. This would add an additional element of privacy for the neighbours and help to screen off the campsite from the paddocks. The property itself and residential garden are situated some 45 metres away from the boundary and are already screened by planting and fencing.

6.24 In addition to concerns raised regarding the late night noise, further representations raised concern as to the impact of the campsite on the local area, particularly in relation to traffic, and the safety of the narrow road. The Local Highways Authority has not raised any objection to the proposal and the site is in an appropriate location, with good access to the road network, with the access being almost opposite the entrance for the sewage works and HDC Depot. It is assumed therefore that if the road can accommodate the larger vehicles associated with this site, 6 vehicles for this campsite will not have a substantial additional impact. It would therefore be difficult to resist the proposal on amenity grounds relating to traffic movements.

6.25 Whilst it is also acknowledged that the campsite will create additional activity in the local area, the resulting activity is considered to be appropriate and not excessive for its countryside location. The application of conditions to this permission will also help to control the campsite, including limiting the number of pitches to 6. It is considered that the impact arising from a transient nature of 'resident' for brief periods during the year, would not adversely impact on the neighbouring amenities, owing to the siting and distances involved. A planning condition will be imposed ensuring the use of the site is restricted to holiday makers. There can also be a planning condition in relation to external lighting. It is noted again that no objection has been received on the principle of the use from either of the two nearest neighbours. The applicant/ owner of the site owns the fields behind the campsite and lives around 100 metres to the south east of the site. There is easy access across her land to the corner of the site and the owner is on call at all times to manage any nuisance or issues that may arise. Page 119

Highways Impacts:

6.26 Policy 40 of the HDPF supports proposals which provide safe and suitable access for all vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, public transport and the delivery of goods, whilst Policy 41 requires adequate parking facilities within developments. Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out that 'development should only be refused on transport grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety grounds, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe'

6.27 The proposed use of a 6-pitch camping / glamping site would likely generate a maximum of 2 / 3 two-way trips per pitch per day. Typically, such uses are not huge generators of trips with visitors staying on site once arrived. Weight is also given that the site could benefit from the 56-day permitted development rule on an annual basis. The daily trips generated under the permitted development rights would be no different to the proposed use only they would occurring over 7 months of the year.

6.28 Further interrogation of the adequacies of the access point, namely visibility and geometry, could only be substantiated if the proposed would result in a material intensification of use at the site access point. Having regard for the existing use and the benefit of permitted development rights for the proposed use of a limited period, it would be difficult to substantiate this would be the case. It is noted that the access is a field access. There would be some highways benefit in formalising this access point with a crossover built under licence to current WSCC specification. The Highways Officer recommend securing such a crossover under a planning condition. An area of block paving or similar bound surface should also be provided beyond the back edge of the highway boundary within land under the control of the applicant. This would mitigate mud and debris being pulled onto the public highway. The access gate should also be set back a minimum of 5 metres form the back edge of the carriageway to ensure that a vehicle can be fully removed from the carriageway while the gate is opened. Such a modification is recommended to be secured within the suggested ‘access’ planning condition.

6.29 Visibility splays have not been formally demonstrated by the applicant, however from a desktop study it does seem that a degree of visibility is available using highway verge. The character of Hurston Lane is such that approaching vehicle speed will likely be slow and infrequent. Without a significant intensification of use occurring it would be unreasonable for a full visibility assessment to be requested for scrutiny. It would however be advised that maximum achievable splays, in as much as is under control of the applicant from a 2.4m distance are secured with plans and details to be provided in the interest of highway safety. This would provide a benefit over the exiting situation but may require the cutting back of some vegetation overhanging the public highway.

6.30 Concern has been raised over the narrow nature of Hurston Lane and it is noted than there is no designated footpath along much of the road. However, it is noted that from around 350 metres along Hurston Road towards Storrington there is a footpath that leads into Storrington. Before that there are grass verges that can be utilised and as is noted in representations and the planning statement the road is commonly used for walking, horse riding and cyclists.

6.31 A total of 2 car parking spaces per pitch is a reasonable parking requirement for this use. While not formally demonstrated it is clear that such a provision can be accommodated within the site.

Climate change:

6.32 Policies 35, 36 and 37 require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water Page 120 consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions seek to reduce the impact of development on climate change. Conditions are attached to build resilience to climate change and reduce carbon emissions to secure the following:

 Refuse and recycling storage  Limiting external lighting to reduce light pollution  No burning of waste materials

6.33 Subject to these conditions the application will suitable reduce the impact of the development on climate change in accordance with local and national policy.

Conclusions

6.34 In policy terms it is considered that the principle of the proposal can be supported. The accommodation would provide for quiet informal recreational use while enabling a low-key form of sustainable development of the rural area. The site is well located for access to public footpaths and bridleways and is in close proximity to the local services and community facilities of Storrington and although outside of the Built up Area, is considered to be a sustainable location. The scale of the accommodation would not be expected to result in a significant increase in the level of activity in the countryside or have a significant impact on the landscape of the countryside. It is considered that the screening provided by the new hedging/ tree planting on the boundary will help to screen the site and minimise the visual impact of the proposal, as will the inclusion of a condition requiring details to be provided on the use of more in-keeping toilet facilities and showers and high quality predominantly traditional local materials such as timber to be used in any structures. For the reasons outlined the proposal is considered to accord with Policies 7, 10, 11, and 26 of the HDPF.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 That the application is approved subject to the following conditions:

1 A list of the approved plans

2 Standard Time Condition: The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission details for the provision for the storage of refuse/recycling facilities shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The refuse / recycling facilities shall be provided within 1 month of such approval being given and shall be retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of recycling facilities in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

4 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission a Site Management Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The Site Management Plan shall include, but not be limited to, responsibilities at all times, measures to control playing of amplified music at all times, a fire risk management plan, no fireworks at all times, no noise after 23:00, prevention of nuisance from BBQs and campfires including fixed locations for fires and BBQs, no group bookings of more than one pitch, and dealing with anti-social behaviour. The approved Site Management Plan shall be adhered to thereafter. Page 121

Reason: To protect the amenities of the locality and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

5 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission details of the vehicular access shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The vehicular access shall constructed within 2 months of such approval being given in accordance with the approved plans and details.

Reason: In the interests of road safety in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission full details of hard and soft landscaping works shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The approved landscape scheme shall include details of the following:-

(i) All proposed planting including species (specifically new boundary hedgerow planting and screening); (ii) Any proposed fencing or gates; and (iii) Proposed car parking and access road surfacing

The scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the approval of details. Any plants, which within a period of 5 years, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development that is sympathetic to the landscape character of the surroundings, and in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

7 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission details of maximum achievable visibility splays, in as much as is under control of the applicant, at the site vehicular access onto Hurston Lane shall be submitted to Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The splays shall thereafter be provided, maintained and kept free of all obstructions over a height of 0.6 metre above adjoining carriageway level or as otherwise agreed.

Reason: In the interests of road safety in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

8 Regulatory Condition: No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed other than with the permission of the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

9 Regulatory Condition: The use hereby permitted shall only take place between the 1 March and 30 September (inclusive) each year.

Reason: To maintain control over the development and to protect the appearance and character of the area in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

10 Regulatory Condition: The total number of glamping units and pitches on the site at any one time shall not exceed 6, comprising 3 glamping units and 3 pitches. No Page 122 individual tent or glamping unit shall remain on the site outside of the period set out in condition 9, or be occupied for longer than 4 weeks by any individual or group in any one year.

Reason: To maintain control over the development and to protect the appearance and character of the area in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this decision details of the composting toilet, including siting, design and waste management and collection details, shall have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The facilities shall be provided in accordance with the agreed details one such approval has been given, and shall be retained as such thereafter.

12 Regulatory Condition: The site shall not allow for the arrival or departure of guests associated with the use hereby permitted after 20:00 on any given day.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

13 Regulatory Condition: Within 3 months of the date of this permission a water and drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of sewage and waste water disposal and details of a wholesome water supply within 90m of all camping pitches, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its approval in writing. The water and drainage strategy shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details and be maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Background Papers: DC/20/1923

Page 123 This page is intentionally left blank 11) DC/20/1923

Little Rock Cottage, Hurston Lane, Storrington

Pond For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public ¯ Pond

Tank Westar Farm

28.3m

Pump

Path (um)

TanglewoodCottage White Canons

CottageBarn

Rock Cottage Stone West Fryern Barn 30.2m Farm Lodge 29.2m Winstead Pointers 92

Little Timbers GHighlawns ree 78 96 nbanks

98 Streams Scale: 1:2,500

Date 04/02/2021 Page 125MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 16 February 2021

DEVELOPMENT: Retrospective application for the retention of roof mounted solar panels New Spinney Spinney Lane West Chiltington Pulborough West Sussex SITE: RH20 2NX WARD: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington

APPLICATION: DC/20/1547 Name: Mr and Mrs Saheid Address: New Spinney, Spinney Lane West APPLICANT: Chiltington RH20 2NX

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: One of the applicants is a District Councillor

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission, subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 The purpose of this report is to update Members since the application was considered on 24 November 2020 by Planning Committee South. At this meeting the application was deferred from consideration to allow planning officers to undertake discussions with the applicant with a view to relocating the solar panels to a more appropriate location, potentially being the southern elevation of the host property. Whilst discussions have taken place with the applicant, no agreement has been reached to reposition the panels and therefore the application is brought back to committee for determination (the previous Committee Report is appended at the end of this update report).

1.2 The applicant states that the solar panels were installed in accordance with the relevant permitted development rights and that the requirements in terms of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and on neighbouring amenity, as set out in the previous committee report, have been fully met. The applicant has further advised that if the solar panels were to be relocated, they would be equally visible from the streetscene and neighbouring properties.

Background

1.3 The application, as set out in the Officer’s report presented to Planning Committee South in November and appended to this report, seeks retrospective planning permission for the retention of solar panels on the east and west elevations of the dwellinghouse and the east elevation of the detached garage at New Spinney, Spinney Lane, West Chiltington. The installation of solar panels is permitted development under Part 14, Class A of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 (as

Page 127 Contact Officer: Shazia Penne Tel: 01403 215 258 amended) however there is a condition that requires such panels to be ‘…so far is practicable they are sited to minimise effect on the amenity of the area’. In this case, following the receipt of a complaint about the installation of the panels, it was considered, on balance, that the installation would not benefit from the relevant permitted development rights and an application was requested to regularise the works.

2. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

2.1 As set out in the appended report, Policy 35 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) states that development will be supported where it makes a clear contribution to mitigating and adapting to the impacts of climate change and to meeting the District's carbon reduction targets. Measures which should be used to mitigate the effects of climate change includes improved energy efficiency in new developments; and the use of decentralised, renewable and low carbon energy supply systems. However, such schemes will also need to ensure that they do not have significant adverse effect on landscape character, biodiversity, heritage or cultural assets or amenity value.

2.2 Policy 36 of the HDPF relates to the development of renewable and low carbon energy as a key means of reducing the district's contribution to climate change. This policy sets out the requirement for development to minimise its energy use in accordance with the energy hierarchy and to incorporate renewable and low carbon energy supplies.

2.3 The solar panels at New Spinney contribute to mitigating and adapting to the impacts of climate change and help reduce carbon emissions as set out in Policy 35 of the HDPF. The aim of policies 35 and 36 of the HDPF is to reduce energy consumption with both policies recognising the benefits of renewable energy and encouraging proposals to utilise opportunities to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

2.4 It is noted that Members of Planning Committee South, whilst supportive of the applicant’s desire to reduce carbon emissions, raised concerns in respect of the impact of the solar panels on the character and appearance of the streetscene and on neighbouring amenity. Members were advised at the meeting in November that being able to view the panels from a public vantage point or the neighbouring property does not make the scheme unacceptable and that there would need to be identified demonstrable harm. Officer’s consider that the solar panels as installed do not have a significant detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the wider streetscene, or on the setting of the neighbouring Wells Cottages, sufficient to warrant refusal of the application, and do not result in any significant harmful impact on neighbouring amenity. It is acknowledged that the panels are visible from both Spinney Lane and the neighbouring property, however as advised at the Committee meeting in November, being able to view the solar panels is not a reason to refuse the application and demonstrable harm needs to be identified. It is not considered that demonstrable harm has resulted in this case with the panels being seen in limited short distance views only, and within the context of the roof of New Spinney and its associated garage.

2.5 In respect of the impact on neighbouring amenity, there is no evidence to confirm that the solar panels have created an unacceptable impact in respect of glare, and having a view of the solar panels does not warrant a refusal on planning grounds.

2.6 Therefore, for the reasons as outlined above, and in the Officer’s report to the Planning Committee South in November, the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant policies of the Horsham District Planning Framework and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Page 128 3 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:

1. List of approved plans

2. Regulatory Condition: The panels hereby permitted shall be retained in accordance with the approved details. In the event of the solar panels ceasing to be used, the panels shall be removed and from the roof, and the roof made good, as soon as is reasonably practicable and be no later than six months after the cessation of the panels.

Reason: In the absence of demonstrable need, there is no justification for the retention of the panels and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 129 This page is intentionally left blank ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 24 November 2020

APPLICATION: DC/20/1547 Name: Mr and Mrs Saheid Address: New Spinney, Spinney Lane West APPLICANT: Chiltington RH20 2NX

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: One of the applicants is a District Councillor

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission, subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for the retention of solar panels on the east and west elevations of the dwellinghouse and the east elevation of the detached garage at New Spinney, Spinney Lane, West Chiltington. The panels appear as black rectangular shaped tiles with approximate sizes of 1.7m by 1m and protrude some 0.35m from the plane of the roof. Some six solar panels have been provided to the eastern roof slope of the garage, with six panels provided to the eastern roof slope of the dwelling and three to the western roof slope.

1.3 The installation of solar panels is permitted development under Part 14, Class A of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 (as amended) however there is a condition that requires such panels to be ‘…so far is practicable they are sited to minimise effect on the amenity of the area’. In this case, following the receipt of a complaint about the installation of the panels, it was considered, on balance, that the installation would not benefit from the relevant permitted development rights and an application was requested to regularise the works.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.4 The application site is located within a semi-rural location, surrounded by large detached dwellings set within verdant generously proportioned plots. The narrow course of the

Page 131 Contact Officer: Shazia Penne Tel: 01403 215 258 ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

highway, together with formal/informal planting verging Spinney Lane, and the general amount of vegetation, gives rise to aspects of a rural character deemed typical to an edge of settlement location. Dwellings along the course of the highway vary significantly in terms of scale, form and design, with no uniform character that could be said to be typical of this locale. There is no consistent building line in this location, with dwellings set at inconsistent distances/orientations relative to the highway. The total site area is of approximately 0.13 hectares and consists of a regular, rectangular shape block of land, located off Spinney Lane. The property and neighbouring properties are not listed, nor are they within a Conservation Area, however they have architectural significance in that some of surrounding properties are ‘Wells Cottages’.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

2.2 The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

2.3 National Planning Policy Framework

2.4 Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 34 - Cultural and Heritage Assets Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use

RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2.5 West Chiltington Parish submitted their Submission draft plan to Horsham District Council on 19 November 2018. In accordance with legislation, the Council is in the process of considering whether the plan meets the Basic Conditions and can progress to Regulation 16 consultation and formal examination.

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

2.6 There is no recent or relevant planning history relating to this site

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

3.2 Conservation Officer: ‘I agree that they are conspicuously placed and do undermine opportunities to appreciate the adjacent Pixies and Blue Cedar, both Wells cottages. The Wells cottages should be considered non-designated heritage assets but in terms of the fitment of solar panels there is no constraint in this regard. I believe the fitment is permitted development under Part 14, Class A with the condition that so far is practicable they are sited to minimise effect on the amenity of the area. Arguably the siting of these panels does not

Page 132 ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

minimise the effect on the amenity. An alternative would be for the more conspicuous panels to be moved to frames placed in the garden’.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.3 Two letters of objection were received from two separate households. The nature of these objections can be summarised as follows:  The panels are visible for windows with the neighbouring property, invade privacy and overlooking neighbouring properties  Detract from enjoyment of neighbouring properties  Harm amenity of surroundings and are clearly visible  Stark contrast to a ‘Wells Cottage’  Not in keeping with character of Spinney Lane and have a futuristic design  No evidence provided to suggest this is the best location for the panels  The panels do not absorb sunlight and are highly reflective, causing a blinding reflection at certain times of the day  Stark contrast to muted terracotta of the tiled roof, cladding and surrounding green vegetation

PARISH COUNCIL

3.4 West Chiltington Parish Council: Objection ‘The Parish Council objects to this application on the grounds that the panels are fitted to the East and West slopes of the roofs, directly impacting neighbours and aesthetically affecting their enjoyment of their own properties. The low level of the panels on the garage roof makes them particularly prominent for the neighbour at Pixies. Had the panels been fitted to the south facing slopes (as is the norm), neighbour impact would be minimised.’

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main issues are the principle of the development in the location and the effect of the development on: - The character of the development and the visual amenities of the street scene - The amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties

Principle of development

6.2 Policy 35 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) states that development will be supported where it makes a clear contribution to mitigating and adapting to the impacts of climate change and to meeting the District's carbon reduction targets. Measures which should be used to mitigate the effects of climate change includes improved energy efficiency in new developments; and the use of decentralised, renewable and low carbon energy supply Page 133 ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

systems. However, such schemes will also need to ensure that they do not have significant adverse effect on landscape character, biodiversity, heritage or cultural assets or amenity value.

6.3 Policy 36 of the HDPF relates to the development of renewable and low carbon energy as a key means of reducing the district's contribution to climate change. This policy sets out the requirement for development to minimise its energy use in accordance with the energy hierarchy and to incorporate renewable and low carbon energy supplies.

6.4 The solar panels at New Spinney contribute to mitigating and adapting to the impacts of climate change and help reduce carbon emissions as set out in Policy 35 of the HDPF. The aim of policies 35 and 36 of the HDPF is to reduce energy consumption with both policies recognising the benefits of renewable energy and encouraging proposals to utilise opportunities to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. On the basis the solar panels at New Spinney are considered, in principle, acceptable due to the core purpose, function and overall value to the environment.

Character and appearance

6.5 Policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF seek to promote development of high quality and inclusive design for all development in the district, ensuring that it is complementary of local distinctive character and heritage, integrating with their surroundings. Furthermore, these policies ensure that the scale, massing and appearance of the development is of a high standard of design and layout and where relevant, relates sympathetically with the built surroundings. Policy 34 of the HDPF seeks to sustain and enhance the historic environment of the district through positive management of development affecting heritage assets through appropriate siting, scale, form and design; including the use of traditional materials and techniques, and retaining and improving the setting of heritage assets, including views, public rights of way, trees and landscape features, including historic public realm features.

6.6 The application site comprises a detached two storey dwelling with a separate detached garage located to the south of Spinney Lane, within the built-up area of West Chiltington. This application seeks to regularise the installation of solar panels on the east and west roof slopes of the dwelling and the eastern roof slope of the detached garage. The panels are sited below the ridge height of New Spinney and its associated detached garage.

6.7 The panels appear as black rectangular shaped tiles (1.7m by 1m). As the host property and garage are also set back from Spinney Lane some 10m, and the solar panels are seen within the context of and against the host property and its associated garage, it is not considered that the panels result in harm to the character of the host property or the wider streetscene sufficient to warrant refusal of the application.

6.8 The wider area is characterised by detached dwellings varying in scale, design and appearance. There are a number of ‘Wells Cottages’ within the locality, considered to be non-designated heritage assets. Paragraph 197 of the NPPF states that the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application and that in weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

6.9 The Council’s Conservation Officer, having been consulted on the application, has advised that the panels are conspicuously placed and do undermine opportunities to appreciate the adjacent Pixies and Blue Cedar, both of which are Wells Cottages. Whilst it is noted that the adjacent properties are Wells Cottages, the fitment of solar panels to either the properties themselves or neighbouring properties is not restricted. It has been noted by the Council’s Conservation Officer however that whilst the fitment of solar panels is permitted development under Part 14, Class A of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Page 134 ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

Development)(England) Order 2015 (as amended), there is a condition that requires such panels to be ‘…so far is practicable they are sited to minimise effect on the amenity of the area’. Whilst acknowledged that the siting of the panels does not minimise the effect on the amenity of the area, an alternative location as suggested by the Council’s Conservation Officer, to site the panels into the garden, is not considered reasonable or necessary in this case.

6.10 The solar panels have been installed on the eastern and western roof slopes of the host property and eastern roof slope of the detached garage, and the site is surrounded by mature screening. The rationale for the siting of the panels on the roof was to ensure the panels could take full advantage of sunlight whilst avoiding shading. Whilst siting the panels within the garden of the property would have made them less conspicuous in views from the streetscene, views of the panels are limited to those in close proximity to the property, and it is considered that any limited harm to both the setting of the Wells Cottages and the wider streetscene is outweighed by the public benefit of reducing the applicant’s dependence on centralised and carbon based energy, by introducing the use of decentralised renewable energy. The efficient and sustainable use of renewable resources to help protect the environment in the medium to long term is a strong material consideration in favour of the development.

6.11 Whilst the solar panels would appear visible in approaches from the east, it is considered that given the host property and detached garage are set back from Spinney Lane some 10m, and that only limited short distance views are available of the panels, the impact on the wider streetscene is, on balance, acceptable. It is noted that the panels have not been sited on the southern elevation of the property, which would have been a more appropriate location in terms of solar gain, and which is considered to be the more important elevation of the host property in terms of it being its principle/front elevation. Whilst the solar panels would have some impact in terms of the visual amenities of the streetscene, it is considered that the aim of reducing the applicant’s dependence on centralised and carbon based energy, by introducing the use of decentralised renewable energy, weighs in favour of approval of the application in this case.

The effect of the development on the amenity of adjoining properties

6.12 Policy 33 of the HDPF also seeks to ensure that the development is designed to avoid unacceptable harm to the amenity of occupiers/users of nearby property and land, for example through overlooking or noise.

6.13 In terms of the impact of the solar panels on neighbouring amenity, it is noted that the reflection of the solar panels has been raised as a concern by the residents of the neighbouring property. Whilst acknowledged that the solar panels are flat and somewhat shiny, they are designed to absorb daylight, rather than reflect it, and as such the panels are not considered to be significantly intrusive and to cause significant harm to the privacy and outlook of neighbouring properties.

6.14 Concern has also been raised in respect of the siting of the solar panels overlooking neighbouring properties given the topography of the area. Given that the detached garage at New Spinney is set forward of Pixies, and taking into consideration the nature and siting of the solar panels, it is considered that whilst the panels would be visible the impact on neighbouring privacy and amenity is acceptable, with the panels seen within the context of the roof of New Spinney and its associated garage. The application, and retention of the panels, is therefore considered to comply with Policy 33 of the HDPF in this respect.

Conclusion

6.15 Overall, the solar panels are not considered to raise any policy concerns and do not have a significant detrimental impact on the site or the visual amenities of the wider streetscene, or Page 135 ADDENDUM – ITEM 12 DC/20/1547

on the setting of the neighbouring Wells Cottages which would warrant a refusal of the application. The panels do not result in any harmful impact on neighbouring amenity, with solar panels designed to absorb daylight rather than reflect it.

6.16 The application is therefore considered compliant with the requirements of policies 32, 33, 35 and 36 of the HDPF and it is considered that the scheme seeks to reduce carbon emissions. The efficient and sustainable use of renewable resources to help protect the environment in the medium to long term is a strong material consideration in favour of the development, and on this basis the application is recommended for approval.

7 RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1. List of approved plans

Reason: In the absence of demonstrable need, there is no justification for the retention of the panels and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 136 12) DC/20/1547

New Spinney, Spinney Lane, West Chiltington

(course of Little Trodgers Sandwells ) Moonraker Old a Stable El Sub St For Business use only - not for distributionArden to the generalCooper's public PlaceCottage Spring Wood Fircroft in Tyndrum The Dra Cottage Rosthwaite Round House ¯ Woodpecker Cottage Martlet The Owls Westward Cottage Butts Barn Cottage April Cottage Cranford Spinney Lanes ub Sta End T LANE El S Oak Corner 30.3m UNSE Honeysuckle Well Cottage S Tree Cottage Willow Cottage The Coach House House Spindlewood

Broom Rufflets E Cottage Lantern Cottage Pansala OV Shadiroc R Bydand Cherry Tree B Honeypot H u ain G Cottage rwo Dr SPIN od Sylvan Oaks BIRC N Brook EYLANE Halycon Thatchers Cottage Espinette Rosedene Brackenburn D Odd rain Stones Farthings Greylands The Spinney Springfield Birchwood Owl Becks CH Pixies Myntwell ere Blue New Chestnuts i Cedar Spinney aum h C E CF Ridge Squirrels a Woodland FB View L AN L Oakhurst Cottage D Tr ef ackPond PINNEY Und S Tregennys Tulip Tree ED & Ward Bdy Old Oaks Cottage CD CB

CF Issues CF CD

Perrett's Copse

(um) Path

P ath Hareswith House

(um)

Scale: 1:2,500

Date 04/02/2021 Page 137MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 13

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development and Building Control

DATE: 16 February 2021 Removal of Condition 4 of previously approved application SR/78/86 (Agricultural dwelling (Outline)). Relating to the occupation of the DEVELOPMENT: dwelling.

Tickletag Farm Hurston Lane Storrington Pulborough West Sussex RH20 SITE: 4HF WARD: Storrington and Washington

APPLICATION: DC/20/2322 Name: Mr P Strudwick Address: c/o Agent The Beehive City Place APPLICANT: Gatwick RH6 0PA West Sussex

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: At the request of Storrington Parish Council.

RECOMMENDATION: To approve planning permission.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 This application is made pursuant to S.73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and seeks the removal of an agricultural occupancy condition (condition 4) attached to the preceding grant of planning permission pursuant to ref: SR/78/86.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.2 The application site comprises a detached bungalow set amongst a cluster of agricultural / equestrian development and sporadic dwellings. The site is approximately 480 metres south of West Chiltington Common in a location otherwise characterised by open countryside. Hurston Street Farmhouse to the south of the site is a Grade II Listed Building.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Page 139 Contact Officer: Giles Holbrook Tel: 01403 215436

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES The following Policies are considered to be relevant to the assessment of this application:

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2019)

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) (2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 16 - Strategic Policy: Meeting Local Housing Needs Policy 17 - Exceptions Housing Schemes Policy 20 - Rural Workers Accommodation Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 27 - Settlement Coalescence Policy 30 - Protected Landscapes Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking Policy 42 - Strategic Policy: Inclusive Communities

Storrington, Sullington and Washington Neighbourhood Plan (SSWNP) (2019) Policy 1 – A Spatial Plan for the Parishes Policy 8 – Countryside Protection

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS SR/25/02 Erection of double garage, covered way & Application Permitted on conservatory 23.04.2002 Site: Tickletag Farm Hurston Lane Storrington SR/103/99 Construction of sand school Application Permitted on Site: Tickletag Farm Hurston Lane Storrington 01.12.1999

SR/82/99 Certificate of lawful use for non-compliance with Application Permitted on agricultural occupancy condition on sr/78/86 18.05.2000 Site: Tickletag Farm Hurston Lane Storrington SR/21/99 Removal of agricultural occupancy condition from Withdrawn Application on sr/78/86 13.04.1999 Site: Stooks Farm Hurston Lane Storrington SR/24/88 Erection of agricultural bungalow (reserved matters) Application Permitted on 12.05.1988

SR/78/86 Agricultural dwelling (outline) Application Permitted on 28.01.1987

Page 140 3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

3.2 Storrington and Sullington Parish Council: Objection:-

3.3 Storrington Parish Council resolved to object to the proposal on the basis that the dwelling was originally granted by virtue of its agricultural use, with no reason demonstrated to remove the condition by reason of the dwellings isolated location.

3.4 The Parish Council remarked that insufficient evidence had been adduced to demonstrate that condition 4 attached to ref: SR/78/86 would no longer be enforceable and/or applicable.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.3 None received.

4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS

5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 This application seeks the removal of an agricultural occupancy condition (no. 4) attached to planning permission ref: SR/78/86, this condition states:-

The occupation of the dwelling shall be limited to a person solely employed or, retired and last employed in the locality, in agriculture as defined in Section 290(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971, or in forestry (including any dependents of such a person residing with him or her) or a widow or widower of such a person.

Reason: The site lies in an area where, in accordance with the policies in the Structure Plan and the (proposed) First Alteration thereto, development unrelated to the unessential needs of agriculture or forestry would not normally be permitted.

6.3 While the national and local planning policy framework has changed significantly in the preceding years, the Horsham District Planning Framework continues through policy 26 to ensure that development is appropriate to a countryside location, both in terms of the essential need for a countryside location and in terms of its association with rural enterprise, inclusive of the needs of agriculture and forestry. This policy is complemented by policies 10 and 20 of the HDPF, which promote appropriate forms of rural economic

Page 141 development and rural workers accommodation in order to sustain the productive use of land and development of the rural economy.

6.4 Policies 2, 3, 4 and 15 of the HDPF, in addition to policies 1 and 2 of the SSWNP, set out the strategy of the development plan in relation to housing growth, seeking to promote market residential development within defined built-up areas and advocating a planned approach to settlement expansion in order to meet housing need. The HDPF and SSWNP do not contain any policies which seek to retain rural workers housing.

6.5 The existing policy basis would therefore presume against market residential development in this countryside location. In this particular instance, however, it is significant that the dwelling subject of this application benefits the grant of a certificate of lawfulness pursuant to ref: SR/82/99. This certificate confirmed that the dwelling had been occupied in non- compliance with the above condition for a continuous period in excess of 10 years. The effect of this certificate is to establish that occupation of the dwelling by persons not solely employed or, retired and last employed in the locality, in agriculture is lawful.

6.6 This existing certificate of lawfulness therefore confirms that no enforcement action can be taken in respect of condition 4 of the original permission for the dwelling. This certificate and the benefits against enforcement action it provides would be transferable to any subsequent occupiers. Consequently, the application site could be occupied in breach of this condition by any non-qualifying persons in perpetuity.

6.7 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires decisions to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance the presence of the certificate of lawfulness is a material consideration which is given significant weight.

6.8 Paragraph 55 of the NPPF provides that planning conditions must be kept to a minimum and imposed only where inter alia necessary, enforceable and reasonable. In the context of a preceding grant of a certificate of lawfulness confirming lawful occupancy in breach of the agricultural occupancy condition, it is not considered that the Authority could reasonably consider that such criteria would remain satisfied in this instance. The Authority, for example, could not enforce the terms of the condition requiring occupancy to be limited to agricultural workers, nor would a condition requiring occupancy to be limited to agricultural workers prove necessary or reasonable where continued occupation in breach of such a condition could lawfully continue in any instance.

6.9 Irrespective of the planning merits of the proposed removal of condition, and its performance against development plan policy, it is considered that the lawful occupation of the existing dwelling in breach of condition as confirmed by the preceding grant of a certificate of lawfulness represents an overriding material consideration. It is not considered that the Authority possesses sufficient grounds to reasonably resist the proposal to remove condition 4 in relation to ref: SR/78/86, which would no longer be deemed to satisfy requirements set out at paragraph 55 of the NPPF. It is, therefore, recommended that this application to remove condition 4 in relation to ref: SR/78/86 is approved.

6.10 The continued occupation of the dwelling for purposes not related to employment in agricultural would have no material impact on the visual amenities of the site or wider surrounding area or neighbouring amenity. There would be no adverse impact on the setting of the neighbouring amenity.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To grant planning permission.

Page 142

Background Papers: DC/20/2322 SR/82/99 SR/78/86

Page 143 This page is intentionally left blank 13) DC/20/2322

Tickletag Farm, Hurston Lane, Storrington For BusinessPond use only - not for distribution to the general public ¯

Issues

Gallop c

T Track

Tickletag Farm

Spiders Barn

29.6m Track

27.9m

Hurston Street Rockytop Farm Farm

Sheep Dip

Riv er Sto r Stor Farm 16.4m

Tacama

16.2m

Scale: 1:2,500

Date 05/02/2021 Page 145MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank