Public Document Pack

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

Planning Committee (South)

Tuesday, 22nd September, 2020 at 2.30 pm via Remote Video Link

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

You are summoned to the meeting to transact the following business

Glen Chipp Chief Executive Agenda

Page No. GUIDANCE ON PLANNING COMMITTEE PROCEDURE 1. Apologies for absence 2. Minutes 7 - 12 To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 18 August 2020 (Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to [email protected] at least 24 hours before the meeting. Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

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

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

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

To consider the following reports of the Head of Development and to take such action thereon as may be necessary: 5. Appeals 13 - 14 Applications for determination by Committee: 6. DC/20/0837 - Threals Farm, Threals Lane, West Chiltington RH20 2RF 15 - 38 Ward: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington Applicant: Mr A James

7. DC/20/0326 - Land on the South side of Hill Farm Lane, Codmore Hill, 39 - 58 Pulborough RH20 1BW Ward: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley Applicant: Mr Benjamin Parker

8. DC/20/0025 - Garage Block, Blackstone Rise, Blackstone Lane, 59 - 76 Blackstone Ward: Bramber, Upper Beeding and Woodmancote Applicant: Horsham District Council

9. DC/20/1019 - Old Dairy East Cottage, Blackstone Gate Farm, Henfield 77 - 90 Road, Albourne, Hassocks BN6 9JJ Ward: Bramber, Upper Beeding and Woodmancote Applicant: Mrs J Copeland

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

Agenda Annex

GUIDANCE ON PLANNING COMMITTEE PROCEDURE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 4

Original recommendation to APPROVE application

Members in support during debate Members not in support during debate

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

Page 5 Page

Director considers planning reasons

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

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

*Or further alternative motion moved and procedure repeated

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

Original recommendation to REFUSE application

Members in support during debate Members not in support during debate

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

Page 6 Page

Director considers planning reasons

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

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

*Or further alternative motion moved and procedure repeated

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

Agenda Item 2

Planning Committee (South) 18 AUGUST 2020

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

Apologies: Councillors: Mike Morgan, Josh Potts and Diana van der Klugt

PCS/14 MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting of the committee held on 21 July were approved as a correct record and would be signed by the Chairman at a later date.

PCS/15 DECLARATIONS OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

DC/19/2524 – Councillor John Blackall declared a personal interest because he knew the applicant. He therefore took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

SDNP/20/01429/LIS and SDNP/20/01428/FUL – Councillor James Wright declared a personal interest in this item because he was a customer of the Frankland Arms.

PCS/16 ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were no announcements.

PCS/17 APPEALS

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

PCS/18 DC/19/2478 - VINEYARDS, OLD LONDON ROAD, WASHINGTON

Item withdrawn from the agenda.

PCS/19 DC/19/0678 - LAND BETWEEN SOUTH LODGE AND MINSTER HOUSE, LITTLEWORTH LANE, PARTRIDGE GREEN

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a detached two storey dwelling with off-street parking and new access onto Littleworth Lane. Revenue generated from the proposal would

1 Page 7 Planning Committee (South) 18 August 2020 facilitate the repair of the Guest House, a Grade II Listed Building to the northeast of the site.

The application site was located in the countryside and formed the western part of St Hugh’s estate, with St Hugh’s Charterhouse further to the east towards the A281. It was on the eastern side of Littleworth Lane close to residential properties.

The Parish Council raised no objections subject to conditions. There had been 41 representations objecting to the application and three in support. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application. A representative of the applicant, the applicant’s agent and a structural engineer all addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members noted the planning history of the site and considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; character and appearance; impact on neighbouring amenity; and highway impacts.

In response to Members’ concerns, officers agreed that a condition requiring an ecology survey be included. It was also agreed that acceptable visibility splays should be secured through an amendment to Condition 13 regarding access and parking. It was noted that this amendment would render Condition 5 unnecessary.

Members discussed the applicant’s business case and it was agreed that this would be reviewed by Local Members with a view to confirming whether the scheme would help secure the future of the Grade II Listed Building.

RESOLVED

(i) That a legal agreement be entered into to ensure that no development takes place until Listed Building Consent has been submitted and obtained for repairs to the Guest House and that net proceeds from the development are not used for any other purpose than carrying out the Guest House repairs.

(ii) That on completion of (i) above, planning application DC/19/0678 be determined by the Head of Development with a view to approval, subject to:

a) the conditions as set out in the report with the following amendments:

the deletion of Condition 5, and amendments to Condition 13 to include the requirement for details to be submitted showing that vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward gear and the submission of a plan detailing that acceptable visibility splays can be provided;

Page2 8 Planning Committee (South) 3 18 August 2020

an additional condition requiring a Preliminary Ecology Survey to be submitted and any mitigation measures identified carried out.

b) a review of the monastery’s business plan in consultation with Local Members.

PCS/20 SDNP/20/01429/LIS - FRANKLAND ARMS, LONDON ROAD, WASHINGTON

The Head of Development reported that this application sought Listed Building Consent for alterations to the listed building to facilitate application SDNP/20/01428/FUL (item 9 on the agenda).

The application site was located in Washington village within the SDNP. It included the Frankland Arms, a Grade II Listed Building. The single storey outbuilding to be demolished was in a poor state of repair.

The Parish Council supported the application in principle, but requested a number of stipulations. There had been 18 representations from 11 households objecting to the application and two letters of support.

Members noted the planning context of the proposal, and considered the officer’s planning assessment and whether the proposal would conserve and enhance the historic environment and safeguard the heritage asset.

RESOLVED

That Listed Building application SDNP/20/01429/LIS be granted subject to the conditions as reported.

PCS/21 SDNP/20/01428/FUL - FRANKLAND ARMS, LONDON ROAD, WASHINGTON

The Head of Development reported that this application sought planning permission for the demolition of an outbuilding and erection of an outbuilding for holiday accommodation, conversion of a garage into a convenience store, moving a timber gazebo and signage for the shop. The holiday accommodation would not include cooking facilities.

The application site was located in Washington village within the SDNP. It included the Frankland Arms, a Grade II Listed Building. The single storey outbuilding to be demolished was in a poor state of repair.

The Parish Council supported the application in principle, but requested a number of stipulations. There had been 35 representations from 18 households objecting to the application, 11 letters of support, and three that commented on the proposal.

Page3 9 Planning Committee (South) 18 August 2020

Members noted the planning context of the proposal, and considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; the impact of the holiday accommodation and convenience store; heritage considerations, design and appearance; landscape and trees; residential amenity; highways, access and parking; and impact on ecology, night skies and climate change.

Members discussed the provision of a convenience store and considered that the scheme would benefit the local economy.

RESOLVED

That planning application SDNP/20/01428/FUL be granted subject to the conditions as reported.

PCS/22 DC/19/2524 - ROSE BARN COTTAGE, CHURCH STREET, WEST CHILTINGTON

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of a barn and the erection of a 3-bedroom detached dwelling 60 metres to the east. The barn benefited from extant permission for conversion to a 3-bedroom dwelling. The proposed dwelling would be of similar size and footprint to the existing barn.

The application site was located approximately 90 metres from the built-up area of West Chiltington at the southern end of Church Street. The barn was in a generous plot shared with Rose Barn Cottage. The surrounding area was semi-rural with sporadic residential development.

The Parish Council objected to the application. No further representations to the public consultation had been received. One member of the public, the applicant and the applicant’s agent all spoke in support of the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; the character of the dwelling and visual amenities of the countryside; residential amenity; residential environment for future occupiers; highways impacts; and ecology considerations. Members noted the sustainable design of the proposal.

Members discussed the location of the proposed dwelling, which was within the curtilage of Rose Barn Cottage, and noted that, whilst the proposal was larger than the existing barn, it had a similar footprint. They discussed the scheme in the context of planning policy considerations and after careful consideration concluded that the proposal was acceptable.

Page 410 Planning Committee (South) 5 18 August 2020

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/2524 be granted subject to the conditions as reported.

PCS/23 DC/19/2331 - NORTHLANDS BARN, NORTHLANDS LANE, STORRINGTON

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the change of use of a redundant agricultural barn into a dwelling and the erection of a single storey linked side extension, which would have a similar footprint to a former agricultural building.

The application site was located outside the built-up area of Storrington. The closest dwelling was approximately 170 metres south. The stone and brick barn was east of Northlands Lane.

Both Thakeham and Storrington Parish Councils objected to the application. Since publication of the report, Thakeham Parish Council had reiterated their concerns. There had been no further responses to the public consultation. The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application and a representative of Thakeham Parish Council spoke in objection to it.

Since publication of the report an addendum to the Structural Survey had been provided by the applicant, which considered the implications of the amended scheme and concluded that it would result in reduced loadings to the external walls and foundations. The applicant had also submitted a flood risk assessment, which concluded that the risk of flooding from all sources within the application site was low.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; landscape character, design and heritage; the amenity of nearby users and occupiers; parking and highways; flood risk and drainage; and ecology and sustainability of design.

Members were concerned that the design of the proposal did not accord with Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan’s policy regarding conversions of existing countryside structures, and considered the design to be of excessive size and at odds with the agricultural character of the building. It was therefore proposed and seconded that the application be refused. The motion was carried.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/2331 be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed conversion and extension of the building would result in an unsympathetic conversion by reason of its excessive size and scale, which

Page5 11 Planning Committee (South) 18 August 2020

would not retain its agricultural character and would result in an inappropriate form of development in relation to its agricultural setting, contrary to Paragraph 79 of the NPPF and Policy 9 of the Thakeham Parish Neighbourhood Plan.

The meeting closed at 5.20 pm having commenced at 2.30 pm

CHAIRMAN

Page 612 Agenda Item 5

Planning Committee (SOUTH) Date: 22nd September 2020

Report on Appeals: 06.08.2020 – 09.09.2020

1. Appeals Lodged

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

Date Officer Committee Ref No. Site Lodged Recommendation Resolution Land at Ditchlings & Wickets Harborough Hill Application DC/19/0136 12-Aug-20 N/A West Chiltington Refused RH20 2PW

2. Appeals started

Consideration of the following appeals has started during the period:

Appeal Officer Committee Ref No. Site Start Date Procedure Recommendation Resolution Land at Grid Reference 510649 117859 Informal EN/19/0436 14-Aug-20 Notice served N/A Bramble Lane Hearing Thakeham West Sussex Land at Grid Reference 510649 117859 Informal EN/19/0436 14-Aug-20 Notice served N/A Bramble Lane Hearing Thakeham West Sussex

Page 13 3. Appeal Decisions

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

Appeal Officer Committee Ref No. Site Decision Procedure Recommendation Resolution South of Kithurst Lane Written Appeal Application DC/19/1638 N/A Storrington Representation Dismissed Refused West Sussex Green Shadow Roundabout Lane West Chiltington Written Appeal Application DC/19/2513 N/A Pulborough Representation Dismissed Refused West Sussex RH20 2NT Land North of West Wantley Barn Written Appeal Application DC/19/2433 Fryern Road N/A Representation Dismissed Refused Storrington West Sussex Redfold Farm Nutbourne Lane Written Appeal Application DC/20/0263 Pulborough N/A Representation Allowed Refused West Sussex RH20 2HS 14 Coxham Lane Steyning Written Appeal Application DC/20/0150 N/A West Sussex Representation Dismissed Refused BN44 3LG

Page 14 Agenda Item 6

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 22nd September 2020 Demolition of agricultural buildings and erection of 5no. dwellings with associated DEVELOPMENT: landscaping SITE: Threals Farm Threals Lane West Chiltington West Sussex RH20 2RF

WARD: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington

APPLICATION: DC/20/0837 Name: Mr A James Address: c/o Agent Batcheller Monkhouse 3-5 Swan Court APPLICANT: Pulborough RH20 1RL

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: (1) The recommendation of the Head of Development would represent a departure to the adopted development plan;

(2) At the request of Thakeham Parish Council

RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to appropriate conditions and a s106 agreement to secure a contribution towards improvements to Bridleway ROW2291.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 The application has been submitted following consent (under Part 3, Class Q of the General Permitted Development order) for the conversion of an existing agricultural unit on the site to 5 residential dwellings (comprising 4x 2-bed units, and 1x 4-bed unit). The application has been submitted in full to replace the extant Class Q consent, and proposes instead the redevelopment of the wider 0.81Ha site to create 5 detached dwellings, comprising 2x 4-bed houses and 3x 5-bed houses. The proposal includes 20 car parking spaces (4 for each unit).

1.2 Revisions to the originally submitted proposals were received by the Council on 21st July 2020. A full public re-consultation followed the submission of these revised plans. The revisions relate solely to the design and layout of the site, and replaced the original 5 detached dwellings with a ‘farmstead’ style development, still comprising 5 dwellings.

1.3 The ‘farmstead’ style comprises a mix of traditional rural dwelling styles and scales. Proposed materials include plain clay roof and hanging tiles, local Sussex stone, soft red

Page 15 Contact Officer: Angela Moore Tel: 01403 215288 brickwork, and oak timber features. As existing, access to the site would be from Threals Lane. A landscaping scheme has been proposed which shows the retention of most of the site’s existing trees and the planting of an additional 22 trees. New hedgerow and wildflower planting is also proposed. Three low-grade individual trees are proposed for removal, as well as two groups of trees.

1.4 Due to the demolition of all agricultural buildings on the site, the proposed development would result in a reduction of built-form on the site from the existing 2150sqm, down to 1618sqm (including garages). A reduction in hardstanding would also result due to the large curtilages proposed for each dwelling.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.5 The site is located at the southern end of Threals Lane, and although situated in Thakeham Parish, the site is accessed via West Chiltington Common, and is positioned adjacent to (but outside) the defined built-up area boundary. The site extends to around 0.81Ha and comprises a number of redundant agricultural buildings. The northern, eastern and western boundaries of the site are defined by relatively mature vegetation which largely obscures the site from these directions. The southern boundary of the site is more open, and views towards open fields and countryside are readily available.

1.6 Threals Farm Cottages and Threals Barn (domestic properties) are located to the north- west of the site, and Bridleway (ROW2291) is located to the south-west of the site running in a southerly direction. The site is partly visible form this Bridleway. Existing dwellings in ‘High Spinney’ are located around 50m to the west of the application site, but due to dense vegetation, are not readily visible form the site itself.

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 STATUTORY BACKGROUND

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.2 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

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

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2019)

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 16 - Strategic Policy: Meeting Local Housing Needs Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 27 - Settlement Coalescence Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding Page 16 Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking

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

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

Parish Design Statement: Thakeham Parish Design Statement (2002) West Chiltington Village Design Statement (2003)

2.3 RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The application site is located within the Parish of Thakeham. The Thakeham Parish Neighbourhood Plan (TPNP) was formally made in April 2017. Alongside the HDPF, this document forms part of the Council’s Local Development Plan.

The following policies are considered to be the most relevant to this application: o Thakeham1 (A Spatial Plan for the Parish) o Thakeham6 (Design) o Thakeham9 (Development in the Countryside)

2.4 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS DC/19/0213 Prior Approval for a proposed change of use of Prior Approval Required agricultural building to 5 x dwelling houses. and PERMITTED on 26.04.2019

DC/16/2614 Prior Notification for Change of Use of Agricultural Prior Approval Required Barn to a residential dwelling house and associated and REFUSED on operational development 13.01.2017

DC/15/2420 Outline application for the demolition of redundant Application REFUSED on agricultural buildings and erection of 5no. dwellings 22.12.2015 with all matter reserved except access

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

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

Due to the submission of revised plans received 21 July 2020, a full re-consultation was undertaken. Where relevant, the summaries below show comments received pursuant to both consultation periods.

Page 17 INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.1 HDC Environmental Health: No Objection (conditions recommended)

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: Previous comments remain valid.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: Given its previous agricultural use, the ground on the site has the potential to be contaminated (including asbestos contamination). Contamination assessments will therefore need to be undertaken to assess the risks to future site users, which can be secured through conditions. Conditions suggested include: (1) Scheme to deal with contamination, (2) Verification that contamination remediation has been implemented, (3) No importation or re-use of soils until chemically tested, (4) Method statement for safe asbestos removal, (5) Verification report for safe asbestos removal, (6) Construction hours restriction, (7) Construction deliveries restriction, (8) Waste removal, and (9) No burning on site.

3.2 HDC Drainage Engineer: No Objection (conditions recommended)

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: No issues raised with revised drainage strategy.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: No overall objections to the drainage strategy proposed, therefore if this development is permitted I would recommend imposing suitable drainage condition.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.3 Ecology Consultant: No Objection (conditions recommended)

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: Comments are broadly the same as previous, recommended conditions remain the same. A HRA has now been prepared which concludes that the proposed development will ‘not have a Likely Significant Effect on the designated features of the Habitats sites listed in this assessment, either alone or in combination with other plan and projects’.

It is noted that there is now a reduced wildflower meadow to the south of the site, and the removal of the oak tree corridor to the southern boundary. However, we support the proposed biodiversity enhancements to secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: The site is approximately 9km south east of The Mens Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The LPA should prepare a HRA screening report of likely impacts on the Barbastelle bat which is a qualifying species for this Habitat site.

In accordance with the ‘Sussex Bat SAC Planning and Landscape Scale Enhancement Protocol’, details of all impacts need to be assessed by the LPA. We are satisfied that the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal confirms that there will be no removal of trees, hedgerow or woodland, and the site does not contain any foraging or commuting habitats. A sensitive lighting scheme should be secured as a condition.

The Site lies within the 5km of the Arun Valley SPA, SAC and Ramsar site, but at 3.3km distance and given its location east of West Chiltington, we consider that

Page 18 indirect impacts are unlikely, and conclude no Likely Significant Effect on these Habitats sites.

The mitigation measures identified in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal should be secured and implemented in full. This is necessary to conserve and enhance Protected and Priority Species. We support the proposed reasonable biodiversity enhancements to secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.

No objection is raised (subject to a HRA), and conditions recommended include: (1) Mitigation and enhancements in accordance with the PEA, (2) Submission of a Biodiversity Enhancement Layout, and (3) Submission of a Wildlife Sensitive Lighting Design Scheme.

3.4 WSCC Highways: No Objection (conditions recommended)

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: No additional comments raised.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: Compared to the previous agricultural use on this site, this proposal will attract a much lower number of movements, and these will not be farm vehicles. The current access into the site will not require any improvements. The layout of the internal roads enables emergency service vehicles to enter, turn and exit in forward gear.

The application is supported by a TS, which includes expected trip generation from the site, using TRICS data. The data concludes a low trip rate of 3 trips in the peak hour, which would not create any severe highway impacts on Threals Lane. There have been no recorded traffic incidents within Threals Lane in the past 5 years.

In line with Manual for Streets guidance, the site will form a cul-de-sac, and will not provide any footways. This is in keeping with the rest of the highway in the area, and due to the rural nature of the site is in keeping with the current layout.

Four parking spaces are allocated per dwelling, and WSCC are supportive of this allocation. EVC charging points must be created within each dwelling as standard, or at the very least 20% should be active, with the remaining provision provided passive to be connected later. Cycle parking should be provided for in sheds or garages of each dwelling.

No objection is raised to the development, subject to conditions securing: (1) a construction management plan, and (2) cycle parking.

3.5 WSCC Fire and Rescue Service: No Objection (condition recommended)

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: Previous comments remain valid.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: Currently the nearest fire hydrant to the proposed properties is 210 metres away. The supply of water for firefighting for a domestic premises should be within 175 metres, therefore conditions have been recommended to secure details and installation of an additional hydrant on this site.

3.6 WSCC Rights of Way: Comment

[Summary]: The existence of a Public Right of Way (PROW Bridleway 2791) is a material consideration. Bridleway 2791 runs south to the junction with Footpath Page 19 2463_1 which will overlook the proposed site. The impact of development upon the public use, enjoyment and amenity of the PROW must be considered by the LPA. The DAS refers to the Public Right of Way as a 'Footpath' but this should be corrected to a ‘Bridleway’ as these rights include cycle and equestrian users. It also affects the specification of any surfacing proposed, and further information on this is required.

The granting of planning permission does not authorise obstruction of, interference to or moving of any Public Right of Way (PROW); this can only be done with prior consent. Any planning permission should include specific reference to the Bridleway and should ensure users are not inconvenienced during works and WSCC are fully consulted regarding any of the improvements mentioned to the surface.

3.7 Southern Water: No Objection

3.8 Thakeham Parish Council: Objection

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: Strong objection raised. Core reasons for objection as previously stated remain valid. The revised appearance of the proposed dwellings would not look authentic in this location (farmstead patterns are more scattered, with buildings on a smaller scale and with very variable vernacular styles). The creation of 3x5-bed and 2x4-bed houses bears no relation to local housing need.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: Strong objection raised. Having considered all of the comparative benefits of this scheme, Council’s view is that the Class Q scheme remains the better option. The site is visible from two very well-used rights of way, popular with local walkers, ramblers and tourists. It will not be possible to fully screen these visual intrusions from the viewpoints on the footpaths. The existing barns are an ‘honest’ feature in the rural/agricultural landscape. The Class Q consent would allow the building to be read as a former barn, whereas introducing 5 large houses in a suburban-style development would be intrusive and inappropriate. These concerns would apply irrespective of the design of the units, but Council also considers that the design style of the proposed dwellings bears no particular vernacular relation the surroundings or locality.

The location is already wholly rural and stands in no particular need of ecological enhancement. The net gain of 23 trees are only required in order screen the intrusion of 5 suburban houses into a rural landscape.

Although upgrading the surface of bridleway 2791 is a Parish priority, the Parish would prefer to secure this funding via other avenues, not by sanctioning inappropriate development.

One affordable unit to be built elsewhere is unlikely to benefit to Thakeham residents, whereas the 4 smaller (2 bed) units in the consented Class Q scheme would give local benefit, hence the Class Q fall-back is better aligned to local housing needs.

The proposal would create a suburban extension into the green gap between West Chiltington and Thakeham conflicting with HDPF Policies 25, 27 and 33. The proposal is outside the BUAB and not allocated for development in the HDPF or Thakeham NP. The development is not ‘essential to the countryside location’, and is an unsustainable form of development contrary to HDPF Policies 1, 2, 3, 4, and 26.

Page 20 3.9 West Chiltington Parish Council: Objection

[Summary of Subsequent Comments]: Same reasons as previously stated. In addition, the Parish Council supports Thakeham PC’s objection including the charge that the application misuses the Prior Approval rules. The assertion that the barns were redundant is incorrect. It is considered that the amendments should have constituted a new application.

[Summary of Initial Comments]: The site is outside the built-up area boundary; dwellings are too big and dense; the aesthetic is also too urban; no local need for dwellings of such size; infill between West Chiltington and Thakeham; contravenes Policies 26 and 4 of the HDPF.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.10 During the initial round of public consultation, a total of 10 representations were received from 10 different households. Of these, 5 representations objected to the proposed development, and 5 representations supported the proposed development. During the second round of consultation (pertaining to the amended plans), one additional representation was submitted (from a repeat household), which raised an objection to the proposed amendments. In total therefore, 6x letters of objection have been received (from 5 different households), and 5x letters of support (from 5 different households).

3.11 The following summarises the main reasons for objection:  Unallocated land  Impact on setting of PROW  Road safety  Not in keeping with rural setting  Foothold for further development  Unsustainable location  No need for larger homes  Poor access.

3.12 The following summarises the main reasons for support:  Makes better use of the site/land  Removal of redundant farm buildings  More attractive  In keeping with nearby housing  Improvement on the consented Class Q scheme  High level of biodiversity.

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.

Page 21 6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main consideration of this assessment is the principle of residential development in the location, and the associated impacts relating to:

 Character and Appearance  Highways and Rights of Way  Ecology  Drainage  Land Contamination  Sustainability / Climate Change  Other Matters – Size of Dwellings

Principle of Development

6.1 The application site lies in the countryside outside of the identified built-up area of any settlement, and as such, the principle of the proposal must in the first instance, be considered in the context of Policies 3, 4, and 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) and Policy Thakeham1 of the ‘made’ Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan.

6.2 Policies 3 and 4 of the HDPF set out that development will be permitted within towns and villages which have defined built up areas; and that outside built up areas, expansion of settlements will be permitted where (amongst other criteria) a site has been allocated in a local plan or neighbourhood plan. Policy 26 of the HDPF states that the rural character and undeveloped nature of the countryside will be protected against inappropriate development, and that any proposal must be ‘essential’ to its countryside location. The application site is located within the countryside, outside of any defined settlement and is not allocated in either the HDPF or the ‘made’ Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan, and as such, the application proposals directly conflicts with these policies. On this basis, the proposal fails to accord with the spatial strategy as outlined in the adopted local Plan, and any approval of this planning application would represent a departure from the development plan.

6.3 Notwithstanding the departure from policy that this proposal would represent, it is acknowledged that the conversion of an existing agricultural barn within the application site to 5 dwellings was granted Prior Approval under Class Q (Part 3) of the General Permitted Development Order (reference DC/19/0213) in April 2019. This permission remains extant, and is therefore a key material consideration in the determination of this application. The existence of Prior Approval for 5 dwellings, could be implemented at any time until its expiry in April 2022, and therefore represents a viable and realistic fall-back position for development were the current application to be refused. A refusal of the current application would not therefore prevent the development of 5 residential dwellings on this site (albeit the units would be of a different scale and type).

6.4 It is acknowledged that the Prior Approval (Class Q) scheme only relates to one of the three existing agricultural buildings on the holding, which represents only a small proportion of the wider application site. If the current proposal (comprising 5 large detached dwellings set in large residential curtilages) was permitted, it would utilise the entire site (comprising around 0.8Ha), rather than the Prior Approval scheme which would restrict the 5 units to the confines of a single existing agricultural building of around 590m².The main consideration for the Council therefore, is whether the proposed scheme for 5 dwellings over the full 0.8Ha site would result in a better or worse development that the consented scheme under Class Q (including the realistic potential for use of the remainder of the site for non-residential purposes).

Page 22 6.5 If the current proposal was refused, the Prior Approval (Class Q) scheme for the conversion of one of the existing agricultural buildings into 5 smaller dwellings could realistically be implemented, and is likely to result in one of the following three scenarios: 1. Previous agricultural practices on the site could be re-established, utilising the other adjacent buildings for farming-related purposes. Given the proximity of these agricultural buildings to the consented Class Q residential scheme; an agricultural use here is not likely to be conducive to residential amenity, and would create an unpleasant living environment for the future occupants. 2. Under Class R (Part 3) of the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) the applicant could consider changing the use of the adjacent agricultural buildings to a ‘flexible commercial use’. This would be allowed under Permitted Development without planning permission, and would afford the Council little control over noise or other undesirable amenity impacts arising from such commercial uses. 3. The adjacent farm buildings could remain redundant, and in the absence of an alternative use, would likely fall into an increased state of disrepair, which is an equally undesirable (and potentially unsafe) outcome for future residents.

In addition to the above outcomes concerning to the remainder of the site, the Class Q scheme as consented under DC/19/0213 is not itself considered by Officers to be of good quality design or layout. This is discussed further in the next section of this report.

6.6 Overall, in terms of principle, the existence of an extant Class Q consent for 5 dwellings on this site is a key material consideration which could be considered significant enough in the planning balance to justify a departure from the adopted development plan policy (as allowed for in Planning Law). With this in mind, the main consideration for the Council is whether the proposed scheme for 5 dwellings over the full 0.8Ha site would result in a better or worse development that the consented scheme under Class Q (including the realistic potential for ad-hoc and unplanned use of the remainder of the site for non- residential purposes as described in paragraph 6.5 above). Alongside other planning matters relevant to the proposed development, the key material consideration pursuant to the extant Class Q consent is considered in full within this report, and a final summary and Officer recommendation is provided in the concluding paragraphs.

Character and Appearance

6.7 The site is located in a rural setting, characterised by existing (albeit redundant) large agricultural buildings, and associated hardstanding. The nearest property (Threals Barn) is not included within the planning application site, but it is assumed that this property is (or was historically) associated with the agricultural holding as the main ‘farmhouse’. Since the original submission of the application, the design and layout of the proposal has been revised. The revisions propose a development of 5 dwellings which have been designed to reflect more of a tradition ‘Sussex farmstead’ setting than an extension of the suburban house styles prevalent in the immediate area. Given the existing rural character of the site, and its peripheral location, it is considered that the layout of the site and the proposed design of the dwellings and associated car port structures, is acceptable. Whilst the site does not attempt to replicate the precise character of a Sussex farmstead, each of the plots have been designed to reflect building types that one would expect to see in a farmstead setting, including dwellings to reflect stable blocks, barns, and a central farmhouse.

6.8 The characteristics of the proposed buildings include features that are considered to be typical of a farmstead; including long-spanned roof forms, courtyard arrangements, simple design, mixtures of one and two storey heights, open-sided timber structures, and lean-to additions. The proposed development incorporates all these features, which help to create a bespoke rural design, which is more appropriate in this peripheral setting and which compliments the rural surrounds more appropriately. The proposed layout adds to the farmstead character due to its low density nature and its ‘organic’ form. The layout allows for generous private amenity spaces, which is a benefit when compared to the consented Page 23 Class Q scheme. Materials proposed include a mixture of timber framing, horizontal timber cladding, brickwork with quoining detail, and soft brown-red roof tiles. The precise details of the materials would be required by condition, but in principle the materials proposed are typical of those used on traditional farmsteads, and would enhance the quality of the development, which is welcomed.

6.9 The layout and design of the site is also considered to be appropriate in terms of its impact on the wider landscape character. Views of the site from Threals Lane (to the north and west) are limited, but the site is much more open to the south and south-east which affords it long-views towards the open countryside and to/from the nearby Bridleway (ROW 2791). Whilst it is accepted that the buildings proposed are large, the overall scale and mass of built structures is less than the scale of the existing agricultural buildings on site. Given the farmstead design that has been proposed (including the use of long-spanned roof forms and traditional materials) it is not considered that the development would look wholly out of place in its setting when viewed from afar. In addition, the retention of a large proportion of open green space to the rear of Plots 1, 2 and 4 (and use of informal post and rail fencing and hedgerow boundaries as opposed to formal close boarded fencing or boundary walls) helps to retain the natural links to the countryside beyond, and assists with the transition from built development to countryside. A condition is suggested to prevent the erection of and other boundary treatments on this site (other than those approved).

6.10 Given the site’s historic use as a farmstead, the quantum of built-form and hardstanding resulting from the proposed development would reduce significantly. The existing built form covers approximately 2,150m² and the proposed built form would cover approximately 1,618m² (representing a 25% reduction). This again, is another improvement on the consented Class Q scheme. The areas of hardstanding as proposed would comprise the access road with a rural surface treatment to match Threals Lane, parking areas to be surfaced in loose gravel, and a cobbled courtyard space fronting plots 1 and 2. To preserve the character of the site and to retain the high quality finishes and materials, a condition is suggested to prevent the laying of any hard surfacing under permitted development, other than those approved.

6.11 A scheme of soft landscaping has been proposed which includes the planting of 22 new trees within the site together with new sections of native hedgerow. All existing boundary vegetation will be retained, with the exception of 5 trees (Category ‘U’ and ‘C’). A new wildflower meadow is proposed at the southern end of the site, which links into the existing pond at the south-east corner. The planting scheme is another improvement on the Class Q scheme which does not require an applicant to provide any additional soft landscaping.

6.12 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF states that “…great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which help raise the standard of design more generally in an area”. Policies 25, 32 and 33 of the HDPF require development to be of high quality design which is sympathetic to the character and distinctiveness of the site and surroundings. Policy Thakeham6 of the Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan requires “the scale, density, massing, height, landscape design, layout and materials to reflect any architectural or historic characteristics of particular merit in, and the scale of the surrounding building and in the wider area”.

6.13 With regard to the consented Prior Approval (Class Q) scheme, whilst it could be argued that the conversion of a large agricultural building helps to retain a typical rural/agricultural character to the site, Officers are of the view that the conversion of this large building to 5x dwellings would result in a building that is incongruous in its setting, particularly when considering the surrounding empty agricultural buildings and extent of hardstanding. Whilst external materials have been conditioned as part of the Class Q consent, the elevations offer no design interest or quality, and are overly-simplistic and unimaginative. The layout of the site does not afford the opportunity for any private external amenity space for future residents, and no additional planting would be included. The consented Class Q plans Page 24 show a line of informal car parking to the southern boundary of the site which is highly visible from key countryside views and from the Bridleway, introducing an undesirable and poorly placed urban feature. In all, Officers are of the view that when compared to the scheme presented in the proposed planning application, the consented Class Q scheme fails to provide a high-quality 5-unit development that preserves the sensitive rural character of its wider countryside surrounds.

6.14 In summary, it is considered that whilst the design and layout of the proposal differs from the more sub-urban character more readily seen within West Chiltington Common, the proposed farmstead character is considered to be appropriate in this rural and more peripheral setting. The site is visible from the nearby Bridleway and from long views to the south of the site, but the bespoke farmstead design with open green spaces and informal boundaries to the south helps to integrate the site into the landscape character by creating structures of a scale and design that are not wholly out of place in their setting. The proposal is considered to be a significant improvement on the consented Class Q scheme, and the character and appearance is considered to accord with Policies 25, 32 and 33 of the HDPF and policy ‘Thakeham6’ of the Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan.

Highways and Rights of Way

6.15 West Sussex County Council (WSCC) as the Highways Authority have reviewed the proposed development and have raised no objection in highways terms. WSCC note that the redevelopment of the site to residential use is likely to result in a reduction in vehicle movements, and movement by farm vehicles would cease, which with regard to the narrow access roads leading to the site, is welcomed. The absence of footways within the site is consistent with the rest of the highway in the area and is not considered to be problematic.

6.16 Access to the site is proposed from the existing site access at the southern-most end of Threals lane. WSCC have confirmed that no improvements would be needed to this access. The application is supported by a Transport Statement (TS) which indicates that the trip rates associated with the proposed development would be low, and would not give rise to a ‘severe’ highways impact on Threals Lane.

6.17 The parking strategy for the site allocates 4 spaces per dwelling, which is in line with the 2019 WSCC Parking Standards, and therefore in accordance with HDPF Policy 41. In accordance with the 2019 WSCC Guidance, 28% of the proposed parking spaces should be fitted with electric charging points. This can be secured by condition. Cycle parking is not shown, but it is considered that there is sufficient space within proposed garages for this. A condition has been drafted to require these details to be submitted and approved.

6.18 The submitted planning statement notes that the applicant is agreeable to making a contribution towards the upgrade of the nearby Bridleway (ROW 2791). The details of this proposed upgrading have not been proposed, but it is assumed that it would include re- surfacing to a specification to be agreed by WSCC. As per the Officer Recommendation, the mechanism for securing this contribution in a s106 agreement will be explored further in consultation with the Council’s Legal team and WSCC.

Ecology

6.19 A Preliminary Ecology Appraisal (PEA) has been submitted in support of this application. Whilst no protected species were found on site, the site contains features that provide potential habitats for nesting birds, hedgehogs, and bats. All such areas of potential habitat are proposed to be retained and enhanced as part of the development. In addition, whilst the existing pond to the south-east of the site is of low-ecological value, it too will be retained and enhanced to increase foraging opportunities for amphibians and reptiles. The PEA recommends mitigation measures (including the installation of bat and bird boxes on

Page 25 buildings and trees, and hibernacula for reptiles and amphibians) and these measures have been drafted as conditions.

6.20 The Council’s consultant ecologist has reviewed the submitted information in detail and initially advised that given the site’s relatively close proximity to The Mens Special Area of Conservation (SAC), the Council would be required to prepare a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of likely impact on the Barbastelle bat. A HRA has now been prepared which concludes that the proposed development will ‘not have a Likely Significant Effect on the designated features of the Habitats sites listed in this assessment, either alone or in combination with other plan and projects’.

6.21 The Council’s ecologist has also noted that the development does not proposed the removal of any significant numbers of trees, woodland or hedgerows, and notes that the enhancement features (such as additional hedgerow and tree planting and wildflower meadow) will help to secure a net gain in biodiversity as required by paragraph 170d of the NPPF.

6.22 In summary, no objection is raised by the Council’s ecologist, subject to the mitigation and enhancement measures (outlined in the PEA) being secured and implemented in full. The ecologist has recommended conditions to that effect, which have been drafted in this report. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with HDPF Policy 31 and Paragraph 170d of the NPPF.

Drainage

6.23 In support of the application a Drainage Strategy (V1.2) has been submitted. The development is proposed to include a sustainable drainage system which will discharge surface water either by ground infiltration (including the installation of 134m³ storage crates), or to the existing pond located to the south-east of the site. The pond will provide sufficient storage, including storage capacity for 1:100 year rainfall events, with a 40% allowance for climate change. Foul drainage is proposed to be discharged via an on-site pumping station leading to the public foul sewer (beneath Threals Lane, 75m to the north of the site). It is noted that the redevelopment will reduce the impermeable surface on site in half, from approximately 4,400m² to 2,200m².

6.24 The Council’s Drainage Engineer has reviewed the revised Drainage Strategy (V1.2) and has confirmed that the proposed method for surface and foul water disposal is acceptable. Precise surface and foul water drainage design details will be secured by condition.

Land Contamination

6.25 The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has advised that agricultural buildings and associated land can be subject to significant contamination risks arising from their use, construction and storage of mechanical equipment, fuels or other chemicals. Potentially hazardous materials may also be incorporated in made ground, yards and hard standings. A recent site visit by the EHO confirmed that it was apparent that corrugated cement sheeting (a likely asbestos containing material), has been used in the construction of the buildings on this site. There was also evidence of waste disposal and made ground in certain parts of the application site. Given the above, the EHO is of the view that the ground on the site has the potential to be contaminated, and has recommended conditions for this to be investigated further, and safely addressed. It should be noted that removal of asbestos is not a planning matter and is covered by other legislation.

Sustainability / Climate Change

6.26 Policies 35, 36 and 37 of the HDPF require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, Page 26 reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions seek to reduce the impact of development on climate change. In support of the application an Energy Statement has been submitted. The Energy Statement lists the following measures to build resilience to climate change and reduce carbon emissions:

 using good insulation in building fabric to reduce heat loss and maximise air tightness performance;  glazing designed to maximise natural daylight;  use of low energy heating and hot water systems;  use of low energy lighting;  provision of secure and covered cycle storage;  use of low-polluting insulation materials;  use of long-life durable materials;  provision of household recycling facilities;  sanitary appliances and fittings will be low mains water use;  reduction of impermeable hard surfacing;  improved ecological value of the site (planting etc.);  Implementation of a construction site waste management plan.

6.27 In addition to these measures, conditions are attached to secure the following:

 Securing of a sustainable surface water drainage systems;  Dedicated cycle parking facilities;  Biodiversity mitigation and enhancement ;  5x (minimum) electric vehicle charging points.

Subject to these conditions it is considered that the proposed development will suitably mitigate its impact on climate change in accordance with local and national planning policy.

Other Matters – Size of Dwellings

6.28 Officers acknowledge a point made by Thakeham Parish Council regarding the size of dwellings proposed as part of this application (2x 4-bed and 3x 5-bed). The Parish Council are of the view that additional large dwellings (such as those proposed) are not needed in the Parish, and that the smaller, more affordable dwellings already permitted under the Class Q consent are required more urgently. Whilst the provision of an appropriate mix of housing to meet locally identified needs is a valid point, it must also be noted that the key housing needs required within Thakeham Parish have been identified and addressed via policies contained within the ‘made’ Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan. The housing need in Thakeham has, for now, been accommodated via Neighbourhood Plan allocations, and the development of this site is considered therefore to be a ‘windfall’ site. In addition, whilst the site is located within the boundary of Thakeham Parish, it abuts the built-up area boundary of West Chiltington Parish. Arguably therefore, the site is more closely associated with the services, functions and community connections of West Chiltington, rather than those of Thakeham. Work on the West Chiltington Neighbourhood Plan is underway, but West Chiltington Parish do not currently have a ‘made’ Neighbourhood Plan to draw upon. As such, the housing needs in West Chiltington are less understood at this stage so it would be premature to suggest that only smaller homes are needed to fulfil future needs within the Parish. Notwithstanding this, the suitability of 5 large houses in this location must also be acceptable in character terms, and this has been assessed in more detail in earlier sections of this report.

Page 27 Conclusion

6.29 The site is located within a countryside location and has not been allocated for residential development. The proposal therefore conflicts with policies 4 and 26 of the HDPF and Policy Thakeham1 of the Thakeham Neighbourhood Plan. However, the principle of the erection of 5x residential units on the site has already been established by the grant of Prior Approval (Class Q) for the conversion of an existing agricultural building on the site to form 5no dwellinghouses. This is considered to form a realistic fall-back position carrying significant weight in the planning balance.

6.30 Whilst the proposed development of 5x large detached houses would constitute development across a larger site area, Officers are of the view that it would result in a much improved appearance to the site as a whole, when compared to the poorer quality and incongruous development that could otherwise come forward on the site under the Class Q consent. The proposal gives the Council more control over the layout and quality of the development (including a higher quality of materials, boundary treatments, planting and ecological enhancements), as well control over the associated amenity impact on future residents. The proposed development would also afford more certainty about the site’s future by preventing further ad-hoc development which is not conducive to residential amenity (including undesirable agricultural or commercial uses, or the further dilapidation of the existing agricultural buildings on site if no alternative use for them is pursued).

6.31 The concerns highlighted by Thakeham Parish Council regarding the lack on need for larger homes in Thakeham is acknowledged. However, when considering the benefits offered by the proposed development compared to the consented Class Q scheme, it is the view of Officers that the proposal justifies a departure from adopted in policy in this particular case. The benefits of the proposed development when compared to the Class Q scheme are therefore considered to outweigh the conflict with the Local Plan policies such that the grant of planning permission, on balance, is recommended.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

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

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

Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

Total Gain

Total Demolition

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

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

Page 28 7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that the Committee delegated approval of the application to the Head of Development, subject to the following conditions, and subject to the completion of a s106 legal agreement to secure a financial contribution for improvements to Bridleway ROW2791.

Conditions

1. List of Approved Plans

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

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

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

i. the anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction; ii. the method of access and routing of vehicles during construction; iii. the parking of vehicles by site operatives and visitors; iv. the loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste; v. the storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development; vi. the erection and maintenance of security hoarding; vii. 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); and viii. details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works.

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

4. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination, (including asbestos contamination), of the site be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:

(a) A pre-demolition preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

The following aspects (b) – (c) shall be dependent on the outcome of the above preliminary risk assessment (a) and may not necessarily be required.

(b) An intrusive site investigation scheme, based on (a) to provide information for a detailed risk assessment to the degree and nature of the risk posed by any contamination to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (c) Full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results of the intrusive site investigation (b) and a

Page 29 verification plan providing details of what data will be collected in order to demonstrate that the remedial works are complete.

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

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

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

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

6. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence, including demolition pursuant to the permission granted, ground clearance, or bringing equipment, machinery or materials onto the site, until the following preliminaries have been completed in the sequence set out below:  All trees on the site shown for retention within the approved Arboricultural Impact Assessment (by PJC Consultancy, ref: 5526/20/02), as well as those off-site whose root protection areas ingress into the site, shall be fully protected throughout all construction works by tree protective fencing affixed to the ground in full accordance with section 6 of BS 5837 'Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction - Recommendations' (2012).  Once installed, the fencing shall be maintained during the course of the development works and until all machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site.  Areas so fenced off shall be treated as zones of prohibited access, and shall not be used for the storage of materials, equipment or machinery in any circumstances. No mixing of cement, concrete, or use of other materials or substances shall take place within any tree protective zone, or close enough to such a zone that seepage or displacement of those materials and substances could cause them to enter a zone.  Any trees or hedges on the site which die or become damaged during the construction process shall be replaced with trees or hedging plants of a type, size and in positions agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

8. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until details showing the proposed location of 1no. fire hydrant or stored water supply (in accordance with the Page 30 West Sussex Fire and Rescue Guidance Notes) have submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with West Sussex County Council’s Fire and Rescue Services. The fire hydrant shall thereafter be installed in the approved location, and connected to a water supply which is appropriate in terms of both pressure and volume for the purposes of firefighting.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and safety, in accordance with Policies 33 and 39 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), and with the F&RS Act 2004.

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

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

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

Reason: As these matters are fundamental to safeguard the ecology and biodiversity of the area in accordance with Policy 31 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), and to enhance Protected and Priority Species/habitats and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

12. Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a lighting design scheme for biodiversity has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall identify those features on site that are particularly sensitive for bats and that are likely to cause disturbance along important routes used for foraging; and show how and where external lighting will be installed so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent bats using their territory. All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the scheme and maintained thereafter in accordance with the scheme. No other external lighting shall be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority.

Reason: As these matters are fundamental to safeguard the ecology and biodiversity of the area in accordance with Policy 31 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), and to enhance Protected and Priority Species/habitats and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

Page 31 13. Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until confirmation has been submitted, in writing, to the Local Planning Authority that the relevant Building Control body will be requiring the optional standard for water usage across the development. The dwellings hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

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

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

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

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

16. Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be first occupied until the cycle parking facilities serving it have been constructed and made available for use in accordance with approved drawing numbers [TF_06 Rev B, TF_07 Rev B, TF_11, TF_13, TF_15, TF_16, and TF_19]. The cycle parking facilities shall thereafter be retained as such for their designated use at all times.

Page 32 Reason: To ensure that there is adequate provision for the parking of cycles in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

17. Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be first occupied until provision for the storage of refuse and recycling has been made for that dwelling in accordance with drawing numbers [TF_06 Rev B, TF_07 Rev B, TF_11, TF_13, TF_15, TF_16, and TF_19]. These facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

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

18. Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, a plan showing a minimum of 1no. fast electric vehicle charging points per dwelling (5no. total across the site) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The electric vehicle charging points shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, and shall be retained as such for their designated use.

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

19. Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, all existing building on site indicated on ‘Existing Site/Block Plan’ reference [TF_01] shall have been demolished (including the removal of foundations) and all materials arising from such demolition removed from the site.

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

20. Regulatory Condition: No soils shall be imported or re-used within the development site until the developer has submitted details of the chemical testing and assessment of the soils which demonstrates the suitability of the soils for the proposed use. The assessment shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified and competent person and full details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to the first occupation (or use) of any part of the development hereby permitted, a written verification report shall be submitted which demonstrates only soils suitable for the proposed use have been placed. The verification report shall be submitted and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

22. Regulatory Condition: No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of any spoil from the site, shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Page 33 Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

23. Regulatory Condition: All works shall be executed in full accordance with the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment/Method Statement by PJC Consultancy, dated 27 April 2020, (ref: 5526/20/02).

Reason: To ensure the successful and satisfactory protection of important trees, shrubs and hedges on the site in accordance with Policies 30 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

24. Regulatory Condition: The development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the ecological mitigation and enhancement measures set out in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by PJC Consultancy, dated 21 January 2020 (ref: 4235E/19).

Reason: As these matters are fundamental to safeguard the ecology and biodiversity of the area in accordance with Policy 31 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

25. Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (and/or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order) no development falling within Class A (extensions), Class B (roofs) or Class F (hard surfaces) of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the order shall be erected, constructed or placed within the curtilages of the development hereby permitted without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and due to the sensitive rural character of the site, in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

26. Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (and/or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order) no development falling within Class A (gates, fences, walls) of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the order shall be erected, constructed or placed within the curtilages of the development hereby permitted without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and due to the sensitive rural character of the site, in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Informatives:

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

2. Please note that Southern Water require a formal application for connection to the public foul sewer in order to service this development. Please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire (tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk

Page 34

3. WSCC Public Rights of Way Informatives:

Access along a public bridleway other than as a walker, cyclist or equestrian whether by the applicant, construction personnel or future site occupiers, will only be lawful if the applicant can prove a private right of access exists. It will be an offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988 section 34(1) if motorised access is undertaken without a private access right existing.

The path is not to be obstructed by vehicles, plant, scaffolding or the temporary storage of materials and / or chemicals during any works; these will constitute an offence of obstruction under the Highways Act 1980.

The applicant must be advised it is an offence to damage / change the surface of a public right of way without the prior consent of WSCC. Where it is necessary to undertake works within the path width, e.g. install utilities, the applicant must be advised to apply to WSCC for a temporary path closure; the applicant must be advised there is no guarantee an application will be approved and that a minimum of 8 weeks is needed to consider an application.

Any damage to the footpath surface reasonably arising from access to and from the site, both during construction and during future occupation, will be the responsibility of the applicant or occupier; they will be held liable and required to make good the surface to a standard satisfactory to the WSCC.

Any change to the surface of the right of way must be agreed with WSCC as Highways Authority prior to any work commencing and the granting of planning permission does not negate the need for this consent.

4. Given the likely presence of asbestos containing materials on the site, the applicant is advised to seek professional advice regarding its removal in accordance with current regulations.

Background Papers:

DC/19/0213 (Prior Approval, Class Q) DC/20/0837 (Current Application)

Page 35 This page is intentionally left blank 06) DC/20/0837

Threals Farm, West Chiltington

For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public Chilcote C R Lyndwood Chorleywood ¯

Plashetts Silverwoods

e ous te H Ga The Little Barn arm Coleraine al's Fes Threottag Sta C Sub Karibu El 1 2 ck Tra Loaningdale Spinney T Lodge NEY h SPIN r Greensleeves IGH e E H a PS l CO s S EAL B THR 4 a Bella Casa r Squirrels n Kingsley Threal's Farm

Pond Pond

Un CH d

E D

&

W

a r d

B d y

P a t h(um)

C

P

Scale: 1:2,500

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

Date 10/09/2020 Page 37MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 18th August 2020 Erection of livery stables with associated facilities and two units of grooms accommodation above, machinery store, horse walker, creation DEVELOPMENT: of an access track and parking area

Land On The South Side of Hill Farm Lane Codmore Hill Pulborough SITE: West Sussex RH20 1BW WARD: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley

APPLICATION: DC/20/0326 Name: Mr Benjamin Parker Address: Hill Farm Barn Hill Farm Lane APPLICANT: RH20 1BW

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: At the request of Councillor Clarke

RECOMMENDATION: Delegated approval to the Head of Development subject to appropriate conditions and the expiration of the 21 day notification period following amendment to Certificate B as served by the applicant on the 4 September 2020, and the consideration of any further representations received.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 The proposal seeks planning permission for the erection of livery stables with associated facilities and two units of grooms accommodation above, machinery store, horse walker, (total 1160sqm) along with the creation of an access track and parking area for horse-boxes with a total capacity for 36 vehicles.

1.3 The proposed courtyard style stable building with groom’s accommodation above is located to the south of the two buildings adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The stable building has a maximum width of approximately 55m and a maximum depth of 36.6m, with a central gable element measuring 12m deep and 8.5m wide. The height to the main ridge height of the roof measures 5.5m, and the height to the apex of the central gable roof is approx. 9.9m. There is a roof turret that rises a further 2.3m above the apex of the gable roof. The stables block comprises a total of 24 stalls across the two protecting wings (12 in each) and a further 3 stalls within the main section of the stable building (27 stalls in total). Additionally, the main section contains wash down and solarium areas, tack, feed and hay storage areas, as well as a kitchen, laundry and office area surrounding the central stair well to the first and second floor areas. The second and third floor areas within the central gable

Page 39 Contact Officer: Amanda Wilkes Tel: 01403 215521 element of the stable building provide two separate self-contained grooms accommodation, each with 1 bedroom. The proposed materials for the stables include timber weather boarding with black roofing shingles. The roof contains a number of roof lights.

1.4 The proposals include a covered horse walker with diameter of 16m and height of 3.5m under a metal sheet roof. The horse walker is located in the far west section of the site, along with the proposed tractor barn which has dimensions of approximately 15m in width, 10m in depth, 4m to eaves with an overall height of 5.6m. The tractor barn would have an opening to the southern elevation and all elevations would be metal clad under metal sheet roofing which is punctuated by 4 roof lights to the southern pitch. The proposed grasscrete parking area has dimensions of 37.3m by 50.5m and will located on the same area currently used for parking purposes. A new spur access track will be formed off of the existing spur access which leads to Hill Farm.

1.5 The traffic that this development will attract will be of two types; firstly traffic associated with the day to day running of the equestrian centre, such as deliveries of horse feed, regular removal of horse manure, etc. and secondly clients and visitors using the facilities. The number of expected traffic movements associated with the clients and visitors using the facilities in regards to the operational use of the livery stables is advised to be between 5-8 movements per day. The applicant has stated that the livery stables will be rented out in full to a professional rider who will bring their horses to the site. Additionally, approximately half of the stables will be used in association with the stabling of horses attending events and competitions. It is advised that there would be no DIY use of the livery stables. It is proposed that the number of events hosted on site will remain at a maximum of 4-6 shows per month (as is already in operation) and as set out on the applicant’s web site http://www.coombelands-equestrian.co.uk/events. The number of horse boxes that are expected on any particular event day is advised as no more than 60, and there are no more than 58 events per year.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The application site forms a parcel of land (approx. 0.8 ha), to the west of the settlement of Codmore Hill, south of Hill Farm Lane which is a narrow country lane. The site is located to the south east of Hill Farm Barn and Hill Farm House, both of which are Grade II listed buildings, and south east of part of the low ‘L’ shaped range of outbuildings to the east of the farmhouse. These structures are all located outside of the application site boundaries. The site lies outside of any defined built-up area boundary and is located within the countryside. Coombelands Equestrian itself is an established Equestrian Centre with a cross country schooling course, show jumping schooling facilities, dressage arenas on dry grass and all weather gallops. The existing equestrian enterprise holds One Day Events, Hunter Trials and clinics throughout the year as well as British Eventing Horse Trials and Classes. There is also an all-weather arena for hire. The site has been in operation for such purposes for many years with planning permission granted under DC/10/2382 for the creation of a 50m by 80m sand school with timber post and rail fence on the site of an existing equestrian/schooling paddock. At the time of this application it is noted that the uses as described above were in operation.

1.7 The wider surrounding site was originally part of wider Hill Farm complex, under a single ownership, but has been subdivided over time and now comprises approximately three different holdings including Coombelands Farm, Coombelands Stables and Coombelands Equestrian Centre. Agricultural and farming activities are still active, however the primary equestrian activities including stabling, schooling are prevalent.

1.8 To the north and immediately bordering the northern boundary of the application site are two atcost barn buildings that are clad in profiled metal sheeting (identified on plan as Barn 3 and 4) and beyond these are two other atcost Barns (identified on plan as Barn 1 and 2) all of which are associated with the neighbouring site. Page 40

1.9 There are three existing access tracks to the original wider farm complex, one serving Hill Farm Bungalow to the west of the application site, one serving Hill Farm House to the north west of the application site and one serving the barns immediately adjacent to the application site. Access to the application site itself is via the A29 (Stane Street). A spur road from the existing access track is proposed to facilitate a new access to the application site itself.

1.10 The topography of the land undulates and falls moderately from north to south beyond the adjacent gallops. This changes how the buildings are viewed within the context of the site, particularly from longer views from the south looking northwards. The application site is separated from the existing training school and gallops by hedgerows to the field boundaries. There is a disused quarry to the south of the converted listed barn. There is a public footpath (PROW 1995) to the west of the site, which runs towards Pulborough and passes along a north east/south west axis between the buildings and adjacent listed residential properties known as Hill Farm House and Hill Barn, before joining PROW 1996 which runs along the east/west axis towards Stane Street adjacent to the southern boundary of the application site.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

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

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 4 - Strategic Policy: Settlement Expansion Policy 7 - Strategic Policy: Economic Growth Policy 9 - Employment Development Policy 10 - Rural Economic Development Policy 11 - Tourism and Cultural Facilities Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 29 - Equestrian Development Policy 30 - Protected Landscapes Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 34 - Cultural and Heritage Assets Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 36 - Strategic Policy: Appropriate Energy Use Policy 37 - Sustainable Construction Policy 38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding Policy 39 - Strategic Policy: Infrastructure Provision Policy 40 - Sustainable Transport Policy 41 - Parking Policy 43 - Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation Page 41

Supplementary Planning Guidance: 2.3 Pulborough Parish Design Statement 2013

RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2.4 Pulborough Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan - Designated (Regulation 7)

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

2.5 The most recent and relevant planning history relating to this site is as follows:

DC/10/1205 Creation of 50 x 80 metre sand school with Withdrawn Application timber post and rail fence on site of an existing on 10.08.2010 equestrian/schooling paddock DC/10/2382 Creation of 50 x 80 metre sand school with Application Permitted timber post and rail fence on the site of an on 10.01.2011 existing equestrian/schooling paddock

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

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

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.2 HDC Landscape Architect: No Objection

3.3 HDC Conservation: Comment The submitted heritage statement is comprehensive and clearly describes the setting of the listed buildings. I do not disagree with the conclusion that the proposed development will not harm the intimate or immediate setting of listed buildings in terms of visual impact. There is little discussion of the other ways setting is experienced and I draw attention to my previous comments below in relation to noise, movement and perception of activity. I remain confident the proposal will harm the wider setting of the listed buildings which is described in para.5.39 as having a medium to low value in relation to the heritage value of the heritage assets. I do not agree with the conclusion that no harm will arise. Therefore paragraph 196 of the NPPF should be considered.

The statement refers to the benefits to the wider landscape of concealing the existing farm buildings with a bespoke and architect designed building. I do not disagree that this will reduced the landscape impact of the utilitarian buildings when viewed from the south. This visual improvement within the landscape is offered as a public benefit as well as the creation of a local business. My view remains that the proposed development will exacerbate the harm to the setting of the listed buildings that already exists by way of the modern farm buildings. This harm is less than substantial and in the middle of that range in my view due to the increase in perception of built form and mass. In considering paragraph 196 it is right that any public benefit should outweigh any harm. I leave it to you to conclude if the public benefits described will outweigh this harm.

3.3 HDC Environmental Health: No Objection

Page 42 OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.4 WSCC Highways: No Objection subject to conditions

WSCC Highways have been consulted and have advised that the extra traffic that this development would be associated with would relate to the day to day running of the equestrian centre, such as deliveries of horse feed, regular removal of horse manure, etc. and use by clients and visitors. Whilst the running of the centre will attract some traffic associated to the activity, it is considered that this would be minimal in relation to the current traffic and this will be concentrated on weekends, when more customers will be more likely be using the facilities. A condition is recommended to restrict the livery use.

3.5 Ecology Consultant: No Objection subject to conditions

3.6 Agricultural Consultant: No Objection

 It is considered that the essential needs of Coombelands Equestrian Centre for 2 Grooms accommodation will arise from the close supervision, management and daily nutrient requirements of all horses either boxed in stables or in grazing/turnout paddocks; the provision of security for valuable horses from theft or malicious attack; dealing with unforeseen emergencies such as a horse cast in its box, or a horse with colic, or abnormal weather conditions which can cause distress to horses, or a fire.

 Overall, RAC considers that the applicant’s existing and proposed equestrian enterprise is financially viable and sustainable now and in the long term and is compliant with national and local planning policy.

 RAC would accept that the proposed stable block with equine facilities and the two units of groom’s accommodation, machinery store and horse walker are of an appropriate size, and that it would support the equestrian needs of the holding and the business trading as Coombelands Cross Country Equestrian. In such circumstances RAC considers it would be compliant with Paragraph 83 of the NPPF and Policies 20, 26 and 29 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

3.7 Southern Water: Comment Environment Agency shall be consulted directly regarding the use of a private wastewater treatment works which disposes of effluent to sub-soil irrigation.

PARISH COUNCIL: 3.8 Pulborough Parish Council: Objection There are concerns about the access as this is a narrow lane. It wouldn't be suitable to have many horseboxes travelling to and from these livery stables.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS 3.9 There are 2 letters of Objection (received from 2 separate households) and 18 Letters of Support (received from 17 households) and 1 letter of comment

Objections have been made on the following grounds:  Increase in activities and events from 6 per year to 6 per week  Growth of Business  Red line boundary incorrect  Access not shown on location plan to main road  Location plan - Ownership dispute  Estate owned by Trust and others  Intensity of use and traffic and parking generation Page 43  Track owned and used in association with equestrian and farming activities  Parking space sizes and appropriateness  Stable waste  Impact on countryside and views from South Downs National Park  Conflict with policy  Public Rights of Way  Horse welfare and need for 2 grooms flats  Safety and security of neighbours  Operational use of site

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

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main considerations material to this application relate to:  The principle of development  The impact and scale of the development on the character and visual amenities of the countryside;  The amenities of neighbour and future occupiers; and  Parking and highway safety issues  Sustainability

Principle of Development:

6.2 The principle of development for the keeping of horses on the application site has already been established over time by virtue of the historic use of the wider site for equestrian purposes. The current application seeks planning permission for the erection of livery stables with associated facilities with two units of groom’s accommodation above, machinery store, horse walker, and the creation of an access track and parking area.

6.3 Policy 10 (Rural Economic Development) of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) states that development in the countryside should be appropriate to the countryside location and contribute to the diverse and sustainable farming enterprises within the district or, in the case of other countryside-based enterprises and activities, contribute to the wider rural economy and/or promote recreation in, and the enjoyment of, the countryside.

6.4 Policy 26 of the HDPF states that outside built up area boundaries, the rural character and undeveloped nature of the countryside will be protected against inappropriate development. In addition, proposals must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside character and location, and would not lead, either individually or cumulatively to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside and protects and/or conserve, enhances key features and characteristics of the landscape character in which it is located. The strategy for Rural Economic Development reinforces the government’s commitment to encouraging sustainable rural business whilst maintaining the quality and special character of the Page 44 countryside as set out in Paragraph 28 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposed equestrian structures in connection with the wider equestrian use of the site, given its size and scale, is considered to be acceptable subject to a thorough assessment against all other relevant policies within the HDPF.

6.5 Policy 25 of the HDPF seeks to protect important and protected landscape against inappropriate development.

6.6 Policy 29 (Equestrian Development) of the HDPF states that ‘Development for equestrian related development will be supported provided that it can be demonstrated that the re-use of existing buildings on site for related equestrian use is not appropriate before new or replacement buildings are considered; the proposal would be appropriate in scale and level of activity, and be in keeping with its location and surroundings, and where possible is well related to existing buildings; and the proposal should where possible be well related to a bridleway network’.

6.7 Policy 20 (Rural worker’s accommodation) supports new housing for rural workers provided that there is a functional need for the accommodation to support an established business use, and there is evidence to demonstrate the viability of that business.

6.8 Policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF require development to provide an attractive, functional, accessible, safe and adaptable environment, and to ensure that developments will complement locally distinctive characters and heritage, and that the scale, massing and appearance of the development is of a high standard of design and layout and where relevant relates sympathetically with the built surroundings, respects the character of the surrounding area, and uses high standards of building materials, and finishes.

6.9 Paragraph 127 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should ensure that developments function well and add to the overall quality of the area; are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting; establish a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit; optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development; and create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and promote health and wellbeing.

6.10 The current application seeks consent for the erection of livery stables with associated facilities with two units of groom’s accommodation above, machinery store and horse walker, along with the creation of an access track and parking area for horse-boxes with a total capacity for 36 vehicles. The precise details of the proposals are as set out in the description of development above. The horse walker, tractor barn, stables and grooms accommodation are considered to be appropriate to the countryside location, and it is considered that that cumulative nature of the proposed equestrian development, which would operate separately from but adjacent to the existing equestrian commercial enterprise, would not significantly increase the level of activity on the site overall. It is accepted that there are no existing buildings on the site that could suitably contain the number of stables and groom’s accommodation proposed.

6.11 In respect of the accommodation for two grooms, this is to be contained above the stables in two small flats sharing the same access and stairs. The primary test set out in the NPPF and Policy 20 of the HDPF is an assessment as to whether it is essential for a rural worker to live at, or near, their place of work, whether there is a functional need for the accommodation, and whether the business is sufficiently viable to support such accommodation in the longer term. Due to the nature of the site, there will be horses on site overnight with specific husbandry needs as well as requirement for security to be fully managed. Thus, the on-site living arrangement can be seen as essential in order to provide Page 45 for the management of the equine business and meet the welfare needs of the horses and other livestock on site.

6.12 In order to demonstrate that there is an essential need for a rural worker to live on site, it is necessary to consider whether it is essential for the proper functioning of the enterprise for one or more workers to be readily available most of the time. An assessment of the essential need for a rural worker to live at or near their place of work requires: • an evaluation of the risks involved; • the frequency and type of out-of-hours emergency that might arise; • the scale and loss that could be incurred should that emergency situation occur; • the potential for an on-site worker to identify the problem; and • the ability of that resident worker to promptly rectify the problem.

6.13 Legislation requires that all animals are managed in a manner that accords them freedom from thirst; hunger and malnutrition; appropriate comfort and shelter; freedom from fear; freedom to display the most normal patterns of behaviour; and it is accepted that without good stockmanship, animal welfare can never be adequately protected.

6.14 RAC have assessed the essential need for a rural worker(s) to live on site and have advised that at Coombelands Equestrian Centre it is considered that the essential needs will arise from: • the close supervision, management and daily nutrient requirements of all horses either boxed in stables or in grazing/turnout paddocks; • the provision of security for valuable horses from theft or malicious attack; • dealing with unforeseen emergencies such as a horse cast in its box, or a horse with colic, or abnormal weather conditions which can cause distress to horses, or a fire.

6.15 The labour requirements for the applicant’s equestrian enterprise can be calculated using Standard Man Days (SMD) data from the Equine Business Guide 2019. For each full-time worker, the SMD equivalent is 278 days. Reading Agricultural Consultants have advised using this guidance that the Eventing horses require 140 SMDs each per year and the short term livery horses over approximately 100 days will each have a requirement of 38 SMDs per year. For the horses stabled on full time livery, a reduction for economies of scale will apply. It is advised that it is not considered appropriate to apply this same reduction to the short term liveries as the horses may change each time.

6.16 The provision of two groom’s accommodation on site will allow a full-time resident worker for each discipline, in this case an employee of the applicant and an employee of the tenant Professional Rider, to meet the welfare requirements of the horses stabled there on a daily basis and to react promptly to any emergencies that arise. In view of the information provided by the applicants and following their own assessment, Reading Agricultural Consultants have advised that they consider that there is a justified essential need for two full-time rural workers to be resident at the application site to care for the two separate disciplines notably the full time and short term livery horses and would therefore be compliant with National and Local Plan Policy.

6.17 Policy 20 also requires evidence to demonstrate the viability of the rural business for which the housing is required. Reading Agricultural Consultants have confirmed following submission of the Applicants detailed profits and loss accounts that the applicant’s business, trading as Coombelands Cross Country Equestrian, is well established and continues to develop offering additional equestrian services through the erection of stabling for liveries (full time and short term) as well as annual tenancy rental income for the stables and grooms accommodation, projected financial accounts have been provided in this Page 46 respect, taking into account forecasted wages and expected utilities. Overall, Reading Agricultural Consultants consider that the applicant’s existing and proposed equestrian enterprise is financially viable and sustainable now and in the long term and is compliant with national and local planning policy. They have also advised that the storage and agricultural machinery store is an appropriate use of the proposed building and that the proposed 16m diameter horse walker which provides exercise for 6-7 horses at any one time is of a suitable size for the horses at Coombelands Equestrian Centre requiring exercise and is an appropriate equine facility as seen on many similar competition yards of the same size.

6.18 The Council’s Agricultural Consultant, concludes that they consider there to be a functional need for the grooms accommodation and that the business is viable to support it. It is therefore considered that the proposed use of the site would be appropriate in this location and would accord with policies 10, 20, 26 and 29 of the HDPF.

Character and Appearance including impact on the Listed Buildings and their setting

6.19 Policies 32 and 33 of the HDPF require development to provide an attractive, functional, accessible, safe and adaptable environment, and to ensure that developments will complement locally distinctive characters and heritage, and that the scale, massing and appearance of the development is of a high standard of design and layout and where relevant relates sympathetically with the built surroundings, respects the character of the surrounding area, and uses high standards of building materials, and finishes. The proposed horse walker, stables and tractor store as described above, are considered acceptable within the context of the wider equestrian site and are suitable in terms of the size, scale and appearance. It is considered that the buildings/structures would not result in an over intensity of the existing use of the site. In this respect the size and scale for the purposes of the proposed stable block are considered to accord with the requirements of Policy 32 and 33 of the HDPF.

6.20 Policy 34 of the HDPF sets out that the Council recognises that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource, and as such the Council will sustain and enhance its historic environment through positive management of development affecting heritage assets. The NPPF draws a distinction between ‘designated’ heritage assets (for the purposes of this case listed buildings and conservation areas) and non-designated heritage assets. There are two Grade II listed buildings, known as Hill Farm House and Hill Barn, located close to the application site but separated by the atcost buildings on the adjacent site. The site is not within a Conservation Area. The applicants have submitted a comprehensive Heritage Statement (Murphy Associates) dated May 2020, which provides historical and architectural background to assist in the understanding of the role that setting plays in the contributing to the special interest of the two listed buildings that once formed part of Hill Farm. The supporting information has been considered by the Councils’ Conservation Officer as part of the consideration of this application.

6.21 The Heritage Statement is described by the Council’s Conservation Officer as being a comprehensive document that clearly describes the listed buildings. The applicant’s statement refers to the benefits to the wider landscape of concealing the existing farm buildings with a bespoke and architect deigned building. The Council’s Conservation Officer agrees that that the proposed development will not harm the intimate or immediate setting of listed buildings in terms of visual impact when viewed from the south, and advises that the proposed visual improvement within the landscape is offered as a public benefit as well as the creation of a local business. However, the Councils Conservation Officer also opines that that the proposed development will exacerbate the harm to the setting of the listed buildings that already exists by way of the modern farm buildings. The harm is considered to be less than substantial and in the middle of that range due to the increase in perception of built form and mass. It is therefore advised that in considering Paragraph 196 of the NPPF, any public benefit should outweigh any harm, and it is necessary for the decision taker to consider whether the public benefits described will outweigh this harm. Page 47

6.22 Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires decision makers to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. Section 72 requires decision makers to have special regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. Any adverse effect on a heritage asset, even if slight or minor, would not preserve the asset or its setting. Case law has established that considerable importance and weight must be attached by the decision maker to the desirability of preserving listed buildings and their settings even when the harm to the significance of the listed building is less than substantial.

6.23 The NPPF defines the setting of a listed building as "the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surrounding evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.'

6.24 In relation to designated heritage assets, the NPPF requires a distinction to be drawn between harm which is substantial and harm which is less than substantial. The test for substantial harm is high. Paragraph 018 of the PPG provides that 'whether a proposal causes substantial harm will be a judgment for the decision-maker, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the policy in the National Planning Policy Framework’.

6.25 In relation to less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset, the NPPF provides as follows:

193. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset's conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.

194. Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification.

196. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.

6.26 Paragraph 193 of the NPPF requires great weight to be given to an asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be), regardless of the level of harm identified.

6.27 In this situation Paragraph 196 of the NPPF would be engaged and the degree of harm would have to weighed against the public benefits (taking into account the requirements of paragraph 193 of the NPPF). In this case, in terms of public benefits, the benefits would include the creation of employment opportunities and accommodation for two grooms; and the reduction of the visual impact from wider views within the countryside of the existing modern farm buildings that separate the application site from the listed buildings.

6.28 Notwithstanding the Grade II listing of Hill Farm Barn and Hill Farm House, it is considered that these modest public benefits outweigh any less than substantial degree of harm which arises from the increase in perception of built form and mass. When viewed within the context of the wider site, and given the limited inter-visibility between the proposed physical equestrian structures on land immediately adjacent to existing equestrian and agricultural buildings (which have no architectural merit themselves) and the listed buildings themselves, and given that the Council’s Conservation Officer also advises that the proposed Page 48 development will not harm the intimate or immediate setting of listed buildings in terms of visual impact when viewed from the south, it is considered that in the final planning balance the proposals would also outweigh any minor conflict with relevant development plan policies. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in demonstrable harm to the setting of the Grade II Listed Buildings.

Landscape

6.29 Policies 25, 32 and 33 of the HDPF promote development that is of a high quality design, which is sympathetic to the character and distinctiveness of the site and surroundings. The landscape character of the area should be protected, conserved and enhanced, with proposals contributing to a sense of place through appropriate scale, massing and appearance. In addition, Policy 26 of the HDPF states that proposals must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside character and location, and should protect, conserve, and/or enhance, the key features and characteristics of the landscape character area in which it is located, including the tranquillity and sensitivity to change, the pattern of fields and other features, and the landform of the area. Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes and recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services.

6.30 The application site lies within the ‘F1 Pulborough, Chiltington and Thakeham Farmlands’ landscape character area. This area is typified by the undulating farmland landscape or arable and horticulture, with small areas of pasture. The area retains its rural character and has a moderate sensitivity to change reflecting moderate inter-visibility and moderate intrinsic landscape qualities. However, the visually prominent northern escarpment areas have a higher sensitivity to change. The undulating topography of the site and wider surroundings is an intrinsic feature of the locality, and contributes not only to the rural countryside setting of which the site forms a part, but also the wider setting of the Grade II Listed Buildings of Hill Farm.

6.31 The Landscape Capacity Study looks at the landscape character sensitivity of the area at a smaller scale. The application site lies within ‘Landscape Character Area 40: Pulborough Park and Gallops’, where the landscape character sensitivity recognises that part of the area provides a strong green gap between the railway line and the southern edge of Stane Street Close. It also recognises that although physically separated, the landscape contributes to the visual setting of the historic core of Pulborough.

6.32 The Council’s Landscape Officer has been consulted and have advised that although fairly substantial, the proposed equestrian structures will be seen in the context of the existing group of barns, other equestrian facilities within the site, as well as other equestrian influences in the surrounding area. It is noted that two public footpaths run in close proximity and adjacent to the site (PROW 1995 and PROW 1996), however it is advised that users of these footpaths already experience the equestrian influences in the area and the site itself, so although there is some harm to the landscape character and visual amenity of the area as a result of the proposals, these are considered to be of an acceptable level and one that the receiving landscape can accommodate. Some of the views of the site from the lower ground to the south will be partially softened by the various layers of existing lines of hedgerow and tree planting outside of the red line boundary. This planting must be retained and where possible enhanced. It is noted the access to the barn might require some removal of the existing hedgerow for exiting the car park and for accessing the barn. As much of the hedgerow should be retained, and if possible the existing gap on the hedgerow used to exit the car park, or otherwise the gap filled in. Further details of the hard landscaped areas are required, however these can be subject to the imposition of a suitable condition should the application be approved. Any surfacing should be mindful of the countryside location and softened were possible. The use of grassmesh within the car park should be considered.

Page 49 Impact on neighbouring amenity

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

6.34 The proposed horse walker, stables with groom’s accommodation and tractor store located adjacent to existing agricultural barns are considered to be appropriate equine facilities within the countryside and would be viewed in the context of the existing equestrian use of the land. The size and scale of the development is considered appropriate when considered in relation to the stables as previously granted on site, and the overall equestrian activities and existing authorised development on the site.

6.35 The nearest dwellings to the application site are Hill Farm House and Hill Barn, to the north west of the application site. The evolution of the equestrian site, including that within the wider area to include the above, is not considered to result in either a development or level of activity that would result in any appreciable harm to neighbouring amenity, particularly with regards noise and disturbance to local residents above that which currently exists. The proposal would be viewed in the context of an equestrian use of the land. It would not be unusual for a horse walker, stables or tractor shed to form part of an equestrian development. It is considered that there is sufficient separation distance (approx. 75m at nearest point of nearest equestrian structures) to the nearest residential dwellings to ensure that there would be no appreciable loss of private amenity arising from the activities that take place on the site over and above those that already exist.

6.36 While noted that the structures and activities could be seen from the Public Rights of Way to the west and south of the site, it is not considered that such structures and activities would result in substantial harm to justify a reason for refusal on amenity grounds. The stables with grooms accommodation, horse walker and tractor shed, as described, when viewed in conjunction with the equestrian use of the wider site is considered appropriate to the countryside location and therefore would not appear out of keeping with the surroundings. The proposal is considered to be of an appropriate form and finish which, given the presence of some screening to the existing boundaries and the nearby residential properties, would not appear either unduly prominent or incongruous within the rural landscape character of the area. As such, the proposal is considered to accord with policies 32 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework.

Ecology

6.37 The submitted assessments are considered sufficiently detailed and robust, and demonstrate that the proposal will minimise impacts on protected species, with a series of enhancements set out which would contribute to biodiversity gain. It is recommended that a Construction Environmental Management Plan for Biodiversity (CEMP) is secured as a condition of any consent. This should include appropriate mitigation measures for the protection of the SSSI.

6.38 Enhancements to be provided include provision of additional habitat on site for roosting bats, either integrated or wall mounted bat boxes that would be added to the new buildings. These will face south and be at least 3m above ground and away from artificial light. Additionally sparrow terraces and swift boxes added to the new buildings to accommodate at least 3 pairs of each species.

Highways

6.39 WSCC Highways have been consulted and have advised that the extra traffic that this development would be associated with would relate to the day to day running of the equestrian centre, such as deliveries of horse feed, regular removal of horse manure, etc. Page 50 and use by clients and visitors. Whilst the running of the centre will attract some traffic associated to the activity, it is considered that this would be minimal in relation to the current traffic and this will be concentrated on weekends, when more customers will be more likely be using the facilities.

6.40 On a competition day a slightly higher attendance is expected but this will be limited by the parking availability proposed which is for 36 vehicles. These competitions will be attended mainly by the riders taking part and their families, but will not attract a large amount of visitors from the general public.

6.41 For the avoidance of doubt, the applicants have confirmed that overall the expected traffic on Hill Farm Lane (and nearby roads), as a consequence of the equestrian activities, would be as follows. It has been confirmed that this is not additional to the current traffic levels as there will be no increase in the number of events held on site as a result of the development proposed. - Weekdays (Monday to Friday): 10-25 journeys daily - Weekends (non-competition days): 30-50 journeys daily - Weekends (competition day): 80-100 journeys daily

6.42 This traffic is relatively spread out throughout the day, being more concentrated only on competition days. It is advised that as most attendees will be competitors and their families, and the activity requires quite some time of preparation ahead of the contest, the traffic is expected to be quite dispersed. It is advised that even if many arrivals converged at any particular moment in time, and some queues occurred, these queues will happen on the long private driveway and not on the public road. The driveway is 150m long and therefore has capacity for 20 to 25 vehicles.

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

Climate Change

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

 Biodiversity mitigation (as listed above)  Use of low energy heating and hot water systems;  use of low energy lighting;  reduction of impermeable hard surfacing (use of grass crete) details to be addressed by the hard landscaping details to be submitted.

In addition to these measures conditions are attached to secure the following:

 Biodiversity mitigation and enhancement  Electric vehicle charging point  Dedicated refuse and recycling storage capacity

Page 51 Subject to these conditions the application will suitably reduce the impact of the development on climate change in accordance with local and national policy.

Other matters

6.45 It is advised by an interested party, in an objection letter that has been received, that there is dispute regarding land ownership within the red edge and blue line boundaries of the application site. It is advised that the land is not owned by the applicant and is subject to probate. The applicant has completed Certificate B in regard to the application. Land ownership itself is not a consideration that the local planning authority takes into account when determining applications. Applicants are required to indicate on their application form whether or not they are the owner of the land, and if not, they have to submit a notice to the landowner indicating that they have applied for permission on land which is not in their ownership. However, Section 65 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 states that any person who knowingly or recklessly issues a false or misleading certificate is guilty of an offence and in danger of a decision being quashed. As such the applicant is reminded of this.

6.46 The Council as local planning authority, as is standard practice, does not undertake any verification of land ownership when planning applications are submitted, and relies upon the information submitted by the planning applicant as being correct and accurate. The planning system is not designed to deal with land ownership disputes and these matters must be dealt with as a private matter outside of the planning system. The planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of one person from the activities of another, although private interests may coincide with the public interest in some cases.

Conclusions

6.47 The proposed development is considered acceptable in principle, and is considered to be of a scale, form and layout that would respect the landform and landscape character of the rural setting. Whilst the proposal would result in less than substantial harm to the wider setting of the nearby Grade II Listed Buildings, this is at the lower end of the scale given the existing larger agricultural buildings set in between. The public benefits of the development, although limited, are sufficient to outweigh this harm. No significant harm would result to the amenities and sensitivities of neighbouring properties or users of land. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with all relevant local and national planning policies.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions and subject to the expiration of the 21 day notification period following amendment to Certificate B as served by the applicant on the 4 September 2020, provided that no new material considerations are received which would otherwise require the application to be re considered by the Planning committee:

Conditions:

1. Approved Plans List

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

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

3 Pre-Commencement Condition: A construction environmental management plan (CEMP: Biodiversity) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following. Page 52 a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities. b) Identification of "biodiversity protection zones". c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction (may be provided as a set of method statements). d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features. e) The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works. f) Responsible persons and lines of communication. g) The role and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) or similarly competent person. h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs.

The approved CEMP shall be adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period strictly in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority"

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

4 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until the following construction site set-up details have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. i. the location for the loading and unloading of plant and materials, site offices, and storage of plant and materials (including any stripped topsoil) ii. the provision of wheel washing facilities (if necessary) and dust suppression facilities The approved details shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

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

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

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

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

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

Page 53 Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

7 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until confirmation has been submitted, in writing, to the Local Planning Authority that the relevant Building Control body will be requiring the optional standard for water usage across the development. The dwellings hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to limit water use in order to improve the sustainability of the development in accordance with Policy 37 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

8 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the use of any of the development hereby approved, precise details for the disposal of manure and stable waste arising from the use of the buildings shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include methods and frequency of stable cleaning, storage, collection, and disposal methods; and details of the location of storage of stable waste. The 'waste' shall thereafter be disposed of in accordance with the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

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

9 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted the vehicle parking spaces necessary to serve it have been constructed and made available for use in accordance with approved drawing no 101. The vehicle parking spaces permitted shall thereafter be retained as such for their designated use.

Reason: To provide vehicle parking space for the use in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

10 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, full details of all hard and soft landscaping works shall have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include plans and measures addressing the following:  Details of all existing trees and planting to be retained  Details of all proposed trees and planting, including schedules specifying species, planting size, densities and plant numbers and tree pit details  Details of all hard surfacing materials and finishes  Details of all boundary treatments  Details of all external lighting  Details of all external lighting (including biodiversity bat sensitive lighting scheme with provision of appropriate lighting contour plans, lsolux drawings and technical specifications)

The approved landscaping scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the first occupation of any part of the development. Unless otherwise agreed as part of the approved landscaping, no trees or hedges on the site shall be wilfully damaged or uprooted, Page 54 felled/removed, topped or lopped without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority until 5 years after completion of the development. Any proposed planting, which within a period of 5 years, dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development that is sympathetic to the landscape and townscape character and built form of the surroundings, and in the interests of visual amenity in accordance and to allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended, s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species) in accordance with Policies 31 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: The proposed development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a scheme for the provision of electrical vehicle charging points has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be installed prior to first occupation of the development and shall thereafter remain as such.

Reason: To provide electric vehicle car charging space for the use in accordance with Policies 35 and 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and the WSCC Parking Standards (2019).

12 Pre-Occupation Condition: No dwelling hereby permitted shall be first occupied (or use hereby permitted commenced) unless and until provision for the storage of refuse/recycling has been made for that dwelling (or use) in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times. Reason: To ensure the adequate provision of recycling facilities in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

12 Regulatory Condition: The development as proposed shall be used only as commercial stabling.

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

13 Regulatory Condition: The occupation of the grooms accommodation above the stable shall be limited to persons employed in connection with the use of the equestrian facilities hereby permitted and for no other purposes.

Reason: The site lies in an area where, in accordance with Policy 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) development which cannot be justified as essential to the needs of agriculture or forestry would not normally be permitted.

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

Page 55 Reason: To conserve and enhance Protected and Priority species and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the UK Habitats Regulations, the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended, s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species), s17 Crime & Disorder Act 1998 and Policy 31 of the Horsham Development Framework.

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

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

16 Regulatory Condition: No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed other than with the permission of the Local Planning Authority by way of formal application.

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

Background Papers: DC/20/0326

Page 56 07) DC/20/0326

Land on the South Side of Hill Farm Lane, Codmore Hill, Pulborough

¯ For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public Page 57 Page

Scale: Approximately 1:4,500

Organisation Horsham District Council Department Comments

Date 10/09/2020 Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey map on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database rights (2019). MSA Number Ordnance Survey Licence.100023865 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 22nd September 2020 Outline application for the demolition of 8No garages and erection of 3No DEVELOPMENT: dwellings with all matters reserved except access. SITE: Garage Block Blackstone Rise Blackstone Lane Blackstone West Sussex

WARD: Bramber, Upper Beeding and Woodmancote

APPLICATION: DC/20/0025 Name: Horsham District Council Address: Parkside Chart Way APPLICANT: Horsham RH12 1RL

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: 1) Horsham District Council is the applicant

2) Over eight letters of representation contrary to Officer’s recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to appropriate conditions.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

1.1 To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 The application seeks outline planning permission for the demolition of eight garages and erection of three dwellings with all matters reserved except access. The application has been accompanied by illustrative drawings comprising a site plan and floor plans. These drawings show a row of 3 x two bedroom terrace dwellings. It is the Council’s intention to sell the site with outline planning permission for three market units.

1.3 The illustrative site plan shows that the eight existing garages would be removed from the site and the three terrace dwellings would be positioned facing eastwards towards Blackstone Lane with rear gardens located to the south of the dwellings.

1.4 A new access is proposed 11 metres to the south of the existing access which would also be retained to form a new ‘in and out’ driveway. The illustrative site plan shows that two car parking spaces would be provided to the front of each dwelling, creating a total of 6 car parking spaces to serve the development.

1.5 During the consideration of this application the following additional documents and plans have been received:

Page 59 Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215189  Amended layout showing indicative replacement hedge and tree planting adjacent to the eastern front boundary of the site  Ecological Scoping Survey & Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment  Bat Emergence & Re-Entry Survey  Vehicle Patrol Survey showing parking use of the site over a 2 month period (August 2019 – October 2019)  Details on the number of existing garages rented on the site  Affordable Housing Viability report  Details on the on-going management of Japanese Knotweed on the site

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The site is located outside the built up area and on the northern periphery of the small settlement of Blackstone. The site is owned by Horsham District Council and currently comprises a row of eight garages which are positioned within the southern section of the site. It has been confirmed that four of the existing garages are rented and four are currently vacant.

1.7 The existing gated vehicular access to the site is from Blackstone Lane to the east. The topography of the site slopes slightly from south to north. The site is predominantly laid to tarmac with a grassed area to the west of the garages. The garage building is brick built with profiled metal sheeting to the mono-pitched roof. The existing site is bound by hedging to the northern, eastern and western boundaries. Trees line the southern boundary of the application site.

1.8 To the south of the site along Blackstone Lane, there are pairs of two storey semi-detached dwellings and terrace properties. To the north and west of the area is more rural in character with large expanses of farmland bound by hedgerows.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 15 - Strategic Policy: Housing Provision Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 39: Infrastructure Provision Policy 41 - Parking

Page 60 RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The Woodmancote Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2031

Policy 1: A Spatial Plan for the Parish Policy 2: Housing Windfall Sites Policy 3: Design Policy 7: Broadband

PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

None relevant

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

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

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.2 HDC Landscape Architect: Comment. (Initial Comments): I am satisfied given the current use of the site and although the landscape character will be affected to some degree, the site has potential to accommodate development without significant local landscape harm or harm to the wider landscape character. Therefore, the principle of development can be supported on landscape grounds.

With regards to the illustrative layout, I have concerns with the eastern boundary proposals. The new dwellings will be more exposed to view by virtue of being 2 stories but in addition to that the loss of the hedgerow line will result in harm to the rural character and appearance of the road. I would strongly recommend, that a linear hedgerow is proposed within this boundary, to replicate the existing rural qualities of the area as failure to do so will likely result in unacceptable harm.

(Comment on Amended Plan): Comment. The principle of the planting along that front boundary of the site is accepted but there are changes to the orientation required but that these details can be finalised by condition. The proposed hedgerows should follow the line of the front boundary, instead of the grass. I would also like to see the visibility splays marked on a plan to make sure the length of hedgerow is the maximum it can be to minimise the impact this will have on the street scene and rural character of the area.

3.3 HDC Environmental Health: Comment. Recommends a contamination preliminary risk assessment is submitted and an assessment to demonstrate that the uses of the agricultural associated activities will not adversely impact the amenity of the occupiers of the proposed dwellings.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.4 Southern Water: Comment. Southern Water informative recommended.

3.5 WSCC Highways: No Objection. Whilst the applicant has not demonstrated achievable visibility from the proposed access, an inspection of WSCC and Local mapping suggests that visibility at the access is sufficient for the anticipated road speeds in this location. There is no evidence to suggest the existing

Page 61 access is operating unsafely or that the proposal would exacerbate an existing safety concern.

Eight garages will be lost as part of this proposal. The garages do meet the minimum internal dimensions for single car garages of 3m x 6m set out in Manual for Streets (MfS). Therefore, the garages are likely only large enough for a small car to park inside and as such, it is not unreasonable for the LHA to believe they may be being used for other purposes (e.g. storage). Notwithstanding this, the LHA does not anticipate that overspill parking from the garages would result in a severe highways safety concern. The planning authority may wish to consider the potential impacts from a small rise in on-street parking demand.

The in-out arrangement will allow vehicles exit the site in a forward gear. The plans have demonstrated a space of 6m behind each bay, allowing vehicles to manoeuvre in and out of the spaces safely. Details of parking and turning and cycle parking can be secured via condition.

3.6 Ecology Consultant: (Initial Comments): Request for more information We are not satisfied that there is sufficient ecological information available for determination. The Ecological Scoping Survey (Bramley Associates, April 2020) states that “a bat roost survey of two emergence and/or return surveys should be undertaken to cover garage roost potential and also nearby oak tree bat roost potential.”

This information is necessary, prior to determination, as paragraph 99 of the ODPM Circular 2005 highlights that: “It is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established before the planning permission is granted, otherwise all relevant material considerations may not have been addressed in making the decision.”

(Comment on Additional Bat Survey): Comment.

We note from the Bat Survey report (Bramley Associates, July 2020) that further to an extra emergence survey of a previously locked garage, it is confirmed that no bats were found roosting in the garages or in the Oak tree near to the site. However the survey recorded moderate bat activity over the site and along the nearby road (east of the garages) so the applicant’s ecologist recommends that the development minimises external lighting. If these are planned, any outside lighting should be low intensity, low set and engineered as downward projection as standard practice to reduce/avoid negative impact on bat behaviour. We therefore recommend that if any lighting is proposed, a wildlife sensitive scheme is secured as a condition of any consent.

To maintain foraging areas and connectivity for bats at this site the Bat Survey report also recommends that additional native deciduous trees and hedge lines are planted around the whole boundary of the planned development. No details are provided for the proposed tree/shrub planting identified on the submitted drawings.

The comments from the HDC landscape officer for a linear hedgerow within the boundary are also supported, particularly as a replacement hedgerow will be needed if the feature to be lost to the development meets the criteria for Priority habitat.

3.7 Woodmancote Parish Council: Objection.  Contravenes Policy 2 of the Woodmancote Parish Neighbourhood Plan as it does not retain or increase parking at the site.  Contravenes Policy 4 of the HDPF as the development does not assist the retention/enhancement of community facilities and services.  There is a suggestion that private residences in Blackstone Rise/Blackstone Lane should put in private driveways to solve their parking issues. Not all of the homes Page 62 have adequate road frontage, and this would reduce the amount of available on road parking, and exiting from the driveways would be problematic in such a narrow lane.  There is Japanese Knotweed on site that needs removing.  As acknowledged in the decision notice for planning application DC/18/1138, this location is not a sustainable area and so is contrary to Policies 1, 2, 3, 4 and 26 of the HDPF.  Contravenes Policy 33 of the HDPF as it has not been designed to avoid unacceptable harm to the amenity of nearby property and land. The applicant was working to replace the parking that would be lost, but this has not been covered in the application.

3.8 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

25 letters of objection have been received from 16 households. The comments made are summarised below:

 Loss of parking for existing residents within Blackstone Lane some of which do not have off-street parking  Will cause additional unsafe parking in the road leading to highway safety concerns and restricted access for refuse or emergency vehicles  Does not comply with policies of the Neighbourhood Plan which require additional parking to off-set loss of parking by redevelopment  Japanese knotweed on the site  The rural nature and character of the hamlet will be eroded by the visual impact of large numbers of vehicles parking along its length.

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

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Principle

6.1 The spatial strategy for development within the District is set in Policies 2, 3 & 4 of the HDPF.

6.2 Policy 4 relates to development outside of defined settlement boundaries and states that the expansion of settlements will be supported where the site is allocated in the Local Plan or in a Neighbourhood Plan and adjoins an existing settlement edge; the level of expansion is appropriate to the scale and function of the settlement type; the development is demonstrated to meet the identified local housing needs; the impact of development individually or cumulatively does not prejudice comprehensive long term development; and the development is contained within an existing defensible boundary and the landscape and townscape character features are maintained and enhanced.

Page 63 6.3 Policy 26 of the HDPF states that outside built-up area boundaries, the rural character and undeveloped nature of the countryside will be protected against inappropriate development. Any proposal must be essential to its countryside location, and in addition meet one of the following criteria: support the needs of agriculture or forestry; enable the extraction of minerals of the disposal of waste; provide for quiet informal recreational use; or enable the sustainable development of rural areas. In addition, proposals must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside character and location. Development will be considered acceptable where it does not lead, either individually or cumulatively, to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside, and protects, and/or conserves, and/or enhances, the key features and characteristics of the landscape character area in which it is located.

6.4 The Council has recently undertaken the Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan Consultation which ended on 30th March 2020. Within the Draft Local Plan a number of settlements which are currently unclassified in the HDPF are proposed to be allocated as secondary settlements in which limited in-fill development would be considered acceptable. Policy 2 of the Draft Local Plan includes a list of secondary settlements within the settlement hierarchy which includes the hamlet of Blackstone. The site would be within the proposed secondary settlement boundary of Blackstone. Secondary settlements are described within this policy as very small villages and hamlets that generally have some limited local employment, services or facilities and/or evidence of a defined local community. As the Draft Local Plan has not been formally adopted limited weight can be given to this draft Local Plan policy.

6.5 The application site is located within the Parish of Woodmancote which has a 'made' Neighbourhood Plan. Given the particularly rural nature of the Parish, there are only two settlements within the Parish of Woodmancote - Woodmancote and Blackstone, both of which are currently unclassified settlements according to the settlement hierarchy of the HDPF. Woodmancote Parish Neighbourhood Plan (WPNP) highlights in paragraph 3.9 that there is no expectation on the WPNP to allocate sites for new homes. However it notes that modest growth is anticipated with a reliance on windfall sites to meet the growth of the Parish.

6.6 Policy 2 of the WPNP relates to Housing Windfall Sites and states the following; Development proposals for small scale housing development of 5 or fewer dwellings on infill and previously developed sites within the Parish will be supported subject to the proposals being well designed and meeting all relevant requirements in other policies in the neighbourhood plan, and where such development:

i. preserves the essential open character of the parish and does not lead to the subdivision of larger sites of a unified character;

ii. the proposal delivers, wherever feasible and viable, on-site affordable homes in accordance with the development plan policy in force at the time of application, and implements the adopted Horsham Housing Register and Nominations Policy in respect of the allocation of some homes to those households with a local connection;

iii. is appropriately contained and avoids harming the amenities of adjoining residential properties nor results in unsuitable access;

iv. where the site lies within or adjoins a designated Green Link defined in Policy 6 of the Neighbourhood Plan and indicated on the policy map, the layout and landscape scheme contributes to maintaining and improving the Green Link;

v. respects and where possible enhances the natural, built and historic environment including where appropriate the landscape setting of the South Downs National Park.

6.7 Paragraph 5.21 of the WPNP does reference the Blackstone Rise Garage site as a possible redevelopment site and comments that Policy 2 of the WPNP would support the development

Page 64 proposals intending to secure the long term benefit of this site as long as the existing parking facilities are retained or increased at the site.

6.8 The site comprises previously developed land which consists of a row of eight garages and an area of tarmac hardstanding. This proposal seeks outline planning permission for three dwellings on the site which would meet the threshold requirement of policy 2 of the WPNP. Given the outline nature of the application with all matters reserved except access, considerations such as design, scale and layout of the development would be reviewed at the reserved matters stage. It is considered that the site has the potential to adequately accommodate three terrace dwellings and parking as shown on the indicative plans submitted without appearing cramped or out of keeping with the character of residential development to the south of the site.

6.9 The redevelopment of the site would involve the demolition of the existing garages and changes to the existing tarmac hardstanding. The proposal would not therefore lead to the subdivision of any larger sites of unified character. The proposed development would be retained within the existing boundaries of the current garage site and would not impact on the open and rural character of the landscape to the north and west of the application site. The proposal would therefore comply with policy 2(i) of the WPNP.

6.10 It should be noted that paragraph ii of Policy 2 requires proposals, where feasible and viable, to provide on-site affordable homes in accordance with development plan policy in force at the time of application. Policy 16 of the HDPF does not require affordable housing provision on sites with fewer than 5 dwellings. Further to this, paragraph 63 of the revised NPPF (July 2018) states that provision of affordable housing should not be sought for residential developments that are not major developments, other than in designated rural areas. As the development proposes 3 dwellings, there would be no requirement to provide on-site affordable homes in relation to the HDPF policy.

6.11 Whilst the design and scale of the dwellings would be considered at the later reserved matters stage, it is not considered that the indicative drawings which show 3 x two storey terrace dwellings would give rise for any obvious harm to the amenities of adjoining residential properties or the landscape setting in which it is located. The existing access will be retained and a new access formed to Blackstone Lane which would provide a suitable ‘in and out’ driveway to serve the residential development. The site is not located within or adjoining the Green Link. The proposal would therefore meet the requirements of Policy 2 (iii-v) of the WPNP.

6.12 Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposal would not conform with Policy 26 of the current HDPF and is not a specific allocation in the Neighbourhood Plan as per Policy 4, the proposal is considered to comply with policy 2 of the ‘made’ Neighbourhood Plan which allows for small scale housing developments of 5 or fewer dwellings on infill and previously developed windfall sites. The site has also been identified within the supporting text of the Neighbourhood Plan as a possible redevelopment site as long as the existing parking facilities are retained or increased at the site. It is therefore considered that the principle of the proposed small scale residential development on this site would be acceptable and would accord with the provisions of Policy 2 of the WPNP. Additionally, the site is within the proposed secondary settlement boundary of Blackstone, which is also a consideration in the determination of this application. The principle of the development of this site is therefore considered acceptable.

Loss of Parking

6.13 Policy 41 of the HDPF states that development which involves the loss of existing parking spaces will only be allowed if suitable alternative provision has been secured elsewhere or the need for the development overrides the loss of parking and where necessary measures are in place to mitigate against the impact. Page 65

6.14 Policy 43 of the Horsham District Planning Framework states that proposal that would result in the loss of sites and premises currently or last used for the provision of community facilities will be resisted unless equally usable facilities can be conveniently provided nearby.

6.15 Policy 5 of the WPNP relates to design and states that adequate off-road car parking spaces should be provided in line with the WSCC residential parking standards and the amount and method of parking provision should not adversely affect road safety, or result in unacceptable levels of on-road parking demand.

6.16 Concerns have been raised within the letters of representation received regarding the loss of parking for the local residents with the proposed redevelopment of the site and the highway safety implications of additional cars parking on Blackstone Lane which is a narrow single track road. Having been aware of these concerns from an early stage, detailed discussions have taken place between Planning Officers and the Applicant prior to the submission of this application. The site comprises a row of eight single garages which have been rented out by Horsham District Council. It has been confirmed that four of the existing garages are rented to local people living within Blackstone and the remaining four garages have been vacant since 2018. The remainder of the site is privately owned land by Horsham District Council and does not comprise a public car park. It is however understood that at times cars are parked on the site as the gate is unlocked for access to people renting the garages.

6.17 Of the eight properties within Blackstone Rise to the south of the site, four have created off street parking capable for parking at least two cars. Four properties within Blackstone Rise have no off street parking. Six properties within North View, approximately 100 metres to the south of the site appear to have no off-street parking.. There is also limited parking for the row of cottages along Blackstone Street, further to the south. It is noted that a number of cars park on Blackstone Lane, outside the front gardens serving properties 1-8 Blackstone Rise. Whilst this appears to have been established practice, it is acknowledged that this creates further narrowing of the single track road.

6.18 In order to assess whether the proposed loss of the garages would provide a harmful loss of parking provision for local residents within Blackstone and a detriment to highway safety associated with the overspill parking along Blackstone Lane, Officers requested further information from the Applicant regarding the usage of the site for parking of vehicles.

6.19 A daily parking survey was undertaken over a two month period between August to October 2019. The results showed that the same three vehicles were consistently parked on the site every day during the 57 day period. In addition to these 3 regular vehicles, an additional 1 to 2 cars parked on the site on 5 days out of the 57 day survey period, thereby creating 5 cars parked on the site. During the Case Officer’s daytime site visits to the site in January 2020 and June 2020, it is noted that there have been no more than 3 vehicles parked on the site.

6.20 The West Sussex Highways Authority has commented that the garages do not meet the minimum internal dimensions for single car garages of 3m x 6m set out in Manual for Streets. It therefore considered that the garages are only large enough for a small car to park inside and as such, it is not unreasonable to believe they may be being used for other purposes such as storage. An inspection by the Council of the four rented garages in August 2020 to check for evidence of bats showed that only one out of the four garages was used for parking. The remaining three rented garages were found to be used for storage. It is noted that only one of the eight garages on the site is therefore being used for parking purposes. Notwithstanding this given their limited size the garages cannot reasonably be counted as parking spaces in any planning assessment. The one space that is being occupied is for a particularly narrow car.

6.21 There is no formal agreement for any cars being parked on the site outside of garages and any cars doing so are essentially parking on private land. The WSCC Highways department Page 66 have confirmed that they would raise no objection on highway safety grounds in relation to the anticipated minor increase in overspill parking from the site. It is therefore considered there are no reasonable grounds to refuse this proposal in terms of the impact of overspill parking on highway safety.

Design, Appearance and Character of the Area

6.22 Policies 25, 32 and 33 of the HDPF promote development which is of high quality design and is sympathetic to the distinctiveness of the dwelling and surroundings. Development should protect, conserve and enhance the landscape character, taking account of the natural environment, landscape and landform pattern to which it forms a part.

6.23 Policy 3 of the WPNP states that the scale, density, massing, height, landscape design, layout and materials of all development proposals, including alterations to existing buildings, will be required to reflect the architectural and historic character and scale of the surrounding buildings, and is appropriate to the plot size.

6.24 A site plan has been provided detailing an indicative layout for the site which comprises three terrace dwellings with parking spaces to the front of the dwellings. The application site consists of a plot measures 974 square metres, which is considered to be of an appropriate size to accommodate the proposed development. There is adequate space to provide appropriate distancing from the neighbouring property to the south, 8 Blackstone Rise and the wider open landscape to the north and west.

6.25 Blackstone Lane comprise pairs of two storey semi-detached properties and two storey terrace dwellings. The Blackstone Rise properties are set in a relatively uniform position and alignment in relation to the road. It would be preferable for any development on the site to mimic a similar orientation and set back position from the Blackstone Lane to remain in keeping with the pattern and character of residential development within the road. Whilst the proposed dwellings, as indicated on the indicative site plan, would be set slightly further back from the road in comparison to the Blackstone Rise properties, they would not be greatly disproportionate in terms of their position and orientation in comparison to the existing residential development to the south. Overall, the indicative plans show that three terrace dwellings could be appropriately sited and scaled in such a way that it would be commensurate with the character of residential development within Blackstone Lane.

6.26 The proposed dwellings would be contained within the existing site boundaries and although visible from the open landscape to the north and west would be viewed in conjunction with the existing residential development in Blackstone Lane. The proposed development would not therefore have a detrimental impact on the rural character or appearance of the wider area. The dimensions, design, appearance and layout of the dwellings, as well as the landscaping of the site would be subject to an application for reserved matters.

6.27 The submitted plans show that a replacement hedge and three trees would be planted adjacent to the grassed verge between the in and out access along the eastern frontage of the site. The Council’s Landscape Officer supports the principle of the replacement planting along that eastern frontage of the site but has requested that the proposed front hedgerow should follow the line of the boundary, instead of the grass, closest to the road. The Council’s Landscape Officer has advised that any landscaping plans submitted through discharge of condition should include visibility splays to ensure the length of hedgerow is the maximum in order to minimise the impact of the development on the street scene and rural character of the area.

Page 67 Impact on Residential Amenity

6.28 Policy 33 of the HDPF states that permission will be granted for development that does not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of the occupiers/users of nearby properties and land.

6.29 The neighbouring property that would be most affected by the proposed development is located to the south, 8 Blackstone Rise. The indicative site plan indicates that the nearest proposed dwelling within the development would be located 2.2 metres from the side boundary of the neighbouring property with a distance of 6.7 metres separating the two properties. This is considered to be an adequate separation distance between residential properties. Providing no windows are proposed within the southern elevation of the southernmost dwelling, the development would not cause any loss of amenity to the existing occupiers of 8 Blackstone Rise. As such, it is considered that the indicative plans demonstrate that three terrace dwellings could be appropriately accommodated on the site without adversely impacting on the privacy and amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, subject to consideration of its exact scale, layout, design and landscaping.

Parking & Access

6.30 Policy 33 of the HDPF requires development to incorporate where appropriate convenient, safe and visually attractive areas for the parking of vehicles and cycles, and the storage of bins/recycling facilities without dominating the development or its surroundings.

6.31 Policy 41 of the HDPF states that adequate parking and facilities must be provided within developments to meet the needs of anticipated users. Consideration should be given to the needs of cycle parking, motorcycle parking, charging plug-in or other low emission vehicles and the mobility impaired.

6.32 The proposed development would utilise the existing access and construct a new second access to create an in-out arrangement for this site. Whilst the submitted plans do not show achievable visibility splays from the proposed access, the Highways Authority have confirmed that visibility at the access is sufficient for the anticipated road speeds in this location. Furthermore, an inspection of collision data provided by Sussex Police reveals no recorded injury accidents within the vicinity of the site within the last five years. It is therefore considered that there is no evidence to suggest the existing access is operating unsafely or that the proposed development would exacerbate an existing highway safety concern.

6.33 The indicative site layout shows six parking spaces to serve the development which meets the WSCC Highways car parking demand calculator of six parking spaces for this development. The proposed parking bays meet the minimum specifications of 2.4 x 4.8m as set out in Manual for Streets. The proposed in-out access arrangement allows for vehicles to exit the site in a forward gear. The plans have also demonstrated a space of 6m behind each bay, allowing vehicles to manoeuvre in and out of the spaces safely. The proposal would therefore provide an adequate and safe access, turning and parking provision to serve the development in accordance with policies 33 and 41 of the HDPF.

Ecology

6.34 Policy 31 of the HDPF states that proposals that would result in the loss of existing green infrastructure will be resisted unless it can be demonstrated that new opportunities will be provided that mitigates or compensates for this loss, and ensures that the ecosystem services of the area are retained.

6.35 An Ecology Scoping Survey, Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment and Bat Entry and Emergence Surveys were submitted during the consideration of this application. The initial ecology survey found given the tarmac surfacing and maintained grassland nature of the Page 68 site, the proposal was unlikely to have an impact on protected species. The Ecology Scoping Survey commented that bats likely forage along Blackstone Lane and that the old Oak trees approximately 20m north of the site provide limited roost potential. The report recommended a bat roost survey of two emergence and/or return surveys should be undertaken to cover garage roost potential and also nearby oak tree bat roost potential.

6.36 The Bat Entry and Emergence Surveys submitted found no bats roosts in the garages or in the Oak tree near to the site. Subsequent internal inspection of the garages by an Ecologist has also revealed no evidence of bats. The survey recorded moderate bat activity over the site and along the nearby road (east of the garages) so the report recommends that the development incorporates minimal external lighting. The Report also recommends that additional trees and hedge lines of a native plant species are planted around the whole boundary of the planned development to maintain foraging areas and connectivity for bats.

6.37 Conditions to secure compliance with the mitigation measures within the submitted Ecology Reports, the additional boundary hedge planting, a wildlife sensitive lighting scheme and biodiversity enhancement layout will also be included as per the Ecology Consultant’s recommendation.

Climate Change

6.38 Policies 35, 36 and 37 require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions seek to reduce the impact of development on climate change. The proposed development will include the following measures to build resilience to climate change and reduce carbon emissions which will be secured by condition:

o Biodiversity mitigation and enhancement o Electric vehicle charging point o Cycle parking facilities o Dedicated refuse and recycling storage capacity

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

Other Matters

6.39 Concerns have been raised in a letter of representation regarding Japanese Knotweed on the site. It is understood from the information provided that a small area of Japanese Knotweed within the site is being managed by the Council. This has involved the regular spraying with a formula to kill the Knotweed. As the Knotweed is being actively treated by the Council for its intended future removal, it is not considered that this would form an adequate reason to refuse planning permission.

Conclusion

6.40 The provision of three dwellings on this site would contribute to meeting housing needs locally. The Neighbourhood Plan provides support for windfall development of this scale, and the redevelopment of this site more generally, and officers therefore consider that the proposal would comprise sustainable development of rural areas as enabled by HDPF Policy 26. Furthermore, officers note that in line with the objectives of the Framework, HDPF Policies 2 and 33 prioritise effective use of previously developed land.

6.41 The proposal would conflict with some aspects of the development plan, specifically Policy 4 given it is not an allocated site and sits outside of a current built-up area boundary; and the Page 69 requirement within HDPF Policy 26 that proposals outside of built-up area boundaries are essential to a countryside location. However, the development would accord with the principles of the Neighbourhood Plan and would make effective use of a previously developed site without detrimental impact on the rural character of the area. Additionally, there would be no harm to the overall settlement pattern and function.

6.42 The impact of the loss of parking for local residents has been considered in detail following concerns raised. The proposed development would only cause a minor potential increase in overspill parking in relation to the existing practise of vehicles parking along Blackstone Lane, and it is difficult to justify re-provision in planning terms given it is private land with garages that do not meet current size standards. Notwithstanding this it is not considered the minor increase in overspill parking would cause any harmful impacts on highway safety or to the visual amenity of the rural area. The proposal is not considered to raise any material effect on the amenities of neighbouring properties, landscape character, highway safety or ecology. Officers therefore conclude that the proposed development would provide a suitable location for housing.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

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

In the case of outline applications the CIL charge will be calculated at the relevant reserved matters stage.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1. Plans list

2. Regulatory (Time) Condition: (a) Approval of the details of the layout of the development, the scale of each building, the appearance of each building and the landscaping of the development (hereinafter called “the reserved matters”) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. (b) Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition (a) above, relating to the layout of the development, the scale of each building, the appearance of each building and the landscaping of the development, shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority and shall be carried out as approved. (c) Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. (d) The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until precise details of the existing and proposed finished floor levels and external ground levels of the development Page 70 in relation to nearby datum points adjoining the application site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: As this matter is fundamental to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity and visual impact and to protect the development from flood risk in accordance with Policies 33 and 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

4. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until the following construction site set-up details have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. i. the location for the loading and unloading of plant and materials, site offices, and storage of plant and materials (including any stripped topsoil) ii. the location for the parking of vehicles associated with the construction iii. the provision of wheel washing facilities (if necessary) and dust suppression facilities The approved details shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

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

5. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a drainage strategy detailing the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that the development is properly drained and to comply with Policy 38 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination, (including asbestos contamination), of the site be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:

(a) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The following aspects (b) – (d) shall be dependent on the outcome of the above preliminary risk assessment (a) and may not necessarily be required. (b) An intrusive site investigation scheme, based on (a) to provide information for a detailed risk assessment to the degree and nature of the risk posed by any contamination to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (c) Full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results of the intrusive site investigation (b) and an options appraisal. (d) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (c) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action where required. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Any changes to these components require the consent of the local planning authority. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to humans, controlled waters or the wider environment during and following the development works and to ensure that any pollution is dealt with in accordance with Policies 24 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 71

7. Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until a Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy for protected and priority species has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

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

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

Reason: To enhance protected and Priority Species and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species) and Policy 31 of the Horsham Development Framework 2015.

8. Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until confirmation has been submitted, in writing, to the Local Planning Authority that the relevant Building Control body will be requiring the optional standard for water usage across the development. The dwellings hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each dwelling to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained.

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

9. Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, the vehicular access facilities shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details as shown on plan 1921.PL02 received on the 06.04.2020 and shall be thereafter retained as such. Reason: To ensure access facilities are available to serve the development in accordance with Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

10. Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, details of the parking and turning facilities shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. No dwelling shall be first occupied until the approved parking and turning facilities necessary to serve it have been fully implemented. The parking and turning facilities shall thereafter be retained as such.

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

11. Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first use of any part of the development hereby permitted a lighting design scheme for biodiversity shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall identify those features on site that are particularly sensitive for nocturnal species and that are likely to cause disturbance along important routes used for foraging and roosting; and show how and where external lighting will be installed (through the provision of appropriate technical specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent nocturnal species using their territory. All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and Page 72 locations set out in the scheme and maintained thereafter in accordance with the scheme. Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority.

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

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

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

13. Pre-Occupation Condition: The proposed dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a scheme for the provision of electrical vehicle charging points has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall have regard to the requirements for electric vehicle charging within the latest West Sussex Parking Standards (2019). The approved scheme shall be installed prior to first occupation of the dwellings and shall thereafter remain as such.

Reason: To provide electric vehicle car charging space for the use in accordance with Policies 35 and 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and the WSCC Parking Standards (2019).

14. Regulatory Condition: All ecological mitigation measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the Ecological Scoping Survey (Bramley Associates, April 2020) and Bat Survey (Bramley Associates, July 2020) as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination.

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

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

15. Regulatory Condition: No works for the implementation of the development hereby approved shall take place outside of 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or public Holidays Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Page 73 This page is intentionally left blank 08) DC/20/0025

Blackstone Garages, Blackstone For Business use only - not for distribution to the general public ¯

Wick Farm 8

Blackstone Rise 19.9m

5

1

North View

6 Scale: 1:1,250

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

Date 10/09/2020 Page 75MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 9

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT

TO: Planning Committee South

BY: Head of Development

DATE: 22nd September 2020 Conversion of existing stables to holiday let together with construction of DEVELOPMENT: replacement stables

Old Dairy East Cottage Blackstone Gate Farm Henfield Road Albourne SITE: Hassocks West Sussex BN6 9JJ WARD: Bramber, Upper Beeding and Woodmancote

APPLICATION: DC/20/1019 Name: Mrs J Copeland Address: Old Dairy East , Henfield Road APPLICANT: Albourne BN6 9JJ

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Employee of Horsham District Council

RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to appropriate conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 The application seeks planning permission to convert one of the existing stables to holiday let accommodation together with construction of replacement stables to replace an existing smaller stable building to be demolished.

1.2 The proposal would involve the modification of the existing stable building located adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The southern wall and eastern wall of the western stable wing would be extended under the overhanging roof canopy of the existing structure. The building would provide a three bedroom holiday let unit with an internal floor area of 137 square metres. The ground floor accommodation would provide 3 bedrooms with 2 ensuite bathrooms, a main bathroom, utility room and an open plan lounge, kitchen and dining room. The proposal would involve the installation of three windows and four doors on the southern elevation of the building. A single door would be installed on the western elevation of the building and five roof lights to the northern roof slope of the building.

1.3 To the west of the holiday accommodation building it is proposed to demolish the existing timber stable building which comprises two stables and a tackroom and construct a larger replacement stable building in the same position. The proposed stable building would comprise three stables, a feed and tackroom, store and wash basin. The stable building would incorporate a floor area of 139 square metres. The stable building would measure 12.7 metres in width and 11.5 metres in length with an eaves height of 2.3 metres and a ridge

Page 77 Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215189 height of 3.8 metres. The building would incorporate a traditional timber cladded stable with a pitched tiled roof.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.4 The site is located on the western side of the Henfield Road, outside of any settlement boundary, and comprises a cluster of stable buildings which forms part of an equestrian yard, including a menage and horsewalker used in conjunction with the residential dwelling, The Old Dairy East Cottage. The stable building subject to this proposed conversion was granted planning permission by the Council in 1999 and permission was granted for an extension to the eastern end of the stable building in 2001.

1.5 The site is bound by hedging and trees to the northern boundary which provides some screening from the neighbouring property, Blackstone Gate Farmhouse and associated buildings to the north. Residential properties, Old Dairy East & West Cottages lies to the east and South Oaks lies to the south-east. The site is located within a countryside setting with the area to the west of the stable building becoming more open and rural in nature.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

National Planning Policy Framework

Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF 2015) Policy 1 - Strategic Policy: Sustainable Development Policy 2 - Strategic Policy: Strategic Development Policy 3 - Strategic Policy: Development Hierarchy Policy 10 - Rural Economic Development Policy 11 - Tourism and Cultural Facilities Policy 24 - Strategic Policy: Environmental Protection Policy 25 - Strategic Policy: The Natural Environment and Landscape Character Policy 26 - Strategic Policy: Countryside Protection Policy 29 - Equestrian Development Policy 31 - Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Policy 32 - Strategic Policy: The Quality of New Development Policy 33 - Development Principles Policy 35 - Strategic Policy: Climate Change Policy 38 - Strategic Policy: Flooding Policy 41 - Parking

RELEVANT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

Woodmancote Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2031

Policy 1: A Spatial Plan for the Parishes Policy 3: Design

Page 78 PLANNING HISTORY AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

WK/22/99 Erection of stables and construction of manage Application Permitted 29.10.1999 WK/9/01 Extension to stables to form feed store & garage Application Permitted 29.05.2001

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

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

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.2 HDC Environmental Health: No Objection. Conditions recommended relation to contamination, asbestos and waste removal.

3.3 HDC Economic Development: Support. Economic Development support this application as the provision of the holiday let will add to the district’s accommodation offer and contribute towards our local visitor economy. It would be advisable for parking to be provided in order to attract visitors to the accommodation, particularly considering the rural location of the development.

There also appears to be other holiday lets close by (e.g. the Mill Sussex Holiday lettings and Blossoms Holiday Cottage), which suggests this is a viable area for such a development.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.4 WSCC Highways: No Objection. Conditions recommended to secure car parking, cycle parking and electric vehicle charging.

There is no evidence to suggest the existing access is operating unsafely or that the proposal would exacerbate an existing safety concern. With due consideration of the proposed holiday home and replacement stable, the Highways Authority does not anticipate that this proposal would result in a material intensification of movements over those already occurring at the site.

The applicant has not demonstrated parking arrangement for this proposal. WSCC has adopted new parking guidance in August 2019. The new guidance does not include standards for holiday let parking demand. The Highways Authority would be minded to advise the planning authority to consider the parking demand as per pre-August 2019 guidance when considering the demand for this application. On this basis, the parking requirements for holiday lets are one parking space per bedroom, therefore creating a requirement of three parking spaces for the proposed holiday home. There appears to be sufficient space on-site to accommodate this, as well as parking for the stables.

3.5 WSCC Fire Officer: Comment. Requests one fire hydrant to serve the development.

3.6 Southern Water: Comment. Southern Water Informative recommended.

Page 79 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.7 Woodmancote Parish Council: Comment. Conditions should be added in relation to parking for cars and horse boxes, no additional flood lights, new stables restricted to equine use only and restriction on large vehicles kept on the property.

3.8 Two letters of support have been received, the comments made have been summarised below:

 Support WSCC recommendations relating to parking, cycle parking, refuse/recycling and EV charging point  Suggests section 106 restriction to ensure no residential use of the new building  Potential to provide much needed affordable housing could be a better use of the site  Opportunity for good design which respects character of area  Opportunity for suitable drainage  Support conditions recommended by the Parish Council  Opportunity to remove all other unauthorised buildings/structures on site  Request for windows on the north side of the barn be fixed and opaque.

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

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

Principle of Development

Holiday Accommodation

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

6.2 Policy 11 of the HDPF outlines that measures which promote tourism and enhance local cultural facilities, including recreation based rural diversification, will be encouraged. Any development should be of a scale and type appropriate to the location, and should increase the range or improve the quality of accommodation, attraction or experiences for tourists, day visitors, business visitors, and residents in the District. Support will particularly be given to proposals which: reinforce the local distinctiveness and improve existing facilities; focuses major tourism and cultural facilities in Horsham Town Centre; seek to ensure that facilities are available within the towns and villages in the District and are in keeping with their relationship with the urban area and countryside around them; develop the opportunities associated with rural diversification and rural development initiatives, particularly where they assist farm diversification projects, benefit the local economy, or enable the retention of

Page 80 buildings contributing to the character of the countryside; and do not result in the loss of a cultural resource.

6.3 In addition, Policy 10 of the HDPF supports sustainable rural economic development and enterprise within the District which maintains the quality and character of the area, whilst sustaining its varied and productive social and economic activity. The policy requires development to contribute to the diverse and sustainable farming enterprises within the district or, in the case of other countryside-based enterprises and activities, contribute to the wider rural economy and/or promote recreation in, and the enjoyment of, the countryside. Amongst other matters, the policy suggests that such development should be contained wherever possible within suitably located buildings which are appropriate for conversion. The policy concludes that proposals for the conversion of rural buildings to business and commercial uses will be considered favourably over residential in the first instance.

6.4 In this instance the application falls outside of the existing built-up area and lies within the countryside. Policy 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) requires development outside the built-up area boundaries to be essential to its countryside location in order to protect the rural character and undeveloped nature of the countryside against inappropriate development. In addition, it must meet one of the following criteria:

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

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

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

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

6.8 The Framework does not impose a blanket restriction on development outside defined settlements. Whilst the site is outside the settlement boundary, this in itself does not mean that the site is in an unsustainable location. The site is located approximately 2.9 km from the centre of Henfield and 3 km from the village centre of Albourne. It is therefore acknowledged that whilst the site is not within walking distance to day-to-day services and facilities, it is close to other holiday accommodation facilities, comprising Mill Sussex Holiday lettings and Blossoms Holiday Cottage within Trusslers Lane, approximately 1 km to the south-east of the application site. Blackstone Farm Campsite and Caravan site is also located along Wheatsheaf Road, approximately 1.2 km to the north-west. The site has good connections to Public Rights of Ways located approximately 1.4 km to the east and west of Page 81 the site for walking and cycling contributing to the promotion of healthy lifestyles and a limited dependency on private motor vehicles once in the area.

6.9 Given the modest scale of the proposed 3 bedroom holiday accommodation unit, it is not considered that the development would have a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside and therefore cause no harmful conflict with Policy 26 of the HDPF.

6.10 The Council aims to take a proactive stance to encourage local tourism within the District and the proposal would make a modest contribution toward the provision of visitor accommodation within the District. There is likely to be a demand for this type of accommodation in this location. One of the recommendations of the Councils Visitor Study is to improve the provision of high quality and small holiday lodges. The proximity of the site to the footpath network may create a demand for the accommodation from tourists and the location in the south of the District would appeal to visitors of the South Downs National Park. The Hotel and Visitor Accommodation Study 2016 specifically identified opportunities for additional holiday lodges and cottages, particularly those along the South Downs Way that the South Downs National Park may not be able to provide. It is considered that the proposal would align with Policy 11, subject to an appropriate condition to restrict holiday-use only.

6.11 In policy terms, it is considered that the principle of the proposal can be supported. The accommodation would make use of an existing building, providing for quiet informal recreational use while enabling a low-key form of sustainable development of the rural area. The site is very well located for access to the Public Right of Ways and the South Downs National Park. The nature of the conversion works and proposed use coupled with the scale of the accommodation would not be expected to result in a significant increase in the level of activity in the countryside. The site has established vehicular access and a suitable parking area. For the reasons outlined the proposal is considered to accord with Policies 7, 10, 11 and 26 of the HDPF.

Replacement Stables

6.12 Policy 29 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) states that equestrian related development will be supported provided that the proposal would be appropriate in scale and level of activity, and be in keeping with its location and surroundings, and where possible is well related to existing buildings; and where possible, is well related to a bridleway network.

6.13 The proposed stables would replace an existing stable building on the site which currently comprises two stables and a tackroom. The stable building proposed for conversion to holiday accommodation also currently comprises four stables, a tack room, food store and general store. The proposed stable building would consist of three stables, a feed and tackroom, store and wash basin. It is understood that the proposed stables would be used for the Applicant’s horses and for horses of the visitors using the proposed holiday accommodation. This would enable visitors of the holiday accommodation to store their horse in the proposed stables adjacent to the proposed holiday accommodation building.

6.14 Given the reduction in the number of stables proposed in comparison to the existing number of stables currently on the site and the existing equestrian nature of this part of the site, it is not considered that the proposal would cause any significant increase in activity in the countryside. The proposal would allow for the continued quiet informal recreational use of the land in connection with the proposed tourism accommodation unit, proposed stable building and existing equestrian use of the site in accordance with policies 29 and 26 of the HDPF.

Design and Appearance

6.15 HDPF policy 25 requires development to protect, conserve and enhance the landscape and townscape characters across the District, taking account of settlement characteristics and Page 82 settlement separation. Policy 32 of the HDPF requires new development to 'Complement locally distinctive characters and heritage of the district' and 'Contribute a sense of place both in the buildings and spaces themselves and in the way they integrate with their surroundings'. Policy 33 requires developments to relate sympathetically with the built surroundings.

6.16 The proposal would involve the modification of the existing stable building located adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The southern wall and eastern wall of the western stable wing would be extended under the overhanging roof canopy of the existing structure. The proposal would involve the installation of three windows and four doors on the southern elevation of the building. A single door would be installed on the western elevation of the building and five roof lights to the northern roof slope of the building. The converted building would retain its existing relationship to the host dwelling and other equestrian buildings located to the west, resulting in limited interventions in the wider rural landscape.

6.17 The proposed stable building would comprise a traditional timber clad building with pitched roof. The stables would extend further south than the existing stable building, yet would be retained within the existing complex of equestrian buildings and would not extend within the paddock area to the south. The proposed building would therefore remain in keeping with in terms of scale, design and external appearance with the semi-rural character of the area. It is suggested that landscaping and parking details should be subject to an appropriate condition in the event of approval being granted.

Impact on neighbour amenity

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

6.19 The nearest neighbouring properties, comprise the Blackstone Gate Farm located 27 metres to the north, The Old Dairy East Cottage located 36 metres to the east and South Oaks lies 37 metres to the south-east. There is a currently a hedge along the northern boundary of the site that screens the building to be converted from view of the neighbouring outbuilding within Blackstone Gate Farm which lies adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The retention of this hedge and planting would maintain privacy to the northerly neighbouring occupiers at Blackstone Gate Farm. Whilst it is noted that five roof lights are proposed in the northern roof slope of the holiday accommodation building, these would just provide light to the ground floor rooms and would not enable any overlooking to the neighbouring land to the north. Given the single storey nature of the holiday accommodation building and the retention of the northern boundary hedge, it is not considered that the proposed development would cause any harmful loss of privacy to the northerly neighbouring occupiers. The generous separation distance to the neighbouring properties to the east and south-east would ensure that the development would not cause any loss of amenity to these neighbouring occupiers.

6.20 As the proposal would only provide one holiday lets on the site, it is not anticipated that the activities associated with the proposal would cause any significant noise disturbance to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. It is also noted that no concerns have been raised by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer in respect of noise disturbance.

Highways Impact

6.21 Policy 40 of the HDPF supports proposals which provide safe and suitable access for all vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, public transport and the delivery of goods, whilst Policy 41 requires adequate parking facilities within developments. Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out that 'development should only be refused on transport grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety grounds, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe'. Page 83

6.22 This application seeks to utilise the existing shared vehicular access into the site from Wheatsheaf Road to the east. Whilst no turning or parking details to serve the development has been shown on the submitted plans, it is noted that there is an existing sizable area of hardstanding located between the host dwelling and the existing stable buildings. It is considered that the existing parking area would provide sufficient parking for the proposed 3 bedroom holiday let, and use of the existing access is not considered to result in harm to the function or safety of the highway network. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with the requirements of policies 40 and 41 of the HDPF. A condition is recommended requiring the applicant to submit further layout details in relation to car and cycle parking.

Climate Change

6.23 Policies 35, 36 and 37 require that development mitigates to the impacts of climate change through measures including improved energy efficiency, reducing flood risk, reducing water consumption, improving biodiversity and promoting sustainable transport modes. These policies reflect the requirements of Chapter 14 of the NPPF that local plans and decisions mitigate the impact of development on climate change. The proposed development includes limited measures to address climate change and therefore conditions will be attached to secure the following:

 One electric vehicle charging point  Provision of refuse and recycling  Cycle parking facilities  Water consumption limited to 110litres per person per day

6.24 Subject to these conditions the application will suitably mitigate its impact on climate change in accordance with local and national policy.

Conclusions

6.25 In conclusion, the proposal has been considered within the context of the NPPF and the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and against Local Policies set out within the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6.26 The proposed replacement stable building and conversion and extension of the existing stable building to provide a 3-bed holiday let is considered to provide for quiet and informal recreation that allows and promotes recreation in and enjoyment of the countryside. The holiday let would bring tourists to an area, well served by public footpaths and with access to nearby Henfield, where a small economic benefit will be felt. The existing buildings are considered to be of a scale that would be appropriate for conversion, with the small addition to achieve an appropriate layout, and of an appearance that would relate sympathetically to the semi-rural landscape character of the area. The proposal is not considered to raise any material effect on the amenities of neighbouring properties, or to the host dwelling, Old Dairy Cottage East, which would be conveniently located next door to provide the servicing needs of the holiday let. In this instance, approval is recommended subject to the conditions set out.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

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

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

Page 84 Use Description Proposed Existing Net Gain

147

Total Gain

Total Demolition

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

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

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1 Plans list

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

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

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

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

4 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall take place until a schedule of materials and finishes and colours to be used for external walls, windows and roofs of the proposed development have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. All materials used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall conform to those approved. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

5 Pre-Commencement Condition: No development shall commence until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination, (including asbestos contamination), of the site be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: (a) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The following aspects (b) – (d) shall be dependent on the outcome of the above preliminary risk assessment (a) and may not necessarily be required.

Page 85 (b) An intrusive site investigation scheme, based on (a) to provide information for a detailed risk assessment to the degree and nature of the risk posed by any contamination to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (c) Full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken based on the results of the intrusive site investigation (b) and an options appraisal. (d) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (c) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action where required. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Any changes to these components require the consent of the local planning authority. Reason: As this matter is fundamental to ensure that no unacceptable risks are caused to humans, controlled waters or the wider environment during and following the development works and to ensure that any pollution is dealt with in accordance with Policies 24 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

6 Pre-Commencement (Slab Level) Condition: No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until confirmation has been submitted, in writing, to the Local Planning Authority that the relevant Building Control body will be requiring the optional standard for water usage across the development. The holiday let unit hereby permitted shall meet the optional requirement of building regulation G2 to limit the water usage of each unit to 110 litres per person per day. The subsequently approved water limiting measures shall thereafter be retained.

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

7 Pre-Occupation Condition: The development shall not be brought into use until details of all hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, including forecourt layout and surfacing materials, new boundary fencing and gate details, and external lighting. All such works as may be approved shall then be fully implemented in the first planting season, following commencement of the development hereby permitted and completed strictly in accordance with the approved details. Any plants or species 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 otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

8 Pre-Occupation Condition: The proposed holiday let unit hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a scheme for the provision of one electrical vehicle charging point has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall have regard to the requirements for electric vehicle charging within the latest West Sussex Parking Standards (2019). The approved scheme shall be installed prior to first occupation of the holiday let unit and shall thereafter remain as such.

Reason: To provide electric vehicle car charging space for the use in accordance with Policies 35 and 41 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) and the WSCC Parking Standards (2019).

9 Pre-Occupation Condition: No use of the holiday let hereby permitted shall be commenced unless and until provision for the storage of refuse/recycling has been made for the holiday

Page 86 let in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

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

10 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of the holiday let hereby permitted, the parking, turning and access facilities necessary to serve the holiday let shall have been fully implemented. The parking, turning and access facilities shall thereafter be retained as such.

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

11 Pre-Occupation Condition: Prior to the first occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, details of secure and covered cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The holiday let shall not be occupied until the approved cycle parking facilities have been fully implemented and made available for use. The provision for cycle parking shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

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

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

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

13 Regulatory Condition: The residential accommodation hereby permitted shall, when occupied as holiday accommodation be managed in accordance with the following: i) The accommodation shall be occupied for holiday and short-term let purposes only; ii) The accommodation shall not be occupied as a person's sole, or main place of residence; iii) The accommodation shall not be occupied by any one person for a period exceeding 28 days in any calendar year; iv) The accommodation shall at all times be managed and supervised by Old Dairy East; v) The owners / operators shall maintain an up-to-date register of the names of all owners / occupiers of the accommodation on the site, and of their main home addresses, and shall make this information available to the Local Planning Authority upon request.

Reason: To maintain the availability of the site as short term holiday tourist accommodation in accordance with Policies 10, 11 and 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

14 Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (and/or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order) no development falling within Classes A, B, C, D or E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall take place to the holiday let accommodation hereby permitted without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and due to preserve the historic character of the site in accordance with Policies 33 and 34 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015). Page 87

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

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

16 Regulatory Condition: The stable building hereby permitted shall be used for private recreational equestrian purposes and not be used for commercial purposes or in connection with any form of riding or livery establishment.

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

17 Regulatory Condition: The hedge along the northern boundary of the site adjacent to the holiday let building shall at all times be retained in conjunction with the proposed development.

Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining residential properties from loss of privacy in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

18 Regulatory Condition: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 or Orders amending or revoking and re-enacting the same, no windows or other openings (other than those shown on the plans hereby approved) shall be formed in the northern elevations of the holiday let building without express planning consent from the Local Planning Authority first being obtained.

Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining residential properties from loss of privacy in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

19 Regulatory Condition: No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed in conjunction with the development unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with Policy 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Background Paper: DC/20/1019

Page 88 09) DC/20/1019

Old Dairy Cottages, Henfield Road, Albourne

For Business usePond only - not for distribution to the general public Nursery ¯ D

r a

i Wagtails n

Blackstone Gate Farm The Old Dairy Cottages Boundary Post GP

15.8m South Oaks

Pond Blackstone Gate Tennis Court

B T

m 1 B 9 . L 0 A

C

K

S

T

O

N

E

L

A

N

E Pond 17.6m

Scale: 1:2,500

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

Date 10/09/2020 Page 89MSA Number 100023865 This page is intentionally left blank