Parish: Ward: Oving

O/15/02343/FUL

Proposal Crop research, technology and multiplication centre, encompassing approximately 2.83 hectares of varietal trial plots, DEFRA official seed testing station, laboratory, ancillary offices, pack house and parking and associated landscaping, incorporating 1,591 cubic metres balancing pond.

Site Land To South Of A259 Bognor Road Oving West PO20 1NW

Map Ref (E) 489262 (N) 103587

Applicant Mr Tim Gleeson Bartholomew’s (Holdings) Limited

RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE

Note: Do not scale from map. For information only. Reproduced NOT TO from the Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the SCALE controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Crown Copyright. License No. 100018803

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral

Red Card: Cllr Plowman - Information/opinion to raise in debate.

2.0 The Site and Surroundings

2.1 The application site comprises a parcel of Grade 1 and 2 agricultural land located within the designated Runcton Horticultural Development Area (HDA). The site area extends to 5.58 ha with a level change of 1.5 metres across the site. The surrounding part of the HDA is known as the Chichester Food Park (CFP). The Food Park is accessed from the A259 via the roundabout, with access to the strategic road network (A27) one mile to the west.

2.2 The site consists of an arable field located to the west of the A259, which is bounded on its southern side by the main access into the Food Park. To the north are a number of residential properties accessible via Green Lane, a residential cul-de-sac, which also provides access to a public bridleway and public right of way. The north field boundary contains deciduous trees and hedging, and the eastern boundary contains mature hedging. The south west boundary is defined by a drainage ditch with mixed species hedgerow. The National Cycle Network runs parallel with the eastern boundary of the site. A public right of way runs along the north west boundary of the site (2792/1) and a second public right of way (274) is located to the north of the A259 up to Drayton Lane.

2.3 A number of horticultural pack houses and distribution facilities are sited to the south and west of the application site within the Food Park. To the south of these buildings, is an extensive range of glasshouses. Members will be aware that permission was granted in 2013 for a grain store, located on the western side of the food park, with two bays now built and operational (13/02608/FUL). There is an extant permission for a further horticultural glasshouse, packhouse, offices and reservoir, to the south west of the application site, on the opposite side of the access into the food park (14/01721/FUL) in addition to a further packhouse currently under construction further to the west of the application site (14/02600/FUL).

3.0 The Proposal

3.1 Permission is sought to erect a crop research and DEFRA seed testing station at the site, including varietal crop beds. The purpose of the facility is to allow the expansion and growth of the current crop research and packaging facility at Bartholomew's on Bognor Road through relocation to a larger, purpose built site that will include crop trials and breeding. The new site will therefore be a fully operational seed testing station, approved by DEFRA. A trials programme is to be run from the site, working with the National Institute of Agricultural Botany (which approves and registers new varieties of crops).

3.2 The north and centre of the site will be retained as varietal trial plots, where new strains and varieties of seeds will be grown, subject to testing and the multiplication process, before being brought to the commercial market. This area of the site would extend to 2.83 ha coverage.

3.3 The built element of the proposal will be located at the southern and eastern end of the site. The building would contain a seed testing station, packhouse, laboratory, education facility and ancillary offices. The building would have a gross internal floor area of 7,750 sq metres and would measure 156 x 51 metres, at a height of 21.5 metres to the ridge, reducing to 17.2 metres at the southern edge of the site, and 19.9 metres at the northern edge. The external treatment of the building will comprise concrete panels to ground level with profiled metal dark green sheeting above, roller shutter doors on the north elevation in contrasting green. The pitch roof would be a mid-grey, profiled metal roof with rooflights and solar panels on the south roof elevation. The south east elevation of the building at the entrance to the facility would have brown profiled metal sheet cladding.

3.4 A total of 16 full time staff would be employed at the site (plus 4 additional staff during harvesting) to include contractors (planting and harvesting of crops), agronomists (monitoring the disease, nutrition and development of crops), seed technicians (assessing breeding and regulatory issues), crop technicians (assessing crops for their commercial benefits) and packing and logistics staff. The submitted floorplans indicates that the entire ground floor of the building would contain processing and packaging plant and equipment, with a mezzanine containing ancillary offices, laboratories and an education/resource room.

3.5 Deliveries and despatch by HGVs would be from the southern edge of the site via a proposed new access off the service road, at the entrance to the Food Park. The area to the east and south of the building would be retained as car parking for staff and visitors with 42 and 16 spaces respectively, and new access road. A further 32 HGV parking spaces would be located on a hardstanding to the north of the building with refuelling depot and weighbridge.

3.6 The proposal includes a landscape strategy which comprises a 10 metre woodland landscape buffer along the site's southern and eastern boundaries, and reinforced hedgerow planting along the north, east and west site boundaries. Areas of scrub vegetation would be retained in the northwest boundary of the site, incorporating a balancing pond of approximately 1500 metre cubic capacity to form new wetland habitat. A Landscape Masterplan Strategy is submitted and includes detailed planting sections of 1.5 metre high bunds on the north-eastern and south-eastern site boundaries closest to the A259, a detailed soft landscaping scheme, planting plans and schedule, a soft landscape specification, and landscape and ecological management plan.

3.7 The facility is proposed to be relocated from the existing Bartholomews site, off Bogner Road. The key difference between the existing site and the proposed site will be modernisation of the facilities and the addition of varietal trial plots, where new strains and varieties of seeds will be grown on site (referred to as basic seed for multiplication), subject to testing and the multiplication process, before being brought to the commercial market.

3.8 The application is supported by numerous technical reports and statements, including a Design and Access Statement, Transport Statement, Flood Risk Assessment, Ecology Report, Landscaping and Visual Impact Assessment, reports on Noise, Archaeology and Lighting, and Foul and Surface Water Disposal. The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Noise Assessment have been updated during the course of the application, in response to officer and consultee comments, and additional transport modelling undertaken. The applicant has also produced a Travel Plan.

4.0 History

13/02357/FUL PER Pedestrian footpath with lighting.

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO Conservation Area NO Rural Area YES AONB NO Tree Preservation Order NO South Downs National NO Park EA Flood Zone - Flood Zone 2 NO - Flood Zone 3 NO Historic Parks and NO Gardens

6.0 Representations and Consultations

6.1 Oving Parish Council

Support

The 21 metre high main building will have a visual impact on the residents of Merston and those using the A259 Bognor Road, as it will part of the Strategic Gap to Chichester. We understand that the building height is required for the processing of seed.

It is essential that the proposed bund and screen includes as many native trees as possible, particularly evergreen varieties to mitigate the visual impact as much as possible.

We are satisfied that the lighting on the site will not further exacerbate the light pollution from the greenhouses in the area; we receive frequent complaints from residents on this issue.

We are concerned about the proposed 120 HGV movements quoted for a typical week. This takes no account of additional vehicle movements, or those associated with other developments in the Food Park. This will add to congestion on the A259 dual carriageway towards the Bognor Road roundabout. It is not possible to determine the impact of these additional vehicle movements until the planned improvements to the A27 Chichester Bypass have been agreed.

6.2 Environment Agency

Please confirm the chosen method of foul drainage. The application refers to a septic tank and a cesspit. Information on the chosen method would be useful. More information is needed on the re-fuelling tank. Will it be double skinned or a bunded oil tank?

Further comment following revised details:

No objection Additional information confirms that the management of foul water is to discharge to a cesspit that will be emptied once a month. This is acceptable. We are pleased that the re- fuelling tank is double skinned.

6.3 Southern Water Services

Applicant is advised to contact the EA directly regarding the use of septic tank drainage, which disposes effluent to sub-soil irrigation. The owner will need to maintain to ensure its long term effectiveness.

The proposed means of surface water drainage is via watercourse. The Council's technical staff should comment on the adequacy to discharge surface water to the local watercourse.

6.4 Highways

In order to assess the impact on the SRN (Strategic Road Network) we require a traffic impact assessment of the A27/A259 roundabout. We note the applicant's view that the increase in trips is insufficient to warrant a detailed assessment. Our view is that the interchange experiences regular congestion and operates above capacity with peak period queues and delays in its present condition. An assessment is required that accounts for Local Plan growth to 2029, and considers scenarios with and without the site traffic for the evening peak hour. We can supply a Transport Model and request that the Council refrains from determining the application.

Further comments following additional information:

Due to the operation of the business, there is little to no effect on the operation of the Strategic Road Network during the morning peak (08.00-09.00 hours) in all modelled scenarios. The south bound A27 entry into the Bognor Road roundabout experiences an additional 20 second per vehicle delay in the afternoon peak (17.00-18.00 hours). This arm already experiences severe delays. At the end of the Local Plan period, the delay is forecast to increase to 9 minutes per vehicle (from 8 minutes 40 seconds). The applicant should propose measures to supress traffic demand during the PM peak or appropriate mitigation measures that bring a no worsening of traffic delay.

Further comments following additional information:

No objection, subject to conditions. Having considered the information, Highways England has decided to offer no objection, but would advise the Council to require a Construction phase Traffic Management Plan which restricts construction traffic movements during the peal AM and PM periods.

6.5 Natural England

No comment. The application is not likely to result in significant impacts on statutory designated nature conservation sites or landscapes.

6.6 Council's Agricultural Consultant

All such seed testing and packaging plants require a DEFRA licence to ensure that the crop seed meets laid quality and purity standards. These ensure that farmers can be confident that the seed produced by each seed is the right variety and quality. Seed breeding companies need to have a symbiotic relationship between agricultural merchants such as Bartholomew's. Seed breeder companies require a conduit through which seed can be multiplied and sold to the farmer. The seed multiplication and provision to the grower is a service provided by the merchant. Agricultural merchants like Bartholomew's know which farmers have suitable ground and the ability to take generation seed that can be grown to provide seed for commercial growers the following season. Such crops need to be kept pure. The merchant will then process the seed and market it the same autumn to the commercial grower.

The application will move the existing seed plant to a larger site incorporating modern technology. This will enable the company to continue to service local commercial growers and test new varieties on the 7 acre trials site. Providing farmers with varietal pure seed at the right time and the right purity and germination is essential for commercial viability and sustainability. Arable seed crop harvest and sale involves timelines of less than 4 weeks from harvest to being drilled as seed for the next harvest. The merchant is required to meet stringent central government guidelines and must have the capacity to provide the commercial grower with seed of the right variety and purity.

The applicant contends that to remain competitive in the seed market, a new facility capable of coping with change and providing growers with seed is required.

Local climate and topography of Chichester enables early harvest of crops so the area has natural advantages for the commercial grower, enabling seed to be produced earlier for other farmers to purchase.

Commercial trials of crops are less common. Universities and colleges undertake some crop trials. These are associated with complex scientific research rather than varietal suitability for the commercial grower. The London University Wye College is closed; therefore the closest research site for is Reading University. The proposed facility will be the only such site combining all aspects of crop seed work in the Southeast. The absence of a 'local seed plant and trials facility' would place Sussex and the South eastern growers at a disadvantage. By contrast, farmers in the eastern counties benefit from the Cambridge facility and without a local seed plant, farmers would have to source seed from there.

Crop varietal trials show regional differences. Transporting seed from different regions into the southeast increases the carbon footprint of each business; it is possible that future grants and central government support will require businesses to meet low carbon footprint criteria in order to quality for financial support.

West Sussex is known as a centre for excellence in horticultural production. It is less well known that cereal farmers are regularly approached by seed suppliers to grow basic and C1 seed for multiplication providing seed for the commercial grower. There are many excellent West Sussex cereal growers and of greater significance, crops can be harvested 2-3 weeks earlier than in other parts of the country due to the maritime climate. This is crucially important for the merchant enabling seed to be tested and treated in time for drilling. A seed facility in the locality is a definite advantage to the local community.

6.7 Chichester Harbour Conservancy

The development is far removed from the AONB boundary. Although the packhouse building is tall and bulky, it will not materially affect the setting and natural beauty of the Chichester Harbour AONB, nor impact on the ecological designations therein.

6.8 WSCC Highways - Local Development Division

Access and visibility - Two access points are proposed from the private access road serving the Food Park. No alterations are proposed to the adopted highway network. The dropped kerb/access found 100m north of the A259/B144 junction on the site side would be required to be closed. Visibility splays and tracking is provided. The LHA recommends that the secondary visibility splay be taken to the nearside kerb line and ensure that vegetation is kept clear at this point. Sliding gates should be set further back to ensure no overhang of HGVs onto the highway. Response is needed from the Road Safety Audit Team responsible from the preparation of previous RSAs for earlier nearby planning applications at the Food Park (to determine whether they consider a further RSA is necessary at the A259/B2144 Drayton Lane roundabout).

Parking - 48 full time staff are to be based at the site (32 HGV drivers and 16 full time staff increasing by 4 during the harvest season). 42 staff parking spaces are provided, plus 16 visitors spaces. Applicant to explain why 60 spaces is sufficient for the new facility, when 90 spaces is provided at the existing facility. 32 HGV parking bays have sufficient turning and reversing to accommodate loading/unloading/manoeuvring. 8 cycle spaces are provided. Applicant to explain why this level of cycle parking is acceptable.

Sustainable Access - A share footway/cycleway runs parallel along the A259 linking Chichester to Bognor Regis. There is a cycle way towards Oving along Drayton Lane. Nearest bus stop is 300m away on the A259 with frequent services to Chichester, Bognor, Portsmouth/Brighton (via no. 700). A segregated footway along the private access road has recently been installed. Site layout shows the footway widening to 2 metre as it is extended into the site. A Travel Plan should be secured for the site.

Traffic flow diagrams are required to include permitted developments on the Chichester Food Park (10/03529/FUL; 13/02608/FUL; 14/01721/FUL; 14/02300/FUL). Modelling has been undertaken from the Bognor Road/Drayton Lane roundabout for 2016 and 2020 scenarios which appears acceptable. Necessary to assess the impact on the A27/A259 roundabout given the development would generate more than 30 vehicle movements per hour. Highways England should be consulted.

Highway contributions will be required in line with CIL and/or TAD methodologies. Further information is required to determine the amount.

Further comment following additional information:

No objection, subject to S106 Agreement to secure improvements to local bus infrastructure (stops, shelters and real-time bus information) and highway conditions.

Access and Safety - Traffic generated by the proposal has only modest impact at the adjacent A259/B2144. A Road Safety Audit was recently undertaken for another development on the Chichester Food Park and mitigation provided. The Highway Authority is satisfied that no further RSA is required on this occasion.

Internal details - Submitted visibility splays at both access points should be taken to the nearside kerb line of the access road and ensure vegetation is kept clear of sightlines. Proposed sliding gate to be set back, to ensure no overhanging HGVs on the site.

Parking - 60 parking spaces are provided. There are 48 full time (16 full-time and 32 HGV drivers) and 42 parking spaces are provided on site anticipating that some staff members will not drive. There are an additional 18 visitor spaces (including 2 disabled). This site would appear to be suitably catered for with respect to parking provision. Space within the loading/unloading area could also provide for any overspill.

Sustainable Access - Being consistent with other developments on the Chichester Food Park site, a new bus shelter (for south-bound stop) and Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) for both nearby bus-stops serving the 700 Coastliner service should be secured by S106. A Travel Plan has been submitted. Largely acceptable. A condition to secure Standard Assessment Monitoring (SAM) surveys at specific intervals in line with TRICs criteria is necessary.

Trip Generation - Resulting trip generation is broadly acceptable based on assumptions within the TA and is as follows:

Combined trips 05.30-06.30 08.00-09.00 17.00-18.00 18.30-19.30

Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound

All trips 35 30 13 0 20 29 16 19

Pedestrians and 3 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 cyclists 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 Public transport 25 3 9 0 3 21 0 14 Car drivers 3 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 Car passengers 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Motorcycle 0 32 0 0 16 0 16 0 HGV

Traffic Modelling - The TA considers recent applications at the Food Park (packhouse 10/03529/FUL), grain store (13/02608/FUL), glasshouse and packing facility (14/01721/FUL) and horticultural packhouse (14/02300/FUL). The applicant has provided modelling outputs for the following scenarios. Modelling is undertaken for the Bognor Road/Drayton Lane roundabout (2016 & 2020 scenarios) reflecting the opening year and give years post application. A response from Highways England is required and associated traffic impacts on the A27 Trunk Road.

6.9 WSCC Flood - Local Development Division

Surface water drainage proposal does not show evidence that the applicant has followed the hierarchy of surface water disposal set out within SUDs guidance (infiltration unless not viable, then discharge to a water course and then sewer as the final option).

Evidence is required that the ground conditions are not suitable for infiltration / soakaway. Should this be proven, the proposal will meet the requirements of the NPPF. No detailed design plans have yet been submitted to show how flow rate is being restricted to pre development runoff rates. We suggest a condition to secure a detailed surface water drainage design based on an assessment of hydrological and hydro geological context of the development to be submitted and approved prior to development commencing. Development should not commence until full details of the maintenance and management of the SUDs system is set out in a site specific manual to be submitted to and approved in writing.

Further comment following revised details:

Support CDC Drainage Engineer's comments i.e. to provide evidence whether or not ground conditions are suitable for infiltration / soakaways. Approved part H of the Building Regs 2000 establishes a hierarchy for surface water drainage, which encourages a SUDs approach with infiltration where possible i.e. soakaways of infiltration trenches.

6.10 Specialist Landscape Architect

It is considered that the form, scale and nature of the proposals would have an adverse impact on the landscape.

The LVIA does not contain a section on Cumulative Impacts and this needs to be addressed for the site.

The scale, location and colour of the building and its surrounding parking areas is very significant and the area of land around the building is inadequate to fully mitigate its impact as the building is located close to the A259. Detailed planting proposals and a Landscape Management Plan are required as part of this application. The management plan could form part of a condition or S106 Agreement. The proposed planting would help to lessen the overall impact from the A259 and the access road to the site; however, establishment would take a significant time to fully reduce the scale of this development. There is inadequate space and planting along the south western boundary.

The scale and mass of the building bears no resemblance to an agricultural barn unit. It has the appearance of an industrial building with extensive offices attached. The proposal would introduce a large building very close to the A259 and would have the effect of totally changing the character of the landscape. The proposed colours of the brickwork and cladding on the building will accentuate the visibility of the building and do not help to make it recessive in the landscape. Dark greys are much less intrusive. Green cladding is the least acceptable colour to integrate into the rural landscape.

The site falls within Natural England Landscape Character Assessment Area South Coast Plain (126) and West Sussex County Council Landscape Character Assessment Area LCA - Chichester to Yapton Coastal Plain (SC9). Within Landscape Character Area SC9 the key issues include urban development pressures, especially in the gaps between settlements on the edge of Chichester and the introduction of large scale industrial buildings and glasshouses with distribution sheds. Both of these issues would be compromised by this proposal. It would change the perception of the road corridor from an essentially rural landscape to having an industrial image.

The existing landscape has been given no quality or sensitivity and the magnitude of the impacts and significance of the development on the landscape character not thoroughly assessed. The LVIA sets out all potential views of the site in detail. There is no methodology set out for determining the sensitivity of the receptor or the magnitude of the view.

The LVIA makes the assumption that because there are other large buildings on the food park it makes the application acceptable in landscape and visual terms. The document is totally lacking in cumulative effects.

Within the application, there is a large area of parking/hard standing for lorries, including a vehicle wash and energy centre. No details are included on these features. The lights attached to the buildings could be visible from a significant distance, even though there are directional luminaries, many viewpoints will be visible from below the lights. Floodlights for the lorry in-lines and hoppers will spill across the yard and be visible from a wider area. During winter months, the roof lights will result in light seepage in the light sky.

The landscape masterplan is inadequate for a building of this scale and planting is inadequate to fully mitigate the impacts. Ground modelling and mounding is not a natural feature but has been introduced elsewhere on the Food Park and provides instant and permanent all road screen. Relying on existing hedgerow to screen and absorb the impact of the development from the southwestern boundary is totally inadequate. A detailed planting plan is required with the application. Without it, it is not possible to verify growth rates or the screening potential as shown on photomontages.

Further comment following additional information:

The scale, location and colour of the building and its surrounding parking areas is very significant and the area of land around the building inadequate to mitigate the impact as the building is located close to the A259. The form, scale and nature of the proposal is too intrusive for the site and location, and would have an adverse impact on the landscape. The applicant has submitted significant additional information to address issues raised in November 2015. These include:

 Outline masterplan landscape strategy, to include cross sections of the landscape bunds  Detailed soft landscaping scheme, layout and detailed planting plans  Detailed planting schedule  Soft landscape specification  Landscape and Ecological Management Plan  LVIA including a Methodology  Rebuttal including assessment of cumulative impacts

Areas of concern that have not been addressed:

 Scale, location and height of the building  Colour and materials of the building  Ground level of the building (appears raised above existing ground levels by up to 1 metre)  Flood lighting attached to the building

Scale, size and long term duration will have a substantial effect on the character of the area. Proposal compromises the objectives of Landscape Character Area SC9. It is accepted that this area is designated for horticultural uses, but the proposal is for a very large building located immediately adjacent to the highway that would change the perception of the road corridor from a rural landscape to an industrial image.

Disagree with conclusions drawn on a number of viewpoints within the LVIA; for example, viewpoint 14, retain concerns about distant views from the Trundle. Accept that the building is not likely to be identifiable, but due to its scale, colour and addition of rooflights, it is likely to be discernible as an additional negative element in the landscape. Viewpoint 1, from the northern side of the A259, the introduction of a building of the height and scale proposed would constitute more than a, 'minor component within the landscape'. The impact should be substantial adverse in year 1 and moderate adverse in year 12-15. Even after this time, a 21 metre high building will remain visible until the vegetation is mature (40-50 years) and the building will be visible in winter.

Mitigation plans, including planting and specification, are very thorough. Species mixes and specification are all suitable; additional planting has tried to address some concerns. This cannot overcome the outstanding issue that the massing, colour of this very large building in this location will be highly visible. 10 metre wide planting belt is less than the width of 1 mature tree.

6.11 CDC - Environmental Health Officer (Noise)

Further information is required. The DAS and description of development does not adequately cover ground floor activities on the site, which are predominantly haulage and distribution, processing of materials, packaging and storage. Plant and equipment needs to be running 24 hours per day; there are 32 HGV spaces and vehicles will be running from 05.00 hours. The application is light on information on these activities, which take up the majority of the site.

Note that the 24 hour plant will only be acceptable if fitted with significant attenuation in the form of silencers to reduce noise by as much as 50dB. This is a significant requirement. They will be significant in size and must be planned on the drawings. This is so critical that it must be included in the application.

Further comment following revised details:

Concern that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on neighbours. Matters below should be clarified and an assessment under BS4142 carried out. When mitigation is finalised, mitigation must be committed to by specific inclusion in the scheme, not left to the consultant's report.

Plant Noise - Neither the application nor the acoustic report show the location of the plant demonstrating whether the plant will be housed internally or exit the building at certain points via flues or other apertures. Acoustic report suggests that three silencers will be fitted to the termination of each piece of plant to reduce noise. There is no information where this is to be accommodated, whether there is sufficient space and where it will terminate. Acoustic report suggests certain elements of plant to run 24 hours per day at certain times. Please clarify. If compliance with night-time noise levels requires certain equipment not being used, this should be confirmed and offered as a planning condition.

Noise - Acoustic Report does not clearly indicate how many HGV movements we can expect each day and at what time. If the successful outcome of the noise assessment is dependent upon cautious assumptions, would the applicant be happy to be conditioned to such restrictions. Early morning noise from HGVs is so critical to the proposal (shift starts at 5am in a lorry park containing 32 HGVs) that the predicted movements of HGVs should be made clear. The applicant should be happy to be committed to the scale of those movements indefinitely and the noise model should be worse case not optimistic.

Further comment following amended Noise Assessment:

The amended Acoustic Report is a comprehensive assessment, which demonstrates that subject to a robust scheme of mitigation, there will be minor to negligible impact caused by the proposal.

Such mitigation includes: doors being kept closed at night; specific kingspan panelling being used in construction; absorbent material being used within the building; fan silencers and fan cladding being installed.

Following submission of confirmation that the measures are not draft, my concerns may be resolved by the imposition of conditions limiting hours of vehicular movement, noise from the site and access road.

6.12 CDC - Environmental Health Officer (Contamination and Air Quality)

Site lies near to former RAF Merston airfield, but the land appears to have been in agricultural use in recent years; therefore the likelihood of encountering land contamination is low. The developer should maintain a watching brief in case of unexpected contamination. A lorry refuelling depot is proposed. Condition L09F should be applied, so that the tank is suitably bunded to contain leaks or spillages. If chemicals are to be stored (such as in the lab) they should be stored in a bunded and ventilated area.

32 lorry spaces are available plus other parking for staff and visitors (60 spaces in total). Highest expected peak flows will be between 0530 - 0730 (Mondays) and 1700-1930 (Fridays). Office based staff will work be between 0900 - 1700. Traffic impacts on air quality, delay times and capacity on the Food Park entrance roundabout on the A259 are likely to be minimal.

Measures to mitigate environmental impacts from construction traffic should be employed.

6.13 CDC - Archaeological Officer

There is potential for the site to contain archaeological deposits. This should be investigated further with the aim of identifying significant archaeological deposits present and appropriate measures for their preservation. This should be secured by condition.

6.14 CDC - Drainage Engineer

Surface water is proposed to be attenuated to a pond prior to discharging to the adjacent wartercourse at a restricted rate. Infiltration should be investigated across the site. Some summer groundwater monitoring has been undertaken, finding groundwater at 800mm below ground level. Winter groundwater monitoring should be undertaken to confirm whether groundwater levels increase beyond this, ruling out infiltration. Percolation testing to BRE 365 or equivalent should be undertaken where possible based on groundwater monitoring results. It may be possible for some areas of the site to infiltrate to ground while other areas drain to a reduced size pond.

Full details of pond construction including the liner and outlet/control structure/headwalls should be provided if infiltration is not possible through the site. Drainage design to be dealt with by condition. All watercourses must retain a 3 metre easement for access and maintenance. Condition to be applied.

Further comment following revised details:

Request that the condition is retained, especially as the ideal opportunity for testing is in the next few months. If some soakage can be utilised, it should be prioritised, even if some of the site has to drain to a basin structure or similar. Without knowing the highest recorded winter groundwater level, we would not know whether shallow structures and surface structures such as permeable paving, swales or even shallow crate soakaways have a chance of working.

6.15 CDC - Environmental Strategy

Bats: If two trees on the western boundary are to be removed, which have potential for roosting bats, further bat emergence surveys will be required. Lighting scheme will need to take into consideration the presence of bats in the local area and minimise potential impacts to any bats using trees, hedgerows and buildings by avoiding any unnecessary light spill through the use of directional light sources and shielding.

Nesting birds: Any works to trees or vegetation clearance on the site should only be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season (1 March - 1 October). If works are required within this time, an ecologist will need to check the site before any works take place (within 24 hours).

6.16 CDC - Economic Development

Horticulture is the second largest industry in . Businesses such as Bartholomew's must continue to grow and adapt. For over one hundred years, they have proved to be very capable of this and the Council must continue to support this growing business, as per the Economic Development Strategy Priority 2: Create the Conditions to support Growth-Orientated Businesses. The use of Horticultural Development Area Land is appropriate, as this facility will be developing Horticultural processes.

6.17 CDC - Planning Policy

There is an objection to the use of the site for lorry parking if it cannot be justified to be required for the proposed development.

Policy 32 and HDAs relate to commercial horticultural development. Comments from the agricultural consultant support the need for a local seed processing facility to benefit the local farming community. In principle, there is support for crop research, technology and multiplication centre (including trial plots), laboratory, ancillary offices and packhouse development on HDAs. Consideration needs to be given to the scale of buildings, ecology, noise and transport.

Paragraph 16.37 indicates that, 'the council considers that HDAs should remain available for growing and packing horticultural products'.

There is concern relating to the scale of lorry parking within the HDA as there does not appear to be justification for the lorry parking associated with the proposed use.

[Officer comment - the existing site at Portfield currently operates with 28 HGV movements daily. 32 HGVs are proposed at the new site, in order to transport seed to farmers across the District and the wider region].

6.18 CDC - Design

The building is functional and utilitarian, and appears as an industrial shed in a carpark. The most prominent elevation facing the roundabout is marred by an external staircase. No attempt or evidence to incorporate ground breaking environmental features to minimise its impact in terms of orientation and incorporation of renewable technologies. No evidence is provided that the materials will be from sustainable, ideally local sources. These should be appropriate to the context and derived from sustainable means. A public art contribution for non-residential development is no longer applicable following the introduction of CIL.

6.19 6 Third Party Support:

 Support new investment, as it will put the applicant (and their customers) at the leading edge of UK food production by offering customers the most up to date information and services on all new varieties of crops and help UK farming by using more environmentally sustainable farming methods;  Applicant has indicated this will be one of the leading facilities of its kind in the UK;  Education and research facility would be an invaluable resource for farmers and residents of the Chichester area [for crop research and planting breeding];  Bayer Crop Science has been involved in the technical design of the seed handling machinery;  Development will positively benefit the farming and growing industry;  Developments in technology and research will contribute to improved food security in the long term and increase investment in UK relevant agri-science;  Underinvestment in crop research has led to plateau in crop yields. The proposal will address this issue and ensure investment in agriculture and horticulture technology, sustain rural jobs, diversify the local economy and meet national food security.

6.20 6 Third Party Objection:

 Development is vastly growing in size;  Landscaping will be insufficient or will not happen at all;  24/7 industrial building will affect way of life in so called rural area;  Chichester Food Park is a nightmare - unbearable HGV noise, light pollution;  Green Lanes properties have been disregarded in this application;  Noise levels will wake children at night from proposed 24 hour noise (91 dCB);  Increase in migrant workers close to our homes (already suffer from loitering);  Monstrosity and eye sore from Bognor-Chichester Road;  Site has lost its agricultural status with commercial/industrial buildings adding to traffic and HGV / plant noise;  Exit and access onto A259 is concerning, as currently I have to wait along time to access;  A259 roundabout is worse in Chichester. Adding another site will add to the problem;  Thought it was horticultural land, not an industrial estate.

6.21 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information

The applicant has provided the following information and documentation in support of the application: Design and Access Statement, Transport Assessment, Flood Risk Assessment, Foul and Surface Water Drainage Strategy, Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, and Landscape Strategy and Masterplan.

7.0 Planning Policy

The Development Plan

7.1 The Development Plan for the area comprises the Chichester District Local Plan: 2014- 2029 and all made Neighbourhood Plans. There is no Neighbourhood Plan for Oving Parish.

7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows:

Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies: 2014-2029

Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 3: The Economy and Employment Provision Policy 8: Transport and Accessibility Policy 9: Development and Infrastructure Provision Policy 32: Horticultural Development Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 40: Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 42: Flood Risk and Water Management Policy 45: Development in the Countryside Policy 48: Natural Environment Policy 49: Biodiversity

National Policy and Guidance

7.3 Government planning policy comprises the National Planning Policy (NPPF) paragraph 14 of which states:

At the heart of the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision taking: For decision-taking, this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole, or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted.

7.4 Consideration should be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), Section 1 (Building a strong, competitive economy), Section 3 (Supporting a prosperous rural economy), Section 4 (Promoting sustainable transport), Section 7 (Requiring good design), Section 11 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment). The contents of the Government's Planning Practice Guidance in respect of the above matters is also material to consideration of the proposal.

Other Local Policy and Guidance

7.5 The following Supplementary Planning Document is material to the determination of this planning application: Planning Obligations and Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document.

7.6 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are:

A1 - A strong local economy where businesses can thrive and grow A2 - Employees with good skills relevant to local employers, prepared for national and international competition and with well-paid and secure jobs A4 - The district to be known as a centre for creative and innovative industries building on our rich arts and heritage base B1 - Managing a changing environment B2 - Greener living B3 - Environmental Resources E1 - Traffic management in the district will improve so as to reduce congestion E2 - There will be improved cycling networks and strong links to public transport to ensure that cycling is a viable alternative to using the car

8.0 Planning Comments

8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: i. Planning policy context; ii. Principle of development; iii. Character and appearance and Landscape Impact; iv. Highways and parking; v. Residential amenity; vi. Other matters; vii. Infrastructure requirements.

Assessment

Policy Context

8.2 The site is located within the countryside where development plan policies seek to carefully control development in the countryside. Local Plan policy 45 states, 'development will be granted where it requires a countryside location and meets the essential, small scale and local need which cannot be met within or immediately adjacent to existing settlements'. Other policies seek to ensure that development is sustainably located and that journeys are minimised.

8.3 Agriculture , including horticulture, is one such activity that requires a countryside location. In recognition of this, the District Council designated four Horticultural Development Areas (HDAs) in the 1999 Local Plan, which has been followed through in the current Local Plan: Runcton, , and Almodington. The site is located in the largest HDA at Runcton, which is 170 ha in total.

8.4 The creation of HDAs resulted from recognition of the favourable growing conditions on the coastal plain (maritime climate, soil and topography); the good transport links; and the contribution that horticulture makes to the local economy. The use of the HDA designation is intended as a positive development tool to encourage development and inward investment, but also to focus such development in appropriate locations where the environmental impacts could be minimised and access to the strategic road network maximised.

8.5 Tangmere and Runcton are the largest HDAs at 170 and 108ha respectively, and are capable of accommodating large scale enterprises with access to the Strategic Road Network (SRN). The Runcton HDA has been the subject of several large scale proposals in recent years, including packhouses, glasshouses and a grain store (14/01721/FUL; 14/02300/FUL; 13/02608/FUL). The grainstore is now built and operational. The Nature's Way packhouse is also currently under construction.

8.6 Policy 32 of the Adopted Local Plan brings forward the HDA designation and is a criteria based policy which, in summary, states that large scale horticultural uses will continue to be focused in the HDAs at Tangmere and Runcton, where new glasshouse, packhouse and polytunnel development will be permitted where there is no adverse impact in terms of noise (resulting from machinery and vehicle movement), spoil, odour, air or light pollution, the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside, landscape impact, highway safety, and acceptable surface water drainage exists or can be provided. The sub-text to the policy is explicit in stating that HDAs should remain available for growing and packing horticultural products and other processes directly related to the preparation of vegetable and salad products, such as washing and shredding. Other related processes, such as cooking, which do not require a countryside setting, should be located on industrial estates.

8.7 The development must also be considered in the context of the national planning policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). There is no specific policy in the NPPF relating to large scale commercial horticulture; however, it is underpinned by policies that support sustainable economic growth in the rural area and the wider economy. The NPPF reaffirms the need to balance economic growth against the need to protect the character of the countryside, and to support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas, through conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings (paragraph 28).

Principle

8.8 The new site will be a fully operative seed testing station, as approved by DEFRA, to allow seed certification processes. A trials programme is proposed to be run from the site working with the National Institute of Agricultural Botany (which approves and registers new varieties of crops).The new site will be required to coordinate the activities of contractors (responsible for planting, agrochemical, nutritional applications and harvesting crops), agronomists (monitoring disease, nutrition and development of crops), seed technicians (assessing breeding and regulatory issues) and crop technicians (assessing crops for commercial benefits).The process will involve sowing pre seed (in the varietal trial beds), monitoring growth and development, harvesting and assessing, and, if deemed suitable, certification and packaging for further multiplication. Further tests and certification are carried out before the crop is placed on the market commercially.

8.9 The applicant has provided flow diagrams to illustrate the five stage cleaning process and agro-chemical protection, undertaken within the main processing and packaging building, before the seed is bagged and distributed to farmers for further multiplication. This process would occupy the entire ground floor area of the building and would be akin to a packhouse. The main difference in relation to the existing facilities at the applicant’s current site would be that the proposed building would operate more efficient, up-to-date processes and technologies. The seed would be tipped into intake hoppers, having been harvested from the varietal trial beds, before being passed through an initial cleaning stage, passed into holding bins and a series of fine cleaning filters. The cleaned seed would then be held in holding bins, treated with agro-chemical protection, before being bagged and distributed to farmers for further multiplication, whereupon it will be returned for further testing. The ultimate purpose will be to put new strains and varieties of seeds, including more drought and flood resistant, on the commercial market for onward sale to farmers.

8.10 As set out in the Agricultural Adviser's response, the proposed facility will be the only such site combining all aspects of crop seed work in the southeast. The local climatic conditions and topography of Chichester will enable crops to be harvested 2-3 weeks earlier than in other parts of the country due to the maritime climate. West Sussex is known as a centre for excellence in horticultural production and the facility will therefore be advantageous to the local farming community.

8.11 The proposed crop research and DEFRA seed testing station, including varietal crop beds, is sited within the rural area as defined by the Chichester Local Plan. The site is also located in part of the Runcton Horticultural Development Area (HDA), one of the two largest of the four HDAs with the district.

8.12 The starting point for the assessment of this proposal is policy 32 of the Chichester Local Plan which relates to horticultural development. Policy 32 is positively worded to encourage horticultural and associated uses within HDAs but it does not restrict other forms of agricultural development; such an approach would be unduly restrictive. Agriculture is the base land use and agricultural development is therefore in principle appropriate in the countryside. Indeed it could be considered peculiar that an agricultural building would not be appropriate in the countryside on agricultural land due to it being identified as an HDA. Furthermore it is noted that not all land within the defined HDAs is solely in existing or active horticultural use, and the land identified for the proposed building is currently used for arable crop.

8.13 Officers have sought a legal opinion regarding the proposed use. The legal opinion states that 'seed growing' is specifically listed within the definition of agriculture. The testing of seeds/laboratory work could be considered as ordinarily incidental to the growing of seeds, cleaning, sifting, sorting, packing and storage. The proposed use is therefore agricultural; 'horticulture' is a separately defined use within the definition of agriculture. On the basis of this legal opinion, officers consider the proposed use which is defined as agriculture, is acceptable in principle and therefore it is considered appropriate and reasonable that the proposed facility is sited on agricultural land; the additional layer of HDA designation does not make this agricultural development in principle unacceptable.

Character and Appearance; Landscape Impact

8.14 The site is located in the countryside where local and national planning policies require careful control of new development in order to protect the essential rural and undeveloped character and appearance of the countryside. Policy 45 of the Local Plan seeks to ensure that new development in the countryside has minimal impact on the landscape character of the rural area in terms of scale, siting, design and materials. Policy 48 of the Local Plan is a criteria based policy that requires, amongst other matters, that development has no adverse impact on the tranquil and rural character of the area; recognises landscape character and contributes to its setting and place; and respects and enhances landscape character of the surrounding area and site.

8.15 The southern half of the site will contain a large building of approximately 7,750 sq metres (GIA) within a building of height 21.5 metres, depth 50 metres and length 156 metres. The proposed building is of a substantial scale, set to the front of the horticultural land in an open agricultural landscape currently used for arable production.

8.16 When travelling east along the A259 away from Chichester, it is considered that there is a general perception that the City has been left behind with the road passing through countryside even though there are a few existing developments. This proposal would introduce a very large building, which would be prominently sited at the main entrance to the Food Park on the A259 and, given its proposed scale, mass and siting, and the flat, open nature of the landscape, it will clearly result in a discernible change to the character and appearance of the area. Long distance views of the development will also be possible from elevated locations within the South Downs National Park (The Trundle).

8.17 As can be seen from the landscape architect’s response at paragraph 6.10, there are concerns regarding the design, siting, scale and mass of the building and the large area of associated parking/hardstanding in the southern half of the site for lorries, and its wider landscape and visual impact. The building, owing to its prominent siting, will have the effect of totally changing the character of the landscape from an essentially rural character to industrial in nature. In clause 3.17 of the applicant’s Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment the report concludes that “the development would have the appearance of a large-scale agricultural barn unit”. The landscape consultant is, however, of the opinion that the scale and mass of the building, along with its design and proposed colour is not considered to bear any resemblance to an agricultural barn unit, but has the appearance of an industrial building with extensive offices attached.

8.18 Regarding the detailed design of the building and materials, green cladding with lower sections of red buff brick are proposed on the external elevations of the building, which will have the effect of accentuating its visibility and will not help to make the building recessive in the landscape. It is the view of the Council's landscape architect that green cladding is the least acceptable colour to integrate into the rural landscape.

8.19 With regard to lighting, this is proposed all around the building, which has been designed to have directional luminaries to reduce light spill. The lights attached to the buildings could be visible from a significant distance, owing to the height of the building, and even though these are mainly directional luminaries, many viewpoints will be from below the lights and the viewer will effectively be looking up into them. Floodlights for the lorry in-lines and hoppers will spill across the yard and will be visible from a wider area. During winter months, the roof lights will result in light seepage in the night sky.

8.20 The A259 runs parallel to the Food Park and the nearest residential properties are located approximately 170 metres away. There are public rights of way that pass along Green Lane (PROW2792/1) to the northwest and a second public right of way (PROW 274) to the north of the A259 that takes a route through a Garden Centre and along the edge of an open field in a north-easterly direction, until it meets with Drayton Lane. There are a number of residential properties approximately 320 metres to the southwest along Marsh Lane, in addition to those along Green Lanes to the northwest. Various short medium and long range public views of the proposed development will be available, including those summarised above, and these are shown in the submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment.

8.21 Views from the public rights of way, nearby residential properties and the A259, are the most sensitive for their proximity to the application site and will be most affected by the proposed development. The LVIA concludes that the landscape effects are deemed to be low, despite the overall height of the proposed building, owing to the presence of other large buildings across the Food Park. The Council's landscape architect disagrees with this view. Whilst other, large buildings have been permitted elsewhere in the Food Park, these are set well back from the road and do not present such a large, physical presence. With regard to longer range views, including from Byway 3407/1 from The Trundle, it is accepted that the building is likely to merge into the mass of existing horticultural developments during daylight hours, however at night it will contribute to additional light spill and is likely to be discernible as an additional negative element in the landscape.

8.22 As a result of the scale and design of the building and its siting in a prominent location at the entrance to the Food Park within an open agricultural landscape, it is considered that the development will not assimilate satisfactorily into the landscape. Mitigation is proposed as outlined in the landscape masterplan, as well as a detailed planting schedule and soft landscape specification. This includes:  a 10 metre wide woodland buffer along the A259 site boundary, incorporating a 1.5 metre high landscape bund;  10 metre wide buffer between the building and the access road;  native hedgerow planting between the lorry park and the field trial plots;  supplementary hedgerow planting along the north-west boundary with new 3 metre wide hedgerow;  retention of hedgerow planting along the south-west boundary;  wildflower grass meadow adjacent to native planting; ornamental planting around the carpark; and a balancing pond.

8.23 Mature trees are to be retained and protected along part of the northern boundary fronting the A259 and the northwest boundary closest to residential properties on Green Lanes. The proposed landscaping scheme would help to lessen the overall impact of the development, however the planting would take a significant time to establish and help mitigate the impact of the development. It is the view of officers and the Council’s landscape architect that even with the proposed planting, it will not be possible to fully mitigate the visual effect and presence of a building in this highly visible location, and of this scale, massing and colour, on the wider landscape through enhanced landscaping. The proposal therefore would not satisfactorily assimilate into the landscape and fails to respect and enhance the landscape character of the site and surrounding area.

Highways and Parking

8.24 A facility of the size and scale proposed will be expected to generate a significant level of traffic movements. The submitted information demonstrates up to 32 daily HGV movements, with a daily total of 168 movements generated by all modes of transport. By comparison, the existing facility at Portfield generates 28 daily HGV movements.

8.25 As can be seen from WSCC Highways response, the A259 Bognor Road / B2144 Drayton Lane roundabout is considered to be capable of accommodating the traffic generated by this development, with only a modest impact. No Road Safety Audit is provided, but WSCC Highways considers this acceptable, as no changes are proposed to the roundabout on the A259 junction, and a Stage Road Safety Audit was recently undertaken for another recent development at the Food Park and mitigation provided. Access is to be taken from two points from the private access road serving Chichester Food Park. Visibility splays are provided and are acceptable, provided these are taken to the nearside kerbline and vegetation kept clear of sightlines. The applicant is agreeable to the closure of the existing dropped kerb/access located 100 metres to the north of the A259/B2144 junction on the site side which could be secured by planning condition. The proposed level of car (60), HGV (32) and cycle (8) parking, is considered acceptable by WSCC Highways, based on an assessment of the existing Bartholomew's site.

8.26 In terms of sustainable modes of transport, the site is located outside the Settlement Boundary, but is located on a bus corridor (700 Coastline route) with a shared cycleway/footpath running along the A259, providing links to Bognor and Chichester, as well as a cycle way towards Oving along Drayton Lane. The site proposes to extend the segregated footpath along the private access road to the Food Park. A Travel Plan is provided, which is considered largely acceptable. The nearest bus stop is approximately 300 metres away on the A259 with frequent services (every 15 minutes). WSCC Highways recommends the provision of a financial contribution to secure a new bus shelter (for the south bound Coastliner stop), real-time passenger information for north and south-bound stops serving the 700 Coastliner service and associated maintenance for both elements is secured by S106 Agreement to support the development and encourage non-car modes of transport.

8.27 As it can be seen from Highway England's response, concerns were raised regarding the impact of the proposed development on the Strategic Road Network at the junction of the A27/A259 roundabout. Highways England requested that transport modelling was undertaken to assess the impact on the roundabout, which currently operates above capacity with peak period queues and delays in its present condition, to take account of Local Plan growth to 2029, and consider scenarios with and without the site traffic for the evening peak hour.

8.28 The results of this transport modelling undertaken by the applicant show that during the morning peak (08.00-09.00 hours) there is little to no effect on the operation of the strategic road network in all scenarios and, in particular, at the end of the Local Plan period 2031. The operation of the network during the afternoon peak (17.00-18.00 hours) however shows an additional 20 second delay per vehicle at the south-bound A27 entry into the Bognor Road roundabout. Highways England states that this arm of the roundabout already experiences severe delays. At the end of the Local Plan period, the delay per vehicle is anticipated to be 9 minutes as a result of the development (increasing from 8 mins 40 seconds).

8.29 The applicant has provided further information to address the concerns of Highways England. The applicant has submitted proposals to mitigate the length of the queue and delay on the south bound entry to the Bognor Road roundabout, by shifting the kerb line 70mm on the entry radius to the roundabout over a length of 20 metres, in order to change operational flows, based on the 2031 predicted traffic flows. This has the effect of removing the additional delay per vehicle at the end of the Local Plan period by widening the southbound entry to the roundabout, but not adding an additional lane. Highways England has re-considered the additional information put forward by the applicant and withdrawn its previous objection, and is satisfied that subject to this alteration, the proposal would not result in a worsening of traffic flows on the southbound approach to the Bognor Road roundabout. These works to the Bognor Road roundabout are recommended to be secured by a Grampian condition. Highways England would also require the applicant to provide a construction phase traffic management plan that restricts construction traffic movements during the peak AM and PM periods.

8.30 Subject to S106 Agreement and conditions, the proposal is not therefore considered to result in a severe residual impact on the operation of the Strategic Road Network at the A27/A259 Bognor Road roundabout or on the local road network, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the NPPF and policy 32 of the Adopted Chichester Local Plan.

Residential Amenity

8.31 A number of objections have been received from local residents, located closest to the application site at Green Lane, 170 metres to the north west of the application site, in respect of the scale, nature, activity and intensity of activities to be undertaken on the site.

8.32 The applicant states that the location of the main building and adjacent HGV parking at the southern half of the site, has been selected in order to minimise, so far as possible, the impact on the visual and residential amenity of nearby residential properties on Green Lanes. The varietal crop trial beds will be located closet to this boundary and within the centre of the site.

8.33 The main building containing the packaging and processing equipment, along with laboratories, ancillary offices and education / resource facility, will be located at a distance of approximately 176 metres from the western and north-west site boundaries, occupying approximately 13% site coverage, at a maximum ridge height of 21.5 metres, reducing to 17 metres on the north and west elevation. The building, although large, is not therefore considered to have an overbearing impact on the residential amenities of nearby residential occupiers resulting in loss of outlook or sense of enclosure, owing to the intervening distance.

8.34 In terms of lighting, lighting columns are proposed around the parking areas at the southern end of the site and the lorry park, as well as floodlights for the lorry in-lines and hoppers to the north. The applicant has provided an isoline drawing that identifies the lux level of illumination and extent of light spill. The lighting columns will incorporate directional luminaries that will confine light spill to the building and carpark towards the centre of the development in the southern half of the site. The lighting will be on a timer, formed of photocells and will not be operational during unoccupied hours, but there will be a perceptible impact to nearby residents, owing to the height of the building. Full details of a lighting strategy could be secured by planning condition if all other elements were acceptable.

8.35 Turning to the issue of potential noise disturbance, the principal activities to be undertaken on the site will be predominantly haulage and distribution, the processing and laboratory testing of crops, packaging and storage, with a small education and resource centre, and office. HGV operations will operate from 05.00 to 19.00 and external plant on site is to operate 24 hours per day during peak season.

8.36 The applicant has provided an Acoustic Assessment to assess background noise levels and appropriate mitigation in respect of the impact on nearby sensitive receptors, identified at Green Lane Lodge, approximately 176 metres to the northwest of the site, and Whitewyke House, approximately 170 metres to the east. The Noise Assessment, as originally submitted, provided limited information on the nature and intensity of the activities to be undertaken on the site, and concerns were raised by the environmental health officer regarding plant and traffic noise.

8.37 The Acoustic Assessment has been amended during the course of the application and as updated sets out matters in relation to: filter fans, seed processing and plant, operations within the seed processing building, and vehicle movements, including HGVs. In terms of HGV movements, the hours of movement during the AM peak will be between 05.00-19.00, during which time, road traffic on the Bognor Road is significant, with high noise levels. For clarification, no externally mounted plant is proposed; any plant and associated silencers will be housed internally. Specific mitigation measures proposed include: heavily insulated panels for the main building fabric; large in-line attenuators for the filter fans; cladding for the filter fan cases; reduced plant operation between the hours of 23.00-07.00 hours; no HGV movements during the hours of 23.00-05.00 hours; and the closure of loading bay doors on the north elevation of the building between the hours of 22.00-05.00 hours, details of which could be secured by planning condition and to which the applicant is agreeable.

8.38 Environmental Health officers have reviewed the revised noise assessment and associated mitigation measures, and are satisfied that subject to this robust scheme of mitigation, there will be a minor to negligible impact caused by the proposal on the nearest noise sensitive receptors, subject to conditions to control the hours of delivery, and night- time background noise levels from the site and access road, to reflect other recent developments in the Food Park.

8.39 The site is located near to the former RAF Merston Airfield, but the land has been in agricultural use for many years; therefore, the likelihood of contamination is low and a watching brief would be recommended to be required by condition if all other elements were acceptable. A bunded oil tank is required for the lorry refuelling depot and again this may be secured by planning condition. Environmental Health Officers advise that traffic impacts on air quality, delay times and capacity at the Food Park entrance roundabout on the A259 are likely to be minimal.

Other Matters

Flood Risk and Foul and Surface Water Drainage

8.40 The applicant has provided a foul and surface water drainage strategy with the application. In terms of foul drainage, following clarification from the Environment Agency (EA), foul water is to be disposed of via a cess pit, which is to be emptied once a month. The EA has requested clarification that the refuelling tank, to be located in the centre of the site for use by the stationed HGVs, will be double skinned. The applicant confirms this to be the case. On this basis, no objection is raised by the EA to the application.

8.41 The site is located in Flood Zone 1, which indicates a low level of flood risk from tidal or fluvial sources, overland flows or groundwater. In view of the scale and size of the development proposed with this application, the applicant has provided a Flood Risk Assessment.

8.42 In respect of surface water drainage, the proposal seeks to discharge rain water from impermeable areas of the site via attenuation to a storage reservoir proposed to be located in the northwest corner of the site with a restricted discharge limited to the existing greenfield runoff rate, to an existing drainage ditch to the southwest of the site. The total impermeable drained area of the development amounts to 1.7ha and includes extensive areas of parking, the roof area of the building and new service road on the south and southwest perimeter of the site.

8.43 West Sussex County Council as the lead Local Flood Authority and the Council's Drainage Engineer have been consulted on the application. The strategy as submitted does not provide any evidence that ground conditions are unsuitable for infiltration or soakaways, to reflect the hierarchy of surface water disposal, which encourages a SUDs approach beginning with infiltration where possible. The CDC Drainage Engineer and WSCC Lead Flood Authority has therefore requested that winter groundwater monitoring is undertaking to confirm whether this is possible, as it may be possible for some areas of the site to infiltrate to ground while other areas drain to a reduced size pond.

8.44 The applicant has subsequently undertaken winter ground water monitoring for the period 11th January - 11th April 2016. The report demonstrates that the design of the drainage strategy, based on a restricted discharge to the ditch and storage via pond, is the most appropriate approach, and that infiltration is not possible on this site, owing to the high ground water levels.

8.45 Should the proposal be considered acceptable, full details of pond construction including the liner and outlet/control structure/headwalls could be secured by condition, if infiltration is not possible through the site, with all watercourses retaining a 3 metre easement for access and maintenance.

Ecology

8.46 The Council's Ecologist has assessed the proposal in terms of its impact on protected species and their habitat in relation to bats, reptiles and birds. The submitted Ecological Surveys identifies potential for sub-optimal habitat for great crested newt and water vole on the drainage ditch on the site. The applicant has undertaken further detailed site survey work following the initial site appraisal, which found no populations of reptiles. No detailed reptile mitigation is therefore proposed with the application, but ecological enhancement is proposed to incorporate linear areas of ecological herbaceous grassland around the site periphery on the western boundary as reptile habitat. If all other elements of the scheme had been considered acceptable, details of a comprehensive landscaping and ecological scheme and management plan could be secured by condition.

8.47 In respect of bats, the existing tree belts on the northern and western tree lines are to be retained. There are 2no. Ash Trees located on the western site boundaries which are identified as having low to moderate bat roost potential. Although these trees are to be retained as part of the development proposals, with development focused on the eastern side of the site, if the trees were to be removed at a later date, further bat emergence surveys would be required. The Ecologist advises that the lighting scheme proposed with the application, which focuses luminaires around the southern half of the site, should minimise impacts on bats using trees, hedgerows and buildings. A detailed lighting strategy could be secured by planning condition with the use of directional light sources and shields had the scheme been considered acceptable.

Archaeology

8.48 Initial site investigations by the applicant conclude that there is potential for some archaeological remains. The Council's Archaeologist has advised that this should be investigated further with the aim of identifying significant archaeological deposits present and appropriate measures for their preservation. A condition could be recommended, if all other elements were acceptable.

Infrastructure Requirements

8.49 The Community Infrastructure Levy was adopted by the Council on 26th January 2016 and implemented on 1st February 2016. The proposed development is not CIL liable, as the Council's charging schedule relates to new residential and retail floorspace only. In the event of planning permission being granted, it would, however, be necessary to secure a financial contribution towards specific off-site highway works and improvements for local bus infrastructure, in the form of a bus shelter, real time passenger information and associated maintenance for both, by way of a Section106 Agreement, in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations and Affordable Housing SPD. The works to the strategic highway network, required to mitigate the impact on queuing times could be secured by a Grampian condition.

Conclusion and Planning Balance

8.50 Officers have carefully assessed the considerations within local and national planning policy, specifically, whether the proposal constitutes a sustainable form of development and, as such, if the adverse impacts of the proposed development outweigh the benefits, when taking into account the NPPF as a whole (paragraph 14). In its favour, the proposal would provide and involve significant investment in an important sector of the District's economy, through the expansion of an established local business that would retain staff and jobs, and provide up to date facilities and equipment. This in turn will improve the efficiency of farming operations and help to achieve national food security. The proposal will not generate adverse environmental effects by reason of noise, contamination, air, ground or water pollution or vehicle movements, nor will it have a material detrimental effect on residential amenity, subject to conditions.

8.51 Adverse impacts to be weighed in the balance include the use of part of a field which is considered valuable for agricultural production and lies within an HDA, and the resultant scale of the building and its consequential visual and landscape impacts which will be only partly mitigated by design and material detail and planting over the medium to longer term. It is accepted that this area is designated for horticultural uses, but the proposal is for a very large building located immediately adjacent to the highway that would change the perception of the road corridor in the vicinity of the site from a rural landscape to an industrial character. The proposal is not considered capable of being assimilating satisfactorily into the landscape, despite the proposed landscape mitigation plans. Taking all matters above into consideration, it is concluded that the proposed development on balance does not comply with the purposes and policies of the adopted Local Plan and the NPPF. The application is therefore to be recommended for refusal, contrary to policy 45 and policy 48 of the Chichester District Local Plan.

Human Rights

8.52 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to refuse is justified and proportionate.

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE

1 U03149 - Landscape impact 2 U03415 - Lack of infrastructure

INFORMATIVES

1 U03150 - INF: PLANS 2 W46F App Ref Following Discussion

For further information on this application please contact Katherine Rawlins on (01243) 534542.