Park North, North Street, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1RL Tel: (01403) 215100 (calls may be recorded) Fax: (01403) 262985 DX 57609 HORSHAM 6 www.horsham.gov.uk
Chief Executive - Tom Crowley
Personal callers and deliveries: please come to Park North
E-Mail: [email protected] Direct Line: 01403 215465
Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 18th DECEMBER 2012 AT 2.00p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBER, PARK NORTH, NORTH STREET, HORSHAM
Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman) Sheila Matthews Vice-Chairman) Roger Arthur Ian Howard Adam Breacher Liz Kitchen Jonathan Chowen Gordon Lindsay Philip Circus Chris Mason George Cockman Brian O’Connell David Coldwell Roger Paterson Ray Dawe Sue Rogers Brian Donnelly Kate Rowbottom Andrew Dunlop Jim Sanson Jim Goddard
Tom Crowley Chief Executive
AGENDA
1. Apologies for absence
2. To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 20th November 2012 (attached)
3. To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee – any clarification on whether a Member has an interest should be sought before attending the meeting.
4. To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive
5. To consider the following reports and to take such action thereon as may be necessary
Head of Planning & Environmental Services Appeals Applications for determination by Committee - Appendix A
Paper certified as sustainable by an independent global forest certification organisation
Item Ward Reference Site No. Number
A1 Chantry DC/11/2334 Old Mill Square Storrington
A2 Chanctonbury DC/12/0851 Southway Stud Harbolets Road West Chiltington
A3 Steyning DC/12/1857 Nash Manor Horsham Road Steyning
A4 Henfield DC/12/1990 Henfield Business Park Shoreham Road Henfield
A5 Chantry DC/12/0687 St Josephs Monastery Lane Storrington
A6 Pulborough and DC/12/1852 Lower Nash Farm Nutbourne Lane Nutbourne Coldwaltham Pulborough
6. 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
DCS121120
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 20TH NOVEMBER 2012
Present: Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman), Roger Arthur, Jonathan Chowen, Philip Circus, George Cockman, David Coldwell, Ray Dawe, Brian Donnelly, Andrew Dunlop, Gordon Lindsay, Chris Mason, Brian O’Connell, Sue Rogers, Kate Rowbottom, Jim Sanson
Apologies: Councillors: Adam Breacher, Jim Goddard, Ian Howard, Liz Kitchen, Sheila Matthews, Roger Paterson
DCS/74 MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16th October 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
DCS/75 INTERESTS OF MEMBERS
There were no declarations of interest.
DCS/76 ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements.
DCS/77 APPEALS
Appeals Lodged Written Representations/Household Appeals Service
Ref No Site Appellant(s)
DC/12/1463 61 Dell Lane, Billingshurst Piers Faulkner
Informal Hearings
Ref No Site Appellant(s)
DC/12/0551 The Caravan, Littleworth Lane, Mr Billy Bath Partridge Green
Public Enquiry
Ref No Site Appellant(s)
DC/11/2385 Land east of Daux Avenue, Bellway Homes Billingshurst (South East) Ltd
Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/77 Appeals (cont.)
Appeal Decisions
Ref No Site Appellant(s) Decision
DC/11/1962 Land east of Manor Close, Welbeck Allowed Henfield Strategic Land LLP DC/11/2490 47 High Street, Billingshurst Weald Estates Dismissed Ltd DC/11/2489 47 High Street, Billingshurst Weald Estates Dismissed Ltd DC/12/0463 Plot 1, Bramblefield, Crays Mr Ian Hollerin Dismissed Lane, Thakeham DC/12/0168 Merywood House, Pentagon Dismissed Merrywood Lane, Thakeham Homes (Southern) Ltd DC/11/2518 Land south of Dukes Row, Mr Kenneth Dismissed Pulborough Road, Cootham McCrone DC/11/0467 Lydford Farmhouse, Kings Mr Luke Dismissed Lane, Cowfold Halestrad DC/12/0327 The Barn, Stable Cottage, Mr and Mrs B Dismissed Wheatsheaf Road, Henfield Stern DC/12/0326 The Barn, Stable Cottage, Mr and Mrs B Dismissed Wheatsheaf Road, Henfield Stern DC/12/0325 The Barn, Stable Cottage, Mr and Mrs B Dismissed Wheatsheaf Road, Henfield Stern DC/12/0716 Glenholme, Stane Street, Mr Paul Dismissed North Heath, Pulborough Quickenden
DCS/78 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1269 – PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING WILDLIFE POND PERMITTED UNDER DC/06/2073 AND RE- CONTOURING OF EXISTING ACOUSTIC EARTH BUND AROUND PERIMETER OF SITE SITE: SOPERS FARM PEPPERS LANE ASHURST STEYNING APPLICANT: MR GUY HARRISON
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission to make alterations to a wildlife pond, which had not been built in accordance with application DC/06/2073, and the re-contouring of an unauthorised acoustic earth bund.
The application site was located to the south west of Sopers Farm House in a countryside location characterised by small scale arable field patterns, woodlands and fragmented hedgerows. The lake was accessed via Peppers Lane or Honeybridge Lane which ran along the southern and western boundaries of the site.
2 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/78 Planning Application DC/12/1269 (Cont.)
The earth bunds stretched for approximately 1000 metres along the periphery of the site and blocked a public footpath to the north west corner with an unofficial diversion. There were numerous mature oak trees and native hedging around the periphery of the site.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3 and CP15; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC5, DC9 and DC40 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
AH/9/00 Change of use to children’s farm Withdrawn
AH/1/03 Extension to pond Granted
DC/04/0923 Extension to pond and construction of Refused bund DC/05/2556 Creation of pond Withdrawn
DC/06/2073 Creation of wildlife pond Granted
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. In particular, it was noted that the Arboricultural Officer and Landscape Officer had objected to the application. The Drainage Officer’s comments regarding the effect the bunding had on the local land drainage network were also noted.
The Parish Council objected to the application. Four letters of objection and one of support had been received. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.
The proposed alterations sought to incorporate land which currently separated the application lake from another larger lake to create one lake. It was proposed to create a shallower gradient to the edges of the application lake and introduce planting. The proposal included a floating island of approximately three square metres. Members considered that the proposal for the lake failed to show a naturalistic design that could be integrated into the landscape and provide wildlife benefits.
The bunding had been constructed from the earth that had been removed when the application lake was dug. It was between 2.08 and 2.81 metres high and had been erected in 2011 without the benefit of planning permission. An Enforcement Notice had been served in October 2011 and this application sought to reduce its height to 1.5 metres and move it further away from trees.
3 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/78 Planning Application DC/12/1269 (Cont.)
However, no information had been submitted for the most northerly 400 metre section of the bund. Members considered that the bunding, due to its height, scale and shape, was not in keeping with the landscape character of this rural area.
Members therefore considered that the proposal was unacceptable and sought assurance that compliance with the resolution would be monitored.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1269 be refused for the following reasons:
01 It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority through the information submitted that the bund, by reason of its height, scale and shape would conserve and enhance the landscape character of this rural area and would not be an incongruous feature in the landscape and the bund, by reason of its siting, would also have a detrimental impact on nearby trees and hedgerows, contrary to Policies DC1, DC2 and DC9 of the Development Control Policies 2007 and Policies CP1 and CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007.
02 It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority through the information submitted that the lake would integrate into the landscape and provide wildlife benefits due to its shape, slopes and levels contrary to Policies DC1, DC2 and DC9 of the Development Control Policies 2007 and Policies CP1 and CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007.
DCS/79 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1489 – VARIATION OF CONDITION 1 (NUMBER OF TRAILERS STORED ON SITE) OF PLANNING PERMISSION DC/08/1423 (CONTINUATION OF USE OF HARD STANDING FOR TRAILER STORAGE) TO INCREASE NUMBER OF TRAILERS TO BE STORED FROM THREE TO SIX SITE: TOWNHOUSE FARM, COOLHAM ROAD, THAKENHAM APPLICANT: MR NEIL WHITE
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought to vary Condition One of Planning permission DC/08/1423 so that up to six trailers could be stored at any one time on the land to the west of the barn. The condition currently stated that no more than three trailers could be stored at any one time. The application had been considered by the Committee on 16th October where it had been deferred pending further consultation with West
4 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/79 Planning Application DC/12/1489 (Cont.)
Sussex County Council Highway Authority regarding the highway impact of the application (Minute No. DCS/71 (16/10/12) refers).
The application site was located within a countryside location to the south west corner of Townhouse Farm farmyard which was located to the west of Coolham Road and included a livery yard and various agricultural buildings which had permission to be used for storage purposes.
Members were referred to the previous report which contained details of relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal.
The Highway Authority had visited the site on 30th October and confirmed that there was no highway safety objection to this proposal. They considered that, whilst the variation would allow more trailers to be parked on site, this in turn should not result in any material intensification of use beyond that which had already been occurring. The Highway Authority advised that a refusal to grant the variation of condition could lead to an increase in trailer movements on and off the site.
Members therefore considered that the proposal was acceptable.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1489 be granted, subject to the following condition:
01 No more than 6 trailers shall be stored at any one time on the land edged red and situated to the west of the barn shown on plan number 093 PD101 received on 14th August 2012.
REASON
ICAB2 The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the character of the area.
DCS/80 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1298 – NEW DWELLING AS REPLACEMENT FOR EXISTING SUB STANDARD DWELLING SITE: NETTLECOMBE WEST END LANE HENFIELD APPLICANT: MR J IRVINE
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission to replace an existing single storey sub standard dwelling with a larger three-bedroom detached house.
5 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/80 Planning Application DC/12/1298 (Cont.)
The application site was located off West End Lane outside of any built-up area within a countryside location. The existing dwelling was relatively central on the site, which included a garage and stable with parking area to the front of the property. The garden was predominantly laid to grass with mature hedging and trees on the boundary. The site was approached by an unmade track which served a handful of neighbouring properties.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1 and CP3; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC8, DC9 and DC28 were relevant to the determination of this application.
There was no relevant planning history to this application.
The Parish Council raised no objection to the application. During the first consultation period eight letters of objection from four addresses and five letters of support from four addresses had been received. During the second consultation period seven letters of objection from three addresses had been received. During the third consultation period four letters of objection from three addresses had been received. Two further letters of objection had been received since the preparation of the report. One member of the public spoke in objection to the application and the applicant and the applicant’s agent both addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.
The existing single storey dwelling on the site had a maximum ridge height of approximately five metres and a floor area of approximately 105.3 square metres. The proposed one and a half storey dwelling would have a maximum ridge height of seven metres and a floor area of approximately 187.77 square metres. The overall footprint would not be significantly larger.
Members noted concerns that the proposed balcony and the height of the building could lead to loss of privacy for neighbouring properties. Amendments had been received during the course of the application to reduce the bulk of the central porch area, and relocate the balcony to the rear elevation, and change the orientation and position of the proposed building so that the windows on the front elevation would predominantly face towards the trees and fields to the north west of the application site. The proposed balcony would face to the south east with significant screening between itself and the neighbouring property which was approximately 55 metres to the south of Nettlecombe.
Whist Members noted that the amended plans had mitigated concerns regarding overlooking, they considered that further amendments to reduce the proposed ridge height and possibly further alter the orientation of the dwelling would limit the impact of the proposed development on the countryside location.
6 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/80 Planning Application DC/12/1298 (Cont.)
Members therefore considered that the proposal was acceptable in principle.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1298 be determined by the Head of Planning & Environmental Services, in consultation with local Members, to seek reduction in the ridge height of 0.5m and possible further re-orientation of the dwelling, and for condition 10 to make reference to the hedging on the southern, eastern and western boundaries. The preliminary view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
DCS/81 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1707 – ERECTION OF A TIMBER LAMBING/STOCK SHED SITE: THORNHILL FARM BILLINGSHURST ROAD COOLHAM HORSHAM APPLICANT: MS LIN ADAMS
Application withdrawn from the agenda.
DCS/82 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1584 – FIRST FLOOR REAR/SIDE EXTENSION SITE: BRAMBLEDOWN MONKMEAD COPSE WEST CHILTINGTON PULBOROUGH APPLICANT: MR AND MRS J CROOK
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission for a first floor extension to a detached bungalow to provide further living accommodation with increased roof space.
The application site was located within a quiet residential cul-de-sac consisting of seven dwellings, five of which were bungalows similar in design to Brambledown. There was a detached garage to the front of the site, which was located within the built up area of West Chiltington.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP2 and CP3; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC9 and DC15 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
DC/08/0048 Conversion of garage, single storey side Granted extension and to erect a detached garage DC/10/2573 Part first floor extension to existing Refused bungalow
7 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/82 Planning Application DC/12/1584 (Cont.)
DC/11/2552 Part first floor extension to existing Refused bungalow DC/11/2552 Part first floor extension to existing Appeal bungalow Dismissed
The Parish Council raised no objection to the application. Four letters of objection and one of support had been received. Two further letters of objection had been received following submission of amended plans. The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.
The existing dwelling was a single storey building, which had had two previous applications refused for schemes to provide first floor living accommodation. The five bungalows within the cul-de-sac contributed to the character of the close and Members noted that the Appeal Decision had considered that development above the existing ridge height would have a detrimental impact upon the street scene or neighbouring dwellings.
The application originally submitted sought to increase the ridge height along the eastern side of the dwelling with dormer windows to the front and rear plus a Juliet balcony on the side (southern) elevation. In response to concerns regarding size and bulk of the proposal, amended plans had been received which moved the proposed extension to the longer northern aspect of the existing dwelling with the ridge height raised by 1.2 metres.
Members considered that, whilst the amended plans reduced the impact of the proposal on the surrounding amenity, the proposal would be an awkward addition to the existing dwelling and incongruous with its surroundings and would therefore have an adverse affect upon the street scene.
Members therefore considered that the proposal was unacceptable.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1584 be refused for the following reason:
The proposed extension, by virtue of its scale, massing and appearance is considered to be unsympathetic towards the design of the existing dwelling and would thereby adversely affect the character and appearance of the street scene and surrounding area. The development is therefore contrary to policy CP3 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007) and policies DC9 and DC15 of the Horsham District Council Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
8 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/83 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1617 – PROPOSED ERECTION OF 4 PRIVATE HORSE STABLES AND CHANGE OF USE OF CATTLE PEN FOR THE KEEPING OF 4 HORSES SITE: BRAMBER BROOKS, THE STREET, BRAMBER APPLICANT: MR GEORGE MARSHALL
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission for the erection of a detached ‘L’ shaped single storey stable building which would be traditionally clad in timber. Access to the site would involve the construction of an access track alongside the existing public footpath to the east of the site.
The application site was located outside the built up area and comprised a grassed expanse of land situated behind a number of residential properties lining the northerly side of The Street. A footpath to the east led to the River Adur. The area of land to the west incorporated a Scheduled Ancient Monument associated with Bramber Casle.
The site was adjacent to the boundary with Bramber, Upper Beeding & Woodmancote Ward, and approximately 100 meters from the boundary of South Downs National Park.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP3 and CP15; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC7, DC9, DC10, DC29 and DC40 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
DC/11/1746 Erection of horse stables to replace Withdrawn existing cattle pen BM/6/91 Erection of grooms quarters Refused
BM/11/90 Stable buildings, equestrian storage and Refused accommodation for groom and family
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. It was noted that the Highways Authority had not objection due to the 20mph speed limit and the existing ‘traffic calming’ measures.
The Parish Council raised no objection to the application, and the neighbouring Parish Council raised no objection to the application. Three letters of objection had been received. One member of the public spoke in objection to the application.
9 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/83 Planning Application DC/12/1617 (Cont.)
The application had been submitted following a similar application DC/11/1746 which the Committee had considered in December 2011. The preliminary view of the Committee had been that the application should be refused (Minute No. DCS/133 (20/12/11) refers) and the application had been withdrawn by the applicant.
This application sought the erection of a stable building within the easterly section of the field, to the west of an existing footpath and to the east of a watercourse. The proposed stables incorporated an ‘L’ shaped single storey building to include a hay store, tack room and four stables. It was considered that the building’s traditional timber façade with the overhanging corrugated roof would remain in keeping with similar equestrian structures within the countryside. The proposed stable building was not considered to constitute sporadic development in the countryside given its close proximity to the former cattle pen to the south and proximity to the adjacent footpath.
The stable building would be located approximately 47 metres from the rear boundary of Monksgate and 25 metres from the boundary of Little St Mary’s. The manure store would be located to the north of the stable building more than 30 metres from neighbouring properties as recommended by the Council’s Public Health Officer. As the stabling would not be used for commercial livery purposes it was considered that the proposal would not cause any further noise or disturbance to the neighbouring occupiers or generate a level of activity that would be considered unacceptable within a countryside location.
Members noted that the site was within an area of flood risk and questioned whether it would be appropriate for keeping horses all year round. The building would comprise a relatively light weight timber structure and it was considered that the proposal was unlikely to give rise to any further flooding within the area.
Members considered that the scale and location of the development would not cause a significant increase in the level of activity that would be harmful to its countryside location or cause any adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and therefore considered that the proposal was acceptable.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1617 be granted, subject to the following conditions:
01 A2 Full permission The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
10 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/83 Planning Application DC/12/1617 (Cont.)
02 M6 Prescribed materials (stables) The materials to be used on the stable building hereby permitted shall strictly accord with those indicated on the approved details associated with the application.
03 M1 Approval of materials (access track and gates) No development shall be commenced unless and until a schedule of the materials and samples of such materials and finishes and colours to be used for access track and gates have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used shall conform to those approved.
04 J7a Stables The stables hereby permitted shall not be used for commercial purposes or in connection with any form of riding establishment.
05 J7b Stables No stable waste shall be burnt on the land.
06 O1 Hours of working No work for the implementation of the development hereby permitted shall be undertaken on the site except between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 on Mondays to Fridays inclusive and 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
07 O2 Burning of Materials No burning of materials shall take place on the site.
08 Prior to the commencement of works a scheme for the management of stable waste is to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This statement should include details of the methods and frequency of stable cleaning and storage, collection and disposal of the stable waste. The proposed development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.
09 D10 Floodlighting No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any that is installed with the permission of the Local Planning Authority shall be maintained in accordance with the approved details. 11 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/83 Planning Application DC/12/1617 (Cont.)
10 No gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure shall be erected in conjunction with the development hereby permitted unless prior written permission has been granted by the Local Planning Authority (pursuant to an application for the purpose).
11 L1 Hard and soft landscaping No works or development shall take place until full details of all hard and soft landscaping works have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any plants which within a period of 5 years from the time of planting 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
The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the character and visual amenities of the locality.
DCS/84 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/0885 – EXTENSION TO LOWER GROUND FLOOR TO FORM CONFERENCE ROOM WITH ROOF TERRACE AND BALUSTRADE OVER SITE: ROUNDABOUT HOTEL, MONKMEAD LANE, WEST CHILTINGTON APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GROUP LTD
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this proposal had been deferred by the Committee for the second time in October 2012 (Minute No. DCS/72 (16.10.12) refers) to allow clarification to be sought in respect of the licensing concerns raised by the application, and for proposals for ongoing liaison between the applicant and the Parish Council to be confirmed.
The application site was located along Monkmead Lane within the defined built up area boundary of West Chiltington. The application site had 26 en-suite bedrooms, bar area, restaurant and additional reception and meeting rooms.
Members were referred to the previous reports which contained details of relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal.
In addition to previous responses to public consultations, four further letters of objection had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application. The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council commented on the application. 12 Development Control (South) Committee 20th November 2012
DCS/84 Planning Application DC/12/0885 (Cont.)
Since the application had previously been considered by the Committee, the applicant has provided proposals to ensure the management of the premises would minimise the impact upon the surrounding residential area. Details included a Noise Management Plan, tighter control over car parking and the continuation of residents meetings at the hotel.
Members noted that levels of noise and numbers of guests attending functions could be controlled under the Council’s Licensing Regime.
Whilst the applicant had stated that the proposed extension sought to increase the size of its existing function facilities with no additional capacity or change of use proposed, local residents remained concerned regarding the potential increase in traffic, parking and noise. Parking along Monkmead Lane was not appropriate for visitors to the hotel and, whilst this could not be controlled by the Local Planning Authority by way of a condition, provisions had been put in place to ensure onsite parking was sufficient and tightly managed by the hotel during busy periods.
Members noted residents concerns but concluded that, given the modest size of the proposed extension and its intended use, and the measures that had been put in place by the applicant, the proposal would result in minimal impact to the surrounding area. Members were concerned that further expansion of the site would be inappropriate, given the nature of Monksmead Road, the limited available parking and proximity to neighbouring properties.
Members therefore agreed that the proposal was acceptable, subject to the imposition of an Informative to advise of concerns that the site was at risk of being over-developed.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/0885 be determined by the Head of Planning & Environmental Services to ensure a condition which requires that no development shall commence until the parking facilities have been provided in accordance with unnumbered location plan received on 3 August 2012, and that the parking facilities shall be implemented and thereafter retained and maintained for that purpose only. The preliminary view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
The meeting closed at 4.07pm having commenced at 2.00pm.
CHAIRMAN
13 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 18TH DECEMBER 2012 REPORT BY THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
APPEALS
1. Appeals Lodged
I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been lodged:-
2. Written Representations/Householder Appeals Service
DC/11/2631 Erection of two private family stables, hay store and tack room incorporating use of existing lawful highway access and change of use from agricultural to private equestrian use. Spring Acres, West End Lane, Henfield For: Mr T Tingey
DC/12/0136 Retrospective application for demolition of glasshouse and erection of conservatory (Full Planning). The Annexe, Church View, The Street, Thakeham, Pulborough, RH20 3EP. For: Mrs Lavinia Bunyan
DC/12/1225 Change of Use to A5 fast food/hot food takeaway. 21 West Street, Storrington, Pulborough, RH20 4DZ. For: Mr Irfan Yildiram
DC/12/0342 Erection of a pair of 3-bedroom semi-detached dwellings. 24 Oakfield Road, Cowfold, Horsham, RH13 8AD. For: Mr Joe Dorman
DC/12/0930 Demolition and reinstatement of side boundary wall and the erection of a detached dwelling house with detached double garage together with improvements to access road and associated landscaping. Land Rear of Waterside House 17 Lower Street, Pulborough For: Mr Brent Dowson
DC/12/1418 Single storey flat roofed side extension. Henfield House, Croft Lane, Henfield, BN5 9TT. For: Mr and Mrs M Lewis
DC/12/0317 Demolition of existing dwelling and replacement with 3 No. 5-bed houses with ancillary garaging and hardstanding. Yaffles, Rock Road, Storrington, Pulborough, RH20 3AF. For: Mr John Matuszewski
DC/12/0908 Erection of 2 No. earth bunds Walden Hall, Cowfold Road, West Grinstead, Horsham, RH13 8LY. For: Mr David Bostock
3. Appeal Decisions
I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been determined:-
DC/12/1227 Fell 1 x Oak tree Oaklea, Harborough Gorse, West Chiltington, Pulborough, RH20 2RU. For: Mr Clive Phelan Appeal: DISMISSED (Delegated)
DC/10/1457 Outline planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of up to 78 residential units, associated ground preparation works, highways, access and the first phase of the Sandgate Country Park. RMC Engineering Services Ltd Workshops, Storrington Road, Washington, Pulborough, RH20 4AG. For: Cemex Appeal: ALLOWED (Committee) APPENDIX A/ 1 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th December 2012 The part demolition of the existing food store and some adjacent shop units in Old Mill Square including some shop units, office space, a DEVELOPMENT: restaurant and a garage; and the construction of an extended food store including storage, plant and service areas, together with ancillary facilities including a 2 level car park. SITE: Old Mill Square Storrington West Sussex WARD: Chantry APPLICATION: DC/11/2334 APPLICANT: Mr Mark Dawkins on behalf of Waitrose & Kiafield Properties
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Category of Development
RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to conditions and the completion of a Sec 106 Agreement to secure monies for the re-surfacing of Old Mill Drive and air quality mitigation measures, off-site highway works and a Low Emission Strategy Agreement.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the part demolition of the existing foodstore and some adjacent units in Old Mill Square, including some retail units and offices together with a restaurant and a garage and the construction of an extension to the foodstore, including storage, plant and service areas together with ancillary facilities. The existing floor area of the store would increase from 1,410sqm to 3,221sqm. The proposal would provide employment for an additional 80 staff.
1.2 The proposal also includes the construction of an additional car parking level to provide a total of 217 car parking spaces and the provision of customer toilets within the store which would be made available to the general public.
1.3 The proposal has been amended during the consideration of the application and a fundamental change to the original scheme is that the closure of Old Mill Drive is no longer proposed. However, the applicant has agreed to offer by way of a Section 106 Agreement a contribution towards the creation of a shared surface along Old Mill Drive. Within the
Contact Officer: Hazel Corke Tel: 01403 215177 APPENDIX A/ 1 - 2
proposed scheme a new mini-roundabout would be incorporated at the North Street junction and an upgrading of the existing pedestrian signalised crossing point in the High Street from a Pelican to a Puffin crossing.
1.4 Additional amendments to the scheme include:-
Reconfiguration of the store layout to incorporate the coffee shop at the Old Mill Drive/Old Mill Square corner. Introduction of flint panels, glazed strips and brick piers to the Old Mill Drive elevation. Reduction in scale of the glazed feature housing the escape stair to Old Mill Drive Additional landscaping throughout the scheme Upper level car park deck set back on the northern boundary Creation of a new vehicular access off Mill Lane Stair and ramp access from car park to pathway at Dems/Havant House Inclusion of full height glazing on the Old Mill Drive/Old Mill square elevation Inclusion of curved canopy to the Old Mill Square entrance
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.5 The application site is located within the centre of Storrington, immediately to the north of the High Street. It is bounded to the west by Old Mill Drive and to the east by Mill Lane and School Hill.
1.6 On the western boundary of Old Mill Drive is an area of trees and grassland which runs down to the River Stor. A footbridge crosses the river which links Old Mill Drive to a car park and the library further to the west which is directly accessed off North Street. A bus layby adjoins the site.
1.7 The surrounding development to the north of the site is mixed in character with elements of both residential and commercial development. To the east, the site is bounded by residential properties which front onto School Hill and to the south there are retail and commercial premises which front onto the High Street.
1.8 Access to the existing store is from within Old Mill Square which is a relatively small partially enclosed 1960s two storey development with retail and commercial premises at ground and first floor levels.
1.9 The site is situated on land which rises gently to the north and it has a total site area of 1.39ha. Whilst the application site does not fall within the Conservation Area, the area of open space along the western boundary of Old Mill Drive does lie within the designated area. The application site lies just outside the boundary of the Storrington Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) which was declared in December 2010. The boundary of the AQMA includes the actual measured areas of exceedance at the Manley’s Hill/School Hill roundabout and extends along the main road through the village encompassing the main traffic routes into and out of the village.
1.10 The application site also forms part of a wider area known as the Old Mill Drive Diamond site which is considered an important area for the provision of services in Storrington and for its’ wider surrounding communities.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 3
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework – Delivering Sustainable Development – Sections 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10 & 12 are relevant to the proposal.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP13, CP15 & CP17 of the Core Strategy are relevant to the determination of the application.
2.4 Policies DC8, DC9, DC12, DC34 & DC40 of the General Development Control Policies are relevant to the determination of the application.
2.5 Of particular relevance to the application is the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD 2008 which provides detailed site-specific planning guidance. The over-arching aim of the brief is to guide prospective developers through the Council’s development plan policy, encourage efficient and effective joined-up future development and promote stronger links between the site and the wider town centre.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.6 Nothing of relevance to the application.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
Given the complexity of the proposal the full responses of key consultees are repeated below. The comments also demonstrate the evolution of the scheme as the amended plans have been submitted and highlight which issues remain, if any. These outstanding concerns are then addressed in the ‘Planning Assessment’ section of this report.
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 The Head of Strategic & Community Planning
Initial comments
The proposal seeks the part demolition of the existing food store and some adjacent shop units in Old Mill Square and the construction of an extended food store including storage, plant and service areas, together with ancillary facilities including a 2 level car park. The application needs to be considered against the Local Development Framework particularly the Core Strategy 2007, General Development Control Policies 2007 and the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief Supplementary Planning Document 2008 (SPD).
The most relevant policies for determining this application are Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 and Policy DC34 of the General Development Control Policies 2007, alongside the principles set out in the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD.
Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 sets out that appropriate development that improves town and village centres will be encouraged, provided that they help them to adapt and reinforce their role in meeting needs, acting as the focus for a range of activities and do not cause unacceptable levels of disturbance to the local community or damage the townscape character. It is fundamental that the retail vitality and viability of the centre is not undermined and, therefore, the Council will resist any proposals which may potentially damage or undermine the retail use of the centre. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 4
In this case, it is considered, particularly from a sustainability perspective, that such a development within the heart of the town centre, as long as it is well connected to the rest of the town centre, will have a positive effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, in that it will help to increase trade to the smaller businesses in the town centre through the retention of shoppers who would usually travel elsewhere to do their weekly shop and by drawing people from outside Storrington into the town centre. It is therefore, considered, that the proposal complies, in principle, with Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 and Principle 2 of the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD. You may, however, wish to seek the views of the Town Centre Manager on this matter.
Policy DC34 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 sets out that proposed development will be permitted within the Defined Town and Village Centres provided that the proposal does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross and that if the proposal connects and relates well to and does not undermine the vitality and viability of, the existing centre. As the proposed site is located within the Defined Town and Village Centre Boundary of Storrington, included within the Primary Retail Frontages and total sales area does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross (21,382 square feet); the proposal therefore complies, in principle, Policy DC34 and Principle 3 of the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD.
Regarding the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD, the applicant fails to make any reference to the SPD specifically within the application. Although this is concerning, when looking at the proposal against the SPD, it is considered that the proposal complies, in principle, with the SPD. Of particular importance when considering the application is the matter of the pedestrianisation of Old Mill Drive against the impact on the Storrington Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The SPD, which was adopted before the Storrington AQMA was designated, states that ‘The full or partial pedestrianisation of Old Mill Drive will be highly encouraged…’ Full or partial pedestrianisation is still encouraged; however, I would suggest consulting Environmental Health over this matter, as this may be dependent on comments regarding health issues.
In addition to the above, the following policies need to be considered. Policy DC12 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 needs to be considered as the western and southern parts of the site either fall within or are adjacent to the Storrington Conservation Area. Therefore, development that affects a Conservation Area is required to preserve but also enhance, where possible, the character of the area. This is also reflected in Principle 1 of the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD. I suggest you seek the views of the Design and Conservation Officer on this matter. Policy DC40 and DC41 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 need to be considered to ensure the development provides safe and adequate access for all. It appears that the proposal complies, in principle, to these policies as the applicant has submitted a thorough transport assessment, a green travel plan and the proposal provides additional car parking to the existing.
Further policies that need to be taken into account are Policy CP3 of the Core Strategy 2007 which seeks to improve the quality of new development in order to gain community support as a beneficial addition to the local environment; Policy DC8 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 which favours developments which ensure that measures are incorporated that reduce the impact of climate change and carbon dioxide emissions; and also Policy DC9, of General Development Control Policies 2007 document, which sets out various development principles which permissions need to take account of to ensure high quality development. As the case officer you are the best person to assess these issues.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 5
In conclusion, the proposal appears to comply, in principle, to the relevant policy, however I suggest you seek the views of the Town Centre Manager, the Design and Conservation Officer and Environmental Health on the specific matters raised above. The site specific matters raised above are best judged by you as a case officer after a site visit and we suggest that you are mindful of the aims of the relevant policies and the above comments. I would be happy to offer further guidance if necessary.
Additional comments
Subsequent to discussions with the Case Officer regarding the policy position of this application, Strategic Planning would like to make the following additional comments.
The proposal needs to be assessed against Policy DC34 ‘New retail development within the defined town and village centres’, which seeks to maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of the centres by permitting appropriate new retail proposals whilst resisting any retail proposals which may potentially undermine their vitality and viability, either because of their nature, size or location.
There are two reasons for this. Firstly, the site is located within the defined town and village centre boundary, as defined by the adopted Core Strategy 2007 and secondly, the proposal does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross (21,382 square feet).
Policy DC34 states that proposals exceeding 2,500 square metres gross will be considered against the criteria in Policy DC35 ‘New retail and leisure development outside the defined town and village centres.’ However, due to the fact that there is already an existing amount of retail floorspace, the focus, from a policy perspective, is on the impact any additional retail floorspace would have on the vitality and viability of the existing centre, not the impact of the total amount of retail floorspace (the existing plus the proposed). In this instance, the proposed additional retail floorspace does not exceed the 2,500 square metres gross as stated in Policy DC34. Therefore, Strategic Planning concludes there is no need to consider the proposal against Policy DC35.
If there was not an existing amount of retail floorspace and the proposed amount of retail floorspace exceeded 2,500 square metres gross, the proposal would then need to be considered against the criteria in Policy DC35, rather than Policy DC34.
It is understood that the 2,500 square metre gross threshold stated in Policy DC34 derives from Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres paragraph 3.23. This is in regards to impact assessments being undertaken for all retail and leisure developments over 2,500 square metres gross floorspace, albeit for sites in an edge-of-centre or out-of- centre location.
3.2 The Head of Public Health & Licensing
Initial comments
NOISE
1. The following comments are made in respect of the Noise Impact Report prepared by Environmental Equipment Corporation Ltd referenced TM/EC11439-004.
2. The noise sensitive residential receptors in Havant House (no.s 1, 3 and 4) have not been included in the assessment. The residents at this location are likely to be the closest to the development site.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 6
3. In section 3.01, Traffic and Vehicular Noise, it is stated that a 55 dB LAeq 16 hour is generally considered an acceptable external daytime noise level. A maximum level of 50 dB LAeq 16 hour is considered a more appropriate standard to be applied as this is the threshold for moderate annoyance in the World Health Organisation guidelines for community noise. It is accepted that current noise levels have been measured in excess of both the 50 and 55 LAeq 16 hour levels on Old Mill Drive, however, the corresponding community response to these noise levels should be explicit and noise level targets should reflect a positive approach to minimising negative community impacts.
4. Assessment standards for traffic and vehicular noise, plant noise, noise from deliveries and from the generator have all been expressed as time averaged levels, Laeq, t. Short duration, high level noise can be lost in these noise descriptors and there should be a consideration of LAmax levels at night as these can have a significant impact on sleep disturbance.
5. The unmanned measurements at MP1 began at 14.40 on 12 October 2011 and ended at 07.55 on 13 October 2011. The measurement period spanned 17 hours and 15 minutes. Derived from these measurements is a 12 hour day-time average noise level (0700-1900), a 4 hour evening average (1900-2300) and an 8 hour night-time average level (2300- 0700). A day-time 16 hour average has also been estimated. The day-time levels that have been derived include a period between 07.55 and 14.40 for which there are no measurements. Given that this time of day is likely to have a different noise climate from the rest of the measured period, there is uncertainty over the day-time averages quoted.
6. The shortened measurement technique in the document “Calculation of Road Traffic Noise” which was adopted to calculate an LAeq 16 hour as stated in section 4.04 requires 3 consecutive hourly L10 measurements which are averaged and this average level is then used to derive an 18 hour L10. There are no measurements or calculations to verify the correct procedure was followed and then how the 18 hour-averaged measurement was converted to a 16 hour-averaged level nor how the L10 was converted to an Laeq. These figures must therefore be considered with caution.
7. It is noted that in the BS4142 assessment for the plant noise a tonal correction of +5dB has not been applied in determining the rating level. It has been assumed in the assessment that there is no tonal or intermittent character to the noise.
8. It has been assumed that there will be up to 6 articulated delivery vehicles a day over a similar period as existing. This is a 50% increase. The car park is increasing from 117 to 224 spaces and the trading floor area is increasing from 1410 m2 to 3220.5 m2. It is questioned whether a 50% increase for deliveries is an appropriate estimate to be inputted into the assessment of future impacts. It is also noted that the assessment has assumed one delivery vehicle in the period between 0700 and 0800. If more deliveries occur during these hours once operations at the store become established, the impacts will not be represented by the assessment.
9. It is understood that a home delivery service will be offered. There is no reference to this in the noise assessment.
10. The noise impacts during demolition and construction phases will be considerable but these have not been addressed in the noise assessment. The implementation of the considerate constructors scheme is welcomed however the detail on noise control during the works has not been made clear. During the demolition and construction phases it would be necessary to control adverse environmental impacts by means of a construction environmental management plan (CEMP). The CEMP should have regard to best practice measures to control noise, dust and waste. Useful guidance for appropriate noise controls can be found in the British Standard BS 5228-1: 2009 Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites; and guidance for dust control is found in APPENDIX A/ 1 - 7
the Greater London Authority publication “The control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition” (2006).
11. This appraisal of the Report indicates there are some uncertainties over the noise impacts which would result from the proposed development. In any case, it is recommended that the following conditions are considered if you are minded to permit the application:
Deliveries to be restricted to 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, 0800-1800 on Saturdays and no deliveries on Sundays and Bank Holidays. A Construction Environmental Management plan to be submitted, approved, implemented and maintained for the demolition and construction phases.
LAND CONTAMINATION
1. The following comments are made with reference to the Land Contamination Assessment report by Hurst Peirce + Malcolm LLP reference job no. 17713 and the Initial Site Assessment report prepared by GRM referenced GRM/P4708/IA.1.
2. The GRM report comprises a desk top study, site walkover, an exploratory investigation, a contamination assessment, the development of a conceptual model and recommendations for remediation measures. It includes recommendations for further assessment. It is noted that in the GRM report, the site boundary subject to investigation does not coincide with the application site boundary.
3. One of the pollutant linkages relates to potential contamination of controlled waters (a major aquifer) and it is therefore recommended that the Environment Agency are consulted to ensure the report and its recommendations meet with their approval.
4. The reports conclusions and recommendations are accepted. Amongst other things, these are: Removal of fuel storage tanks Further investigation into the extent of hydrocarbon impacted soils Removal/remediation and validation of hydrocarbon impacted soils Further ground gas monitoring Further groundwater sampling Detailed quantitative risk assessment for contamination of controlled waters Gas precautions incorporated into the design of the ground floor slab Upgraded water pipes and trenches backfilled with inert material Site specific risk assessment to be carried out to protect ground workers during construction activities
AIR QUALITY
Background
1. The application site lies just outside the boundary of the Storrington Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The AQMA was formally declared in December 2010 due to exceedance of the UK Government Air quality objective for nitrogen dioxide. The exceedance is based on the annual average nitrogen dioxide concentrations measured at a number of monitoring sites within the village and is predominantly attributable to road traffic emissions.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 8
2. The boundary of the AQMA includes the actual measured areas of exceedance at the Manleys Hill/ School Hill roundabout and extends along the main road through the village encompassing the main traffic routes into and out of the village. Horsham District Council will be producing an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) during 2012 detailing measures intended to reduce pollution levels over the short, medium and long term.
3. Dispersion modelling of air quality data for Storrington indicates that, in order to comply with the air quality objective, the emission of oxides of nitrogen at the worst receptor location needs to be reduced by approximately 30%. This is a very challenging task and will be difficult to achieve. In view of this, all new development in Storrington and surrounding areas needs to be carefully assessed in terms of traffic generation and air quality impact. This must include the cumulative impact of all planned developments, including those whose individual impact may have been calculated as ‘negligible’.
Assessment of the Traffic Data
4. The impact of the proposed Waitrose extension on traffic and air quality has been submitted by way of the Air Quality Assessment (October 2011) and Transport Assessment (Issue 3: 7 November 2011). The modelled air quality impact predictions for the development are fundamentally based on traffic data from the Transport Assessment and it is, therefore, imperative that the traffic data is accurate. Much of the baseline traffic data and the trip generation calculations have been agreed by West Sussex County Council at pre-application stage.
5. The traffic data presented in the air quality assessment at Table 10: Summary of Traffic Data used in the Assessment (AADT) has raised some concerns in that the traffic data does not correlate in all cases with data derived from West Sussex County Council automatic traffic counters. Obviously there may be some variation in the data due to the different counting equipment used and the duration of the actual counting period. However, as an example, the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) value reported in the Applicant’s air quality assessment for West Street, Storrington (east of Rectory Road) in 2010 is 14,504 vehicles, whereas the WSCC automatic counter in West Street (east of Rectory Road) recorded an AADT (2010) of 17,249 vehicles, a difference of 2,745 vehicles per day. There is also a discrepancy between the two sets of data in relation to the quoted percentage of Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV), with the WSCC automatic counters indicating 3.0% and the Applicant 2.0%, at worst this translates to a difference of 227 HDV’s a day on West Street.
6. Whilst this example relates to just one location this is not considered an acceptable margin of error and we would recommend that all traffic data used in the Transport Assessment and the subsequent Air Quality Assessment are verified by WSCC to ensure confidence in all the data.
7. With regards to the trip generation data, this is a matter for WSCC to determine as part of the transport assessment process. The projected number of additional vehicles generated by the proposal is a key element in assessing the impact on air quality, however we would recommend that WSCC confirm that the projections are realistic given the scale of the development, the proposed number of additional car parking spaces and the current performance of the store in terms of customer numbers versus store size. This is relevant given the recent appeal decision in respect of Sainsbury’s, Sheffield (Appeal Ref: APP/J4423/A/10/2143547), where the Inspector required the Appellant to adjust their calculations for the predicted increase in traffic that would result from the proposal and to adopt ‘worst-case’ figures.
Assessment of Air Quality Data.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 9
8. The air quality assessment considers the air quality impacts of the construction and operational phases of the proposed development. The assessment relies on dispersion modelling to predict the impact of each phase based on traffic and air quality monitoring data. With any dispersion modelling a number of assumptions are made and inevitably the outputs of the model are influenced by those assumptions.
9. There are a number of aspects of the air quality assessment which have been queried with the consultant to clarify elements of the modelling process. Some of these have been addressed pre-application but the following aspects of the assessment are disputed.
10. The overall conclusions of the AQ assessment are that the incremental increase in traffic generated by the development will be mitigated by the incorporation of a new mini- roundabout at North Street. The Transport Assessment indicates that the new roundabout will increase average vehicle speeds, and consequently improve air quality, on Manleys Hill by reducing the blocking effect of west bound vehicles turning right into North Street. However, our contention is that whilst the proposed roundabout may be of some benefit, the overriding factor effecting congestion on Manleys Hill is that west-bound traffic has to give way to traffic from the right (School Hill), and any increase in traffic, particularly southbound on School Hill, will exacerbate congestion at this junction.
11. The predicted increase in average vehicle speeds on Manleys Hill, as a result of the introduction of the mini-roundabout, is 3kph. The AQ model predicts that this increase in speed will reduce nitrogen dioxide concentrations at the Manleys Hill/School Hill junction by approximately 6%. The predicted increase in speed is quoted as a 24-hour average for both east and west bound carriageways on Manleys Hill. Whilst this may be theoretically correct it is difficult to accept that an increase in speed of less than 2 mph as an average over a 24 hour period will make any significant difference to traffic congestion in practice. For this reason we do not accept that the introduction of a mini-roundabout at North Street, as a single measure, offers sufficient mitigation to offset the impact of the proposed scheme.
12. In order to predict pollutant concentrations of nitrogen dioxide associated with traffic in 2013 the AQ assessment has used emission factors published by the Department of Transport. The factors have indicated that emissions from vehicles on local roads would decrease as the fleet modernised. However evidence over recent years suggests that there is little evidence of a significant downward trend in nitrogen dioxide as had been predicted. In the recent planning appeal for Sainsbury’s, Sheffield (Appeal Ref: APP/J4423/A/10/2143547), the future emission factors were questioned and the inspector stated: “Under these circumstances, I consider that it would be reasonable to expect sensitivity tests to be undertaken on the outcome of the modelling, based on the possibility that the emissions reductions suggested by the Emission Factor Toolkit would not be realised.” The implications for the Waitrose air quality assessment are that the nitrogen dioxide concentrations predicted in 2013 may be higher than shown. The Applicant is therefore required to undertake sensitivity analysis, including an assessment of nitrogen dioxide levels at modelled receptors for 2013, assuming no reduction in background or traffic emission factors.
Impact of Closure of Old Mill Drive.
13. One principle of The Supplementary Planning Document ‘Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief’ (June 2008) was the potential pedestrianisation of Old Mill Drive to enhance links with the High Street and improve the public space. Whilst it was noted in the document that the site was within an area of poor air quality, the subsequent declaration of an Air Quality Management Area in Storrington in 2010 effectively means that the planning brief is now out of date. Under Planning Policy Statement 23, air quality APPENDIX A/ 1 - 10
is a material planning consideration particularly where the proposed development is inside, or adjacent to, a designated AQMA.
14. The impact on air quality of closing the section of Old Mill Drive, between the High Street and the existing bus turning facility, to through traffic has been detailed within the Air Quality Assessment. In terms of traffic, the closure of Old Mill Drive is predicted to place an additional 1660 vehicles per day on School Hill, an additional 615 vehicles on the High Street (east of Old Mill Drive) and will generate increased bus movements on School Hill, Fryern Road and Mill Lane. Whilst the number of buses involved may not be particularly significant, additional buses negotiating the Manleys’s Hill/School Hill roundabout is likely to cause further congestion and an increase in pollution. This would be counterproductive given that this junction currently suffers the highest nitrogen dioxide levels within the AQMA.
15. With the closure of Old Mill Drive additional traffic will cause an increase in pollution levels on School Hill. Whilst the AQ assessment predicts that the increase will be small, it is important to note that measured nitrogen dioxide levels at the south end of School Hill are currently very close to exceeding the UK air quality annual mean objective. (The measured concentration at 3 School Hill for 2010 was 38.0µg/m³ against the UK AQ objective of 40µg/m³). Should concentrations of nitrogen dioxide increase as a result of the development, either with or without the closure of Old Mill Drive, it may be necessary for the AQMA to be extended further along School Hill. This would be a retrograde step given that Horsham District Council, in conjunction with the Highways Authority, has been charged with reducing pollution levels within the existing AQMA.
16. On air quality grounds the Public Health and Licensing Department does not support the closure of Old Mill Drive as proposed.
Cumulative Effects of Development on Traffic and Air Quality.
17. The application has not considered the cumulative impact of other developments in the locality. This is relevant given that Storrington village is an important community hub for a number of other outlying villages and hamlets. PPS23 confirms that air quality deterioration may be cumulative and that it will be necessary to consider the effects of multiple developments on the air quality of an area. The Sainsbury’s Sheffield Appeal decision recently confirmed this requirement. This department would recommend that the Applicant be required to review both the traffic and air quality assessments taking into account the impact of committed developments both within Storrington village itself and in outlying locations for which Storrington is likely to be the hub.
Impact of Construction Phase on Air Quality.
18. The Air Quality Assessment, submitted as part of the application, sets criteria for assessing the impact of the construction phase in terms of dust and air quality. It indicates that some properties are at risk of dust soiling and /or elevated levels of fine particles (PM10). The actual impact depends on a number of variables including the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures and site management practices. The Public Health & Licensing Department would recommend that a condition be attached to any consent requiring the Applicant to follow ‘best practice’ as contained in the Greater London Authority ‘The control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition Best Practice Guidance’ (November 2006).
Proposed Mitigation Measures.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 11
19. In addition to the North Street roundabout the Applicant has proposed the development of a Travel Plan and Low Emissions Strategy (LES) as further mitigation. An LES is defined as a package of measures designed to help mitigate the transport impacts of development and was introduced by Defra in January 2010 as ‘Good Practice Guidance’. Low Emission Strategies are used to complement other design and mitigation options, such as travel planning and the provision of public transport infrastructure. They can incorporate policy measures and/or require financial contributions towards the delivery of low emission transport projects or strategic monitoring or assessment initiatives.
20. The Applicant’s proposed LES demonstrates limited commitment to proposed initiatives and lacks defined timescales. The principle of Low Emission Strategies was discussed with the Applicant at a pre-application meeting and a draft LES schedule drawn up. This schedule detailed the minimum LES commitment required by Horsham District Council for a development of this scale, and the Public Health & Licensing department would strongly recommend that it be attached as a planning condition should the application be approved. The LES schedule is attached at Appendix A.
Air Quality Impact Summary
21. The Public Health & Licensing Department have a number of concerns regarding the impact on air quality predicted by the Applicant in respect of this development. In particular there are queries over some of the assumptions underlying the modelling data relating to the baseline traffic counts, future traffic levels and the choice of emission factors. We also question whether, in practice, the proposed North Street roundabout will relieve congestion at the Manley’s Hill/School Hill junction as much as is predicted given that the projected increase in traffic speed is marginal and that vehicles on Manley’s Hill will still have to give priority to traffic from the right at the roundabout. In addition the Applicant has failed to assess the cumulative impact of other developments in the area on traffic and air quality. It is, therefore, considered unlikely that the Air Quality Assessment, submitted with the application, reflects the ‘worst-case’ scenario, which is an important factor when considering the overall significance of air quality impacts.
22. The proposed mitigation in respect of the proposal is not accepted as being adequate and should be reviewed in light of the above comments.
2nd comments
Thank you for the notification of amended plans for this development.
NOISE
There are no additional submissions that amend the previous report on noise impacts from the proposed development. Therefore the comments made in the memo dated 20 February 2012, together with the recommended conditions noted below, remain pertinent:
Deliveries to be restricted to 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, 0800-1800 on Saturdays and no deliveries on Sundays and Bank Holidays. A Construction Environmental Management Plan to be submitted, approved, implemented and maintained for the demolition and construction phases.
LAND CONTAMINATION
There are no additional submissions relating to land contamination and the previous comments remain valid. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 12
LIGHT
The External Lighting Statement dated April 2011 produced by Building Services Solutions Limited contains some information on the impacts from artificial lighting resulting from the development. However, the locations of the 8m high luminaires have not been indicated on any of the plans. There are residential properties in close proximity to the store and car park, in particular to the north at Havant House, Mill Lane. Whilst it is noted that the report states that baffle plates will be installed to minimise light pollution to adjacent properties, it is always preferable to design out problems to ensure they do not occur in the first place. It is not clear from the report whether this has been done.
There are no details of the lighting arrangements at the service yard. There are residential properties in Old Mill Drive that could be affected by lighting in this area and without any details it is difficult to assess these impacts.
AIR QUALITY
1. Amended plans for the above development include an amended Air Quality Assessment (dated September 2012). The amended assessment addresses the majority of the outstanding air quality issues raised by the Public Health department as part of the consultation response dated 20th February 2012.
2. The baseline traffic data has been updated by the Applicant and is now in accordance with West Sussex County Council automatic traffic count data.
3. With regards to the trip generation data, the projected number of additional vehicles generated by the proposal is a key element in assessing the impact on air quality, however the Applicant has indicated that the proposed development would reduce 24-hour flows generated by the site (compared to traffic generated by existing uses). WSCC have confirmed that these projections are acceptable and therefore this authority is not in a position to question these figures.
The Applicant’s air quality assessment states that, “the proposed development would reduce traffic flows across a number of critical junctions, would not significantly change the proportion of heavy duty vehicles and would reduce congestion. It is therefore concluded that the proposed development would be beneficial in air quality terms, and would serve to reduce annual mean concentrations of nitrogen dioxide within the AQMA”. (paragraph 3.7).
This assertion that the proposed development will be beneficial in air quality terms can only be accepted on the basis that the predicted reduction in traffic flows generated by the site, as agreed by West Sussex County Council, are accurate. The district planning authority (DPA) may wish to consider the merits of imposing a suitable condition ensuring that, should traffic generated by the development be significantly in excess of that forecast, further air quality mitigation measures would be required.
4. The issues that were raised by Public Health & Licensing regarding the technical aspects of the air quality assessment process have been responded to within the amended air quality assessment report (September 2012).
5. On air quality grounds Public Health & Licensing could not support the closure of Old Mill Drive as had been proposed. As part of the revised scheme Old Mill Drive would remain open to traffic, which will effectively overcome the air quality concerns associated with the displacement of additional traffic onto School Hill.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 13
6. The requirement to assess the cumulative effects of development on traffic and air quality has in effect been negated by the Applicant’s predicted reduction in traffic flows for this development. Please refer to paragraph 3 above regarding trip generation data.
7. We welcome the Applicant’s commitment to a Low Emissions Strategy and note the summary of measures listed in paragraph 4.2 of the amended air quality assessment (September 2012). We would require the measures to be incorporated into an LES Agreement which would include set dates for periodic review of the LES. This will ensure that the strategy is based upon 'best available knowledge' and that the measures included as future commitments are incorporated into the strategy at the earliest appropriate opportunity. The LES Agreement should be implemented by way of a planning condition should the application be approved.
8. For mitigation of construction impacts we would recommend imposition of a planning condition requiring submission of a full Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), should the application be approved.
3rd & final comments
Thank you for forwarding the comments from Ian Gledhill, Strategic Planning Officer West Sussex County Council, regarding the appraisal of the applicant’s transport assessment and information provided by 3rd parties on traffic generation for the proposed development. The following comments on air quality impacts are made with reference to WSCC’s submission. For completeness the other potential environmental impacts from noise, land contamination and light are also commented on to supplement the memos dated 20 February and 9 October 2012.
AIR QUALITY
9. Amended plans for the above development includes an amended Air Quality Assessment (dated September 2012). The amended assessment addresses the outstanding air quality issues raised by the Public Health department as part of the consultation response dated 20th February 2012.
10. With regards to the traffic data, the Highway Authority have reassessed the Applicant’s Transport Assessment and considered concerns raised by 3rd parties relating to the trip rates applied from TRICS. They have concluded that the Transport Assessment is acceptable and does take into account a worst case situation.
11. The projected number of additional vehicles generated by the proposal is a key element in assessing the impact on air quality, however the Highway Authority has confirmed that the proposed development would generate less traffic per day overall when compared to the consented use of the site.
12. The assertion by the Applicant that the proposed development will be “beneficial in air quality terms” is based on the predicted reduction in traffic flows generated by the site when compared to existing uses. The district planning authority (DPA) may wish to consider the merits of imposing a suitable condition ensuring that, should traffic generated by the development be significantly in excess of that forecast, further air quality mitigation measures would be required.
13. On air quality grounds Public Health & Licensing could not support the closure of Old Mill Drive as had been proposed. As part of the revised scheme Old Mill Drive would remain open to traffic, which will effectively overcome the air quality concerns associated with the displacement of additional traffic onto School Hill. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 14
14. The requirement to assess the cumulative effects of development on traffic and air quality has in effect been negated by the Applicant’s predicted reduction in traffic flows for this development.
15. We welcome the Applicant’s commitment to a Low Emissions Strategy and note the summary of measures listed in paragraph 4.2 of the amended air quality assessment (September 2012). We would require the measures to be incorporated into an LES Agreement which would include set dates for periodic review of the LES. This will ensure that the strategy is based upon 'best available knowledge' and that the measures included as future commitments are incorporated into the strategy at the earliest opportunity. The LES Agreement should be implemented by way of a Section 106 planning agreement should the application be approved.
16. For mitigation of construction impacts we would recommend imposition of a planning condition requiring submission of a full Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prior to commencement of the development, should the application be approved.
NOISE
17. As noted in the memo dated 9 October 2012, the amended plans did not change the previous report on noise impacts from the proposed development. Therefore the comments made in the memo dated 20 February 2012, together with the recommended conditions noted below, remain pertinent: Deliveries to be restricted to 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, 0800-1800 on Saturdays and no deliveries on Sundays and Bank Holidays. A Construction Environmental Management Plan to be submitted, approved, implemented and maintained for the demolition and construction phases (as noted in paragraph 8 above).
LAND CONTAMINATION
18. There are no additional submissions relating to land contamination and the previous comments remain valid.
LIGHT
19. The External Lighting Statement dated April 2011 produced by Building Services Solutions Limited has been supplemented with an External Lighting Strategy Drawing no. 113-373- sk95 which details the position and height of the luminaires. Sufficient information has been supplied regarding the exterior lighting and I have no further comment to make.
3.3 Design & Conservation Officer
Initial comments
I have the following concerns regarding the impact on the character and setting of the conservation area and general design of the proposals:
The increase in bulk and height and location of the proposed store, including the removal of the trees and turning area, gives an appearance of a particularly large and imposing impact on the character of the street, as well as the parkland area to the western side of the brook. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 15
The materials and detailing of the Old Mill Drive elevation appear stark, causing the building to be particularly prominent and intrusive to the street and detrimental to the setting of the conservation area.
The location of the stores entrance to the rear (car park) side of the building does not help to present an active frontage to the street. It does not help to create a linked up town centre experience.
The “closed in” nature of the bottom floor of the car park is unconvincing; I am unsure how will this present a high quality environment that is safe and legible to use for all.
The transition between the existing shops at 1-2 Dams House and 1-2 Havant House and the rear of the car park is poor.
The shared space proposals are acceptable in principle. There aim to help join Old Mill Drive to the village centre is welcomed. The space should enable a successful balance between pedestrian and vehicular movement, as well as allow a flexible use of the area. At this stage, the details need refining however this could be controlled by condition and should be subject to the scrutiny of the landscape architect.
Although there are benefits to the scheme, the improvements in my opinion, do not outweigh the negative aspects of the design of the building and car park as set out above. Therefore, in conclusion, the application detracts from the character of the conservation area and does not meet criteria a,c,d,e,f,g,I,j,k of DC9. I therefore raise an objection.
2nd comments
These comments focus on the previous concerns raised on my consultation response. I note that the application has been amended and this consultation response focuses on those areas where design concerns were previously raised.
Relevant policies: DC9, DC12; NPPF, specifically chapter 7: requiring good design and 12: conserving and enhancing the historic environment; English Heritage guidance “The setting of Heritage Assets”.
Old Mill Drive elevation
Concern was previously expressed regarding the elevation facing Old Mill Drive, especially in relation to the detail and prominence facing the street and the conservation area to the east of Old Mill Drive. The elevation has been amended to include flint panels, reflecting local vernacular materials found in Storrington and the South Downs. The central glazed access has been reduced in size, reducing the impact on the street and the previous dominance of this element of the scheme. A small amount of glazing has been added to the corner element of the façade to integrate the entrance into Old Mill Square and the café use internally. This helps to add an element of connection between the activity inside and the street scene. Further landscape screening has been introduced to stipple the effect of the blank elevation. These alterations have reduced the impact of the development on the street, and thus impact on the setting of the conservation area adjacent, as viewed travelling over the bridge towards the site. Although within the conservation area and contributing positively to it, the river corridor is not a focal reason for designation of the conservation area. It is considered that the changes to the design have alleviated some of the previous concerns, as such the design of the development facing Old Mill Drive is considered to be no more harmful to the significance of the setting of the conservation area than the existing bus stop, garage, and shopping parade which currently is viewable from the conservation area, and has a minor negative impact. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 16
Thus, the design of the elevation is considered to preserve the setting of the conservation area.
Transition between Dams House and Havant House
The scheme has been amended to include a ramp and direct access from the car park. Planting has been introduced to help soften the transition between the two spaces. This is acceptable.
As discussed above, the elevation facing Old Mill Drive is likely to preserve the setting of the conservation area the public realm improvements to Old Mill Drive (subject to detailed design) is likely to improve the character of the conservation area. In conclusion, I raise no objection to the development.
3.4 Landscape Officer
Initial comments
Whilst I have no objection in principle to an extended store in this location I consider the development proposals as currently proposed will result in adverse material landscape and visual impact due to its overall layout, scale, mass and form. I do not see in policy terms how I can advise the landscape of the conservation area is conserved and enhanced. I also have number of concerns about the quality of detailed design of the shared space, lower part of the Old Mill Driive.
In terms of the relevant provisions of National Planning Policy Framework I am not satisfied that the development overall secures good landscape /public realm design or 'appropriate landscaping', enhances biodiversity or ensures local distinctiveness is taken account of.
1. Mill Lane- The walls of the decked car park will not be effectively mitigated/softened the low shrub and fastigiate growing hornbeam tree planting within a raised bed due to it being only mostly 1m width and even narrower in some places. I cannot see how this tree planting or shrub planting can successfully establish within this environment- issues include insufficient tree rooting area, or space for a natural shaped canopy, even with the Frans Fontaine variety and potential problems with drying out of the raised bed unless irrigation is ensured. A greater width of planting must be provided for here and a raised bed avoided. The visual setting of the existing cedar tree will be adversely affected by a 2.5 m retaining wall on 2 sides in close proximity to its outer canopy. There is no provision for climbing plants to the wall or shade tolerant shrub planting
2. Old Mill Drive adjacent to the northern part of the store and the service yards- I am concerned about the visually dominating impact of the building and service yard walls in relation to the intimate riverside open space, The patterning and recessing of blank walls of the store shown on the Feb visualisations do not make any significant difference to addressing their visual impact and the same problems apply with planting in some of the raised beds as on the Mill Lane boundary. In one section the bed is as narrow as 900mm.
The use of a proprietary vertical green wall system to blank walls is still sought. I have not had an explanation of why this could not be provided
3. Boundary with Dems and Havant House- The carpark wall will present a harsh, ugly boundary to the development unmitigated by planting. Provision must be made to allow for a strong landscape structure of tree planting and understorey shrub planting in this location to to soften the walls and enhance the quality of the pedestrian walkway, Trees should be APPENDIX A/ 1 - 17 of at least medium size and not narrow fastigiate varieties. At present all that is shown on the architects drawings is a narrow raised shrub bed across part of the area which will have very little impact.( this bed is not included anyway on the landscape drawings)
4. Green roof tree planting on the upper storey of the carpark has been recommended previously to the applicants on a number of occasions (eg located at the centre of each group of 4 car parking bays and in the paved boundary with the upper storey of the building) to visually break up the impact of car parking and the building as seen from surrounding residential properties and to enhance the green infrastructure of the site. This appears to never been given due consideration. It should be technically feasible to provide and in any case the applicant has not demonstrated that it is not possible
5. The creation of a more pedestrian friendly environment, whether this be a shared surface with traffic still permitted or future pedestrianisation to the lower part of Old Mill Drive is fully supported. However the detailed design of this area needs further consideration. The heavily patterned design, including bands across the road and around the tree grilles and the use of square flags does not seem an appropriate design response to ensure sensitive integration with the adjacent riverside and historic environment nor provide a scheme that enhances local distinctiveness. I fear it could look like an "anywhere design''. There were previous suggestions made for the use of sandstone setts that have not been taken account of Existing features/memorials in the current square at the junction with the high street do not seem to have been taken account of. The drawing is in precise about a bus stop at the junction with the High Street- this needs to be sensitively designed if to be provided here. I do not consider the fastigiate hornbeam avenue will integrate well with the riverside space and would expect to see an alternative species with a somewhat broader crown considered.
The layout and quality of materials to be used in this area must be addressed before any planning permission is granted
Overall I would expect to see some significant amendments to this scheme before I could advise no objection to the proposals- I would be happy to attend a meeting to discuss further if this would be helpful. The final precise planting details (some species choices need to be considered further and written specification provided) and a detailed landscape management plan should be conditioned
2nd comments
Summary
Whilst it is recognised that the existing Waitrose store is not an attractive building and has certain adverse townscape and landscape impacts currently, a number of important landscape issues/ concerns in respect of the development proposals which I have raised previously through the course of the application have been either ignored or not adequately addressed by the applicant. Whilst I fully support the principle of enhancements to the lower part of Old Mill Drive I do not think a high quality of landscape design is demonstrated by the developers indicative proposals (too much emphasis on a tree lined 'roadway' as opposed to a more considered design of focal spaces along it), nor do I think a high quality of materials will be achievable, given the limited finance so far offered to HDC to undertake the works ourselves. In addition I consider other softening new planting associated with the store , is too restricted to relatively narrow planting beds on Mill Lane and Old Mill Lane , and is therefore inadequate. I would therefore be of the APPENDIX A/ 1 - 18 view at present the 'enhancements' would not outweigh other adverse impacts and on balance I continue to register an objection to the application. It is accepted a landscape reason for refusal on its own may not necessarily be sustainable but it could be considered a reason for refusal in combination with others, if there were reasonable grounds for these. However If an adequate contribution can be secured for a high quality landscape/public realm design of Old Mill Drive this could more favourably alter the balance of my considerations
1. Boundary with Old Mill Drive-
I remain concerned about the visually dominating impact of the extended store and the service yard walls on the character of the small intimate riverside space. I do not think the proposals demonstrate that they will result in conservation and enhancement of the landscape of this part of the conservation area and the green setting it provides, especially taking account of the loss of mature trees from both the current roundabout and the encroachment into the open space and associated loss of mature trees from the bus turning area which have a collective value, despite the new planting proposals.
I have consistently argued for the long length of blank sevice yard and store walls to be given a softer green wall/facade treatment. This has been steadfastly ignored by the developers and no explanation has been given as to why they cannot consider this, yet this was also recommended by WCEC Architects in their independent Design Advice Report to Chis Carey. Whilst flint is a local walling material I do not think the pastiche looking large flint panels and associated brick walls, in combination with rather fussy ornamental landscaping in narrow beds will conserve and enhance local character and promote local distinctiveness. This should not be something left to a detailed landscape condition to resolve without a clear commitment to a different design approach from the applicant
4. Old Mill Drive
I have previously set out my concerns with the quality of the design for the enhancements. I am nonetheless working with Chris Carey (HDC property), and his consultants, in advance of the committee to establish the principles of an acceptable scheme and agree what a suitable commuted sum would be to carry out the work ourselves. It will be very important to ensure a fully coordinated scheme between works Waitrose will do and work we may do and I would be looking to ensure this through discharge of any landscape conditions. At the moment also the boundary between Waitrose construction and what HDC will do with a commuted sum contribution is not identified on any of the submitted plans. It is strongly recommended that this boundary is clearly identified now and I would suggest the logic would be that the developer is responsible for the construction of all planting beds and walls , steps and ramp adjacent to the building and service yards, for the main entrance steps and for the carriageway as far south as and including the bus turning circle and planted island, but that all the rest of the Old Mill Drive south of the turning circle and all works within the riverside section of conservation area be the responsibility of HDC.
5. Mill Lane
I have previously highlighted the difficulties of establishing Carpinus betulus ' Frans Fontaine' within a narrow restricted planting bed. The applicants informally submitted info and photos to show how they have implemented this tree planting in a narrow bed elsewhere successfully at Crewkerne Waitrose store in Somerset, including provision of irrigation. My understanding this planting has been there 5-10 years. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 19
Whilst clearly these trees have become successfully established I continue to have a concern about their suitability in the longer term for what is a crucial landscape boundary at a Mill Lane. I believe, having also considered this matter with Will Jones the arboricultural officer, there could be a risk that the trees could become top heavy above the height of the carpark wall in the long term with an insubstantial root plate in the narrowest sections of the planting bed and liable to wind throw. I therefore recommended an alternative strategy where the semi mature size Carpinus fastigiata are planted more closely spaced to grow together and then be maintained as a hedge to a height equivalent to just above car height on the upper storey of the car park or through use of instant hedge planting. The requested commitment sought on this matter has not given, with the precise planting and irrigation details only to be agreed by condition.
6. Boundary of the carpark with Dems and Havant house
My request for tree planting along this boundary which could have softened this area and could have been done with widely spaced and lightly foliaged choice of tree species has not been addressed. This could be done in a way that avoids screening of commercial properties. The current proposals with some shrub planting and allowance for ramped access down from the carpark to the pedestrian route are only a slight improvement on the previous proposal with regard to the precise planting data.
Without prejudice to the committeees decision I would recommend the following conditions and note to applicant :
L1 (b Hard and soft landscaping
Notwithstanding the submitted landscape proposals shown on plans..... prior to the commencement of development full details of hard and soft landscaping works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall be submitted concurrently as a complete scheme, unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority, and shall comprise:
· Planting and seeding plans and schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers · Tree pit and staking/underground guying details · A written hard and soft specification (National Building Specification compliant) of planting (including ground preparation, cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment) Existing and proposed levels. · Hard surfacing materials: layout, colour, size, texture, coursing and levels · Walls and railings: location, type, heights and materials · Minor artefacts and structures – location, size and colour and type of street furniture, signage, refuse units and lighting columns and lanterns
The approved scheme shall be implemented in full accordance with these details. Planting shall be carried out according to a timetable to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development.
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.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 20
Reason : To ensure a satisfactory development in the interests of amenity in accordance with Policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007)
Trenches and Underground services
Prior to the commencement of development details of all underground trenching requirements for services, including the positions of soakaways, service ducts, foul, grey and storm water systems, manhole covers and all other underground service facilities, and required ground excavations there for, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. These details shall demonstrate effective coordination with the landscape scheme submitted pursuant to condition ...., and with existing trees on the site. All such underground services shall be installed in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect roots of important trees and hedgerows on the site in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) and to ensure provision of a satisfactory landscape scheme.
Landscape Management and Maintenance plan
Within 6 months of the commencement of the development a detailed long term 25 year Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan for all landscape areas shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing.
The plan shall include: · Aims and Objectives · A description of Landscape Components · Management Prescriptions · Details of maintenance operations and their timing · Details of the parties/orgainisations who will be maintain and manage the site, to include a plan delineating the areas that they will be responsible for
The plan shall demonstrate full integration of landscape, biodiversity and arboricultural considerations. The areas of planting shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan, unless any variation is approved in writing by the LPA.
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development and in the interests of amenity and nature conservation in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
Note to Applicant
Prior to the formal submission of detailed hard and soft landscape proposals pursuant to condition no ... above the developers Landscape Architect is strongly recommended to meet with HDC's Landscape Architect to discuss the proposals, both to ensure there is effective coordination between/a unified design approach is achieved to those hard and soft landscape works carried out directly associated with the new Waitrose store and the public realm works to Old Mill Drive and The Conservation Area which will be carried out by HDC . This will need to include the need to address specific detailed design issues raised regarding the precise orientation of the entrance steps and pedestrian ramp and regarding planting, including those identified in the above consultation response.
3.5 Arboricultural Officer APPENDIX A/ 1 - 21
Further to your instructions, I re-visited the above site on 11th January 2012 to make a specific inspection of tree T18, Deodar cedar, in relation to the development proposals, and I report accordingly. I have taken regard of appendix D to the submitted Arboricultural Statement, referring specifically to tree T18, and to the site layout plans.
The tree has high amenity value in the local landscape, and I am accordingly pleased to see it is intended to retain it. Should it subsequently be threatened with removal, I can advise that it readily meets the criteria for protection by a Tree Preservation Order on amenity grounds. The content of Appendix D appears to represent a satisfactory analysis of how this tree can be retained within the scheme; I find no issue with it. Central to its retention is that it is in fact being allowed greater undisturbed space, at ground level, than it presently has, the existing car parking spaces being 2.9m away to the south and west. This is being increased to a distance of 5.4m to the west, and 6.4m to the south. This remains a minor ingress into the tree's RPA, but to a minor and acceptable degree, given the existing circumstances the RPA finds itself in (tarmac to within 2.9m). Moreover, although the tree has a crown with long tipped laterals, typical of the species, these are concentrated within the lowest third of the crown only, and could easily be lightly trimmed back as advised within the tree survey schedule. Given that in the recent winds, two of these long tipped branches have been torn off the tree (they remain on the ground below), this would be prudent practice, and should not be seen as an attempt to 'shoehorn' the tree into the space available. As the tree continues to grow (it is no more than semi- mature at this stage), it can readily be pruned again to control this lateral growth without harm to its aesthetic appearance or health.
I therefore register NO OBJECTION to the proposals to retain the tree, or to the methods set out in the submission for its protection and surgery.
3.6 The Council’s Technical Engineer has advised that he has no overall objections to the drainage strategy proposed (Sustainable Drainage Systems – Underground Attenuation Tanks). However, he considers that this would be an opportunity to provide additional betterment to the local surface water system than projected. The proposed strategy maintains peak flows into the River Stor at current levels whilst attenuating the excess on site via the underground storage tanks. The storage volume planned is small in comparison with the overall site extent.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.7 County Surveyor
Initial comments
As submitted, the Highway Authority is unable to make a recommendation on this planning application. Further information is required from the applicant to enable a recommendation to be made.
In summary, the information required is:
Full stage 1 safety audit with associated documents, e.g. brief given to safety auditor, designers response and client response, in accordance with the West Sussex Safety Audit Policy; Tracking drawings of the altered bus turning area, to include assessment of buses and supermarket delivery vehicles using the area, and the potential conflict of these; APPENDIX A/ 1 - 22
Evidence that delivery lorries can arrive at the site and access it in a safe manner, without risk of collisions; Evidence that re-routed bus services are afforded no additional delays from the alterations made to the bus stop locations; and Evidence that a shared surface approach to Old Mill Drive will work safely. Site description
The site is located in the centre of Storrington Village and to the north of the A283 a major east/west distributor between the A29 at Washington and the A29 at Pulborough it also forms part of an east/west alternative route to the A27.
The existing site is a ‘diamond’ shaped area bounded by Old Mill Drive to the west and School Hill (B2139) and Mill Parade to the east. The majority of the ‘diamond’ area, with the exception of the northern and southern tips has been included within these proposals.
The area is predominantly retail and could be considered as the centre of the village. Included within the site boundary are; former petrol filling station and MOT centre, 117 space HDC run car park, northern section of Old Mill Square shopping parade (including the existing Waitrose store), access road from School Hill to development site and Old Mill Drive/bus turning area.
Proposal
The proposals include the demolition of the existing Waitrose store and the northern section of Old Mill Square shopping parade and the construction of a 3,130m Waitrose Store, the construction of a 2 storey car-park, a relocated access onto School Hill Road, a new access into Old Mill Drive and the pedestrianisation of the southern section of Old Mill Drive which would include alterations to the existing bus turning area.
It is not clear from the Drawings provided or the details in the TA (Existing Accommodation Schedule - App D 2.1) as to which shop units have been included within the schedules. Clearly the units south of Old Mill Square are to be retained and as they are outside of the application boundary have been excluded from the Existing Accommodation Schedule. This leaves the Shop Units (1148m), Restaurant (119m) Health and Beauty Salon (63m) and Offices (92m) which must currently be in the northern section of Old Mill Square. However, the area to be demolished appears to be much smaller than this. Clarification is required from the applicant.
Existing Road Layout
The car park currently has 2 egress/ingress points, the main access is via School Hill Road which is also the access for service vehicles, the secondary access is onto Mill Lane from which it is not possible to turn right to travel south as Mill lane is closed at the southern end.
Proposed Road Layout
It is proposed for the existing access onto School Hill Road to be closed and a new junction constructed a few metres to the south of its current location. The access onto Mill Lane will be closed. A new access from Old Mill Drive to the north of the site will be constructed with direct access onto the first floor level of the car park
The garage to the north of the development site is to be redeveloped. There are 2 existing access points to the garage which have been re-designed and relocated to accommodate service vehicles accessing the service area. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 23
Highway Works
The new access onto School Hill has been designed in accordance with Manual for Streets with visibility splays of 2.4x 43m shown although in reality visibility to the north is likely to exceed this figure. This access is replacing an existing which has been operating safely. However, the corner radii are large which results in a large area of carriageway for pedestrians to cross – an issue raised in the Road Safety Audit - it may also lead to 2 vehicles attempting to leave the site at the same time which could lead to Highway safety issues. We would recommend the corner radii are reduced in line with highway standards.
There are 2 access points into the service yard of adequate dimension for service vehicle. Visibility from these access points is acceptable providing vegetation is low. Intervisibilty with these access points and with vehicles exiting the car park could be compromised by vehicles turning left from the car park – an issue raised in the RSA – vegetation will need to be a low growing variety and continuously maintained. Hard landscaping should be considered as an alterative.
There is insufficient turning space for service vehicles to enter the service area from the north, it is therefore proposed for service vehicles to enter from the south utilising the proposed bus turning area, it is then proposed for a reversing manoeuvre within the service area which will result in vehicles re-entering the highway in a forward gear. It is proposed for service vehicles to enter the service yard
Traffic Impact
Based on the WSCC automatic count site on West Street in Storrington, Traffic growth from autumn 2008 to autumn 2011 was calculated which showed an increase in traffic flows along the A283 during this period which does not support the negative growth as concluded in the Transport Assessment.
Saturday flows do show a reduction in traffic flows but this appears to be due to the high traffic flows recorded in autumn 2008 which is likely to be because of the A27 bridge weekends closures at Arundel. The traffic flows for Saturdays have been examined and found to be approximately 4700 vehicles higher on the days when the A27 bridge was closed than for the remaining Saturdays of 2008. Autumn Saturday flows from 2009 to 2011 have shown an increase.
The modelled flows for 2010 (projected from the 2008 surveys) for West Street have been compared to the 2010 and 2011 observed flows from the ATC. It was found that the modelled flows are reasonably close to the observed flows from the WSCC ATC.
The Weekday PM Peak and Saturday Midday Peak flows modelled are greater than observed flows, and so the model shows a worst case scenario than the observed yearly average at the peak times. The modelled Weekday AM peaks are slightly lower than the observed, however this is the time period where the traffic generated by the Waitrose expansion is likely to be the lowest.
The VISSIM methodology (software used to model traffic) has been accepted previously by WSCC. On close analysis with regards to this application, although there are discrepancies with regard to some of the data used in the TA, we are of the conclusion, by making comparisons with newly available data from permanent ATC sites in Storrington that there are no fundamental issues with store impact. In the event the model was re-run using newly available data it is unlikely that a significantly different outcome will result.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 24
The model study has concluded that additional delay on School Hill southbound would be limited to ten seconds and on the A283 by 5 seconds.
In summary, whilst there are areas of the TA that we feel could be improved upon, we have measured the predicted traffic flows against the data currently held by the Highway Authority, and we conclude that the demonstrated flows are acceptable. It should also be noted that there is likely to be a reduction in ‘reverse’ trips, i.e. those residents of Storrington that currently choose to shop outside of the village, and would be able to stay in Storrington if this proposal was taken forward. It may be the case, however, that this conclusion may not be satisfactory to assess the air quality issues relating to the proposed development, so additional data may be required to determine the traffic impacts on Air Quality.
Traffic Generation The Scoping information provided for the Transport Assessment has previously been examined by WSCC through discussions undertaken as part of the earlier scheme for a new store which retained the existing store (Somerfield). Further discussions in April 2011 with regards to the proposed scheme were undertaken through our pre-application process and resulted in the removal of the Petrol Filling Station from the figures as the PFS had closed in 2008 and therefore not considered representative of the current situation. The trip rates obtained from the TRICS database and submitted as part of the application have been evaluated and are considered to be acceptable. Parking
The existing parking areas which will be affected by the proposals are; 117 space public car park, layby parking in High Street, bus turning circle, garage site and Old Mill Drive. A parking survey has not been included within the TA and is considered to be sufficient.
224 spaces are proposed within the proposed 2 story car park inclusive of 19 disabled/parent with child spaces. This car park will remain open to the public and not solely for use by Waitrose shoppers. Parking levels are within WSCC car parking standards.
The proposed westbound bus stop on the south side of High Street would result in the loss of 2-3 on-street parking spaces. The end on parking bays on High Street to the east of Old Mill Drive will not be affected by the proposals.
The submitted plans show the parking bay on the eastern side of Old Mill Drive as hard landscaped and outside of the ‘carriageway’ area of the proposed Shared Surface. The principle of a shared surface has yet to be agreed and will need to be designed in detail before it can be considered by WSCC. If the outcome of this consultation is that a Shared Surface would work in this area designated parking areas would have to be considered within the detail design. Our recommendations are for Old Mill Drive to stay open, further consideration is required to determine if it is suitable for mixed use.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
The proposal includes the upgrading of the Pelican Crossings to Puffin Crossings in High Street. One crossing has already been upgraded by WSCC. In addition, a mini- roundabout has been proposed for the junction of North Street/West Street/High Street to improve flows along the A283.
Construction Traffic
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 25
Schematic information has been provided in relation to the phasing of the construction, however this is based on the assumption that Old Mill Drive will be closed to traffic. A detailed construction plan including routing for construction vehicles, times of construction and predicted vehicle numbers will need to be submitted and approved prior to construction commencing.
Deliveries
Deliveries will continue to be made via Water Lane/Thakeham Road but will be re-route along Freyern Road and Old Mill Drive. This will result in HGV’s encountering 2 additional junctions School Hill/Fryern Road, Fryern Road/Mill Lane/Old Mill Drive. Tracking plots for articulated vehicles have been provided which show turning within the carriageway can be achieved at both junctions, however both lanes are required to undertake the manoeuvre. Further evidence is required to demonstrate that this is a safe manoeuvre for HGVs to undertake.
Road Safety Audit The scheme was originally audited in 2008 and was re-audited in February 2012. No major concerns were raised in the audit and any outstanding issues raised which have not been addressed within the design can be addressed through Detailed Design. However, given that the proposal includes the use of the bus turning facility for HGV/Delivery turning, we have concerns that the Road Safety Auditor may not have been aware of the proposed uses for the area, the applicant will need to provide evidence as to how the Safety Auditor was briefed on the scheme and assurance that any HGV/Bus conflict has been considered by the Auditor. Travel Plan A Travel Plan has been submitted. Negotiations with the applicant are still ongoing regarding this, but for completeness, a copy of the Highway Authority’s initial comments can be found below. Travel Plan Co-ordinator
It is noted that a Travel Plan Coordinator (TPC) will be appointed to deliver the Travel Plan. If possible, the TPC should be appointed prior to occupation of the site and contact details provided to this office and/or included within the Travel Plan document. In any event, this should occur within 3 months of occupation of the site.
Targets
The headline target for the Travel Plan should be to achieve a 12-hour weekday vehicle trip rate that is 10% lower than that predicted for the site in the Transport Assessment assuming a Travel Plan were not implemented. The Travel Plan should clearly state the 12-hour trip rate target.
Monitoring and Auditing
The Travel Plan should be monitored in accordance with the TRICS UK Standard Assessment Methodology (aka TRICS SAM). This involves 3 multi-modal surveys over a 5- year period whereupon the 10% trip rate reduction target should be achieved or further TP measures implemented.
The developer/Travel Plan Coordinator should commission these directly with the TRICS organisation.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 26
The initial TRICS SAM survey should be conducted within six months of occupation (year 1) with subsequent surveys in years three and five.
We require the developer to pay an auditing fee of £500 per survey. If the results show the TP is on track then a meeting to discuss remedial actions will not be required, and hence we will be able to offer a 25% discount on the fee.
Cycling
It is noted that covered cycle parking will be provided, however there are no details about the number of spaces that will be provided for staff and customers. It is noted that 40% of employees are expected to be on site at any one time; however the Travel Plan does not include a figure for the total number of staff that will be employed. It is not therefore possible to assess whether sufficient cycle parking will be provided.
The proposal to consider offering cycle trailers to customers is welcomed (6.20); however we would like to see a stronger commitment to provision of this service.
It is noted that a home delivery service will be offered to customers, and this is welcomed. We would like to see a commitment to using bicycles for some deliveries as appropriate.
Travel Information and Induction Packs
It is noted that travel information and an explanation of the reasons for the Travel Plan, and the objectives contained within it, will be distributed to all new employees.
In addition to the information highlighted in the draft Travel Plan, we would also like to see the following additions: Information about how to access the site by public transport, including approximate journey times, route numbers etc from popular locations and a cost comparison with car travel + parking. The employer should also consider providing short-term ‘taster’ tickets to enable employees to try commuting via public transport. Public transport operators may be encourage to provide such tickets free of charge, although the employer should the tickets if this is not the case. Information about how to access the above on foot or by bicycle, including approximate journey times, route information etc from popular locations and a cost comparison with car travel + parking. Information about bike shops offering discounts to employees working for companies that operate Travel Plans in West Sussex. The County Council has negotiated various discounts on new purchases and servicing on behalf of developers and further details can be found on our web site: http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/leisure/getting_around_west_sussex/travelwise/cycle_to_wo rk_scheme.aspx#discounts Information about adult cycle training (Bikeability) courses that can be provided by the County Council’s Road Safety team. Further details and course costs are available at www.westsussex.gov.uk/cycling. The employer should consider funding, or part-funding cycle training for employees that wish to cycle to work. Information about the West Sussex cycle journey planner and other journey planning sites such as Transport Direct, Traveline, and National Rail Enquiries etc. The link to our cycle journey planner is http://cyclejourneyplanner.westsussex.gov.uk/
We have recently commissioned Pindar Creative's Travel Plan Mapping Solution. The service will enable developers, employers, and other organisations to purchase site- specific multi-modal travel maps, notice boards, and interactive PDFs. The applicant may wish to consider using this service to produce the local travel information for the induction APPENDIX A/ 1 - 27 packs, staff notice boards, and company web sites. Examples of how the scheme is operating in other parts of the country can be found on Pindar Creative’s website: http://travelplan-store.pindarcreative.co.uk. It is anticipated that West Sussex will ‘go-live’ in early 2012, however in the meantime please contact Maria Heaman for further details: DD: +44(0)1296 390123 Mob: +44(0)7787 578722 Fax: +44(0)1296 381233 Email: [email protected]
EV charging points
The site would benefit from one or two publically available EV charging points for employees and/or visitors. There is a network of 20 points in West Sussex, which is currently part of the Charge Your Car scheme. Ideally any points installed at this site would be part of the same scheme. Further information is available on our web site: http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/leisure/getting_around_west_sussex/travelwise/electric_vehi cle_charging_netw.aspx
Promotion and Publicity
National awareness events, such as Bike Week, Travelwise Week, Car Free Day, and Liftshare Week etc should be promoted by the TPC.
The County Council has developed a suite of posters, which can be displayed in staff and public areas in order to promote sustainable and active modes of travel. The artwork may be used free of charge and can be downloaded from our web site: http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/leisure/getting_around_west_sussex/travelwise/supporting_material.a spx
Public Transport Season Ticket Loans
It is noted that Waitrose offers season ticket loans to employees and this is welcomed. At present employees only become eligible for a loan after 3 months employment. We would ask that this policy is reviewed as regular and long-standing travel habits are often formed soon after commencement of employment.
Enforcement
The Travel Plan should include provision for enforcement action that would be taken in the event that the 5-year target is not met.
Closure of Old Mill Drive The proposals include the closure of the southern section of Old Mill Drive (OMD), however consideration has also given to the possibility of a Shared Surface for this section of road. Consultation has been undertaken with WSCC Fire Service and Sussex Police, whilst the Fire Service would accept Emergency Access, Sussex Police require full access to OMD at all times. To provide full access, no physical measures can be in place to restrict entry to police vehicles, this will therefore result in access to other motor vehicles being possible and difficulty in enforcing the closure.
The closure of Old Mill Drive will undoubtedly have negative impact on the flow of traffic in Storrington. This, and the view of Sussex Police that full access will be required by them at all times, leads the Highway Authority to the view that OLD Mill Drive should be left open to traffic. It may be possible for a shared surface approach to be taken here, however, the traffic flows along the road could be too high for this. Further work and evidence is required of the applicant to demonstrate that this can be achieved safely. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 28
Impact on Bus Services It is proposed, in the event OMD is closed, that some of the bus services are to be relocated to the High Street. Although these are not the main services and are therefore less frequent, they include School Buses and Supermarket buses which, given the age of users may require the bus to wait at the stops for a period of time. The principle of re-routing bus services is only acceptable if there is no problematic time penalty for doing so. The applicant will need to demonstrate that liaison with the bus companies has been undertaken and a satisfactory outcome found.
For school buses the applicant will have to demonstrate that there is enough room for the buses to stop somewhere and students to wait safely.
As far as facilities are concerned shelters and raised curbs are required. RTPI should also be installed, potentially with money available for on-board equipment, if required, which it may not be because the 1 and the 100 already have it. The shelters must be able to accommodate the number of people travelling.
Bus Turning Circle
Swept path analysis has been undertaken of the proposed bus turning area which appears to be suitable for articulated lorries (16.5m) and therefore suitable for buses at 12m.
However, there is insufficient room for a bus or delivery lorry to pass a stationary bus which is either on a layover period or loading/unloading passengers. This is likely to have a significant impact on route times and will lead to delays. The lack of room for a vehicle to pass a waiting bus will also result in standing vehicles in the highway which is detrimental to highway safety as there is a risk of conflict between buses and HGVs using the area. . This is of particular concern given that it is proposed for delivery vehicles to also utilize this turning area. It is essential that the area is redesigned to accommodate safely all transport uses proposed.
Stopping Up/Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) A Stopping Up order is required for the area of Highway which is part of the existing bus turning circle. It is proposed for the turning area to be reduced with the area lost to form part of the building footprint. Application will need to be made and the procedure will involve consultation with WSCC and other interested parties. If the area is required for Highway Safety reasons it is unlikely that the Stopping Up of the Highway will be allowed. In addition, any changes to how the Highway is regulated will require a TRO to be undertaken at the applicant cost and, as with Stopping Up Orders, require a consultation period from which a positive outcome may not be guaranteed.
2nd comments
Transport Assessment For transport network analysis, the data submitted within the Transport Assessment is acceptable to the Highway Authority.
Old Mill Drive No detailed comments can be provided at this time on the proposal for an additional access from the development site onto Old Mill Drive, as the details of the proposal have yet to be formally submitted. It is unlikely that an additional access will have an impact on APPENDIX A/ 1 - 29 the overall level of traffic generated by the proposed development, however additional work may be required with regards to traffic distribution to determine the impact additional flows may have on the junction of Old Mill Drive with High Street.
3rd and final comments
Summary This proposal has been the subject of lengthy discussions both as part of the pre- application and formal planning application stages. The scheme has subsequently evolved and a number of changes have resulted to the initially proposed layout.
The site does accommodate a range of existing uses, which have been clarified as amounting to 748sqm of existing A1 retail space, along with a garage (328sqm), a petrol filling station (54sqm), offices (92sqm), restaurant (119sqm), and a health and beauty salon (63sqm) along with 1,410sqm of A1 food retail and 117 car parking spaces. The car park is not presently allocated to a specific use. The site does also accommodate a petrol filling station, which has not been included within the assessment given that it has not been in use for some time. The proposal seeks the redevelopment of these uses to provide 3,130sqm of A1 food retail use and 217 car parking spaces. The car park will be retained for general public use and would not be solely for the use of those visiting the proposed food retail store.
It should be noted that the Highway Authority have considered this proposal on the basis of highway safety and capacity.
Trip Generation and Capacity Impact Trip generation for both the existing and proposed uses has been derived from TRICS, which is a nationally accepted database and means of ascertaining trip generation from different land uses for planning purposes. The purpose of TRICS is to find sites that are as closely comparable and compatible with that representing the development site; evidently it is not possible via TRICS to find in all situations sites that are identical to that of the proposed development. In these instances it is appropriate to ensure suitable filtering criteria are selected (for example, applying representative uses, car ownership, population within 1 and 5 miles). The various TRICS selection criteria used by the Developer have been submitted to, reviewed and agreed with WSCC at the pre-application stage and these have been applied to determine potential trip generation included within the current proposal.
An alternate means of ascertaining trip generation from existing uses is to undertake surveys at appropriate times. Undertaking a survey to determine vehicular traffic generation from the existing uses however for this site this would prove difficult and potentially inaccurate for the reason that traffic visiting these uses is not contained within a single point of vehicular access, hence those visiting these uses could park elsewhere and walk to the site. Similarly, to survey the traffic entering and exiting the car park that forms part of the proposed development would also not produce a trip rate that could be applied to ascertain the baseline level of traffic, as again those using the car park may not be visiting the food retail store or those local shops that are to be redeveloped. As such, TRICS is considered to be a suitable means of ascertaining vehicular trip generation from the existing and proposed uses.
The various trip rates obtained from TRICS have been applied to determine the impact of the proposals at times when the highway network is at its most sensitive, which is in the AM and PM network peaks (8-9am and 5-6pm respectively). Given that an extension is proposed to the existing food retail store, a further assessment period of Saturday APPENDIX A/ 1 - 30 lunchtime (1200-1300) has also been included. The undertaking of assessments during these periods is in accordance with the WSCC Transport Assessment Guidance.
Base traffic flows have been determined from traffic surveys undertaken in a neutral month (September 2008) and when traffic is considered representative of typical conditions. Subsequent assessment has made use of these base traffic flows, factoring in as appropriate the potential trip generation arising from the proposed development. The base traffic flows are based upon surveys undertaken in 2008, which it is acknowledged are now somewhat dated. However a further survey was undertaken in 2011 that indicated that traffic flows on the local highway network had reduced. Notwithstanding the age, given the 2008 indicated higher traffic flows, for robustness these surveys have been used to determine the base traffic situation.
Based on TRICS, the existing uses have the potential to generate 223 (128 arrivals, 95 departures) and 385 (183 arrivals, 202 departures) movements in the AM and PM weekday network peak periods. Again TRICS is used for the proposed food retail use. However account is taken within the calculation that the site already accommodates 1,410sqm of A1 food retail that is in essence being replaced on a like for like basis as part of this proposal but that this use is being extended by 1,720sqm. It is accepted that extensions to food retail stores will not result in a directly proportionate increase in movements (i.e. a doubling of store size will not double the number of movements) and typically store extensions will generate only between 25-50% more trips (for example a recent 1,500m extension to a Sainsbury in Crawley was forecast to increase trade by 8%, a 3,551sqm extension to a Tesco in Burgess Hill was forecast only to increase trade by 19%). For robustness however 75% has been applied in this instance and this has been accepted as being representative of a worst case. Applying this methodology and the TRICS trip rates, the proposed A1 food retail use is anticipated to generate 123 (79 arrivals and 44 departures) and 443 (207 arrivals and 236 departures) movements in the AM and PM network peak periods. As stated above however there is an existing food retail use and thus the movements associated with this would remain unchanged, there would though be the net increase of movements arising from the extension. Taking account of just the extension this would result in an additional 59 movements in the AM peak and 212 in the PM peak. Evidently applying the base and proposed development total trip rates, this proposal has the potential to result in a decrease in vehicular trips in the AM peak period and an increase of 58 trips in the PM peak. An identical approach has also been undertaken for the Saturday lunchtime peak and the net increase of trips in a with development scenario amounts to 81 movements.
The increased trips and impact upon the local highway network have been assessed using Vissim micro simulation modelling. The results of the modelling work indicate minor increased journey times in a with development scenario compared with the base position amounting at worst to an increase of 13 seconds (for Pulborough Road eastbound). However, the second biggest increase is 6 seconds on the West Street to High Street link. Taking account of the guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework, which states that, ‘Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe’, in this instance the anticipated impacts resulting from this development are not considered severe and would not justify an objection on the basis of detriment to capacity or the through flow of traffic.
Concerns Raised by 3rd Parties A number of issues have been raised by 3rd parties as to the trip rates applied from TRICS with there being the concern that these may over-estimate trip generation (for the existing uses, most notably the restaurant, offices, salon and local shops) and may under-estimate trip generation for the proposed use particularly within the AM peak hour where the assessment is showing a potential reduction in trips. A survey of movements has also APPENDIX A/ 1 - 31
been undertaken by a 3rd party to further support the inappropriate estimations of vehicle movements from existing and proposed uses. This survey is acknowledged to count footfall and vehicle movements into the Mill Lane car park. Further consideration has been by WSCC given to the evidence provided by these 3rd parties relating to the existing uses and the resultant trip generation in the AM period, and additional assessment of the net increase of trips has been undertaken by WSCC.
In consideration of the existing uses as part of the additional assessment, the movements generated by restaurant, salon, offices and those generated by the existing A1 food retail use have not been counted towards the base situation. The reasoning for this is that it is understood that the restaurant, salon and office are not currently open before 9am and are not generating movements in the AM peak hour. In terms of the food retail, only the additional movements generated by the extension should be considered as these movements are new, thus the existing store floor area has been disregarded in both the base and proposed situations as the potential movements this generated in both situations remains unchanged. Taking these assumptions into account, for the base situation, the total number of two way trips would be 119 (10 from the garage and 109 from the local shops). Again, 3rd parties have considered the trip rate for the local shops in the AM peak as being too high. Whilst WSCC are satisfied with the trip rates used as these take into account the potential movements, even so if the local shop trip rate is reduced by 50%, the total base two way movements in the AM peak would be 64. Comparing this with the proposed extension, which would generate 59 movements it’s acknowledged that there would be no material change against the existing situation. In light of the above the outcome of this would still give rise to a minimal impact in the AM peak and there would be no justification to seek the provision of additional trip rates or further modelling.
Two Existing Uses Arrivals Departures Way A1 retail (reducing TRICS trip rate by 50%) 29 25 54 Garage 6 4 10 Office, Salon, Restaurant 0 0 0 Total 35 29 64
Proposed Uses Food retail extension (applying the 75% pro- rata increase) 38 21 59
Difference 3 -8 -5 AM Peak – Reduced Trip Rates
A similar approach could be applied to the PM and Saturday lunchtime with a reduced trip rate applied for the local shops and office, salon and restaurant. This approach would result in there being an additional increase in the total number of trips resulting from the development on top of that already forecast. It should be noted however that the trip rate used for the extended store is based on a worst case assumption that the extension would generate an increase of 75% trips, whereas evidence and experience from other store extensions suggests a much reduced figure. The assessment provided also considers that all trips are new whereas in reality a number may already be on the network in the form of pass-by trips (for example, those already on the network stopping at the site to buy goods), diverted and transferred trips (visiting this site instead of other food retail stores), and linked trips (associated with other uses, for example, a customer may park and visit more than one shop). Assuming that all trips are new, if a pro-rata increase of 50% is applied rather than 75%, the impact upon the highway network would be no different as to that APPENDIX A/ 1 - 32
already considered through the TA. As it is the trip rate used for the food retail extension is likely to over-estimate actual trip generation.
Trip Rates PM Saturday Existing Two Two Uses Arrivals Departures Way Arrivals Departures Way A1 retail (at 50%) 25 27 53 19 19 38 Garage 5 4 9 0 0 0 Office, salon, A5 (at 50%) 9 10 19 7 7 14 Total 39 41 81 25 25 52
Proposed A1 food ext (at 50%) 66 75 141 61 62 123
Difference 27 34 60 36 37 71 PM and Saturday – Reduced Trip Rates
Following on from the above, TRICS has been further referred to ascertain if the trip rate for a smaller or larger food retail store would be significantly different to that applied, and therefore whether a different gross floor area selection criteria should be applied for the extended store rather than identical food retail store trip rates being applied throughout, which is the case with the current assessment.
For the existing store, it is recognised that the TRICS gross floor area range and those site surveys used do exceed of the current store size. However, there is only one TRICS weekday survey from between January 2002 to January 2012 that could be applied to the application site based upon size and location. The use of a single TRICS site is not considered appropriate nor is likely to give an accurate assessment of trip generation. The criteria used in the assessment are considered to be appropriate. Similarly for the extended store, increasing the gross floor area of the sites surveyed up to 6,000sqm with a lower threshold of 2,500sqm, excluding those sites with petrol filling stations and of non- comparable locations, still only gives three sites where weekday surveys have been undertaken and that could be used to determine potential trip generation, although one of these sites is within the centre of Redhill and thus has been discounted. This leaves two sites and applying the resultant trip rate is not considered representative. As a point of comparison, the trip rate for a much larger store (9,000sqm retail store) has been obtained from TRICS to determine whether trip rates for between larger and smaller stores are significantly different. The AM and PM weekday two way trip rate for this larger site are 7.724 and 14.234 respectively. It would therefore seem that the trip rates do not proportionately increase as floor space increases. As such the trip rates used for the extended store are considered representative. As mentioned above, it does need to be recognised that the present assessment does consider all trips generated by the extension to be entirely new, whereas it would be expected for a significant proportion to already on the highway network. The assessment provided is still considered robust.
Similarly for the PM and Saturday lunchtime peaks, those trips resulting from the store extension have been treated as entirely new trips. In reality a number of these trips may already be on the network either as pass-by trips, transferred from other food stores (the proposed store may encourage fewer trips out of the village), or linked with visits to other retail stores in the village centre. As such the assessment undertaken is considered to be robust and takes account of a worst case situation.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 33
The TA submitted does not refer to permitted and committed developments within the surrounding area, with it appreciated that a development of 78 dwellings having been recently permitted at the former RMC Works to the east of Storrington. The TA’s for both the 146 dwellings at Thakeham and the 78 dwellings at the former RMC Works did not consider the impact of increased traffic flows at the Manleys Hill roundabout or through Storrington. The reasoning for this was that the sites were not to result in an increase of 30 or more movements through this junction and thus would not meet the WSCC Transport Assessment threshold to require further assessment. Two developments have also recently been permitted for restricted age units on Church Street and Meadowside. These are both restricted age developments and are not of a scale to warrant full TA’s nor would these be expected to generate any significant peak hour traffic flows. Whilst these developments would inevitably add some additional movements through Storrington, this increase would not warrant the addition of further capacity assessments as a consequence of this proposal.
It’s appreciated also that the extended store would provide an e-commerce or collection/drop off point for internet goods. This facility is understood to be provided in a number of similar stores operated by the retailer. This additional use is understood not to require planning permission and as such could be provided within the existing store regardless of the outcome of this proposal.
In conclusion, whilst the 3rd party concerns are acknowledged, the Transport Assessment provided is considered to be acceptable and does take into account a worst case situation. Further modelling work could be undertaken, however this is only likely to reduce the traffic generation figures associated with the existing and proposed uses, and would still be expected to come to the same conclusions as presented within the current TA.
Parking The parking provision has been reduced from 221 to 217 spaces, although the overall provision is increased from the existing 120 spaces. As stated above, the car park is not to be provided solely for the use by the extended food retail store nor is it provided solely for the current retail use. Whilst the proposed food retail use would result in increased parking demands, the extended car park would be available for the general use of those visiting Storrington.
Highway Alterations A number of changes have been proposed to the highway network to accommodate the proposed development. Notably, this includes the closure of Old Mill Drive to vehicular traffic and its subsequent pedestrianisation. This element of the proposal has now been removed with the Developer proposing to make a contribution towards the future pedestrianisation of this. Plans and details for the proposed bus turning area would be sought via condition.
A new access is also proposed into the proposed car park from Mill Lane. This access is intended to operate as an entrance only. Given that the car park can be accessed from Old Mill Drive, this additional entrance does appear superfluous. Given the presence of another access point onto Old Mill Drive, this additional proposed access is not anticipated to result in attracting any significant additional number of vehicle movements beyond those that the access onto Old Mill Drive could attract, with there being the expectation for those inbound movements to the car park arriving from the north to be now split between the Mill Lane and Old Mill Drive access points.
Routing of Delivery Vehicles Deliveries to the extended food store are intended to access the site from School Hill/Thakeham Road via Fryern Road, Mill Lane and Old Mill Drive. The originally submitted TA does detail that the extended store would generate a maximum of 9 APPENDIX A/ 1 - 34 deliveries per day (4 from articulated vehicles and 5 from smaller rigid vehicles). A number of swept path analyses have been provided for a 16.5metre long articulated vehicle. These assessments do show that an HGV would cross the centreline when entering onto Mill Lane from Fryern Road and when exiting Fryern Road onto School Hill. These swept paths were available to and reviewed as part of the Stage One Road Safety Audit. The Safety Auditor has not raised any concerns with the HGVs crossing the centrelines of these roads. Visibility at those junctions where an HGV would cross the centreline is also good, hence an HGV driver would be able to see that a road was clear before emerging from a junction. From on-site observations during the AM peak hour, it is evident that buses along with other articulated vehicles exiting Fryern Road onto School Hill/Thakeham Road presently have to cross the centreline in order to turn left thus this is an existing situation that does not in practice give rise to any issues. In light of this base situation and the low additional number of HGV’s movements from this junction, it’s not considered that this development could be resisted on this matter.
It is recommended that the number of movements and routing of delivery vehicles are incorporated into a service management plan secured via condition.
Conclusions The Transport Consultant acting on behalf of the Applicant has stated that, ‘it has been proven beyond all doubt and been accepted by the local highway authority that the development as proposed will reduced the level of traffic generated by the development site’. The Highway Authority are satisfied that the TA submitted is reflective of a worst case situation on the basis that this considers the potential number of movements that could arise from those permitted uses, that an overly high pro-rata increase in trips has been applied for the extended store and that no discount has been for pass-by, diverted, or linked trips. It is noted also that the existing petrol filling station has not been considered in any assessments, whereas this is an extant use that could restart without requiring any further planning permission. Even taking account of a reduced trip rate for the existing uses, the impact of this proposal is not considered to be severe. It would be confirmed that the Highway Authority are satisfied based upon the information provided that this proposal would have no detriment to highway safety or that increase in terms of vehicular movements would have a severe impact upon highway capacity. No highway objection would consequently be raised to this proposal.
The Applicant should note that a stopping up order is required to close the existing bus turning area. The Applicant will also need to enter into a Section 278 agreement in order to undertake works within the existing highway and a Section 38 agreement may also be required to dedicate additional land forming part of the revised bus turning area. Amendments to existing Traffic Regulation Orders may also be necessary within the remodelled Old Mill Drive.
If the Planning Authority is minded to approve this application, the following conditions would be recommended.
S106 OBLIGATIONS Upon commencement of development, the Applicant shall submit plans and details to the Highway Authority for the upgrading of the existing pedestrian signalised crossing point in the High Street from a Pelican to Puffin crossing. The signals shall thereafter be upgraded in accordance with the details agreed by the Highway Authority prior to the first opening of the store extension.
Upon commencement of development, the Applicant shall submit plans, details and safety audits to the Highway Authority for the provision of a mini-roundabout at the junction of the A283 / North Street junction. The mini-roundabout shall thereafter be constructed in APPENDIX A/ 1 - 35
accordance with the details or as otherwise agreed with the Highway Authority prior to the first opening of the store.
CONDITIONS Access No part of the development shall be first occupied until such time as the vehicular accesses onto Old Mill Drive, Mill Lane and School Hill have been constructed in accordance with plans and details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety
Car parking space No part of the development shall be first occupied until the car parking has been constructed in accordance with the approved site plan. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose. Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use
Construction Management Plan 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), measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition and construction, lighting for construction and security, details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area.
Travel Plan Statement No part of the retail store extension shall be first occupied until such time as a Travel Plan Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan Statement shall be completed in accordance with the latest guidance and good practice documentation as published by the Department for Transport or as advised by the Highway Authority. Reason: To encourage and promote sustainable transport.
Bus Turning and Passenger Infrastructure No development shall take place until plans and details showing the integration of the proposed bus turning area within Old Mill Drive, bus passenger infrastructure and footways have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
Servicing Management Plan No part of the retail store extension shall be first occupied until such time as until a Servicing Management Plan for has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall set out the arrangements for the loading and unloading of APPENDIX A/ 1 - 36
deliveries, in terms of location and frequency, and set out arrangements for the collection of refuse. Once occupied the use shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved Plan. Reason – to safeguard the operation of the public highway.
INFORMATIVE Section 278 Agreement of the 1980 Highways Act - Works within the Highway The applicant is advised to enter into a legal agreement with West Sussex County Council, as Highway Authority, to cover the off-site highway works. The applicant is requested to contact The Implementation Team Leader (01243 642105) to commence this process. The applicant is advised that it is an offence to undertake any works within the highway prior to the agreement being in place.
3.8 County Archaeologist
No objection on archaeological grounds is raised to the proposal.
Apart from the site of a 17th century watermill, later a tannery, below the hard standing on the west side of the junction of Old Mill Drive and the High Street, the site lies outside the historical core of Storrington. The buried former mill site is unlikely to be affected significantly by re-forming of the High Street junction.
It is possible that there may be some presently unknown buried archaeological sites within the application area, pre-dating the medieval town. But if this is or was the case, such archaeological remains are unlikely to have survived to any great degree the extensive previous landscaping of the site for construction of the present Old Mill Square development, access and car parking.
Consequently, the new development proposals would be unlikely to have any significant new archaeological impact.
3.9 Southern Water
Southern water advised that the exact position of the water mains and foul sewers must be determined on site by the applicant before the layout of the proposed development is finalised.
It might be possible to divert the water distribution main of 4’’ diameter so long as this would result in no unacceptable loss of hydraulic capacity, and the work was carried out at the developer’s expense to the satisfaction of Southern Water under the relevant statutory provisions.
Following initial investigations, there is currently inadequate capacity in the local network to provide foul sewage disposal to service the proposed development. The proposal would increase flows to the public sewerage system and existing properties and land may be subject to a greater risk of flooding as a result. Additional off-site sewers, or improvements to existing sewers will be required to provide sufficient capacity to service the development. Alternatively the developer can discharge foul flow no greater than existing levels if proven to be connected and it is ensured that there is no overall increase in flows into the foul system.
Therefore no objection is raised to the proposal subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of details of the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage disposal.
The comments of Southern Water remain unchanged and valid for the amended details. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 37
3.10 Sussex Police
Sussex Police advise that the level of crime and anti-social behaviour here is average when compared to the rest of the country. However, in an attempt to reduce the opportunity for crime and the fear of crime it is recommended that a CCTV camera is installed in the service yard with appropriate fit for purpose lighting which would enable the monitoring of activity within the service area. Further advice is given in respect of lighting and planting, particularly within the car park, in order to maintain surveillance throughout the communal areas.
Sussex Police have advised that their comments remain extant following the submission of the amended plans.
3.11 English Heritage
English Heritage has recommended that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of the Council’s specialist conservation advice.
3.12 Environment Agency
The Environment Agency has no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a surface water drainage scheme for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.13 Thakeham Parish Council neither supports nor objects to this application but as a neighbouring parish wishes to raise a number of points which HDC are requested to take into account when reaching a decision on the application: 1 It is accepted that this area would benefit and be energised by being modernised. 2 Rather than a complete pedestrianisation of Old Mill Drive consideration should be given to only partially pedestrianise to enable access for emergency vehicles, buses and also delivery vehicles on a controlled basis. 3 The air quality/environmental issues in this already very congested area should be addressed more fully by the applicant. 4 The Council does feel the scale of development is out of proportion when compared with the size of the village and to avoid over-reliance on Waitrose some form of encouragement should be given to enable other businesses to thrive. Local shops should also be entitled to compensation to ameliorate the effects of the long construction period. 5 The additional local jobs that would be created by this development are welcomed. 6 The traffic modelling study is not considered to have been carried out adequately.
3.14 West Chiltington Parish Council objects to the proposal as it is considered that the development is over large for a village like Storrington and it would have a detrimental impact on existing village shops. The extra traffic would exacerbate the already overcrowded road system and contribute to a greater pollution of the atmosphere. The proposed 18 month construction period will also place considerable strain on travelling and parking which will have a negative impact on the existing traders.
3.15 Storrington & Sullington Parish Council
Initial comments
COMMENT – CONDITIONAL NO OBJECTION. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 38
This is a current Brownfield site with no existing features of aesthetic value. The size of the overall development will be just 61 sq ft larger than the existing buildings to be demolished so is therefore not considered overdevelopment. This Parish Council therefore can find no grounds for objection to the development in principle.
However there are several serious concerns relating to the actual design and detail of the plan and this council would ask that these be addressed and where necessary, amendments be submitted.
Impact upon traffic and air quality both during and after construction. The Granville Transport Assessment, which is included as part of the submission documents by Waitrose, continuously states that WSCC have agreed with their methodology and statistics. Part of the statistics are the use of a “comprehensive traffic survey of Sept./Oct 2008 figures as these were higher than a May 2011 survey, due possibly to unique conditions on the A27 the day of the 2011 survey.” Granville agreed that the 2011 figures did not reflect normal traffic flows but state that the 2008 figures remain valid and robust for assessment purposes and that this had all been agreed with WSCC. However, in a document by Ian Evans, Principal Transport Planner for WSCC, headed “Air Quality Management via Local Transport Plans (LTP) dated 21st June 2011 page 11 shows a graph that depicts approximately a 6% rise in AQMA Traffic Indices from 2008 to 2010. Can WSCC please clarify whether or not these are comparable traffic throughput flows and if they are why there is such a deviation in statistics? Also, if these are comparable statistics why WSCC did not insist that Granville use the 2010 figures?
Store Entrance. The current proposals locate the main entrance to the store to the east of the development facing the car park. This will do little to encourage shoppers to visit the remainder of the retail area. The main entrance must be located on the west side – facing Old Mill Drive, to facilitate the use of the high street as a complete shopping experience.
Car Park. The plans suggest that the upper level of the car park will be just 1 metre higher than the existing elevations. If this is correct consideration should be given to digging down this extra metre to alleviate any increase to the elevations. The lower level must be equipped with CCTV and secured outside of opening hours to prevent anti social behaviour. The request for the height of the car park lighting to be increased from 5mtrs to 8 mtrs must be declined. The applicants must also provide further detail regarding staff commutes and parking in order to alleviate existing problems re parking in residential roads. Consideration should also be given to additional drop off points for disabled and minibus users.
Design of Store. The parish council agrees with the Design and Conservation Officer’s comments regarding the overall design of the store. The current proposal of a 100 metre solid red brick wall facing Old Mill Drive will be drastically out of keeping with the rest of the area. The overall design is deemed far too modern and requires considerable changes to provide a more traditional, softer outlook using local materials.
Old Mill Drive – Shared surface. The Parish Council requires further detail regarding the day to day operation of the shared surface at Old Mill Drive. There is no detail in the proposal of exactly how this would work and what hours / days, if any, it would be closed. The Parish Council favours full pedestrianisation of the southern end of Old Mill Drive in order to create a more cohesive village centre.
2nd comments
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 39
The Parish Council resolved: To uphold the decision taken on 12th January 2012, that the Parish Council had no objection to the planning application in principle.
THE PARISH COUNCIL THEREFORE SUBMITS A COMMENT OF NO OBJECTION (CONDITIONAL).
However there are several serious concerns relating to the actual design and detail of the plan and this Council would ask that these be addressed by the applicant.
Impact upon traffic and air quality both during and after construction. The Parish Council notes West Sussex County Council’s acceptance of the traffic figures presented by the applicant. However the council would like to support the suggestion made by the Public Health and Licensing Department that should the traffic prove to be more than predicted, then the applicant should make funds available for further air quality measures. The use of Thakeham Road by construction vehicles and delivery lorries should be considered carefully as this is a school route and efforts should be made with WSCC Highways to ensure the safety of children walking to school.
Store Entrance. Members were disappointed to note that no provision had been made for a secondary entrance / exit onto the Old Mill Drive end of the development and would like this decision to be reviewed by the applicant once again. The Parish Council believes that the provision of such access is of paramount importance to encourage customers to visit the rest of the shopping area.
Car Park. Members were pleased to note the inclusion of CCTV throughout the car park but raised concerns regarding the security of the car park, particularly the lower level, during store closing times. The Parish Council requests that the lower level and the newly proposed access ramp from Mill Lane, be closed at night to prevent youths congregating.
Design of Store. The Parish Council is satisfied with revisions made to the external area of the store facing Old Mill Drive. It was felt that the design of the loading bay doors required improvement.
Delivery Times. It was noted that the applicants had requested that smaller delivery vans should be allowed to commence at 6:30 am and Members would request that the recommended conditions set out by the Public Health and Licensing Department are upheld. i.e. Deliveries to be restricted to 0700-1900 Mon to Fri and 0800-1800 on Saturdays. No deliveries on Sundays and Bank Holidays.
Impact upon Traders during construction. The Parish Council would like to see discussions take place between local traders and the applicants to address and mitigate the impact upon their businesses during the construction stage.
Staff commutes / parking arrangements. The applicant must make arrangements to prevent existing problems with workers parking in residential roads causing problems to those living there, either by negotiating further parking permits with HDC or by a review of HDC’s time restrictions on parking in the North Street Car Park.
3rd and final comments
The Parish Council objects to the proposed timber boarded fence on top of the service yard wall as its erection would be contrary to the Principles and Guidelines (7.2) of the Storrington & Sullington Parish Design Statement which states that fences should be APPENDIX A/ 1 - 40
avoided wherever possible. In this case it is considered detrimental to the outlook of the businesses positioned to the north of the site.
3.16 256 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:
The scale of the building would be totally out of keeping within the surrounding area Increase in existing high levels of pollution Detrimental impact on the Conservation Area Noise, dust and disturbance during the construction period Mill Lane access would lead to further congestion Poor urban design A two storey car park is not in keeping with the village Existing infrastructure is overloaded and will not be able to cope with the additional traffic resulting from the development Re-siting of the exit to the main car park further down School Hill will add to the already serious pollution, congestion and noise The proposal would dominate the shopping function of the village and overwhelm existing shops and cafes Open area in Old Mill Drive would be adversely affected as the bus turning circle would be extended into this green area Loss of trees Loss of outlook from the houses in School Hill and Old Mill Drive Local businesses may suffer a loss of custom as a result of the construction process Increase in air pollution Significant extra traffic congestion Over-development of a lovely Sussex village located under the South Downs Partial demolition of the precinct would be a half hearted attempt to enhance the village environment Proposal would result in a giant retail monopoly Proposed materials are not in keeping with the surrounding area Removal of large areas of grass and trees would have an urbanising impact on the verdant village character of Old Mill Drive Proposed service yard wall would be an industrial and alien feature Design of the building and service area walls fail to respect or reflect the character and appearance of its surroundings Increased traffic and congestion Adverse impact on the setting of neighbouring listed buildings Photomontages are misleading
3.17 61 letters of support and 17 letters of representation have been received.
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.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 41
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENT
6.1 The main issues in the determination of the application are considered to be the principle of the development, the effect of the development on highway safety and capacity; environmental issues, the character and appearance of the surrounding area and in particular on the adjacent Conservation Area.
6.2 The planning assessment will first set out the policy background against which the application has been assessed and then a description of the application will be provided. The assessment will then address each of the main issues identified above.
Policy background
6.3 Storrington is classified as a village capable of accommodating some expansion, in-filling and re-development in the LDF Core Strategy document. The application site is a brownfield site within the defined built-up area of Storrington and therefore the most relevant policies for determining this application are Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 and Policy DC34 of the General Development Control Policies 2007,
6.4 Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 sets out that appropriate development that improves town and village centres will be encouraged, provided that they help them to adapt and reinforce their role in meeting needs, acting as the focus for a range of activities and do not cause unacceptable levels of disturbance to the local community or damage the townscape character. It is fundamental that the retail vitality and viability of the centre is not undermined and, therefore, the Council will resist any proposals which may potentially damage or undermine the retail use of the centre.
6.5 Policy DC34 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 sets out that proposed development will be permitted within the Defined Town and Village Centres provided that the proposal does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross and that if the proposal connects and relates well to and does not undermine the vitality and viability of, the existing centre.
6.6 The site also forms part of the Old Mill Drive Diamond site which is the subject of a planning brief ‘Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief Supplementary Planning Document 2008’ (SPD). The SPD provides detailed site-specific planning guidance, which is informed by government guidance and development plan policy. The SPD lists 15 principles of development which will aid in the achievement of the Council’s overarching vision for the site and which is set out below:
‘Our overarching vision for the Old Mill Drive Diamond site is for the creation of a new village centre of joined up sustainable development that is sympathetic in design, provides mixed use development including the potential for an enlarged supermarket and promotes a more efficient use of the surrounding infrastructure and parking facilities. It will strengthen and enhance links with the existing High Street shopping accommodation whilst maintaining a suitable bus service and incorporating improved access between the site and the wider town centre for pedestrians.’
Description of the proposal
6.7 The application proposes the demolition of approx. 75% of the existing Waitrose store together with the shop/office units immediately to the east of the store in Old Mill Square. The garage/workshop with offices, restaurant and shops at first floor level, to the north of the store would also be demolished. The proposed extension to the store would incorporate a new unloading bay/warehouse which would be served by a new service yard immediately off Old Mill Drive. Offices and warehouse space would be provided at first floor level together with a screened area for plant mounted externally on the roof. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 42
6.8 In terms of appearance the primary shop front elements to Old Mill Square and the new car park would be fully glazed with the new entrance to the store being located at the north east corner of Old Mill Square. The single storey element of the store fronting Old Mill Drive would follow the curvature of the road and would be constructed of local brickwork with feature flint, glazed panels and stone banding. Within this single storey element a glazed stair would give access and means of escape to the first floor office/warehouse accommodation. The first floor accommodation is set back 7m from the Old Mill Drive frontage and would be treated in cream cladding panels. In terms of height the single storey element would be 5.25m to the ridge while the two storey element would be 9.45m to the ridge. The 2.8m high service yard wall would also follow the curvature of Old Mill Drive and would again be constructed in local brickwork and incorporating stone features and brick piers. The boundary walls to the car park would vary in height between 1m and 2m above the surrounding roads/paths depending on their location on the site and would be constructed in matching materials.
6.9 The existing car park to Old Mill Square provides 117 car park spaces. However the application proposes an additional 125 parking spaces by taking advantage of the slope of the existing car park and creating a 2 level car park. The land falls quite steeply from the north east to the south west and the lower level of parking would be provided by excavating to a depth of 2.1m below the existing car park at its highest level in the north eastern corner. The upper level would be at a level approx. 1m higher than the existing car park at its highest point. The proposed upper level of the car park would be accessible directly from Old Mill Drive to the north west and Mill Lane to the north east. Both the upper and lower levels would be accessible from the new access from School Hill. Within the overall car parking provision a total number of 10 disabled parking spaces and 9 parent and child spaces would be provided. The car park would be designed to accord with the Waitrose ‘Gold Standard’ with spaces increased from 2.4m to 2.5m wide and ‘green routes’ laid out within the car park to facilitate safe pedestrian movements within both levels. Two passenger lifts are proposed to link both levels of the car park and would be sited adjacent to the new main entrance to the store. Two re-charging points for electric vehicles would be located at the upper deck level and the electrical ductwork would be installed to allow this to be extended to further additional units. Secure cycle parking for 20 cycles would be provided under cover at the lower level.
6.10 The proposal would require the relocation of the existing bus turning area on Old Mill Drive. The existing bus turning area would be stopped-up to remove the existing highway rights so that it could form part of the development. A new bus turning area would be constructed and provision for all bus stops and waiting would be provided within the new layout on Old Mill Drive. Similarly, provision is also allowed for the locally operated minibus service with a drop-off and collection point adjacent to the new ramped entrances to Old Mill Square.
6.11 A number of trees within the open space to the west of Old Mill Drive would be removed to facilitate the new development layout together with a mature Willow tree in Old Mill Drive and a Cedar tree in School Hill. However replacement trees are proposed to mitigate the loss of the existing trees and it is proposed that the mature Cedar tree in the north east corner of the site would be retained. Additional landscaping is proposed along the bounding access roads of Old Mill Drive and School Hill by way of a combination of low ornamental shrub planting and the planting of feathered Hornbeam trees in low raised planters. It is maintained that this mix would provide year round interest/structure and vertical greening which would break up and soften the expanse of brickwork. The same landscape approach would be adopted along Mill Lane to help screen and break up the proposed decked car park.
6.12 It is proposed that the re-development of the site would be undertaken in phases which would allow Waitrose to continue to trade throughout the re-development process and APPENDIX A/ 1 - 43
provide as much temporary car parking as possible through the process. In this respect, it is proposed to provide additional temporary parking on Old Mill Drive for use during the construction period. The construction phase is estimated between 12–18 months and mitigation measures to minimise dust emission during this time has been submitted in order to reduce the impact upon neighbouring residential properties. Having regard to the nearby Air Quality Management Area, a Low Emission Strategy has been submitted incorporating, amongst other things, measures to reduce the number of deliveries to and from the store. The originally submitted Transport Assessment advises that the extended store would generate a maximum of 9 deliveries per day (4 from articulated vehicles and 5 from smaller rigid vehicles). All delivery vehicles would continue to be routed away from the Manley’s Hill/School Hill junction and would use the existing route via Water Lane.
Principle of development
6.13 With regard to the principle of development, the comments of the Head of Strategic & Community Planning are of particular relevance in the assessment of the application and these are repeated below for ease of reference:
‘’In this case, it is considered, particularly from a sustainability perspective, that such a development within the heart of the town centre, as long as it is well connected to the rest of the town centre, will have a positive effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, in that it will help to increase trade to the smaller businesses in the town centre through the retention of shoppers who would usually travel elsewhere to do their weekly shop and by drawing people from outside Storrington into the town centre. It is therefore, considered, that the proposal complies, in principle, with Policy CP17 of the Core Strategy 2007 and Principle 2 of the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD. ……’
‘Policy DC34 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 sets out that proposed development will be permitted within the Defined Town and Village Centres provided that the proposal does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross and that if the proposal connects and relates well to and does not undermine the vitality and viability of, the existing centre. As the proposed site is located within the Defined Town and Village Centre Boundary of Storrington, included within the Primary Retail Frontages and total sales area does not exceed 2,500 square metres gross (21,382 square feet); the proposal therefore complies, in principle, Policy DC34 and Principle 3 of the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD.’
Regarding the Storrington Old Mill Drive Diamond Planning Brief SPD, the applicant fails to make any reference to the SPD specifically within the application. Although this is concerning, when looking at the proposal against the SPD, it is considered that the proposal complies, in principle, with the SPD….’
For clarification purposes, Principle 2 of the SPD states: ‘Set within an existing town centre it is important that future development of the site maintains and where possible enhances the vitality and viability of the centre, and integrates efficiently with associated services and facilities’.
Principle 3 of the SPD states: ‘The creation of a range of improved and enhanced retail accommodation at the site is encouraged when accompanied by adequate servicing facilities’.
Having regard to the advice of the Head of Strategic & Community Planning, it is therefore considered that the principle of development is acceptable in terms of the relevant policies and guidance contained in the SPD.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 44
6.14 However, concern has been expressed by a number of local residents in respect of the development control policy against which the application has been assessed. In their view, Policy DC35 ‘New retail and leisure development outside the defined town and village centres’ would be the correct policy to be used in the assessment as the resultant total floor area of the development would be some 3,221sqm. Whilst Policy DC34 does indeed state that proposals exceeding 2,500 square metres gross will be considered against the criteria in Policy DC35, nevertheless, it should be noted that the proposal seeks an extension to the existing store. The existing floor area of the Waitrose store is 1,410sqm and the total floor area that exists within the boundary of the application site is 2,814sqm. Therefore, if the policy was to be interpreted as either an extension to the Waitrose store only or as an extension to the total existing floor area within the site, in both scenarios, the increase in floor area would be below 2,500sqm. Policy DC34 is therefore the appropriate policy to be used in the assessment of the proposal.
Highway safety and capacity
6.15 With regard to the issue of highway safety and capacity, the proposal has been the subject of lengthy discussions with West Sussex County Council (WSCC) at the pre-application stage and following the submission of the application. As a result the scheme has evolved and now incorporates significant amendments to the scheme as originally submitted – the most notable being that the closure of Old Mill Drive is no longer proposed following objections from WSCC and the emergency services. However, the applicant has indicated that he is prepared to make a contribution, to be secured by way of a Section 106 Agreement, for the re-surfacing of Old Mill Drive south of the entrance to Old Mill Square which would enable that section of the highway to be used as a ‘shared surface’ whereby vehicles and pedestrians are mixed but due to the detailing of the surfaces generated, traffic speeds are very low with the emphasis being on the pedestrians.
6.16 In response to various concerns raised by local residents regarding the level of traffic likely to be generated by the proposal, the County Surveyor has provided a detailed explanation as to why the use of TRICS is considered to be the most suitable means of ascertaining trip generation from the existing and proposed uses. Members will be aware that the level of traffic likely to be generated by the existing uses on the site would be a material consideration in the assessment of any such proposal. The site currently accommodates a range of existing uses, comprising 748sqm of A1 retail space, a garage (328sqm), a petrol filling station (54sqm), offices (92sqm), restaurant (119sqm), a health and beauty salon (63sqm) and 1,410sqm of A1 food retail, together with 117 car parking spaces. The application proposes 3,130sqm of A1 food retail and 217 car parking spaces. The County Surveyor has advised that TRICS is a nationally accepted database and means of ascertaining trip generation for different land uses for planning purposes. The purpose of TRICS is to find sites that are as closely comparable and compatible with that representing the development site as it is not always possible via TRICS to find sites that are identical to that of the proposed development. The various TRICS selection criteria used by the applicant have been submitted to, reviewed and agreed with WSCC at the pre-application stage and these have been applied to determine the potential trip generation of the proposal. An alternative means of ascertaining trip generation from the existing uses would be to undertake surveys at appropriate times. However, in this instance, this would prove difficult and potentially inaccurate for the reason that the traffic visiting these uses is not contained within a single point of vehicular access, as there would be the option to park elsewhere. Similarly, to survey the traffic entering and exiting the car park that forms part of the proposed development would also not produce a trip rate that could be applied to ascertain the baseline level of traffic, as again those using the car park may not be visiting the application site. For these reasons, TRICS is considered to be a suitable means of ascertaining trip generation from the existing and proposed uses.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 45
6.17 The County Surveyor’s final comments on the proposal are set out in full at Para 3.7 and Members will note that when applying the base and proposed development total trip rates, the County Surveyor has advised that the development as proposed has the potential to reduce the level of traffic generated by the application site and he concludes with regard to the issues of trip generation and capacity impact ‘…in this instance the anticipated impacts resulting from this development are not considered severe and would not justify an objection on the basis of detriment to capacity or the through flow of traffic.’
6.18 Further concerns have been raised by local residents in respect of the trip rates applied from TRICS and the fact that the Transport Assessment (TA) does not refer to permitted and committed developments within the surrounding area. With regard to the first issue a survey of movements has been undertaken by a third party to further support the inappropriate estimations of vehicle movements from the existing and proposed uses. Further consideration has been given by WSCC to the information provided and an additional assessment of the net increase in trips has been undertaken by WSCC. As a result of this further assessment the County Surveyor remains of the view that the trip rates used for the extended store are considered representative and the assessment undertaken is considered to be robust.
6.19 Having regard to the recent approval of 78 dwellings at the former RMC works to the east of Storrington and the 146 dwellings at Thakeham, the County Surveyor has advised that the TAs for both developments did not consider the impact of increased traffic flows at the Manley’s Hill roundabout or through Storrington as the sites were not to result in an increase of 30 or more movements through this junction and thus would not meet the WSCC Transport Assessment threshold to require further assessment. In respect of the age restricted developments at Church Street and Meadowside these developments are not of a scale to warrant full TAs nor would they be expected to generate any significant peak hour traffic flows.
6.20 Deliveries to the extended food store are intended to access the site from School Hill/Thakeham Road via Fryern Road, Mill Lane and Old Mill Drive. The originally submitted TA does detail that the extended store would generate a maximum of 9 deliveries per day. A number of swept path analyses have been provided for a 16.5metre long articulated vehicle. Concern has been expressed that these assessments do show that an HGV would cross the centreline when entering onto Mill Lane from Fryern Road and when exiting Fryern Road onto School Hill. However, the County Surveyor advises that these swept paths were available to and reviewed as part of the Stage One Road Safety Audit. The Safety Auditor has not raised any concerns with the HGVs crossing the centrelines of these roads. Visibility at those junctions where an HGV would cross the centreline is also good, hence an HGV driver would be able to see that a road was clear before emerging from a junction. From on-site observations during the AM peak hour, it is evident that buses along with other articulated vehicles exiting Fryern Road onto School Hill/Thakeham Road presently have to cross the centreline in order to turn left thus this is an existing situation that does not in practice give rise to any issues. In light of this base situation and the low additional number of HGV’s movements from this junction, the County Surveyor does not consider that this development could be resisted on this issue.
6.21 In conclusion in terms of highway safety and capacity, WSCC are satisfied based on the information submitted that the proposal would have no detriment to highway safety or that an increase in terms of vehicular movements would have a severe impact on highway capacity. Accordingly no highway objection is raised to this proposal.
Environmental issues
6.22 Intrinsically linked to the issue of traffic generation is the matter of air quality. The projected number of additional vehicles generated by the proposal is a key element in APPENDIX A/ 1 - 46
assessing the impact on air quality. The Head of Public Health & Licensing did not support the closure of Old Mill Drive due to air quality concerns associated with the displacement of additional traffic onto School Hill. However, as the closure of Old Mill Drive is no longer proposed the identified concerns have been overcome. Furthermore, given WSCC has confirmed that the proposed development has the potential to generate less traffic per day overall when compared to the existing uses on the site, the Head of Public Health & Licensing has advised that the requirement to assess the cumulative effects of development on traffic and air quality has in effect been negated by the predicted reduction in traffic flows as a result of the proposed development. However, he welcomes the applicant’s commitment to a Low Emission Strategy (LES) and would require the measures to be incorporated into an LES Agreement which would include set dates for the periodic review of the LES. This would ensure that the strategy is based upon ‘best available knowledge’ and that the measures included as future commitments are incorporated into the strategy at the earliest opportunity.
6.23 With regard to the issue of noise the Head of Public Health & Licensing has advised that the noise impacts during demolition and construction phases will be considerable but these have not been addressed in the noise assessment. The implementation of the considerate constructors scheme is welcomed however the detail on noise control during the works has not been made clear. During the demolition and construction phases it would therefore be necessary to control adverse environmental impacts by means of a construction environmental management plan (CEMP). He therefore recommends that a condition be imposed to secure the submission of a CEMP. Furthermore given the proximity of a number of residential properties to the site it is recommended that a condition regarding the hours of deliveries to the store be imposed in order to protect the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers. In respect of land contamination, the conclusions and recommendations of the Land Contamination Assessment are accepted. Consequently, no objection is raised by the Head of Public Health & Licensing subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Character and appearance of the area and adjoining Conservation Area
6.24 In relation to the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and in particular to the adjoining Conservation Area, it is acknowledged that the Council’s Design and Conservation Officer objected to the proposal as originally submitted. Specifically, the increase in the bulk, height and siting of the proposed store in combination with the removal of the trees was considered to result in an imposing impact on the character of the street scene. This concern was exacerbated by the choice of materials and detailing of the Old Mill Drive elevation which would appear stark causing the building to be particularly prominent and detrimental to the setting of the conservation area.
6.25 Following discussions with the applicant amended plans were submitted incorporating the following design changes:-
Reconfiguration of the store layout to incorporate the coffee shop at the Old Mill Drive/Old Mill Square corner. Introduction of flint panels, glazed strips and brick piers to the Old Mill Drive elevation. Reduction in scale of the glazed feature housing the escape stair to Old Mill Drive Additional landscaping throughout the scheme Upper level car park deck set back on the northern boundary Creation of a new vehicular access off Mill Lane Stair and ramp access from car park to pathway at Dems/Havant House Inclusion of full height glazing on the Old Mill Drive/Old Mill square elevation Inclusion of curved canopy to the Old Mill Square entrance
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 47
Following consideration of the amendments, the Conservation & Design Officer has advised that in her opinion the elevation facing Old Mill Drive would be likely to preserve the setting of the Conservation Area. In particular, the reconfiguration of the internal layout with the coffee shop being relocated to the Old Mill Drive/Old Mill Square corner and the inclusion of full height glazing at this point would help to add an element of connectivity between the store and the High Street and it would provide an ‘active frontage’ to the Old Mill Drive elevation. The central glazed access has been reduced in scale and height thereby reducing its previous dominance within the scheme and consequently its’ impact on the street scene. The introduction of flint panels, glazed strips and brick piers to the Old Mill Drive elevation, are considered to reflect local vernacular materials found in Storrington and the South Downs and would help to integrate the proposal within the surrounding area. The amendments to this elevation, together with the proposed additional landscaping, would help to break up and add interest to what was previously considered a very bare and imposing feature.
6.26 In terms of landscaping, the Landscape Officer has advised that he does not consider a high quality landscape design has been demonstrated by the applicant’s indicative proposals. In his view, and with reference to Old Mill Drive, too much emphasis has been placed on a tree lined ‘roadway’ as opposed to a more considered design of focal spaces along the Drive. In relation to Mill Lane there is concern that the proposed planting would be restricted to relatively narrow planting beds and is therefore considered inadequate. In conclusion, the Landscape Officer is of the opinion that the proposed ‘enhancements’ do not outweigh other adverse impacts and therefore on balance he continues to register an objection to the proposal.
6.27 The scheme as originally submitted was considered to represent a large imposing building which would be visually intrusive in the street scene and would thereby have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area and the setting of the adjoining Conservation Area. Your officers expressed particular concern with regard to the treatment of the service yard boundary wall and the lack of connectivity with the High Street as exemplified by the location of the store’s main entrance within Old Mill Square. Following lengthy discussions with the applicant amended plans were submitted and the main design changes have been detailed in Paras.1.4 & 6.24. It is acknowledged that there has not been a reduction in the scale and height of the proposal, however, the proposed design changes are considered to overcome your officers’ concern with regard to the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Specifically, the amendments to the Old Mill Drive elevation, in terms of design and materials, are considered to help successfully integrate the proposed development within the street scene as would the relocation of the coffee shop which would provide a more ‘active frontage’ to Old Mill Drive and encourage pedestrian links with the High Street.
6.28 It is accepted that the proposal would have a greater visual impact on the street scene than the existing development, however, the existing development is of no particular architectural merit and is not considered to make a positive contribution to the character of the surrounding area. Whilst the proposal retains its scale and bulk as originally submitted, nevertheless, given the proposed amendments to the scheme in terms of its design and appearance, it is considered that the proposal would now enhance the character and appearance of the surrounding area and would also accord with the guidance contained in the SPD through the use of modern materials, construction and design. It is considered that the proposed re-development of the site would therefore have a resultant positive effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, in that it would help to increase trade to the smaller businesses in the town centre through the retention of shoppers who would usually travel elsewhere to do their weekly shop and also by drawing people from outside Storrington into the town centre. Furthermore, the proposal would provide employment for an additional 80 members of staff which would be likely to also have a positive effect on the local economy. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 48
Conclusion
6.29 In conclusion, no objection has been raised to the proposal on policy grounds, highway safety and capacity, environmental issues and impact on the character of the surrounding area for the reasons given above. Whilst the Landscape Officer has objected to the scheme, it is your officers’ view that it would be difficult to justify a reason for refusal on landscape grounds alone and a more acceptable landscaping scheme could be secured by condition. Whilst the full or partial pedestrianisation of Old Mill Drive has not been achieved through this application, nevertheless, as previously advised the applicant has indicated that he is prepared to make a contribution towards public realm improvements of Old Mill Drive which would further enhance linkages with the shopping accommodation within the High Street and the wider village centre. It is therefore considered that the scheme as amended is acceptable and that planning permission should be granted.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Planning permission be granted subject to the completion of the Sec 106 Agreement and the following conditions:
1. A2 – Full Permission 2. M1 – Approval of Materials 3. Deliveries to the store shall be restricted to 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, 0800- 1800 on Saturdays and no deliveries on Sundays and Bank Holidays. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007. 4. Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Environmental Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall be implemented and maintained for the demolition and construction phases of the development. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007. 5. No part of the development shall be first occupied until such time as the vehicular accesses onto Old Mill Drive, Mill Lane and School Hill have been constructed in accordance with plans and details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety 6. Car parking space No part of the development shall be first occupied until the car parking has been constructed in accordance with the approved site plan. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose. Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use 7. Construction Management Plan 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, o the anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction, o the method of access and routing of vehicles during construction, o the parking of vehicles by site operatives and visitors, o the loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste, o the storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development, APPENDIX A/ 1 - 49
o the erection and maintenance of security hoarding, o 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), o measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition and construction, lighting for construction and security, o details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area. 8. Travel Plan Statement No part of the retail store extension shall be first occupied until such time as a Travel Plan Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan Statement shall be completed in accordance with the latest guidance and good practice documentation as published by the Department for Transport or as advised by the Highway Authority. Reason: To encourage and promote sustainable transport. 9. Bus Turning and Passenger Infrastructure No development shall take place until plans and details showing the integration of the proposed bus turning area within Old Mill Drive, bus passenger infrastructure and footways have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety. 10. Servicing Management Plan No part of the retail store extension shall be first occupied until such time as until a Servicing Management Plan for has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall set out the arrangements for the loading and unloading of deliveries, in terms of location and frequency, and set out arrangements for the collection of refuse. Once occupied the use shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved Plan. Reason – to safeguard the operation of the public highway. 11. L1 (b Hard and soft landscaping
Notwithstanding the submitted landscape proposals shown on plans..... prior to the commencement of development full details of hard and soft landscaping works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall be submitted concurrently as a complete scheme, unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority, and shall comprise:
· Planting and seeding plans and schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers · Tree pit and staking/underground guying details · A written hard and soft specification (National Building Specification compliant) of planting (including ground preparation, cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment) Existing and proposed levels. · Hard surfacing materials: layout, colour, size, texture, coursing and levels · Walls and railings: location, type, heights and materials · Minor artefacts and structures – location, size and colour and type of street furniture, signage, refuse units and lighting columns and lanterns
The approved scheme shall be implemented in full accordance with these details. Planting shall be carried out according to a timetable to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development.
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 APPENDIX A/ 1 - 50
similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason : To ensure a satisfactory development in the interests of amenity in accordance with Policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) 12. Trenches and Underground services
Prior to the commencement of development details of all underground trenching requirements for services, including the positions of soakaways, service ducts, foul, grey and storm water systems, manhole covers and all other underground service facilities, and required ground excavations there for, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. These details shall demonstrate effective coordination with the landscape scheme submitted pursuant to condition ...., and with existing trees on the site. All such underground services shall be installed in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect roots of important trees and hedgerows on the site in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) and to ensure provision of a satisfactory landscape scheme. 13. Landscape Management and Maintenance plan Within 6 months of the commencement of the development a detailed long term 25 year Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan for all landscape areas shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing.
The plan shall include: · Aims and Objectives · A description of Landscape Components · Management Prescriptions · Details of maintenance operations and their timing · Details of the parties/orgainisations who will be maintain and manage the site, to include a plan delineating the areas that they will be responsible for
The plan shall demonstrate full integration of landscape, biodiversity and arboricultural considerations. The areas of planting shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan, unless any variation is approved in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development and in the interests of amenity and nature conservation in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007). 14 M9 – Sustainable Construction 15. O1 – Hours of Working 16. 02 – Burning of Materials 17 No development shall take place until a surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The drainage strategy should demonstrate the surface water run-off generated up to and including the 100 years plus 20%. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall also include: The peak discharge rates and together with associated control structures and their position. Details of the drainage system capacity (e.g. 1:30 year). Safe management of critical storm water storage up to the 1:100year event. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 51
Overland flow routes for events in excess of the 1:100 ( 20% Climate change). Details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed after completion Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding both on and off site. 18. Construction of the development shall not commence until details of the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage disposal have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. Reason: To ensure that the development is properly drained. 19. No development shall take place until a Construction Phasing plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General development Control Policies. 20. L2a – Protection of trees
Notes to Applicant
1. Prior to the formal submission of detailed hard and soft landscape proposals pursuant to condition no 12 above the developers Landscape Architect is strongly recommended to meet with HDC's Landscape Architect to discuss the proposals, both to ensure there is effective coordination between/a unified design approach is achieved to those hard and soft landscape works carried out directly associated with the new Waitrose store and the public realm works to Old Mill Drive and The Conservation Area which will be carried out by HDC. This will need to include the need to address specific detailed design issues raised regarding the precise orientation of the entrance steps and pedestrian ramp and regarding planting, including those identified in the above consultation response.
2. Section 278 Agreement of the 1980 Highways Act - Works within the Highway The applicant is advised to enter into a legal agreement with West Sussex County Council, as Highway Authority, to cover the off-site highway works. The applicant is requested to contact The Implementation Team Leader (01243 642105) to commence this process. The applicant is advised that it is an offence to undertake any works within the highway prior to the agreement being in place.
3. A formal application for connection to the water supply is required in order to service this development. Please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James house, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester SO23 9EH ( tel 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
1. ISHO1 – The proposal would serve to improve and maintain the existing shopping facilities in the area. 2. ICAB3 – The proposal does not have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene or locality. 3. ICAB5 – The proposal would improve the vitality and viability of this part of the town centre. 4. ITHP3 – The vehicular traffic associated with the development would not adversely affect the safety and convenience of other highway users.
Background Papers: DC/11/2334 APPENDIX A/ 2 - 1.
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th December 2012
Retrospective application for change of use from agricultural to equestrian stud farm, keeping of horses including retention of DEVELOPMENT: mobile field shelters, dog breeding and associated mobile kennelling, stationing of mobile containers and retention of mess room/mobile home
Southway Stud SITE: Harbolets Road West Chiltington
WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/12/0851 APPLICANT: Ms M Edwards
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON AGENDA: Category of Development
RECOMMENDATION: To refuse planning permission and authorise enforcement action to remove unauthorised structures and cessation of uses.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of land from agriculture to equestrian stud farm, and the retention of mobile field shelters, dog breeding and associated mobile kennelling, stationing of mobile containers, and retention of mobile home used as a mess room.
1.2 The application seeks to retain 3 blocks of stables each 6 metres wide and 3.5 metres deep, two kennels one 3.1 metres wide and 2.6 metres deep, and the other 6 metres wide and 1 metre wide with associated runs. Four containers are also on
Contact: Nicola Mason Extension: 5289 APPENDIX A/ 2 - 2.
site, and an oil tank, and also a hay store 6 metres wide and 3.5 metres deep. A mess room is also included in the application which would be 9.3 metres wide, 4.5 metres deep at its furthest point and 6.5 metres high. The structure is a timber clad mobile home and contains a lounge, kitchen, bootroom, bathroom and single bedroom.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.3 The application site is located on the northern side of Harbolets Road, outside of any defined built up area boundary. Access to the site is via a single access track which is also used as a public footpath. A hedge encloses the site to the east where the footpath runs alongside the boundary, whilst on the southern boundary there is a part wicker screen and hedgerow.
1.4 The structures placed within the site are located close to the eastern boundary and are laid out in a linear form along the boundary. Within the site the area has been subdivided into paddocks with a horse walker. On the day of the site visit there were pigs on land within the site, horses, spaniels and Jack Russell Terriers.
PLANNING HISTORY
1.5 DC/07/0710 – In April 2007 an application under the prior notification procedure to rebuild and harden the existing farm track was refused.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 Town & Country Planning Act 1990
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 Relevant government policies are contained within the National Planning Policy Framework which was published in March and has replaced guidance contained within existing PPG’s and PPS’s.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP2 (Environmental Quality) CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development), CP5 (Built Up Areas and Previously Developed Land), CP13 (Infrastructure Requirements), CP15 (Rural Strategy) and CP19 (Managing Travel Demand and Widening Choice of Transport) are considered relevant to this application.
2.4 General Development Control Policies DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC9 (Development Principles), DC27 (Essential Rural Working Dwellings), DC29 (Equestrian Development) and DC40 (Transport and Access) are also considered relevant to this application. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 3.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 The Councils Public Health and Licensing Officer has raised no objection to the application but has suggested a number of conditions.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.2 West Sussex County Council has not raised any highways concerns with regards to the application. An application would need to be submitted to divert the Public Footpath if the application were to be approved.
3.3 Southern Water has noted that there are no public sewers in the area to serve the development, and that the Environment Agency would need to be consulted with regards to the septic tank drainage, and the Councils own technical staff with regards to soakaways.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.4 West Chiltington Parish Council has strongly objected to the application to set up a business on agricultural land in open countryside. The site had no previous buildings and the mess room is used as sleeping accommodation regularly. Approval of the application would set an unwelcome precedent in the countryside. Applicant has tried to restrict use of the footpath.
3.5 Ten letters have been received supporting the application on the grounds that: the use of the site has led to improvement of the land, local business’s are benefitting from the use of the land, the buildings on the site are unobtrusive in the landscape, the provision of a mess room and accommodation is vital for the care of horses when foaling.
3.6 Seven letters have been received objecting to the application on the grounds that; the land has no history of development, the access is onto a dangerous bend, business is not agricultural, access to the footpath is being restricted, land should be maintained for farming, lack of facilities (sewerage) on site, burning of manure and generator causes noise and smell, noise from dogs barking continuously, applicants have been living on site for last 2 years the application sets a precedent.
APPENDIX A/ 2 - 4.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
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 the application. Consideration of Human Rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
It is not considered that the proposal will have any material impact on crime and disorder issues.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENT
6.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of land from agriculture to equestrian stud farm, the keeping of horses including the retention of mobile field shelters, dog breeding and associated mobile kennelling, stationing of mobile containers and retention of mess room/mobile home. The application site is in a rural location outside of any built up area boundary as defined in the Horsham District Local Development Framework Proposals Map. The countryside policies of the Local Development Framework therefore apply.
6.2 Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies requires that development outside built up area boundaries should essentially require a countryside location and in addition either support the needs of agriculture or forestry, enables the extraction of minerals or the disposal of waste, provides for quiet informal recreational use, or ensures the sustainable development of rural areas. Any development permitted must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside location and must not lead, either individually or cumulatively, to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside. It is considered that the proposed use of the site for equestrian purposes may require a rural location however, it is considered that the dog breeding element is not essential to a countryside location. It is also considered that the isolated position of the site would not ensure the sustainable development of the rural area, and would result in an increase in the overall level of activity in a previously undeveloped rural location.
6.3 Policy DC29 of the General Development Control Polices refers to applications for Equestrian Development and states that the re-use of existing buildings should be considered prior to applications for new buildings. The policy also requires that the proposal is appropriate in scale and level of activity and in keeping with its location and surroundings and does not result in sporadic development leading to an intensification of buildings in the countryside.
6.4 It is considered that the proposed change of use of land to equestrian and dog breeding in this location would have an adverse impact on the rural character of the area. The site is set back from the road by some 230 metres and is accessed via a narrow track which is also shared as a public footpath. The site due to its distance from the roadway does not reflect the pattern of surrounding development which is APPENDIX A/ 2 - 5.
linear in form following the pattern of the road network. The current site was open agricultural land prior to occupation by the applicant and consequently all facilities have had to be brought onto the land to enable it to be used as a stud farm and for dog breeding. The proposed use of the land for equestrian and dog breeding purposes has involved the provision of a mobile home and the accumulation of structures on the site for the storage of feed, tack, machinery and for the shelter of the animals themselves. It is considered that the structures together with the hardstanding has resulted in a form of development which is of a level and form which is out of keeping with the rural appearance of the area and would result in sporadic development in the countryside. It is considered that the number of structures on the site is inappropriate in scale to the undeveloped nature of the land and that the level of activity would be inappropriate in this rural, quiet location.
6.5 Policy CP15 requires any development in the rural area to be appropriate to its location and contribute to the wider rural economy, be contained within suitably located buildings wherever possible, and result in a substantial environmental improvement and reduce the impact on the countryside particularly where exceptionally new buildings are involved. It is considered that insufficient evidence has been submitted as part of the application to determine the economic benefit to the local economy of the proposal, with no short or long term business plan provided. No details have been submitted indicating how the proposal could represent sustainable farm diversification. It is considered that the proposed change of use of the site with the paraphernalia and hard standing required for a stud farm and dog breeding would not result in a substantial environmental improvement to an area which was previously undeveloped agricultural land, and that therefore the proposal would be contrary to Core Policy 15.
6.6 The development would introduce a mixed use of equestrian and dog breeding in what was an otherwise undeveloped stretch of rural land. The thrust of the policies in the Local Development Framework is to protect the countryside and its landscape character from development inappropriate in form and scale. Moreover, it would amount to additional sporadic development in this location and its scale would result in a significant increase in the level of activity at the site further eroding the open countryside and its landscape character. It is therefore your officers view that the application should be refused.
7. RECOMMENDATION
7.1 To refuse planning permission for the following reason and authorise enforcement action to remove unauthorised structures and cessation of uses.
1) The proposed use of the land would represent an unacceptable level and scale of development that would have a detrimental impact on the rural character and visual amenities of this countryside location. Furthermore the proposal would constitute an undesirable element of sporadic development in the rural area. The proposal thus conflicts with policies DC1, DC2, DC9 and DC29 of the Horsham District Council Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007), and policies CP1 and CP15 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007).
APPENDIX A/ 2 - 6.
Background Papers: DC/12/0851 Contact Officer: Nicola Mason
WK3/DC071028/46 APPENDIX A/ 3 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th December 2012 DEVELOPMENT: Change of use from bed and breakfast hotel to private residence SITE: Nash Manor Horsham Road Steyning West Sussex WARD: Steyning APPLICATION: DC/12/1857 APPLICANT: Mrs M Esler
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Request from Councillor Cockman & Councillor Rogers.
RECOMMENDATION: To REFUSE planning permission.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 This application seeks planning permission to change the use of part of the building from Bed and Breakfast (Class C1) use to a single residential dwelling (Class C3). There are no internal of external changes proposed to the building and vehicular access will continue to be obtained from the existing access to the north-west of the building.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2 The application site is located outside the built up area and comprises a large detached two storey building with accommodation within the roof space. The proposed change of use relates to the B&B accommodation on the ground floor which incorporates a sitting room, kitchen, office, utility room and dining room and six bedrooms at the first floor level. The submitted plans show that there are two one bedroom private residences located at the northerly and southerly ends of the building.
1.3 To the west of the building there is a hard standing area and there is a customer car park located to the north-west of the building. Beyond the hard standing to the west there is an extensive grassed garden area which then continues round the southerly side and easterly rear section of the building.
Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215382 APPENDIX A/ 3 - 2
1.4 Nash Manor is accessed from Horsham Road to the west via a track which provides access to a number of residential dwellings. The site is surrounded by other residential properties to the north, east and south. To the west there is a small group of single storey dwellings situated to the east of the site and the larger dwellings comprising Nash Farm and Nash Grange are located to the north-east and south-east of the application site.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 - Section 1 (Building a strong, competitive economy) and Section 3 (Supporting a prosperous rural economy) are considered to be the relevant National planning policy guidance relating to this proposal.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy 2007 – Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP14, CP15 & CP18.
2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007 – Policies DC1, DC9, DC39.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.5 ST/40/01 – Planning permission was granted in 2001 for the removal of condition 1 from ST/55/83 which related to restricting the permission to a named occupier.
ST/6/91 – Planning permission was granted in 1991 for change of use from hotel to rest home.
ST/55/83 – Planning permission was granted in 1983 for the renewal of temporary permission ST/24/80.
ST/12/83 – Planning permission was granted in 1983 for a change of use from guest house and holiday flats to residential home for the retired.
ST/34/80 – Planning permission was granted in 1980 for the renewal of ST/66/78.
ST/61/81 – Planning permission was granted in 1981 for a guest house and/or holiday flats for maximum of 16 persons including family and staff.
ST/66/78 – Planning permission was granted in 1978 for change of use of first floor four rooms for guest house to self catering holiday units.
APPENDIX A/ 3 - 3
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 The Council’s Strategic Planning department have provided the following concluding comments in relation to this application.
“Additional information as outlined above is required regarding the viability of the existing use. As the proposal currently stands, it is considered that due to the lack of relevant information and evidence provided regarding the viability of the existing B&B, a strategic policy objection is raised in principle to the change of use of this tourist facility as it does not comply with the objectives of CP14 of the Core Strategy (2007). However, this policy allows for some circumstances where the loss of tourist facilities would be acceptable, therefore, should the applicant provide additional information which clearly demonstrates that the B&B is no longer feasible; or should there be evidence of an alternative comparable facility within the vicinity of this property then there may be scope to allow the change of use of this building from the current use as a B&B to a residential dwelling. Should further evidence become available prior to consideration of the application I would be happy to comment further.
In conclusion then it is noted that the applicant currently resides at the property and the proposal is to allow the property to revert back to its original use as a dwelling to be occupied solely by the applicant. As such, it is acknowledged that this proposal would not allow a new residential property in the countryside; nonetheless, given the proposed loss of the B&B facility, particularly near to the SDNP, it is considered that the overall aims and objectives of policies CP14, CP18 & DC39 of ensuring the protection of tourist facilities, have not been met. Therefore, on balance, without the required evidence, a strategic planning objection would be is raised to this proposal.”
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.2 West Sussex County Council Highways department have raised no highways concerns with this application providing the proposed car parking provision does not exceed the WSCC Maximum Standards. The Highways Authority have also confirmed that the proposal is unlikely to result in any material increase or any detrimental impact over and above what is currently permitted.
3.3 Steyning Parish Council have raised no objection to this application and have advised that the Parish Committee supports the proposed change of use.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.4 No letters of public representation have been received in relation to this application.
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 the application. Consideration of human rights is an integral part of the planning assessment set out below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the proposal would have a material impact on crime and disorder.
APPENDIX A/ 3 - 4
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The application seeks planning permission to change the use of part of the building known as Nash Manor from a Bed & Breakfast (Class C1) to a residential dwelling (Class C3).
6.2 The proposed change of use relates to the six bedrooms on the first floor of the building and the sitting room, kitchen, office, utility room and dining room at the ground floor level of the building. On checking the planning history of the site, it would seem that the building previously formed a residential dwelling and parts of the ground and first floor of the building received planning permission during the eighties to be used as holiday let units and B&B use. Since 2001, the ground floor and first floor sections of the building have been used within B&B use (Class C3) and the accommodation has been used in conjunction with weekend workshops that took place at Nash Manor and ceased at the end of October 2012. Some additional information has been submitted by the applicant in relation to the use of the site over the past two years. During the period of January 2010 to October 2012, the workshops have generated 72 participants on a monthly basis (this however excludes the months of December to February). Since the end of October to 16th November 2012 a total of 6 people have stayed at the B&B for stays which varied from 1 night to 11 nights in total.
6.3 The Horsham District Tourism Strategy states that there appears to be a shortage of B&B facilities within the District and that high-quality self catering and B&B facilities are likely to sustain local services. When read in conjunction with tourism policy DC39 of the General Development Control Policies, policy CP14 of the Core Strategy states that proposals that would result in the loss of sites and premises for the provision of community facilities, leisure or cultural activities will be resisted. When considering the loss of such facilities, CP14 requires as a minimum that the applicant demonstrate that continued use of the service is no longer feasible having regard to appropriate marketing, the demand for the use of the premises, it usability and the identification of a potential future occupier. No details regarding whether the B&B has been marketed appropriately or relating to the demand for the use of the premises has been submitted with this application. It is therefore considered that the proposed change of use and loss of the B&B facility would conflict with policy CP14 of the Core Strategy.
6.4 Within accompanying information submitted with the application, the applicant and agent state that the B&B is not viable as a tourism business based on the rural location of the premises. The site is however located approximately 1.5km from the centre of village of Steyning, therefore, the people who visit the B&B could readily access pubs, restaurants and shops in the village. It is however noted that visitors are mainly restricted to using a vehicle as there are no safe pedestrian links to Steyning village. The sites proximity to the South Downs National Park is also considered to be relevant, as visitors may come to enjoy the rural character of this area, and as such the B&B facility could provide an important tourist facility within the National Park.
6.5 Within the accompanying Planning Statement, a number of hotels and B&Bs are listed many of which provide tourist accommodation within nearby village centres. However, given that no marketing exercise has appeared to have taken place for the B&B use and that a lack of information has been submitted in relation to the demand for the use of this B&B in accordance with policy CP18, it is considered that the listing of other tourism accommodation in the local area would not justify the loss of this B&B facility on its own.
6.6 The applicant currently resides in the B&B part of the building in order to oversee the B&B business and would like to continue to stay in the dwelling when she retires from the business. Whilst this could not form part of the consideration of this planning application, it is however noted that there are other areas of the building particularly the residential units APPENDIX A/ 3 - 5
at the northerly and southerly ends which appear from the information submitted with this application to fall within the same ownership as the B&B and these could be potential areas in which the applicant could reside within.
6.7 In conclusion, it is considered that this proposed change of use would conflict with planning policies CP14 and DC39 and Officers therefore feel unable to support the loss of this B&B facility on the basis of the information submitted with this application.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that permission be REFUSED subject to the following reason:
The proposed change of use would result in the loss of a premises currently used as tourism facility and it has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that its continued use as a Bed & Breakfast facility or service is no longer feasible having regard to appropriate marketing, the demand for the use of the site, its usability and the identification of a potential future occupier. The proposed change of use would therefore conflict with policies CP14 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2007 and Policy DC39 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies 2007.
Background Papers: DC/12/1857 Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier APPENDIX A/ 4 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18 December 2012 Erection of 2 No. single-storey industrial units for B1(Business), B2 DEVELOPMENT: (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage or Distribution) use plus associated parking SITE: Henfield Business Park Shoreham Road Henfield West Sussex WARD: Henfield APPLICATION: DC/12/1990 APPLICANT: HHC Development
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Request to vary a Section 106 agreement previously agreed at Committee
RECOMMENDATION: To Grant Planning Permission subject to the completion of a S106 legal agreement securing contributions and that Section 106 agreement (S106/0795) is varied as requested.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application & to seek the approval of this Committee to vary the Section 106 agreement as requested.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks permission for the erection of two new business units within Henfield Business Park. The proposed business units would measure approximately 24.1metres in width by 14metres in depth with an overall ridge height of 5.7metres. In addition to this, there would be a small porch on the western elevation measuring 2.1metres in depth and 6.8metres in width which would have an overall ridge height of 3.2metres.
1.2 The two units would be identical in design with roller doors on both the east and west elevations and a number of small windows. The buildings themselves would be constructed of green coated pressed steel metal cladding with brick faced block work. The plans show that the internal layout is to be determined by the occupants.
1.3 Externally the building would be surrounded by hardstanding and there would be 10 car parking spaces to the western edge of the site, and to the southern edge of the site would be lorry parking.
Contact Officer: Emma Greening Tel: 01403 215122 APPENDIX A/ 4 - 2
1.4 The freehold units would be occupied by Boretech and Quad Vehicle Consultants, who also plan to purchase two of the freehold units approved under DC/10/2400 once these are completed.
1.5 This proposal also seeks to vary a Deed of Revocation and Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which was completed on 16 February 2000 (Reference S106 0795).
The agreement states that:
“The Second Owner and the Third Owner agree with the Local Planning Authority that following commencement of the Development and thereafter for the period of eighteen years the Yellow Land shall not be occupied other than by R Vinall (Builders) Limited (Co. Registration Number 2798279) whose registered office is situate at 1 Church Street, Henfield, West Sussex.”
1.6 Application HF/32/98 permitted the erection of B1 & B8 units and associated parking and turning at Henfield Business Park in February 2000. This application was subject to the S106 being completed and signed.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.7 The application site is located outside of the Built up Area boundary and therefore countryside policies would apply. To the south of the application site lays ancient woodland and there is a public footpath which runs to the east of the application site.
1.8 The site itself is an established business park located to the east of the A2037 and to the south of Henfield. There are presently 25 units on the site, along with a Royal Mail Delivery unit, and there are five units under construction which were permitted under DC/10/2400.
1.9 The access to the site would be through the existing business park. To the south of the application site is an area of Ancient Woodland, Horton Golf Club lies to the east and the northern boundary to the Business Park is screened by trees with open fields beyond.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework 2012: Achieving Sustainable Development, Section 1 (Building a strong and competitive economy), Section 3 (Supporting a prosperous rural economy), Section 4 (Promoting Sustainable Transport)
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007): Policies CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP2 (Environmental Quality), CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development), CP10 (Employment Provision), CP11 (Employment Sites and Premises), CP13 (Infrastructure Requirements) & CP15 (Rural Strategy)
2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies (2007). Policies DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC8 (Renewable Energy and Climate Change), DC9 (Development Principles), APPENDIX A/ 4 - 3
DC25 (Rural Economic Development and the Expansion of Existing Rural Commercial Sites / Intensification of Uses), & DC40 (Transport & Access)
PLANNING HISTORY
2.5 HF/15/90 Use of land for industrial estate, including relocation of R Vinall Buildings Yard & Milcot Industrial Estate, Permitted October 1994
HF/32/98 Erection of B1 & B8 units and associated parking and turning, Permitted February 2000
HF/111/98 Erection of building to provide a royal mail local delivery office, Permitted March 2000
HF/49/00 Erection of B1 & B8 industrial unit, parking and treatment plant, Refused November 2000
HF/133/00 Erection of B1, B2 & B8 industrial units, Permitted November 2001
HF/37/01 Installation of sir inlet and air extract flues to roof to serve spray booth, Permitted June 2001
HF/56/01 Erection of Class B1, B2 & B8 industrial unit, parking & turning, Refused September 2001
HF/64/02 Erection of a B1, B2 & B8 class industrial unit, Permitted August 2002
DC/06/1115 Single storey extension & open storage, Permitted July 2006
DC/10/2400 Expansion of Henfield Business Park including the erection of an industrial building containing 5 units, a new access, parking and cycle provision, permitted May 2011
There is no other relevant planning history for the site.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Strategic Planning: This application has been considered against the Local Development Framework, in particular policies in the Core Strategy (2007) Development Plan Document and the General Development Control Policies (2007) Development Plan Document. The recently adopted National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also relevant to the consideration of the application.
I note that this application is for the erection of 2 single-storey industrial units for B1, B2 and B8 use plus associated parking.
The site is located outside the designated built-up area as defined by Policy CP5 of the Core Strategy (2007) and is therefore considered to be in a countryside location. This application by virtue of its countryside location, and due to the nature of the proposal is subject to Policies CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP2 (Environmental Quality), CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development), CP11 (Employment Sites and Premises) & CP15 (Rural Strategy) of the Core Strategy (2007), and Policies DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC8 (Renewable Energy and Climate Change), DC9 (Development Principles), DC19 APPENDIX A/ 4 - 4
(Employment Site / Land Protection), DC25 (Rural Economic Development and the Expansion of Existing Rural Commercial Sites / Intensification of Uses), & DC40 (Transport & Access) of the General Development Control Policies (2007). Any proposal will need to comply with all the relevant policies of the Horsham District Local Development Framework.
The Presumption in favour of sustainable development is a golden thread running through the NPPF. In addition, one of the core planning principles of the NPPF is supporting a prosperous rural economy, this states that planning should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development. To promote a strong rural economy, local plans should support sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas.
The proposal should be in compliance with policies DC1, CP1 and CP2 which restrict any development in the countryside to that which can be justified as being essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry, the extraction of minerals, disposal of waste or quiet informal recreational use. These policies set out that any development must ensure the sustainable development of rural areas and should maintain and enhance the landscape character of the District’s countryside, villages and towns. Where development is essential it must not lead to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside and therefore, accessibility to transport other than the private car will be of particular relevance in meeting sustainability objectives.
Policy CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007 sets out that sustainable rural economic development will be encouraged and 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. However, any development must be appropriate to its countryside location, should be contained, where possible, within suitably located buildings, result in the environmental improvement of the site and should not harm the character of the area by virtue of the nature and level of activity involved and the type and amount of traffic generated. As with the NPPF, the emphasis is on sustainable rural economic development. This site is considered to be relatively appropriate to its countryside location, is served by public transport, and is within a relatively short distance from the village centre of Henfield, and as such appears to relate well to sustainability objectives.
Policy CP11 sets out that the Council should provide a range of locations, types and sizes of employment premises and sites to meet the needs of the local economy and that more efficient use should be made of existing sites and premises which are not fully used because they are unsuited to modern business needs. Policy CP11 also sets out that provision of employment floorspace will be informed by the Employment Land Review.
The Employment Land Review (ELR) 2010 identifies Henfield Business Park as a small good quality local industrial estate comprising B1(c) units together with a Royal Mail sorting office. It also identified that whilst there is physical potential to extend the site to the east it is not thought that there is sufficient demand to support this, and despite the quality of the unit, there remain 3 vacancies within the estate.
It is recognised that the situation on the site may have changed somewhat since the ELR, in particular the demand for units and the number of vacant units on the site. It is noted that the agent has stated in their design and access statement that Henfield Business Park is fully occupied and has been for several years. Should this be the case and the demand for units on the site has increased then it is considered that the principle of the proposed development would be acceptable.
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 5
Policy DC25 adds that development should relate to the needs of the rural local economy and proposals for the expansion of existing commercial buildings / intensification of uses should be limited to the expansion and / or adaption plans which are essential to the operation of established businesses. The information submitted by the applicant does provide evidence of the need for this business to expand and to relocate to Henfield Business Park.
Meeting the local need is a key issue for an application such as this, which proposes the expansion of an existing rural commercial site. It is noted that the agent has set out a compelling case for this in the Design and Access Statement, but this is at odds slightly with the ELR, although it is acknowledged above that the ELR dates back to October 2010 and circumstances on the site may have changed somewhat.
Before determining this application we would advise the case officer to investigate the current situation on site in order to be satisfied that expanding the Business Park will not leave parts of the existing Park unnecessarily vacant or redundant. You as case officer after a site visit will be best placed to assess whether any units have subsequently become available and if so whether the proposed use would be appropriately sited within any vacant units on the site. It is our view that the intensification of uses or redevelopment of a commercial site in the countryside should be investigated thoroughly in the first instance before expansion proposals are considered.
The applicant states in the Planning, Design and Access Statement that the proposal would mean the relocation of the companies existing site at Golding Barn Estate. Concern is raised regarding the future of the vacated site, if you were minded to grant this application permission. I suggest you seek further information from the applicant whether the future of the existing site has been considered. Policy DC19 of the General Development Control Policies sets out that in the case of company relocation from an Employment Protection Zone, or other commercial premises within built up areas, the Council is satisfied that the proposal constitutes the relocation of badly sited uses; that relocation can be achieved at existing commercial land allocations or from existing stock of commercial premises; or in a suitable new location and that an acceptable future use of the vacated site can be secured. In the context of this application, it is noted that Golding Barn Estate is not an Employment Protection Zone and is not within any BUA. However, the essence of the policy is such, that even if the site is outside a built up area, consideration of the future of the existing site is still important.
In addition, concern is raised regarding criterion b (iv) of DC25, as it is understood that the application site is within land which is the subject of a legal agreement and is effectively reserved to allow for the relocation of businesses from another site within Henfield to Henfield Business Park. As case officer you will be best placed to assess whether the proposed siting of the new units would be acceptable on this site. You may wish to consult with the Council’s Legal department concerning the S106 agreement.
Policy DC40 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 sets out that development should provide safe and adequate means of access and make adequate provision for all users. The applicants do not appear to have provided any information on the vehicular movements that would be generated by the proposed new units, as case officer you should request this information from the applicant. However, it is not appropriate for me to comment further on this matter and once this information has been received I suggest you seek the views of the Highways Authority.
Further policies that need to be taken into account are Policy CP3 of the Core Strategy 2007 which seeks to improve the quality of new development in order to gain community support as a beneficial addition to the local environment; Policy DC8 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 which favours developments which ensure that APPENDIX A/ 4 - 6
measures are incorporated that reduce the impact of climate change and carbon dioxide emissions; and also Policy DC9, of General Development Control Policies 2007 document, which sets out various development principles which permissions need to take account of to ensure high quality development. As these issues are more development management related it is considered that as the case officer you are the best person to assess these issues.
Conclusion In conclusion, provided that there are no vacant units on site that would be suitable for the applicants business, strategic planning raises no objection in principle to this proposal. The potential to expand Henfield Business Park to the east is suggested and supported in the ELR, and the proposed new units and relocation of the existing business is considered to address the objectives of policies CP15 & DC25. Furthermore, the proposal is in line with the one of the key planning principles of the NPPF of supporting a prosperous rural economy. Any site specific matters raised above, are best judged by you as a case officer after a site visit, however, I would be happy to offer further guidance if necessary.
3.2 Technical Services: With reference to our conversation this week, I can confirm that the letter attached explaining their proposals is acceptable and that we should as agreed impose drainage conditions as per the previous application. (DC/10/2400 Condition No.11)
3.3 Environmental Health: I do not object to this proposal. However, I strongly recommend the following conditions are included to ensure potential detrimental impacts are adequately controlled:
1. As noted in the response to application reference DC/10/2400, the proposal site lies approximately 260m from a gassing landfill site, has been subject to fly tipping and has been used to dispose of waste by open burning. These factors indicate the potential for contamination on the land which could cause risks to future occupiers. An intrusive visual assessment was carried out by Environmental Services Limited and the findings reported in a letter dated 2nd February 2012. A suggested condition to ensure appropriate vigilance during construction activities for this development is noted below: If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.
2. No work for the implementation of the development should be undertaken on the site except between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 on Mondays to Fridays inclusive and 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3. The hours of use (including deliveries, loading and unloading) once the development is operational shall be restricted in line with the neighbouring development: 0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays.
4. No plant or machinery that is likely to generate noise shall be operated outside the buildings unless a noise assessment has been carried out in accordance with BS4142 and submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The APPENDIX A/ 4 - 7
rating level of the noise source should not exceed the existing background noise level. The noise levels shall be determined at the nearest noise-sensitive premises.
5. Although ordinarily steel stockholding and heavy plant hire fall within B8 use class, they would be inappropriate in this location. They should therefore be prohibited.
6. No floodlighting or public address systems to be installed without prior approval from the Local Planning Authority.
3.4 Arboricultural Officer has raised no objection to the proposal
3.5 Economic Development: Any comments received will be reported verbally at the meeting
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.6 WSCC Highways: In summary, there would be no significant highway concerns with this proposal. The application form states that this proposal would create an additional 321sqm of ‘other’ use class, which from the information submitted would seem to fall into the B2 light industrial use class and it’s on that basis that the highway implications of this proposal have been considered. The site does have a number of existing and permitted industrial units along with an existing point of access onto the A2037. In light of the existing uses and given the floor area of the proposed units, no significant intensification of use of the access would result as a consequence of this proposal.
In terms of parking, if viewed against the B2 use class, the proposed provision does exceed the maximum standard of 1 space per 40sqm.
The current proposal does seek to alter the layout approved under DC/10/2400 with the lorry parking space re-provided on the southern boundary. Access and egress into this may be dependent upon some of the hardstanding adjacent to unit 5 permitted under the above planning reference.
No highway objection would be raised.
3.7 WSCC Contributions: Contributions totalling £12,643 have been requested. A justification for these contributions has been sought from WSCC and any further information received will be reported verbally at the meeting.
3.8 Environment Agency: No Comment
3.9 UK Power Network: No Objections
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.10 Henfield Parish Council: No objection, all agreed. The Committee would like to bring to the Officer’s attention that the proposed development is in the area marked yellow that is especially reserved for the possible relocation of Vinalls Business Centre in Nep Town Road, Henfield. Is there still sufficient room for this? Please ensure adequate drainage is in place.
3.11 No other representations have been received to public notification on the application at the time of writing this report.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 8
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 The application seeks permission for the erection of 2 industrial units. The main issues in determination of this application are considered to be the principle of the development, the effect of the development on the amenities of nearby occupiers, the effect of the development on the character of the area and the existing legal agreement on the site.
6.2 Henfield Business Park is located outside of the Built up Area boundary between Henfield and Small Dole on the A2037 as a result countryside policies apply. Policy DC25 covers the expansion of existing rural commercial sites. This policy states that:
a. Proposals for development which delivers economic benefits to the rural area, and extension of existing commercial sites outside the defined built up area will be permitted where it relates to the needs of the rural local economy and in the case of company relocation the Council is also satisfied that the proposal constitutes the relocation of a currently badly sited use
The proposed units would be for the use of a company called Boretech and Quad Vehicle Consultants who are planning to purchase two of the units approved under DC/10/2400 and have just secured a substantial additional contract for the work which cannot be accommodated within the two approved units. The company who are planning to relocate to the proposed units currently occupy the Golding Barn Industrial Estate and have stated in their supporting information that the company currently occupiers “approx 2000sqft of accommodation at Golding Barn Industrial Estate although the space is rented and fragmented over 5 units. Jointly the businesses are due to relocate to Henfield Business Park on completion of the current development under construction which was permitted under DC/10/2400. The two southernmost units of that development have been purchased and they will provide 3000sqft of accommodation that we anticipated would be sufficient to cater for expansion needs. However, since that development was approved, Boretech has been successful in negotiating two long term contracts, which are additional to the long term business development that the relocation will facilitate.” The statement further justifies the relocation by stating that “Henfield Business Park and the proposed additional development provide the ideal opportunity for the expansion of the above mentioned businesses. Freehold ownership of the buildings is essential to allow the necessary funds to be raised to fund the expansion, an avenue that is simply not possible with rented accommodation”.
6.3 As well as assessing the policy in accordance with DC25, it also needs to be looked at in the context of CP10 and CP15 of the Core Strategy (2007). Policy CP10 sets out the employment provision strategy for the District and states that the future provision should include ‘Development for business, industry or warehousing on existing sites, including extensions to existing buildings and/or to sites within the boundaries of an existing industrial estate, redevelopment or intensification of use’. The proposal includes an extension to the east of the existing Henfield Business Park, whilst this may not be contrary to Policy CP10, there is potential conflict with Policy CP15 which states that rural economic development outside of any built-up area boundary should be appropriate to the countryside location and should, in the case of an established rural industrial estate, be APPENDIX A/ 4 - 9
within the existing boundaries of the estate. Whilst the proposal would result in an extension to the existing industrial estate, it is well screened from the surrounding area and is considered to be relatively appropriate to its countryside location.
6.4 It should be acknowledged that there was a recent application (DC/10/2400), which permitted five units as an extension to Henfield Business Park. This permission is currently being implemented. The 2010 application was permitted on the basis that the applicant was able to demonstrate that there was a local need and demand for the proposal.
6.5 The application currently under consideration has provided substantial supporting information on the need for the units. In an email dated 04 December 2012 the Agent has stated that “There is one 900 sq ft unit for rent on the original site (Unit 3) but this is not sited, of a size or offering freehold to be of any use to the current proposed occupier who already owns the 2 southerly units of the 5 unit scheme and needs to expand into the new units currently proposed, which is essential for the efficiency of running the business etc. As agreed on the 5 unit scheme, one occupier will be moving from an existing freehold unit (DSA of Unit B) on the original site and no doubt this will be sold in due course, in all probability to an existing lessee from another unit on the Park to allow them to expand their business, but it is of no use to the current occupier for the reasons set out above.”
6.6 Strategic Planning has been consulted on the application and has stated that “provided that there are no vacant units on site that would be suitable for the applicants business, strategic planning raises no objection in principle to this proposal. The potential to expand Henfield Business Park to the east is suggested and supported in the Employment Land Review, and the proposed new units and relocation of the existing business is considered to address the objectives of policies CP15 & DC25. Furthermore, the proposal is in line with the one of the key planning principles of the NPPF of supporting a prosperous rural economy.”
6.7 Whilst it is noted that there is an existing vacancy on the site, it is considered that based on the supporting information that the proposal would serve a local need and the applicant has demonstrated that the vacant unit is unsuitable due to the need to have freehold units in order to raise finance. It is considered that on balance the proposal is in line with the policies in the Horsham District Local Development Framework and would bring economic benefits to the local area.
6.8 The second area of consideration is the design of the proposed units and its impact on the rural location. The proposed units would be located close to the eastern boundary of the site and constructed in the same materials as the units currently under construction. It is therefore considered that the design of the proposed units is appropriate. The proposed units would not be visible from the road and the site is well screened to the south and north from the existing woodland. In order to minimise the impact further it is considered appropriate to attach a landscaping condition.
6.9 In terms of the design and location of the proposed units. This is considered appropriate given its proximity to the existing industrial estate, and the existing screening on the site.
6.10 The final element of the proposal concerns the existing legal agreement. The previously agreed legal agreement (S106/0795) states that:
“The Second Owner and the Third Owner agree with the Local Planning Authority that following commencement of the Development and thereafter for the period of eighteen years the Yellow Land shall not be occupied other than by R Vinall (Builders) Limited (Co. Registration Number 2798279) whose registered office is situate at 1 Church Street, Henfield, West Sussex.”
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 10
Therefore, it is proposed that the yellow line representing the yellow land be reduced in order to facilitate the development. The original yellow land was previously reduced under DC/10/2400. The agent has stated in this application that “whilst this development will reduce the extent of the ‘yellow land’ intended to facilitate relocation of the Nep Town facilities, that area which will remain for this purpose is more than sufficient to facilitate the relocation of the Nep Town facilities.” The agent has suggested that the size of the yellow land proposed is acceptable because the reduced yellow land would not be constrained by the electricity wires which are above the application site and therefore the height of the buildings would be unrestricted. He has therefore suggested that any future buildings on the yellow land could have an overall height of 7metres (the same as three of the units approved under DC/10/2400).
6.11 It should be stressed that by amending the size of the yellow land within the legal agreement, it would not prejudice the outcome of any future application submitted which would be subject to assessment against normal Local Development Framework policies. Therefore any future proposals could be controlled through the planning application process.
6.12 Overall, the proposal seeks permission for the erection of two business units. Whilst it is noted that the proposal would result in the expansion of Henfield Business Park, the proposal is on balance considered acceptable. As a result it is considered that the proposal meets the aims of planning policy and it is recommended that planning permission be granted.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions, completion of the legal agreement securing the contributions and subject to varying the yellow land in legal agreement S106/0795.
1. 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.
2. No development shall be commenced unless and until a schedule of materials and samples of such materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls and roofs of the proposed buildings(s) have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used shall conform to those approved. Reason: 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 DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
3. The site shall be used for B1, B2 & B8 uses only and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in any class of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987). Reason: To enable the LPA to control the use of the site because other uses would be contrary to policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies (2007).
4. No works or development shall take place until full details of all hard and soft landscaping works (including details of any bund proposed) have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any plants which within a period of 5 years from the time of planting 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. APPENDIX A/ 4 - 11
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development and in the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
5. No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority by way of a planning application. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
6. No work shall be undertaken on the site except between the hours of:- 0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays, And no work shall be undertaken on Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
7. Deliveries, loading and unloading shall be restricted to 0730 hours and 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays and no deliveries, loading or unloading shall be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
8. No work for the implementation of the development hereby permitted shall be undertaken on the site except between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 on Mondays to Fridays inclusive and 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of nearby residents in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
9. No plant or machinery that is likely to generate noise shall be operated outside the buildings unless a noise assessment has been carried out in accordance with BS4142 and submitted & approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The rating level of the noise source should not exceed the existing background noise level. The noise levels shall be determined at the nearest noise-sensitive premises. Reason: In the interests of amenity and to ensure the use of the site does not have a harmful environmental effect and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
10. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure that any pollution is dealt with in accordance with Policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
11 .Full details of means of surface water drainage to serve the development shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to works commencing on development. The scheme agreed shall be implemented strictly in APPENDIX A/ 4 - 12
accordance with such agreement unless subsequent amendments have been agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is properly drained.
12. Before development commences on site a Travel Plan Statement (TPS) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To secure access by alternative means other than the car to the site.
13. No produce, crates, packing materials or waste (with the exception of the parking of golf buggies) shall be stacked or stored on the site except within the buildings, without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
14. No steel stockholding or heavy plant hire shall take place on site. Reason: In the interests of amenity and to ensure the use of the site does not have a harmful environmental effect and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
15. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or Orders amending or revoking and re-enacting the same, the buildings shall not be extended or altered in any way, unless permission is granted by the Local Planning Authority on application in that behalf. Reason: To maintain control over the development in the interests of amenity.
16. Prior to the use of any part of the buildings for B2 purposes a scheme of sound insulation shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and such scheme shall be installed as approved and retained for so long as the B2 use continues. Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residential occupiers.
18. None of the units shall be occupied until works for the disposal of sewage have been provided on site to serve the development hereby permitted, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the development is properly drained.
19. No part of the development shall be first occupied until the car parking has been constructed in accordance with the approved site plan (dwg. 0913.10/01 date stamped 29 October 2012). These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose. Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use
20. No part of the development shall be first occupied until covered and secure cycle parking spaces have been provided in accordance with plans and details submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To provide alternative travel options to the use of the car in accordance with current sustainable transport policies.
Note to Applicant The applicant is advised that in order to discharge Condition 11, you need to prove to the Local Planning Authority that the existing underground storage system and network has the capacity to accommodate the proposed expansion. The maximum permissible out flow rate to local ditch network – 11.44 l/s (original requirements as laid down when site first developed.)
Note to Applicant APPENDIX A/ 4 - 13
The applicant is advised that waste produced during construction and operational phases of the development should be removed by a licensed waste carrier and there should be no open burning of waste materials.
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 IDP1: The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the development plan.
Background Papers: DC/10/2400, S106/0795 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th December 2012 Retrospective permission sought for erection of garden shed and DEVELOPMENT: reinstatement of previously existing border wall SITE: St Josephs Monastery Lane Storrington Pulborough WARD: Chantry APPLICATION: DC/12/0687 APPLICANT: Mr A Manton
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: The application has been referred back to the Planning Committee as the Committee’s resolution to secure a satisfactory landscaping plan in consultation with Local Members at the September Planning Committee has not been met.
RECOMMENDATION: To GRANT planning permission.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 This application was first reported to September’s Planning Committee Meeting whereby Members resolved that the application should be delegated to the Head of Planning & Environmental Services in consultation with Local Members, following the receipt of a satisfactory landscaping plan. The preliminary view of the Committee was that the application should be granted. A copy of September’s Committee Report can be found within Appendix A of this report.
1.2 At September’s Committee meeting, Members were concerned that the shed in its proposed new location would still be visible from the street scene and that satisfactory landscaping with appropriate planting on the southern side of the proposed shed would need to be agreed. The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan which shows two large potted Red Robin (Photinia Fraseri) plants to be positioned on the southerly side of the shed. This plan has been forwarded to the three Local Chantry Members and comments have been received that the planting scheme submitted is not adequate, the potted plants could be moved and could potentially block access into the building.
Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215382 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 2
1.3 The front garden area and area to the south of the shed is paved in York stone and the applicant has advised that he would not be willing to dig up part of this area to provide a more substantial planting scheme to the south of the building. The applicant has submitted some additional supporting photographs which show other structures and walls which are visible within Monastery Lane and he considers that the re-positioned location of the shed in the north-westerly corner of the site and the extension of the wall would ensure that the structure does not have a detrimental impact on the street scene. The applicant has however confirmed that he would be willing to raise the height of the westerly front boundary wall further in order to completely obscure the structure if Councillors felt this was necessary.
2. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
2.1 When assessing the impact of the repositioned shed structure on the street scene, it is noted that the existing shed in its current location is most visible when travelling in a northerly direction along Monastery Lane. The road also slopes from south to north which makes the existing shed (which is not screened from the road) particularly prominent within the street scene. The 2.5 metre high shed would however be repositioned within the north- westerly corner of the site and would mostly be screened from the southerly perspective by the extended 1.9 metre high wall along the frontage of the site as described in September’s Committee Report in Appendix A. It is however noted that the existing orange colour of the shed makes the structure particularly prominent within the road. In discussions with your Officers, the applicant has agreed that the shed could be stained a darker brown colour to lessen its visual impact within the street scene.
2.2 The proposed planting scheme submitted shows two large potted plants comprising Red Robin (Photinia Fraseri) plants which would be located approximately 1.5 metres from the shed to the south. This distance would allow access to the shed building from the open plan paved front garden area to the east. The Red Robin species are bushy evergreen trees which can grow to a height of 2 metres and it is therefore considered that the plants would mostly screen the southerly elevation of the building when travelling along Monastery Lane in a northerly direction. Officers are therefore of the view that the proposed planting would provide further screening of the repositioned building from the street scene perspective.
2.3 In conclusion and when taking into account the proposed planting scheme, darker staining of the shed, the increase in height of the front boundary wall and the repositioned location of the shed, it is considered that the impact of the existing structure on the street scene will be considerably reduced.
3. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
3.1 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 the application. Consideration of human rights is an integral part of the planning assessment set out below.
4. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
4.1 It is not considered that the proposal would have a material impact on crime and disorder.
APPENDIX A/ 5 - 3
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 It is recommended that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. The shed shall be moved to the repositioned location as shown on the plans hereby approved within three months from the date of this permission. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
2. The extension to the westerly front boundary wall as shown on the plans hereby approved shall be completed within three months from the date of permission. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
3. No development shall be commenced unless and until a schedule of materials and samples of such materials and finishes and colours to be used for the extended wall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used shall conform to those approved. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a structure of visual quality in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
4. The shed hereby approved shall be stained within three months of the date of this permission in accordance with colour details to be first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The shed shall be maintained thereafter with the approved stain.
5. The two Red Robin (Photinia Fraseri) plants shall be positioned in the location shown on the submitted Planting Plan received on the 25th October 2012 within three months from the date of this permission. These plants shall thereafter be maintained in the position shown on the planting plan in conjunction with the shed at all times. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
6. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the character and visual amenities of the locality.
Background Papers: DC/12/0687 & DC/11/1094
ITEM A? - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th September 2012 Retrospective permission sought for erection of a garden shed and DEVELOPMENT: reinstatement of previously existing border wall SITE: St Josephs Monastery Lane Storrington Pulborough WARD: Chantry APPLICATION: DC/12/0687 APPLICANT: Mr Alan Manton
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Member request – Councillor Dawe and Councillor Mason.
RECOMMENDATION: To GRANT planning permission.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for a garden shed which measures 4 metres by 3 metres and 2.5 metres in height. The shed is currently located adjacent to the westerly front boundary of the site. The proposal seeks to relocate the existing shed approximately 1.9 metres to the north, so the structure sits in the north- westerly corner of the application site.
1.2 It is also proposed to raise the lower sections of the staggered westerly brick wall along the frontage of the site. The existing wall measures approximately 1.9 metres at the highest northerly end and staggers down to approximately 1 metre in height towards the vehicular entrance to the dwelling. The proposal seeks to extend part of the existing lower sections of wall across to sit level with the 1.9 metre high section of the existing wall and the extended wall would then stagger down to approximately 1.7 metres in height adjacent to the vehicular access to the site. The extension of the wall would incorporate brick materials to match the existing wall.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.3 The application site is located within the built up area of Storrington and comprises a detached two storey residential dwelling which is set back approximately 12 metres from the road. The vehicular access to the site is located centrally along the westerly frontage, a
Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215382 ITEM A? - 2
staggered brick wall measuring approximately 1.9 metres in height is situated on the northerly side of the access and a stone wall approximately 1.6 metres in height is located on the southerly side of the vehicular access.
1.4 The road incorporates a number of different buildings of varying scale and appearance. To the north of the site, the neighbouring dwelling Lady Place comprises a Grade II Listed Building, to the west there are a number of residential dwellings on the opposite side of the road and to the south lies Our Lady of England Church.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework 2012 - Delivering Sustainable Development, Section 7 (Requiring Good Design).
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Horsham District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy (2007) – CP3 & CP5.
2.4 Horsham District Council Local Development Framework, General Development Control Policies (2007) – DC9.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.5 DC/11/1094 – Retrospective planning permission was refused in 2011 for the retention of the garden shed and the reinstatement of previously existing border wall.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.1 Storrington & Sullington Parish Council have objected to this application on the basis that the garden shed is detrimental to the street scene and is located next to a Listed Building.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.2 No letters of representation have been received in relation to this application.
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 the application. Consideration of human rights is an integral part of the planning assessment set out below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the proposal would have a material impact on crime and disorder.
ITEM A? - 3
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The principal issues are the effect of the development on the appearance of the street scene and on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.
6.2 Within its current location, the shed was refused under planning application DC/11/1094 as it was considered that the structure due to its scale, location and design would appear unduly prominent within the road and would cause a detrimental impact on the appearance of the street scene. In comparison to the previously refused application DC/11/1094, this proposal seeks to retain the existing shed yet reposition it approximately 1.9 metres further to the north, incorporating it within the north-westerly front corner of the application site. This application will now also involve an increase in the height of the staggered sections of the wall on the northerly side of the vehicular access to the site. The proposal seeks to extend part of the lower 1 metre high section of wall across to sit level with the highest 1.9 metre section of the existing wall. The extended wall would then stagger down to approximately 1.7 metres in height adjacent to the vehicular access to the site.
6.3 It is noted that the 1.7 metre high southerly end of the extended front boundary wall would sit next to an existing 1.6 metre high stone wall also located along the frontage of the application site and to the south of the vehicular entrance. The extended wall would also sit next to a staggered stone wall measuring approximately 1.9 metres at its highest point fronting the neighbouring property at Lady Place to the north of the site. The surrounding walls are therefore of a similar height to the proposed wall as extended and the design of the extended wall would continue to be staggered in height which is considered to remain in keeping with the appearance of walls visible within the road. On this basis, it is therefore considered that providing that matching brick materials are incorporated in the extension of the wall then the structure will not appear out of keeping within the street scene.
6.4 When assessing the impact of the repositioned shed structure on the street scene, it is noted that the existing shed in its current location is most visible when travelling in a northerly direction along Monastery Lane. The road also slopes from south to north which makes the existing shed (which is not screened from the road) particularly prominent within the street scene. The 2.5 metre high shed would however be repositioned within the north- westerly corner of the site and would mostly be screened from the southerly perspective by the extended 1.9 metre high wall along the frontage of the site. It is however noted that the existing orange colour of the shed makes the structure particularly prominent within the road. In discussions with your Officers the applicant has agreed that the shed could be stained a darker brown colour to lessen its visual impact within the street scene. When taking into account the proposed darker staining of the shed, the increase in height of the front boundary wall and the repositioned location of the shed, it is considered that the impact of the structure on the street scene will be considerably reduced.
6.5 The shed will continue to sit adjacent to a fence of similar height at the northerly neighbouring property, Lady Place. As the shed will be mostly screened from the northerly neighbouring Listed Building, it is therefore considered that the repositioning of the shed would have no detrimental impact on the setting of the Grade II Listed Building or to the amenity of the northerly neighbouring occupiers.
6.6 On balance, it is therefore considered that the proposed repositioning of the shed, staining of the shed and extension to the height of the front boundary wall will overcome the previous concerns raised in relation to the prominence of the structure within the road and its visual impact on the street scene.
ITEM A? - 4
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. The shed shall be moved to the repositioned location as shown on the plans hereby approved within three months from the date of this permission. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
2. The extension to the westerly front boundary wall as shown on the plans hereby approved shall be completed within three months from the date of permission. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
3. No development shall be commenced unless and until a schedule of materials and samples of such materials and finishes and colours to be used for the extended wall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and all materials used shall conform to those approved. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a structure of visual quality in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
4. The shed hereby approved shall be stained within three months of the date of this permission in accordance with colour details to be first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The shed shall be maintained thereafter with the approved stain. Reason: In the interests of amenity in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the character and visual amenities of the locality.
Background Papers: DC/12/0687 & DC/11/1094
APPENDIX A/ 6 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18 December 2012 DEVELOPMENT: Demolition of five existing buildings and erection of replacement building SITE: Lower Nash Farm Nutbourne Lane Nutbourne Pulborough WARD: Pulborough and Coldwaltham APPLICATION: DC/12/1852 APPLICANT: Mr P Crosdil
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Category of Development
RECOMMENDATION: To refuse planning permisison
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks permission for the demolition of five existing buildings and the erection of a replacement building to be used for the purposes of agriculture.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2 The site consists of mainly farm land with two dwellings, of which the main farmhouse is currently being rebuilt. These buildings are located towards the eastern boundary of the site and accessed via Nutbourne Lane. The buildings which form part of the application lie to the north of the dwellings in the north east corner of the site with remaining aspect of the site consisting open fields used as part of the farm.
1.3 This site, due to the nature of its use is located within the countryside with little surrounding development. There is a small cluster of dwellings to the north east of the site with the nearest dwelling being approximately 70-80m from the existing farm buildings. These dwellings are located on either side of Nutbourne lane. There are further farm buildings and residential dwellings to south east of the site approximately 200m away.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
Contact Officer: Doug Wright Tel: 01403 215522 APPENDIX A/ 6 - 2
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework – Section 7, Requiring good design, Section 3, Supporting a prosperous rural economy
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 The relevant Local Plan Policies are CP1, CP3 of the Core Strategy (2007) and DC9 & DC23 of the Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies (2007).
PLANNING HISTORY
2.4 DC/12/0792 – Replacement dwelling – Permitted
DC/12/0920 - Demolition of 5 existing buildings and erection of replacement agricultural building - Withdrawn
DC/12/1119 - Proposed conversion of existing redundant granary/store building to provide a 2-bed dwelling - Withdrawn
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Public Health & Licensing had no objections to the application
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.2 Pulborough Parish Council has no objection to the application
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.3 4 letters of representations in support were received, however these were received outside the statutory 21 day consultation period.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
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 the application. Consideration of human rights is an integral part of the planning assessment set out below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
It is not considered that the proposal would have a material impact on crime and disorder.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The principal issue is the effect of the development on the rural character of the surrounding area and the agricultural use of the land.
6.2 The site is currently occupied by a number of agricultural buildings, which comprise a large cattle barn alongside a smaller open fronted cattle barn, there are also 3 containers used for storage and a further building used for machinery storage. The buildings are mostly in a APPENDIX A/ 6 - 3
bad state of repair with other buildings having already been removed. Upon a site visit it was noted the site also contained several vehicles and a disused caravan.
6.3 The current application is a re-submission following the withdrawal of a previous application (DC/12/0920) for a larger agricultural building. During the course of the previous application an independent agricultural consultant was instructed to comment on the application. Her comments concluded that the area of land currently farmed is unable to support the level of activity suggested and therefore it had not been demonstrated that the building was reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture. The previously proposed building had a total floor space of 1521m2 with 988m2 for cattle and 228m2 for the storage of haylage plus further space for a workshop and machinery storage (246m2). It was considered that the number of livestock suggested (36 suckler cows & 148 ewes) would only require 608m2 of housing space. The current proposal has reduced the size of building with a floorspace of 914m2, along with a considerable reduction in the number of livestock (47 cows, 49 ewes), thereby reducing the required housing floorspace. It is again therefore considered that it has not been demonstrated that the building is reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture.
6.4 It is recognised that the current cluster of buildings due to neglect in recent years along with a variety of construction methods and materials have resulted in the site becoming less than fit for purpose and unpleasant in appearance. It would therefore not be unreasonable to provide a modern and practical replacement. However for the reasons given above the proposed building at its current size along with its proposed scale of use is not considered to be appropriate for the purposes of agriculture.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that permission be refused.
7.2 Permission should be refused for the following reason:
The proposed replacement building, by virtue of its size and scale of use would not be considered reasonable necessary for the purposes of agricultural. The development is therefore contrary to policy CP3 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007) and policies DC9 and DC23 of the Horsham District Council Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
Background Papers: DC/12/0920, DC/12/1852