Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 18TH FEBRUARY 2014 at 2.00Pm COUNCIL CHAMBER, PARK NORTH, NORTH STREET, HORSHAM

E-mail: CommitteeServices@horsham.gov.uk

Direct line: 01403 215465

Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 18TH FEBRUARY 2014 AT 2.00pm COUNCIL CHAMBER, PARK NORTH, NORTH STREET, HORSHAM

Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman) Sheila Matthews Vice-Chairman) Roger Arthur Liz Kitchen Adam Breacher Gordon Lindsay Jonathan Chowen Brian O’Connell Philip Circus Roger Paterson Roger Clarke Sue Rogers George Cockman Kate Rowbottom David Coldwell Jim Sanson Ray Dawe Diana van der Klugt Brian Donnelly Claire Vickers Jim Goddard

Tom Crowley Chief Executive

AGENDA

1. Apologies for absence

2. To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 21st January 2014 (attached)

3. To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee – any clarification on whether a Member has an interest should be sought before attending the meeting

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

5. To consider the following reports and to take such action thereon as may be necessary

Head of Planning & Environmental Services Appeals Applications for determination by Committee - Appendix A

Horsham District Council, Park North, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Tel: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive - Tom Crowley

Item Ward Reference Site No. Number

A1 Cowfold,Shermanbury DC/13/2213 Oaklands, Honeybridge Lane, & West Grinstead Dial Post

A2 Billingshurst & Shipley DC/13/1492 Pear Tree Farm, West Chiltington Lane, Billingshurst

A3 Bramber, Upper SDNP/13/05646 Horton Hill, Henfield Road, Small Dole Beeding & /FUL Woodmancote

A4 Chanctonbury DC/13/2301 Rambledown Court, Rambledown Lane, West Chiltington

A5 Cowfold,Shermanbury DC/13/2113 Sake Ride Farm, Wineham Lane, & West Grinstead Wineham, Henfield

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

DCS140121

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 21st January 2014

Present: Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman), Roger Arthur, Adam Breacher, Philip Circus, Roger Clarke, George Cockman, Brian Donnelly, Liz Kitchen, Gordon Lindsay, Brian O’Connell, Roger Paterson, Sue Rogers, Kate Rowbottom, Jim Sanson, Diana van der Klugt, Claire Vickers

Apologies: Councillors: Sheila Matthews (Vice-Chairman), Jonathan Chowen, David Coldwell, Ray Dawe, Jim Goddard

DCS/87 MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 17th December 2013 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

DCS/88 INTERESTS OF MEMBERS

There were no declarations of interest.

DCS/89 ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were no announcements.

DCS/90 APPEALS

Appeals Lodged Written Representations/Household Appeals Service

Ref No Site Appellant(s)

DC/13/1303 1 Picketty Cottages, Coolham Road, Mr Francis Ashbee West Chiltington DC/13/1681 Tunsgate, Jarvis Lane, Steyning Mr Michael Bissett-Powell DC/13/0475 Luckista Caravan Site, Frankham Real Billingshurst Road, Ashington Estates Ltd SDNP/13/ Watersfield Chapel, London Road, Mrs C E Judd 01577/FUL Watersfield, Pulborough DC/13/1342 Springwood (land south of), Mrs H Amand Sandgate Lane, Storrington DC/13/1357 Little Bracken, 63A Roman Road, Mr Alan Margodt Steyning DC/13/0780 116 High Street (land rear of), Mr Nigel Alexander Billingshurst

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/90 Appeals (Cont.)

Informal Hearings

Ref No Site Appellant(s)

DC/13/0926 The Caravan, Littleworth Lane, Mr Billy Bath Partridge Green

Appeal Decisions

Ref No Site Appellant(s) Decision

DC/12/1878 116 High Street, Billingshurst Mr Nigel Dismissed Alexander DC/13/0897 Smallham Farm Barns, Dr David Dismissed Kennel Lane, West Grinstead Hartnett DC/12/1997 4A West Street, Storrington Mr Ray Kwok Dismissed DC/13/1303 1 Picketty Cottages, Coolham Mr Francis Dismissed Road, West Chiltington Ashbee DC/13/1093 Copper Beeches, The Street, Mr & Mrs Allowed Thakeham Keenan DC/13/0808 Lannards Annexe, Mr & Mrs C and Allowed Okehurst Lane, Billingshurst J Buck

DCS/91 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/13/1265 – DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 75 DWELLINGS INCLUDING THE CREATION OF AN ACCESS POINT FROM WATER LANE. PROVISION OF OPEN SPACE INCLUDING CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA, LINEAR PARK, LANDSCAPING AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN DRAINAGE SYSTEMS ON THE SITE (OUTLINE) SITE: LAND NORTH OF BROOK CLOSE AND ROTHER CLOSE, STORRINGTON APPLICANT: MR NEIL KELLY

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought outline planning permission for the erection of approximately 75 residential dwellings with informal open space, play area and parking. Matters for consideration under this outline application were the principle of the development and access, with all other matters reserved for future determination.

The application had been considered by the Committee in October, when Members had been minded to refuse the application (Minute No. DCS/63 (15.10.13) refers). The Committee had reconsidered the application in December, in the light of legal advice with regard to the suggested reasons for refusal, and had resolved to defer the application to allow for clarification to be sought regarding West Sussex County Council’s consultation response to highway safety and capacity (Minute No. DCS/81 (17.12.13) refers).

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/91 Planning Application: DC/13/1265 (Cont.)

The application site was located outside the built-up area to the north-east of Storrington on the northern side of Water Lane and covered an irregularly shaped area of 4.47 hectares comprising rough grassland bounded by field hedging and trees. A stream flowed along the southern boundary.

Members were referred to the previous reports which contained details of the location, relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal.

Since preparation of the report, five further letters of objection had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application, and a representative from Thakeham Parish Council spoke in objection to the application. The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the proposal.

Members discussed the proposal in the context of national and local policy, in particular Facilitating Appropriate Development (FAD) 13 and Core Strategy policy CP1, and considered whether the proposal would be contrary to these policies. It was noted that it would not be appropriate to defer a decision until the Melton Drive appeal had been determined because each application should be determined on its own merits.

Members questioned the sustainability of the site, which was in a countryside location, and considered that the proposed air quality mitigation measures, including operational phase mitigation measures, would not have a material affect on the number of traffic movements generated by the proposal.

Members discussed their concerns regarding the proposal at length, in particular: the impact of the scheme on the AQMA (Air Quality Management Area); additional pressure on local services and infrastructure; strong local opposition to the proposal; drainage and flooding issues, in the light of recent flooding events in the locality; and whether the application was premature, in the context of the emerging housing strategy within the Horsham District Planning Framework.

In conclusion, after careful consideration, Members remained concerned that the development would be contrary to Policy CP1 and the potential benefits of the scheme would not outweigh the potential harm and was therefore unacceptable.

RESOLVED

That application DC/13/1265 be refused for the following reason:

01 The proposal is contrary to Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CP1.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/92 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/13/1818 – REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING GARAGE BUILDING AND CHANGE OF USE FROM CAR REPAIRS TO A MIXED USE OF CAR SALES, CAR REPAIRS, CLASS 7 MOT TESTING PLUS EQUIPMENT HIRE & REPAIRS SITE: BRIDGE GARAGE, HENFIELD ROAD, COWFOLD APPLICANT: BRIDGE GARAGE SUSSEX LTD

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission for the replacement of the existing car repair garage with a larger building. The site would be used for car sales, repairs, car and Class 7 MOT, and the existing crane hire businesses would continue to operate. The building would be 9.6 metres by 31.8 metres, with a height of 8.4 metres. Original plans had been amended to retain the existing front brick façade. The rest of the building would be constructed of green metal sheeting with five roller shutters on the southern elevation. The southern slope of the pitched roof would include photovoltaic panels.

The application site was located on the eastern side of Henfield Road at the southern end of Cowfold, within its defined built up area boundary. There was a row of residential dwellings directly to the north and further dwellings on the western side of Henfield Road. A narrow brook lay to the south with open fields to the east.

Parts of the existing building were in a poor condition. The forecourt and front section of the existing building was used for car sales, and the rear contained a workshop for car repairs with a larger area at the rear of the building used for further car repairs and the crane hire businesses.

A large yard to the south of the main building, separated from the sales forecourt with a 2.4 metre fence, contained three porta cabins and four storage containers, as well as miscellaneous equipment and vehicles.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3 and CP11; Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC2, DC9, DC20 and DC40; and the Horsham District Planning Framework Preferred Strategy were relevant to the determination of this application.

Relevant planning history included:

DC/04/0466 Residential development of up to 9 Withdrawn dwellings (15000 sq Metres) and access, following the demolition of existing buildings (Outline) DC/04/2635 Residential development of approximately Refused 9 dwellings (1500 Sq Metres) and access, following the demolition of existing buildings (Outline)

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/92 Planning Application: DC/13/1818 (Cont.)

DC/07/1969 Demolition of existing garage premises Refused and erection of 2 x 4-bed houses and 1 pair of 3-bed semi-detached houses, access and parking DC/08/0504 Demolition of existing garage premises Refused and erection of 3 x 4-bed dwellings, access, parking and landscaping DC/09/0152 Erection of 2.4 metre high boundary Granted fencing DC/13/1837 Relocation of existing signage Pending Consideration

The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council did not consider the site suitable for an industrial building or industrial use and suggested a number of conditions regarding activity on the site should the application be granted. 49 letters of objection, 78 of support and one of comment had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application. Two members of the public and the applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the principle of the development and its design and impact on the amenity of the surrounding area. It was noted that use of the site was currently unrestricted and the proposal would enable the site to be regularised.

Members noted the opinions of local residents and discussed concerns regarding intensification of the site. The impact of the proposal on the neighbouring properties was discussed, in particular the generation of noise. The proposed replacement building would be located one metre from the adjoining boundary (1.5 metres closer than the existing building) and would also be 1.4 metres higher than the existing building. Members considered that, on balance, the impact of the proposal on the neighbouring property would not be greater than that of the existing building, given the gradient of the site and design of the proposal.

Members noted the current poor condition of the building and considered that the proposed new building, which included sound insulation, would not lead to increased noise from the site. It was noted that traffic movements and vehicular activity on the site would be restricted to certain times by condition.

Members also considered that the proposal would bring economic benefit to the area by enhancing a longstanding local business.

Members therefore considered that the proposal was acceptable.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/92 Planning Application: DC/13/1818 (Cont.)

RESOLVED

That application DC/13/1818 be granted, subject to the following conditions:

01 A2 Full Permission

02 M6 Prescribed Materials

03 Before any other operations are commenced or the development is occupied the proposed vehicular modified access to Henfield Road shall be designed/constructed and provided with visibility zones, in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, all to be permanently maintained to a specification to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and the visibility zones shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction.

04 Within three months of the date of this permission or such extended time as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan showing the layout of the proposed development defining the areas used solely for the car sales forecourt and the area used solely for car repairs, Class 7 MOT and crane hire business and the provision of their associated car parking spaces shall be submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority. The areas of land so provided shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than stated.

05 Within three months of the date of this permission or such extended time agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority details for the loading and unloading of vehicles and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The parking/turning areas shall be used and retained exclusively for their designated purpose.

06 The car repairs, Class 7 MOT and the crane hire business hereby approved shall be undertaken as a single unit of operation at all times.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/92 Planning Application: DC/13/1818 (Cont.)

07 No development shall start until a Construction Management Plan, to include details of:

Element 1: Public Safety, Amenity and Site Security Element 2: Operating Hours, Noise and Vibration Controls Element 3: Air and Dust Management Element 4: Storm water and Sediment Control, including the prevention of mud on the highway. Element 5: Waste and Materials Re-use Element 6: Traffic Management, including parking of construction vehicles

have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction period.

08 O3 Site Clearance

09 S4 Surface water details…..option B

10 Prior to the commencement of development in respect of the garage building hereby approved an acoustical report prepared by a suitably qualified person should be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a scheme of attenuation measures to mitigate any potentially adverse impacts identified in the acoustic assessment. The report should include and take account of BS8223:1999 (sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings Code of practice) and BS4142:1997 (noise assessment of industrial plant) and include 1/3 octave frequency analysis with appropriate corrections for acoustic features where necessary. The scheme as approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be fully installed before the use of the garage building hereby permitted commences and shall be maintained thereafter.

11 No work shall be operated and no process carried out and no deliveries taken or dispatched from the car sales office and forecourt outside the following times:-

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/92 Planning Application: DC/13/1818 (Cont.)

0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Saturdays inclusive, 1000 hours and 1600 hours on Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays.

12 No vehicles, plant or machinery shall be operated and no process carried out and no deliveries taken or dispatched from the site, excluding the car sales office and forecourt outside the following times:-

0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays, and not on Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays.

13 D10 Floodlighting

REASON

The size of the building is considered acceptable in terms of its design and appearance within the street scene.

The proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon highway safety.

Whilst the existing building inflicts an element of harm upon the occupants of the neighbouring dwelling to the north, it is considered that the larger building would not increase that harm.

DCS/93 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1028 – CHANGE OF USE OF BUILDING FROM FUEL STORE BUILDING TO TRAY AND CRATE STORAGE AND FILLING INVOLVING EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO THE BUILDING SITE: SUSSEX MUSHROOMS, STORRINGTON ROAD, THAKEHAM APPLICANT: SUSSEX MUSHROOMS LTD

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought planning permission to change the use of a building from a fuel store granted under DC/10/0860 to tray and crate storage and filling for mushroom production. The application had originally included the washing of trays, but had been amended so that the emptying and washing of trays would take place elsewhere on the site.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/93 Planning Application: DC/12/1028 (Cont.)

The trays would be sterilised using steam in a new ‘cookout room’ and then moved into the main area of the building to be filled and then moved by forklift into the growing houses. To improve sound attenuation, the western elevation would include concrete infill panels and the pedestrian access door would be removed, and double skinned insulated cladding would be added to the roof and upper wall sections of the building and new cookout room.

The application site was located on the western side of Storrington Road with the building towards the south west corner of the site. The eastern and western ends of the building currently had exposed openings. There was a metal clad building to the north of the application building, with the main brick built mushroom buildings to the east. There was an established vegetated boundary to the south with two large trees, and an open area of green space with vegetation along the western boundary. Old House Farm was approximately 100 metres to the west of the application site. There were also houses approximately 130 metres to the south of the site.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3 and CP15; Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC9, DC24, DC25 and DC40; and the Horsham District Planning Framework Preferred Strategy were relevant to the determination of this application.

Relevant planning history included:

DC/04/0348 Change of use to coach storage and Refused maintenance DC/10/0860 Fuel storage building Granted DC/10/1316 Erection of new bunkers (1,697 sq metres) Pending with aerated floors which will reduce Decision odours, a replacement Gypsum and material store (2,800 sq metres), pasteurising tunnels (1,840.5 sq metres) and growing rooms (16,698.5 square metres) required for the cultivation of mushrooms, open space and landscaped areas (Including footpaths) DC/11/1236 Prior notification relating to the installation Refused of solar panels onto the roofs of buildings on the Chesswood site (prior approval)

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/93 Planning Application: DC/12/1028 (Cont.)

DC/12/0841 Demolition of existing growing rooms and Granted surrounding ancillary buildings, removal of compost production on site. Erection of new growing rooms (farms) required for the cultivation of mushrooms, a replacement office building, staff cafeteria, pack house building, ancillary plant structures and provision of open space and landscaped areas (including re- directed footpaths). Refurbishment and extension of existing production and package buildings including alterations to entrance of the site. DC/13/2176 Part demolition of former mushroom Withdrawn production buildings and the change of use of retained buildings and the remaining hard surfaced areas to general storage within Class B8

The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council raised no objection to the application, subject to certain conditions. Ten letters of objection had been received, and Thakeham Village Action had commented on the proposal. One member of the public spoke in objection to the application.

It was considered that the principal issues in the determination of the application were the principle of the development, which would support an existing business, and the effect of the development on the amenities of nearby residents, in particular with regard to noise.

Members discussed the need to ensure that effective mitigation measures to reduce the impact on nearby residents were controlled by condition. The concerns of nearby residents concerning noise, including that generated by forklift trucks, were discussed. Members noted that resurfacing of the internal roads within the application site was being carried out to reduce the sound generated by forklift trucks. It was noted that conditions attached to this application, including restrictions on times of operation, only applied to the application site within the mushroom farm.

Members noted the proposed amendments to the building designed to mitigate potential noise and considered that these measures would reduce the impact of the business operation connected to the application site. Members therefore agreed that the proposal was acceptable.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/93 Planning Application: DC/12/1028 (Cont.)

RESOLVED

That application DC/12/1028 be granted subject to the following conditions:

01 A2 Full Permission

02 J1 Use Limitation “Tray and Crate Storage and Filling”

03 M6 Prescribed Materials

04 No work for the implementation of the development hereby permitted shall be undertaken on the site except between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 on Mondays to Fridays inclusive and 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

05 No work shall be undertaken on the site except between the hours of:-

0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays, and no work shall be undertaken on Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays.

06 Before the use commences on site, the alterations to the external elevation of the building and the proposed internal noise insulation as shown on drawing no. 02.01C and the mitigation measures in the Plant Noise Assessment received on 4th December 2013 shall be implemented. The scheme shall thereafter be retained at all times. Reason – In the interests of amenity and to ensure the use of the building does not have a harmful environmental effect and in accordance with Policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/93 Planning Application: DC/12/1028 (Cont.)

07 The building shall not be brought into the use hereby permitted until the resurfacing works shown on drawing no. 01.04 received on 10th January 2014 have been implemented on site. Reason - In the interests of amenity and to ensure the use of the building does not have a harmful environmental effect and in accordance with Policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007.

REASON

The proposal accords with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.

DCS/94 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/13/2060 – INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC FARM AND ASSOCIATED WORKS INCLUDING INVERTER HOUSING, FENCING, CAMERAS AND LANDSCAPING SITE: NEW BARN FARM, SWALLOWS LANE, DIAL POST, HORSHAM APPLICANT: SIR CHARLES BURRELL (KNEPP CASTLE ESTATE)

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought permission for the installation of a series of solar photovoltaic panels across an area of 2.58 hectares. Their height would be 2.7 metres and there would be a minimum separation distance of 10 metres from the north-east and southern boundaries. The associated plant would be enclosed in cabinets, painted Holly Green, no greater than 2.5 metres in height, and they would be close to the access on the western corner of the site. A three metre high CCTV mast painted Holly Green would be close to the north-eastern boundary of the site.

New and infill hedgerow planting, within a deer fence, would be introduced on the north-east and north-west boundaries, with the surrounding area put to grassland and wildflower areas, with some additional hedgerow and tree planting.

The site was located within the Sussex Low Weald to the west of Dial Post, and was part of Knepp Castle Estate. The surrounding area was characterised by gently undulating fields, with a collection of rural buildings known as New Barn Farm to the west.

The application site was a triangular area of approximately 2.58 hectares, which would be formed out of part of a field currently used for equestrian purposes in association with New Barn Farm. There were dense hedgerows along the north-east, north-west and south-eastern boundaries.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/94 Planning Application: DC/13/2060 (Cont.)

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3 and CP15; Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC5, DC8, DC9, DC13 and DC40; and DCLG Guidance Note ‘Planning practice guidance for renewable and low carbon energy’ were relevant to the determination of this application.

There was no relevant planning history for this site.

The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council raised no objection to the application. No letters of representation had been submitted. A representative of the applicant and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.

Members considered the principle of the development in the context of national planning policy which supported the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy.

Members discussed whether the solar panels would have an impact on the ecology of the site and noted the extent of wild seed planting and other mitigation measures that had been proposed in the Landscape Management Plan. It was considered that the site would be well screened from the surrounding area and there would be no detrimental impact or urbanisation of the rural landscape.

Members considered that the proposal would introduce the generation of large-scale renewable energy, while protecting the rural landscape and enhancing biodiversity and agreed that the proposal was acceptable.

RESOLVED

That application DC/13/2060 be granted subject to the following conditions:

01 Standard Time Limit: (A2 - full permission 3 years)

02 Approved Plans: (Option A)

03 Construction Parking (H4A - on-site parking)

04 Construction Materials Storage: (H4B)

05 Landscape Management Plan: (L4 - tailored to specific landscape/ecology plan)

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/94 Planning Application: DC/13/2060 (Cont.)

06 Approved Landscape Plans: ( LA001 rev O; LA002 rev O; LA003 rev O)

07 Retention of hedgerows: (those bounding the site at a height of no less than 3m from ground level & the replanting of hedgerows in accordance with condition 4).

08 Colour of Cabinets and CCTV Mast: (RAL: BS4800 Shade 14 C 39 Holly Green)

09 Cessation of Use: (The use of the site hereby approved shall cease and all plant, equipment and associated hard-standing shall be removed from the site on the expiration of 25 years from the date of this permission).

REASON

01 The application is compliant with policies CP1, CP2, CP3 and CP15 of the Core Strategy (2007), policies DC1, DC2, DC5, DC9, DC13 and DC40 of the General Development Control Policies (2007).

02 The application fully endorses those policies within the framework that seek to promote the generation of renewable energy and protect the natural environment; namely sections 7 and 10 of the Framework.

DCS/95 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/13/2285: S106 2050 – VARIATION TO TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTION RELATING TO DC/12/1990 (ERECTION OF 2 NO. SINGLE-STOREY INDUSTRIAL UNITS FOR B1(BUSINESS), B2 (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) AND B8 (STORAGE OR DISTRIBUTION) USE PLUS ASSOCIATED PARKING) SITE: HENFIELD BUSINESS PARK, SHOREHAM ROAD, HENFIELD APPLICANT: HHC DEVELOPMENT

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought a variation of the legal agreement that had been agreed in association with planning permission DC/12/1990, which had been granted in October 2013. West Sussex County Council Highways Authority had requested transport contributions (TAD (Total Access Demand contributions)) of £12,643 towards transport projects within the parish, due to be paid on commencement of the development. Construction of the development was to commence shortly.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/95 Planning Application: DC/13/2285 (Cont.)

The applicant questioned the validity of the legal agreement and whether the contributions had been robustly justified and therefore sought to reduce them to £1.

The application site was located to the south of Henfield outside the built up area boundary to the east of the A2037. It was an established business park and the units connected to this application were located to the east of the industrial units permitted under DC/10/2400. A footpath ran along the north eastern corner of the site and there was an area of Ancient Woodland to the south. Access to Horton Golf Club was through the business park site.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP10, CP11, CP13 and CP15; Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC9, DC25 and DC40; and Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document were relevant to the determination of this application.

Relevant planning history included:

HF/15/90 Use of land for industrial estate, including Granted relocation of R Vinall (Henfield) ltd builders yard & Milcot industrial estate HF/32/98 Erection of b1 & b8 units and associated Granted parking and turning DC/10/2400 Expansion of Henfield Business Park Granted including the erection of an industrial building containing 5 units, a new access and parking and cycle provision DC/12/1990 Erection of 2 No. single-storey industrial Granted units for B1(Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage or Distribution) use plus associated parking DC/13/2287 Application for Variation to Transport Pending Contribution amount relating to Consideration DC/10/2400 (Expansion of Henfield Business Park including the erection of an industrial building containing 5 units, a new access and parking and cycle provision)

The response from West Sussex County Highways Authority was considered by the Committee. The Highways Authority had objected to the proposal and considered that the transport contributions of £12,643 were reasonable and would be used towards transport projects in the area that would encourage less car dependency and the use of sustainable transport modes.

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/95 Planning Application: DC/13/2285 (Cont.)

It was noted that the Highway Authority would be prepared to defend their position at appeal, and Members discussed whether the transport contributions within the legal agreement would directly relate to the development and fit the criteria set out within the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations. It was considered that the works proposed by the Highways Authority did not relate to the application site, and the information supplied by the Highway Authority did not confirm that infrastructure works were necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

Members therefore agreed that the proposal was acceptable.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/13/2285 be granted whereby legal agreement S106/2050 relating to planning application DC/12/1990 be modified to reduce the Total Access Demand contributions to be paid to West Sussex County Council to £1.

REASON

The three criteria whereby a planning obligation may constitute a reason for granting planning permission, as set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy 2010 (CIL), are not met.

Paragraph 205 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that, in cases where obligations are being sought or revised, planning authorities ‘should take account of changes in market conditions over time and, wherever appropriate, should be sufficiently flexible to prevent planned development being stalled’.

DCS/96 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/13/2287: S106 1869 – VARIATION TO TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTION RELATING TO DC/10/2400 ((EXPANSION OF HENFIELD BUSINESS PARK INCLUDING THE ERECTION OF AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING CONTAINING 5 UNITS, A NEW ACCESS AND PARKING AND CYCLE PROVISION) SITE: HENFIELD BUSINESS PARK, SHOREHAM ROAD, HENFIELD APPLICANT: HHC DEVELOPMENT

The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought a variation of the legal agreement that had been agreed in association with planning permission DC/12/2400, which had been granted in May 2011. West Sussex County Council Highways Authority had requested transport contributions (TAD (Total Access Demand contributions)) of £26,241 towards transport projects within the parish, due

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/96 Planning Application: DC/13/2287 (Cont.)

to be paid on commencement of the development. The development had been substantially completed but no TAD contributions had been paid.

The applicant questioned the validity of the legal agreement and whether the contributions had been robustly justified and therefore sought to reduce them to £1.

The application site was located to the south of Henfield outside the built up area boundary to the east of the A2037. It was an established business park and the units connected to this application were located to the east of the original industrial units. A footpath ran along the north eastern corner of the site and there was an area of Ancient Woodland to the south. Access to Horton Golf Club was through the business park site.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP10, CP13 and CP15; Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC9, DC25 and DC40; and Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document were relevant to the determination of this application.

Relevant planning history included:

HF/15/90 Use of land for industrial estate, including Granted relocation of R Vinall (Henfield) ltd builders yard & Milcot industrial estate HF/32/98 Erection of b1 & b8 units and associated Granted parking and turning DC/10/2400 Expansion of Henfield Business Park Granted including the erection of an industrial building containing 5 units, a new access and parking and cycle provision DC/12/1990 Erection of 2 No. single-storey industrial Granted units for B1(Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage or Distribution) use plus associated parking DC/13/2285 Application for Variation to Transport Pending Contribution relating to DC/12/1990 Consideration (Erection of 2 No. single-storey industrial units for B1(Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage or Distribution) use plus associated parking)

The response from West Sussex County Highway Authority was considered by the Committee. The Highways Authority had objected to the proposal and considered that the transport contributions of £26,241 were reasonable

Development Control (South) Committee 21st January 2014

DCS/96 Planning Application: DC/13/2287 (Cont.)

and would be used towards transport projects in the area that would encourage less car dependency and the use of sustainable transport modes.

Members therefore agreed that the proposal was acceptable.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/13/2287 be granted whereby legal agreement S106/1869 relating to planning application DC/10/2400 be modified to reduce the Total Access Demand contributions to be paid to West Sussex County Council to £1.

REASON

The three criteria whereby a planning obligation may constitute a reason for granting planning permission, as set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy 2010 (CIL), are not met.

The meeting closed at 4.38pm having commenced at 2.00pm.

CHAIRMAN

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 18TH FEBRUARY 2014 REPORT BY THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

APPEALS

1. Appeals Lodged

I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been lodged:-

2. Written Representations/Householder Appeals Service

DC/13/1813 Proposed side extension and front porch. Granary Barn, Wyckham Lane, Steyning, West Sussex, BN44 3YW. For: Mr and Mrs Barry Robinson

DC/13/1537 Detached annexe. Ferndene, Bracken Close, Storrington, Pulborough, RH20 3HT. For: Mr R McCann

EN/13/0259 Unauthorised bunds (appeal dismissed against DC/12/0908). Walden Hall, Cowfold Road, West Grinstead, Horsham, RH13 8LY. For: Mr David Bostock

DC/13/1759 Consent to display metal sign on metal pole with name of business and directional arrow. Well Adjusted Health, The Sports Pavilion, Church Lane, Ashington, Pulborough, West Sussex, RH20 3JY. For: Mr Mark Jones

DC/13/1677 Two storey extensions to east and south, including the integration of the existing garage and removal of existing extension to south. 2 Lock Farm Cottages, Lock, Partridge Green, Horsham, RH13 8EG. For: Mr and Mrs Nick Murphy

DC/13/0964 Retention of replacement non-illuminated fascia sign (Listed Building Consent). 60 - 62 High Street, Steyning, West Sussex, BN44 3RD. For: Ms Jess Denny

3. Informal Hearings

DC/13/0827 Retrospective application for change of use from agricultural to equestrian stud farm including retention of mobile field shelters and mess room/mobile home, and the proposed erection of hay barn in lieu of existing mobile containers and external storage. Southway Stud, Harbolets Road, West Chiltington, Pulborough, RH20 2LG. For: Ms Melanie Edwards Continued/… Appeals (Continued)

DC/13/1596 Proposed permanent agricultural workers (3-bed) dwelling to replace the temporary agricultural workers dwelling. Whitebridge Farm, Wineham Lane, Wineham. For: Mrs Susie Russell-Smith

4. Appeal Decisions

I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been determined:-

DC/11/1630 Outline application proposing the erection of 2 two-storey dwellings together with associated access and parking (Land North of Downsview Nurseries) Land West of Downsview, New Hall Lane, Small Dole. For: Mr K Vangelov Appeal: DISMISSED (Delegated)

DC/13/1357 Amendment to previously approved DC/13/0001 (Extension to the front of the property, raising of roof to form additional 1st floor living accommodation and new roof, to improve space and appearance) to include the removal of 1x roof light on south elevation and the addition of 1 x roof light on north elevation. Little Bracken, 63A Roman Road, Steyning, West Sussex, BN44 3FN. For: Mr Alan Margodt Appeal: DISMISSED (Delegated)

DC/13/1604 Retrospective application for the installation of solar panels. 6 Hillview, High Street, Billingshurst, West Sussex, RH14 9ER. For: Mrs Katherine Charlwood Appeal: ALLOWED (Delegated)

APPENDIX A/ 1 - 1

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT

TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services

DATE: 18th February 2014

Replacement of the existing mobile homes with four detached bungalows DEVELOPMENT: and access (Outline)

SITE: Oaklands, Honeybridge Lane, Dial Post WARD: Cowfold,Shermanbury and West Grinstead APPLICATION: DC/13/2213 APPLICANT: Mr G Johnson

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Number of letters received contrary to recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION: That the application is refused.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.2 This application seeks outline planning permission for the removal of the three mobile homes on the site and the provision of four detached bungalows with associated access. This outline application seeks only to establish the principle of residential development in this location and the proposed access to the site. The details of appearance, layout, scale and landscaping are all reserved for consideration at a later date should outline permission be granted.

1.3 The existing access would be retained and reused to provide access to the proposed four dwellings.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.4 The application site is situated in a rural location to the west of Grinders Lane. To the north and west of the site is the garden centre known as Old Barn Nurseries. On the western boundary of the site is a panel fence with a conifer hedge and wire link fence along the northern boundary. Within the site are three static mobile homes on associated hardstanding with a central shared access drive. There are also touring caravans on the site.

Contact Officer: Nicola Mason Tel: 01403 215289 APPENDIX A/ 1 - 2

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF)

NPPF6 - Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes NPPF7 - Requiring good design NPPF8 - Promoting healthy communities

2.3 Planning Policy for Traveller Sites

RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY

2.4 Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP2 (Environmental Quality) CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development), CP5 (Built up Areas and Previously Developed Land) and CP16 (Inclusive Communities).

2.5 General Development Control Policies DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC3 (Settlement Coalescence), DC9 (Development Principles), DC28 (House Extensions, Replacement Dwellings and Ancillary Accommodation) and DC32 (Gypsies and Travellers) are also considered relevant to this application.

2.6 The Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) Preferred Strategy was approved by Council for consultation on 25th July 2013. The consultation period ran from 16th August to 11th October 2013. The planning application was considered after the consultation period and the Preferred Strategy is therefore a material consideration in the assessment of this planning application.

PLANNING HISTORY

2.7 In October 2013 an outline application for the replacement of the existing mobile homes with four detached bungalows and access was refused (DC/13/1673).

2.8 In August 2000 an application for a replacement mobile home and shed was approved (WG/24/00).

2.9 In February 1995 an application for the stationing of three caravans on the site was approved (WG/50/92).

2.10 In September 1991 outline planning permission was refused and dismissed at appeal for the construction of a bungalow and access (WG/49/91).

2.11 In November 1982 permission was granted for the renewal of temporary permission WG/41/79 (WG/25/82).

2.12 In July 1981 an appeal was allowed for the stationing of a caravan on the site (WG/8/80). APPENDIX A/ 1 - 3

2.13 In October 1979 planning permission was granted for the temporary stationing of a caravan (WG/41/79).

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

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.1 Strategic Planning (summarised) – The proposal would result in the loss of a Gypsy and Traveller site for which there is an identified need in the District. It is also considered that the location of the application site and sustainability of what would be essentially four market dwellings in an isolated rural location is not considered acceptable. It is therefore considered that the proposal is not in accordance with Policy DC1 and DC32 of the General Development Control Policies (2007), Policy CP1 and CP5 of the Core Strategy (2007), emerging draft policy 20, 21 and 22 of the Horsham District Planning Framework, the National Planning Policy Framework and national planning policy for traveller sites.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.2 WSCC Highways Strategic Planning (summarised) - The highway implications of this proposal have been considered in detail as part of the submitted scheme. It is not considered that there has been any significant material change in circumstances that would justify a change in recommendation from that previously offered. On that basis, no highway objection would be raised.

3.3 Environment Agency – Having screened the planning application with regard to the development type and location of the proposal, it can be confirmed that the Environment Agency have no comments to make.

3.4 Southern Water (summarised) - Southern Water has advised that the applicant should consult the Environment Agency regarding the use of a sewerage treatment plant. The Councils Building Control Officers or Environment Agency should be asked to comment on the adequacy of soakaways to dispose of surface water from the proposed development.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.5 West Grinsted Parish Council – has strongly supported the application noting that the proposal would not detract from the rural character of the area and the applicant has lived at this location for many years.

3.6 14 Letters have been received in support of the application noting that the applicants have lived on the site for a long period of time, and the proposal would not harm the character of the area.

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.

APPENDIX A/ 1 - 4

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 key issues for consideration in relation to this proposal are:

 The principle of the development  Impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area  Highway impacts

Principle of the development

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

6.3 The main aim of the National Planning Policy Framework is to achieve sustainable development. The document sets out three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. It seeks to create a high quality built environment with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well being and contributes to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment. The document makes a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through the planning process.

6.4 Emerging local policy can be considered a material consideration in determining the application. The Council has recently consulted on the Horsham District Planning Framework Preferred Strategy (16th August – 11th October 2013). The comments received are currently being analysed and adoption is anticipated in 2014. The relevant Gypsy and Traveller policies in the document propose to safeguard existing authorised Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople sites from development that would preclude the continued occupation by these groups, unless the site is no longer required to meet identified need. The policies also set out a number of sites that are proposed for use as permanent traveller sites to meet the existing need within the District. The site at Oaklands is referred to in the document and is identified as a potentially suitable site for traveller site development to provide 3 permanent, non-personal planning permissions. This is proposed in order to help fulfil the current backlog of unmet need and future accommodation needs identified through the Council’s Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTAA). The new national guidance Planning policy for traveller sites gave local authorities a year (ending in March 2013) to show a five year supply of traveller sites and encourages a plan led approach.

6.5 In accordance with Government Guidance the Council undertook a GTAA during the summer of 2012. This assessment established a requirement for the provision of 39 pitches over the next five years (until 2017). As part of this requirement there is an existing need for 29 pitches to address the current accommodation need arising from sites which may be unauthorised, have temporary or personal permissions or through overcrowding on APPENDIX A/ 1 - 5

existing sites. Oaklands was identified as a site which is in accommodation need due to its personal planning permission and the overcrowding generated by an individual aged 18+ residing with relatives on the site. 6.6 The original planning permission on this site for the siting of the 3 existing mobile homes (WG/50/92) was subject to a personal condition limiting its occupation to the applicant and her family. It is clear from the planning history relating to the site that planning permission was justified as an exception because of the applicants Gypsy status. Planning permission was first granted on the site in 1979 for the temporary stationing of one caravan which was justified due to the Gypsy status of the family and the agricultural use of the land. The permission was personal to Mrs G Johnson. A further caravan was brought onto the site without planning permission in 1980 to provide accommodation for Mrs Johnson’s daughter and younger son. Planning permission was granted on appeal for the retention of the second caravan on a temporary and personal basis. The Inspector in his appeal decision considered the development in the light of government policy which encouraged gypsies to settle down on their own sites. Planning permission was then renewed in 1982. In 1985 permanent permission was granted on the condition that the two caravans were used as a single unit of accommodation, and that the permission would enure for the benefit of Mrs G Johnson only. In 1992 a third caravan was moved onto the site without planning permission. This was occupied by Mrs Johnson’s son and his family. The three caravans were occupied as a single unit of accommodation as the third caravan only had an electricity supply and no water or drainage connection. At the time the application was considered Mr Johnson Senior was no longer travelling because of ill health, however both sons were still landscapers and still travelled. It is therefore apparent from consideration of the planning history relating to the site, that permission has always been based on the gypsy status of the family. 6.7 The three mobile homes on the site were granted as an exception to established planning policy. Applications for new dwellings in the countryside would be judged amongst others against Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy which seeks to protect and enhance the landscape character of the district and retain the townscape character of settlements and Policy CP5 which also seeks to direct new residential development within the existing built up area boundaries. Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies states that any development outside of the built-up area boundaries must be considered essential to its countryside location, must ensure sustainable development of rural areas, be of an appropriate scale, and should not lead to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside. Where development is essential it must not lead to a significant increase to overall level of activity in the countryside and therefore, access to transport other than the private car will be of particular relevance in meeting sustainability objectives. In addition, paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 indicates that within the countryside new residential development which would result in new isolated homes in the countryside, should be avoided unless it is required for an agricultural or forestry worker, would involve the reuse of existing buildings and enhance the area or would provide a building of exceptional quality. It is considered that the current proposal for four market dwellings would not be essential to their countryside location, and therefore the proposal would not be in conformity with the above polices. 6.8 The applicant has noted that the proposed dwelling could be tied to the family through a personal condition, however, any condition would be required to be necessary, relevant to planning, relevant to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects. Government guidance notes that personal conditions should only be granted because of strong compassionate or other personal grounds, and that such a condition will scarcely ever be justified in the case of permission for the erection of a permanent building. It is therefore considered in this instance that there is no overriding justification for a personal condition relating to the proposed occupation of the four dwellings on the site. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 6

6.9 There is no supporting documentation to indicate that the applicant and his family have permanently given up their Gypsy way of life, and the Council currently includes the site as a Gypsy site in the bi-annual Gypsy and Traveller count. As such the site currently provides accommodation for a Gypsy family and if planning permission were to be granted for this proposal, it would result in the loss of a Gypsy site, for which there is an identified need in the District.

6.10 In the most recent Gypsy appeal decision at Kingfisher Farm (December 2011), the Inspector concluded that “The harm to the character of the area would not be great. On the other hand, the general need for sites in Horsham is significant and this is unlikely to be addressed in the near future. There is currently a lack of available alternatives and because progress in making planned provision for sites has been slow this is likely to remain the case for some time to come. Taken together these factors and the benefits arising from meeting a proportion of the unmet need for gypsy sites at Kingfisher Farm outweigh the harm that would arise.” The overall position in the District is largely unchanged since this appeal decision and highlights that there is a need for gypsy sites within the District as a whole, and therefore it is considered the loss of existing sites should be resisted.

Impact on Character and Appearance of the Area

6.11 The policy framework in respect of this issue is Policy DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement) and Policy DC9 (Development Principles). At present there are three mobile homes on the site which have been occupied by the same family since an original permission was granted for a single caravan in 1979 which was justified by the gypsy status of the family and the agricultural use of the land. The existing mobile homes are low in height and due to their size compared to the area of the site have resulted in the site having a relatively spacious and low density appearance. It is considered that although the application has been submitted in outline form, (with the layout and the appearance of the buildings reserved for later consideration) that the proposed provision of four detached properties on the site would not retain this spacious character as an additional unit is proposed, and each permanent dwelling would be likely to be larger in scale and form than the existing mobile homes. It is considered that the provision of four detached dwellings to replace the existing three mobile homes would result in a cramped form of development which would be suburban in appearance and would not be reflective of its countryside location. It is considered that the proposal would be out of keeping and incongruous with the rural character of the area, especially as the pattern of residential development in the locality is characterised by generally individual properties set in generous plots.

6.12 The existing mobile homes on the site have an approximate floor area each of 60 sq metres. The proposal would result in an additional unit, providing four detached bungalows on the site. It is considered that a two bedroom single storey dwelling would be likely to have a floor area of a minimum of 76.6 sq metres, which would be larger than the existing mobile homes on the site. A bricks and mortar dwelling would also have an increased roof height to that of a mobile home. It is therefore considered that the change in the appearance of the site from accommodating three mobile homes, to the proposed development of four detached dwellings would be harmful to the character of the area by virtue of the proposals increase bulk and height and would result in a cramped overdevelopment of the site which would be at odds with the prevailing character of the surrounding area.

6.13 The application site is located within a countryside location adjacent to the garden centre known as Old Barn Nurseries. It is accepted that as a rural business the garden centre has a particular form and character however, it is not considered that the appearance of the garden centre has such a significant impact on the character of the countryside that the APPENDIX A/ 1 - 7

proposed provision of four detached dwellings on the adjoining site would be acceptable. It is therefore considered that the proposal would result in a group of dwellings which would not reflect the rural nature of the locality especially to the south of the site and would be contrary to both DC1, and DC9 of the General Development Control Policies.

Highways Impacts

6.14 The County Surveyor has raised no objection to the site on highways grounds and therefore it is considered that it would be difficult to object to the application on highways grounds.

Conclusion

6.15 It is clear from the planning history relating to this site that the three mobile homes existing on the site were permitted as an exception to countryside policy due to the gypsy status of the applicant. The site itself is included within the bi-annual Gypsy and Traveller Count and is identified as a potentially suitable site for traveller site development to provide 3 permanent, non-personal planning permissions in order to help fulfil the current backlog of unmet need. It is considered that there is a need for gypsy sites within the District which has been emphasised in recent appeal decisions. It is consequently your officer’s view that the proposed application would result in the loss of a Gypsy and Traveller site which would be incompatible with the objective of providing Gypsy and Traveller sites to meet the identified need within the District. With regards to the proposed dwellings is it considered that the provision of four detached dwellings on the site would appear out of keeping with the character of the area and would not be reflective of its countryside location. It is considered that the proposed four bungalows would result in a harmful overdevelopment of the site which would appear prominent and out of keeping with the rural nature of the locality. Therefore the proposal is contrary to the aims of Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy and policy DC1, DC9 and DC32 of the General Development Control Policies.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that planning permission is refused for the following reasons;

1. The proposed development would result in the loss of gypsy accommodation for which there is an acknowledged need and which outweighs the development of housing in this unsustainable location. The proposal therefore conflicts with policy DC32 of the Horsham District Council Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) and policy CP16 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007).

2.The proposed development of four detached bungalows would result in an over development of the site in an unsustainable location which would fail to protect or enhance the character of this rural area by virtue of the cramped form and layout which would impact on the visual amenity and rural character of the locality. Therefore the proposal is contrary to Policy DC1, DC2 and DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007, and Policies CP1, CP3, CP5 and CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007.

Background Papers: DC/13/2213, DC/13/1673

DC/13/2213

Oaklands

Scale : 1:1250

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission Organisation Horsham District Council of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright 2000. Department Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Comments O/S EXTRACT Date 07 February 2014

SLA Number 100023865 APPENDIX A/ 2 - 1

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT

TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18 February 2014 Change of use from agricultural to a an agricultural and Class D1 use to DEVELOPMENT: enable provision of a Early Years Nursery SITE: Pear Tree Farm West Chiltington Lane Billingshurst West Sussex WARD: Billingshurst and Shipley APPLICATION: DC/13/1492 APPLICANT: Mrs Tracey Poulton

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Category of development

RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 The application seeks permission for a change of use from agriculture to an agricultural use and D1 use (Sui Generis) to enable the provision of an Early Years Nursery alongside the existing agricultural use on the site.

1.2 The application proposes the provision of an Early Years Nursery which would provide for up to 35 children at any one time and employ 13 members of staff. The proposed nursery is designed to focus on learning through nature and wildlife and will operate on various parts of the land depending on the weather and time of year.

1.3 The accommodation for the proposed nursery would be provided within ‘cabans’ which are considered to be non-permanent structures. The proposed ‘cabans’ would be circular in shape with a diameter of approximately 5metres and a maximum height of approximately 2.5metres. The ‘cabans’ would be constructed of timber and the supporting information provided has suggested that the ‘cabans’ would take three hours to erect and approximately 1.5 hours to dismantle. The ‘cabans’ would be heated by a wood burning stove and be lit by battery powered lights.

Contact Officer: Emma Greening Tel: 01403 215122 APPENDIX A/ 2 - 2

1.4 It is proposed to provide a car parking area for 20 vehicles at the south east entrance to the site, parallel to the existing drive using permeable paving blocks. It is suggested that there would be a further 6 parking spaces for staff located close to the existing barn. In addition to this, the existing access track would be widened to 6 metres.

1.5 The nursery would operate 5 days a week (Monday to Friday) between 07:30 and 18:00. The applicants have suggested that traffic flows would be distributed throughout the day with peak flows in the morning and evening.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The application site is located outside of the built up area boundary. The main dwelling house (Pear Tree Farm) is a Grade II listed building. In addition to this, there are two barns arranged in an ‘L shape’ which are also listed. There are a number of public footpaths running through the site and an area of Ancient Woodland on the western edge.

1.7 The site itself is accessed off the western side of West Chiltington Lane and is located in a predominantly rural area. The access currently serves the main dwelling house (Pear Tree Farm) and a barn which has permission to be converted into a dwelling house. The surrounding area is characterised by open fields and field hedging. There is hedging along the front boundary of the site with post and rail fencing close to the entrance. A wind turbine and solar panels are located in the field to the east of the main dwelling house and there is a poly tunnel located in the field to the north east of the main dwelling house.

1.8 At the time of the site visit, one of the barns which are located approximately halfway along the access track had been converted into an office. The nearest neighbouring properties are located to the southern boundary of the site, to the western and north western areas of the site. Along the northern boundary runs ‘New Road’ and open fields/woodland are located to the south and west.

1.9 The Category 2 settlement of Barns Green is located approximately 2.2 kilometres by car from the application site and Billingshurst (Category 1 settlement) is located approximately 4.5 kilometres by car from the application site.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 Relevant Government Policy is contained within the National Planning Policy Framework published in March 2012

2.3 Relevant sections include: 1 (Building a Strong and Competitive Economy), 3 (Supporting a Prosperous Rural Economy), 4 (Promoting Sustainable Transport), 7 (Requiring Good Design), 8 (Promoting Healthy Communities), 11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment), 12 (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) APPENDIX A/ 2 - 3

RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY

2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework, Core Strategy (2007): CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development), CP14 (Protection and Enhancement of Community Facilities and Services), CP15 (Rural Strategy), CP19 (Managing Travel Demand and Widening Choice of Transport)

2.5 Horsham District Local Development Framework, General Development Control Policies (2007): DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC6 (Woodlands and Trees), DC9 (Development Principles), DC13 (Listed Buildings), DC23 (Sustainable Farm Diversification), DC40 (Transport and Access)

PLANNING HISTORY

There is a relatively extensive planning history for the site predominantly relating to the listed dwelling house and barns, which whilst not directly related to this application is a material consideration in the determination of this application.

Applications DC/10/0346 and DC/10/0347 granted permission for a two storey link extension with single storey storage building and construction of new access drive and garage

Applications DC/09/2268 and DC/09/2310 granted permission for repairs, alterations and change of use of redundant listed agricultural barn for residential purposes

DC/10/2427 was allowed at appeal for the installation of 16 solar panels, 1 wind turbine and batter store

Application DC/11/1248 was permitted for the Erection of 12 No. solar panels and retrospective planning for the erection of a building used as a battery store and 4 No. solar panels

Application DC/11/0639 concluded that agricultural prior approval was not required for erection of a poly tunnel

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

3.1 The following section provides a summary of the responses received as a result of internal and external consultation, however, officers have considered the full comments of each consultee which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.2 Head of Leisure and Economic Development: supports this application on the basis that the Council supports small business and related employment particularly in rural areas. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 4

3.3 Strategic Planning Policy Manager: Has advised of the following policy issues:  Policies DC1, CP1 and CP2 set out that any development must ensure the sustainable development rural areas and should maintain and enhance the landscape character of the District’s countryside, villages and towns, whilst it is recognised that the natural and undeveloped nature of rural areas must be protected  The NPPF states that planning should support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas and promote the development and diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses  It is considered that the location of the D1 nursery use on agricultural fields does not represent sustainable development of the rural area and could potentially result in inappropriate levels of activity on previously undeveloped rural land  Consideration needs to be given on the impact of the proposal on the setting of the Grade II listed farmhouse  Overall, the countryside location of the application should be judged against the provision for new facilities and the creation of jobs supporting the rural economy, whilst also taking into account the Grade 2 listed building

3.4 Design and Conservation Officer: Following the submission of amended plans to exclude part of the field from the proposal, it is advised that the parking area is in the least harmful location on the site and improvements to this area are on balance considered acceptable. Therefore it is considered that on balance the application is considered to preserve the heritage asset and would therefore meet the requirements of DC13 and Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.5 Arboricultural Officer: No objections to the proposal (verbal response)

3.6 Head of Public Health and Licensing: No Objection

3.7 Access Officer: Concerns over the disabled parking and level of provision within the facility

3.8 Leisure and Parks: No comments

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.9 WSCC Childhood Services: comments that the Childcare Sufficiency Assessment Termly Monitoring Reports show that there is an identified need for additional early year’s childcare places in Horsham District. Representatives from the service have visited the proposed site and have no reservations that these premises could be made into an appropriate environment for an early year’s provision.

3.10 WSCC Highways: has no objection to the proposal following the submission of amended plans.

3.11 WSCC Rights of Way: Do not consider that the proposal would have a negative impact on users of the rights of way. Only concern is that during construction there may additional traffic which could inconvenience users, however this is not considered significant enough to object.

3.12 Ofsted: Any response received will be reported verbally at the meeting

3.13 Environment Agency: Has no objection in principle to the proposal, however the drainage engineers should be satisfied with the method of surface water run off from the proposed car parking area. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 5

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.14 Billingshurst Parish Council: Strong Support

3.15 Neighbour Comments: 6 letters of objection received from 5 addresses over two consultations raising the following concerns:  Site is clearly unsustainable, the entire business will be car dependent and there is no public transport provision in the area  Would be more appropriate to establish the business in the built up area  Pear Tree Farm poses dangers to children with a deep pond, electric fences etc  Would add to the level of traffic using the narrow country lanes  Concerns about the lack of provision of toilets  Concerns regarding the use of ‘Cabans’ in winter months  Security arrangements are inadequate given the public footpaths which run through the site

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main considerations in the determination of this application is (I) whether the proposal is acceptable in principle having regard to policy at both central government and local level, (II) the impact on the wider countryside location, (III) highways issues, (IV) whether the proposal would have an adverse impact on the setting of the listed building and (V) impact on neighbour amenity.

6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework has a golden thread running through it which seeks to ensure a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The National Planning Policy Framework seeks to ensure that the planning system performs an economic, social and environmental role. The Framework requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan. It is considered that the policies contained within the Horsham District Local Development Framework are still relevant in this case.

6.3 As outlined within the National Planning Policy Framework there are three dimensions to sustainable development. The economic role seeks to build a strong, responsive and competitive economy by identifying and co-ordinating development requirements. The social role supports strong, vibrant and healthy communities to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a high quality built environment with accessible local services which reflect the community’s needs. Finally the environmental role seeks to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment by helping to improve biodiversity, minimise waste and pollution and adapt to climate change. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 6

Principle of Development

6.4 The application seeks permission for a change of use of the land from agricultural to an agricultural/ nursery use. Presently on the site there is a single dwelling house with the Design and Access Statement suggesting that the applicants are in the process of establishing a farming enterprise on the site with livestock on the fields to the north-west end of the site and to the east there is a poly tunnel and field being used for growing a variety of fruit, vegetables and willow. The rest of the land is used for grazing with a number of animals on site at the time of the site visit.

6.5 It is acknowledged that the proposal has received support from a number of sources and that West Sussex County Council has suggested that there is a need for additional nursery places in the area. A site visit has been undertaken and the County Council has confirmed that it has no reservations that the premises can be made into an appropriate environment for an early year’s provision.

6.6 In terms of the impact on the countryside the applicants have indicated that the proposed nursery would predominantly operate outdoors in association with the non permanent structures within the site. The proposed nursery would have a focus on outdoor activities and would move around the site according to the time of year. The additional supporting information supplied suggests that the principles of and the reasons for the nursery are based on the natural environment and its location within a farming setting. At any one time, the nursery would cater for up to 35 children with 13 members of staff.

6.7 The proposed nursery seeks to offer a curriculum focusing on the outdoors, as outlined in the supporting information “a new and innovative approach to teaching young children. Every day, our children are engaged in outdoor activities inspired by the day to day life of the farm and its beautiful, natural surrounding. All activity is in line with the Early Years Foundation Stage Curriculum and provides each child with a unique environment for gathering important life skills whilst developing their understanding of the world we live in”. Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies seeks to restrict development in the countryside unless it is considered essential to its countryside location. Generally, it would be expected that children’s nurseries should be located within the built up area boundary to minimise transport movements and where they can meet the needs of the local community. However the nursery currently under consideration is being proposed with a curriculum focusing on the natural environment. As a result it is considered on this occasion that this specific nursery would require a countryside location in which to operate.

6.8 One of the core principles of sustainable development as advised within the National Planning Policy Framework is its economic role. Paragraph 28 emphasises the importance of economic development in the rural areas and suggests that “planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development……support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas…..promote the development and diversification of agricultural and other land based rural businesses”. It is considered that the proposal see the nursery use running alongside the existing agricultural use of the land and it is suggested that profits will be reinvested back into the farming enterprise.

6.9 In addition consideration needs to be given to the issue of sustainability. The National Planning Policy Framework suggest that “plans and decisions should ensure developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel would be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised” (paragraph 34). The site is located in a rural area where the car will be the primary means of access. The APPENDIX A/ 2 - 7

supporting information suggests that the nursery would cater for up to 35 children each day with 13 members of staff and the main traffic movements would likely be at the beginning and end of the day. As part of the additional information supplied the applicant has supported their proposal with a Green Travel plan to try and minimise the traffic movements to the site, on which the County Surveyors comments have been sought.

6.10 It has to be acknowledged that a day nursery is not normally considered essential to a countryside location but in this particular case, the operational requirements of the day nursery requires a countryside location and the proposal would support the existing farm, create jobs and meet a need for nursery places in the area. Whilst the development would contribute to the economy of the area, it is recognised that the landscape and undeveloped nature of rural areas must be protected and the impact on the wider countryside is assessed below.

Impact on the wider countryside location

6.11 In terms of the impact on the countryside, Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy (2007) states that “The landscape character of the District, including the settlement pattern, together with the townscape character of settlements will be maintained and enhanced. Activities which may influence character should only take place where: a. the landscape and townscape character is protected, conserved or enhanced taking into account key landscape and settlement characteristics, including maintaining settlement separation”. The application site is located within a rural area with sporadic residential development along West Chiltington Lane. The existing dwelling house (Pear Tree Farm) is accessed via an unmade track which serves a single dwelling house and there are a number of public footpaths which cross the site. The dwelling house is currently surrounded on all sides by fields which have their boundaries marked by hedging.

6.12 There are two elements to the proposal, the parking area and the siting of the proposed ‘cabans’ which have the potential to adversely affect the visual character of the rural area. The parking area for 20 cars would be located close to the entrance of the site and would involve increasing the width of the existing track to up to 6 metres and the addition of a passing bay to the north of the existing turning area. The proposed parking area would be constructed of permeable paving blocks with joints that can be filled with soil. The amended plans show that the layout of parking spaces has been amended to try and reduce the expanse of hard surfacing. Whilst it is noted that there is some existing tree screening to the south, it is considered that in order to reduce the impact, additional screening would be required at the entrance to the site and within the parking bays to try and minimise the perceived visual impact of this isolated form of development.

6.13 The second issue for consideration is the impact of the ‘cabans’ on the countryside location. Whilst the applicants claim that the six ‘cabans’ would move round the site depending on the seasons, general locations have been identified for the summer and winter months. The proposed ‘cabans’ would be accompanied by associated paraphernalia for the nursery including the proposed field kitchen and toilet facilities as well as outdoor games and equipment, it is also likely that some temporary fencing would be required. It is considered that the structures associated with the nursery would be visible from the public footpaths which run through the site, and these structures coupled with the associated paraphernalia would have an adverse impact on its countryside location. However during the course of the application, discussions have taken place with the applicant to try and mitigate the impact of the structures on the rural area. The applicants have now agreed to reduce the red edging, which would ensure greater control over the location of the ‘cabans’. Whilst it is acknowledged that the ‘cabans’ would have some impact on the countryside, they would nevertheless be temporary structures and the reduced area of the red edging would further limit the visual impact of the structures. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 8

6.14 Therefore In terms of the impact on the countryside location, it is considered that the proposed parking area and structures associated with the running of the nursery would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the rural location. However on this occasion, it is on balance considered that the impact could be mitigated against to some extent with additional planting around the parking area and the reduction in the red edge area.

Highway Safety

6.15 The policy framework with regard to highway safety is Policy DC40. The Highways Authority has raised no objection to the intensification of use of this access and it is suggested that visibility is acceptable. Concerns were however raised regarding the layout of the parking bays in relation to the width of the track way. Amended plans have been submitted which have overcome the Highways Authority’s concerns. Given the Highways Authority have not raised an objection to the proposal, it would be difficult to justify a reason for refusal on highways grounds.

Impact on setting of the Listed Building

6.16 Policy DC13 sets out the policy framework for the assessment of the proposal’s impact on the setting of Pear Tree Farm, a Grade II listed dwelling house. There is also an additional listed barn located along the track to the dwelling. Whilst the submitted information suggests that the ‘cabans’ are non-permanent structures which would be moved around the site, consideration still needs to be given to their impact on the setting of the listed building. During the course of the application the Design and Conservation Officer suggested that the most sensitive areas of the site which would affect the setting of the listed building were the lane and the area to the south of the access lane in front of the listed building. In response to this concern the listed dwelling and barns and part of the field which surrounds the buildings have been removed from the red edging thereby removing the ‘cabans’ from being located in a position where they would adversely impact on the setting of the listed building.

6.17 The second area of concern was the proposed parking area, which although located a significant distance from the listed building itself would still provide part of the experience when accessing the main dwelling house. The parking area has been amended and the Design and Conservation Officer has suggested that the revised location is the least harmful location on the site. As a result, whilst it is acknowledged that the proposal would have some impact on the heritage asset, this is not considered significant enough to justify refusal of the scheme on this basis.

Impact on neighbour amenity

6.18 Policy DC9 (Development Principles) is the policy framework against which the proposal would be assessed in terms of the impact of the proposal on neighbour amenity. The nearest neighbours are located close to the southern and eastern boundary of the site, with the properties to the west located a number of fields away from the site boundary. Whilst the proposal would be likely to generate additional noise given the number of children proposed for the nursery, the location map for the ‘cabans’ show that they will generally be located to the north west of the site. Furthermore the red edging has been reduced to prevent the ‘cabans’ being located in close proximity to the neighbouring properties. In addition to this, the access way would be approximately 60 metres from the nearest neighbouring property. As a result the overall impact on neighbour amenity is considered to be limited. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 9

Other Issues

6.19 During the course of the application, a number of other issues have been raised. These include concerns over child safety. A number of the neighbour representations received have outlined concerns regarding the safety of children on a working farm and the proximity of public footpaths and ponds. Whilst the concerns regarding child safety are noted any nursery permitted would need to receive a license from Ofsted to be able to operate. The supporting information supplied as part of the application has suggested that the curriculum, security, and the number of children attending would have to be approved and licensed by Ofsted. Whilst the representations are noted, it is considered the issues raised would be covered by other legislation and would not be possible to be controlled by a planning condition.

6.20 The second issue is that of the barn which is located approximately halfway along the existing track. Planning permission and Listed Building Consent was granted under DC/09/2268 and DC/09/2310 for the change of use of the barn for residential purposes. At the time of the site visit, the original hovel was being used as an office. Having looked at the planning history for the site, it does not appear that any conditions have been discharged on this permission and further clarification has been sought from the applicants regarding the works which have taken place. It should however be noted that this barn no longer forms part of the planning application as it has been removed from the red edge area. Further discussions with the applicants have suggested that they would be seeking to use one of the barns for an administrative part of the nursery. However this would need to be dealt with by a separate application and considered on its own merits.

Conclusion

6.21 As has been previously outlined above in 6.2 and 6.3 the National Planning Policy Framework has three key roles (economic, social and environmental). It is acknowledged that the proposal would meet an economic need by providing jobs in the local area and hopefully enabling additional funds to be reinvested back into the farming enterprise currently on the site. The proposal would also fulfil a social need by helping to meet an additional shortfall in Early Years Childcare places. However it is acknowledged that the proposal would have an impact on the countryside by virtue of the intensification of the use and likely paraphernalia that a nursery would create along with the visual impact of the structures and parking.

6.22 During the course of the application, amendments to the scheme have taken place to reduce the impact of the proposal on its countryside location. The red edged areas which the ‘cabans’ could be located has been reduced and a condition is proposed requiring details of the car park surfacing and for additional screening around the parking area. Having regard to all matters it is on balance considered that the economic and social benefits of the proposed nursery and proposed mitigation measures outweigh the identified harm to the countryside location. As a result it is considered that the proposal meets the aims of policy DC9, DC13 and DC40 of the General Development Control Policies and it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

That planning permission is granted with the following conditions attached.

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. APPENDIX A/ 2 - 10

2. The Early Years Nursery hereby permitted shall only be open between the hours of:- 0730 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, and no work shall be undertaken on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank and Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

3. The number of cabans located within the application site as shown on drawing no. LC2 rev C shall not exceed 6 at any time. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

4. The number of children enrolled at the Early Years Nursery shall not exceed more than 35 children at any one time. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

5. The development hereby approved shall be used for an agricultural use and an early years nursery within Class D1 use and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in any class in the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. Reason: Changes of use as permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 are not considered appropriate in this case under policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

6. No external lighting or floodlighting shall be installed. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

7. Prior to the opening of the nursery full details of all hard and soft landscaping works around the parking area have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 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 DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

8. The cabans hereby approved shall be used in association with the Early Years Nursery operating from the application site and for no other purpose. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

Note to applicant:

This permission does not authorise the display of advertisements for which separate consent is required under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992.

Background Papers: DC/13/1492 DC/13/1492

Pear Tree Farm

Scale : 1:5000

SLA Number 100023865 Blank APPENDIX A/ 3 - 1

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

REPORT

Development Management Committee South TO: BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services

DATE: 18th February 2014 Change of use from B1 (Business) to C3 (Dwellings) including the demolition of DEVELOPMENT: the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site with the erection of 2 no. detached houses, garages and associated works SITE: Enterprise House, Horton Hill, Henfield Road, Small Dole

WARD: Bramber, Upper Beeding and Woodmancote

APPLICATION: SDNP/13/05646/FUL

APPLICANT: Mr Christopher Boardman (New Place Investment Company Ltd)

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Category of Development

RECOMMENDATION: To Refuse Planning Permission

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 The application seeks consent for the change of use from B1 (Business) to C3 (Dwellings) including the demolition of the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site with the erection of 2 no. detached houses, garages and associated works.

1.2 Two residential plots would be formed measuring approximately 70m by 70m. The dwelling on Plot 1 would measure 16.4m by 15.4m and would have a ridge height of 7.6m. The dwelling would provide a lounge, dining and family room, kitchen, study, hall and bedroom to the ground floor level and three bedrooms with en-suites to the first floor level. The proposed garage building would measure 6.6m in width by 9.5m in depth and would have a ridge height of 5.2m. An office would be provided within the roof space of the building.

1.3 The dwelling on Plot 2 would measure 31.5m by 12.6m and would have a flat roof measuring 3.2m in height. A lounge, dining room, study, kitchen, utility, hall, five bedrooms with en-suites would be provided on one level. A garage/office building is also proposed which would measure 10.1m by 6.6m and would have a flat roof height of 3.2m.

1.4 The application seeks to remove the two existing commercial buildings on site along with the existing conifers which are currently positioned along the western boundary of the site which screen the existing buildings. The applicant has submitted a comprehensive landscaping scheme as part of the application.

Contact Officer: Kathryn Sadler Tel: 01403 215175 APPENDIX A/ 3 - 2

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.5 The site is located in a countryside location and within the South Downs National Park. The site has been used as a commercial site but is currently unoccupied. There are two commercial buildings on the site. These buildings are fairly low rise buildings and are industrial in nature. The site extends to 1.015 ha in area with a built footprint of 1215 square metres. The western boundary of the site consists of fir trees to the north western end of the site and the rest of the western boundary is open and the land drops away substantially from the site. There are far reaching views from the site to the west. The southern end of the site consists of a grassed area. The older of the two buildings located close to the entrance of the site is split into a number of offices and workshop areas. This building has space for up to 5 tenants. The other building is partly refurbished with a fairly modern extension, having been constructed in 2000/2001 and was occupied by Dragons of Walton Street until January 2012.

1.6 A public footpath (ROW2768) runs to the north and west of the site from Pound Lane in Upper Beeding to Horton Hall, Henfield Road, Small Dole. There are views of the site from the whole length of this footpath. The site is situated in an elevated position in relation to the route of the footpath.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 National Planning Policy Framework

Section 11, Paragraph 109 of the framework seeks to protect and enhance valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils.

Paragraph 55 states “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances such as:

● the essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside; or ● where such development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; or ● where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting; or ● the exceptional quality or innovative nature of the design of the dwelling.

Such a design should:

–– be truly outstanding or innovative, helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; –– reflect the highest standards in architecture; –– significantly enhance its immediate setting; and –– be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.” APPENDIX A/ 3 - 3

Paragraph 113 also states that “Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites, so that protection is commensurate with their status and gives appropriate weight to their importance and the contribution that they make to wider ecological networks.”

Paragraph 115 also states that “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.”

Paragraph 116 also states “Planning permission should be refused for major developments in these designated areas except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest.”

RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY

2.3 The following policies of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (adopted February 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: CP1 – Landscape and Townscape Character, CP2 – Environmental Quality, CP3 – Improving the Quality of New Development, CP4 – Housing Provision, CP5 – Built – Up Areas and Previously Developed Land & CP15 – Rural Strategy.

2.4 The following policies of the Local Development Framework, General Development Control Polices Document (December 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: DC1 – Countryside Protection and Enhancement, DC2 – Landscape Character, DC4 – Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, DC9 – Development Principles, DC18 – Smaller Homes/Housing Mix, DC19 – Employment Site / Land Protection, DC30 – Exceptions Housing Schemes & DC40 – Transport & Access.

2.5 The South Downs Management Plan 2008 – 2013 and South Downs Planning Guidelines 2008 are relevant material considerations in the determination of this application since the South Downs National Park’s creation in April 2010. The guidance contained within the documents reflects government guidance which seeks to give maximum protection to the most valuable landscapes.

2.6 The South Downs Partnership Management Plan 2014 – 2019 – This sets out a shared vision for the National Park in the future and provides the framework for the emerging park wide local plan which will include spatial planning policies for housing and other development.

2.7 DEFRA’s Circular March 2010 “English National Parks and The Broads” provides updated policy guidance on English National Parks. It states in Paragraph 31 that “Major development in or adjacent to the boundary of the Park can have a significant impact on the qualities for which they were designated. Government planning policy towards the Parks is that major development should not take place within a park except in exceptional circumstances.”

2.8 As a National Park, the SDNPA has statutory purposes and socio-economic responsibilities as specified in the Environment Act of 1995.

1) To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. 2) To promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the Park by the public.

Working in partnership with other Local Authorities and other organisations, it is also the duty of the Authority to seek to foster the economic and social well-being of the local communities within the National Park. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 4

PLANNING HISTORY

2.9 Application UB/15/58 for the change of use of an agricultural building for livestock to therapeutic purposes which was permitted in 1958.

Application UB/17/58 for the erection of a monkey holding unit for therapeutic purposes which was permitted in 1958.

Application UB/25/98 for the re-cladding of a building was permitted in 1998.

Application DC/05/1225 for a telecommunications installation consisting of one pole mounted tri- corner antenna unit and various internal equipment was permitted in 2005.

Application DC/11/1878 for the demolition of the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site for 4 detached houses, garages and associated works (South Downs National Park) was refused in November 2011 and was dismissed on appeal in 2012.

Application DC/12/0528 for the change of use from B1 (Business) to C3 (Dwellings) including the demolition of the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site for 3 detached houses, garages and associated works (South Downs National Park) was refused in May 2012.

Application SDNP/13/03314/FUL for the change of use from B1 (office) to C3 (residential) including the demolition of the existing commercial buildings and the redevelopment of the site with the erection of 2 no. detached houses, garages and associated works was withdrawn in August 2013.

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

The following section provides a summary of the responses received as a result of internal and external consultation, however, officers have considered the full comments of each consultee which are available to view on the public file at www.horsham.gov.uk

INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS

3.1 Public Health & Licensing has commented that there is the potential for residual contamination from the historic uses to present unacceptable risks to future occupiers. There is also a risk that residual contaminants may be causing pollution to ground and surface waters. These potential risks require investigation and there have been no submissions with this application which relate to site investigation or risk assessment.

3.2 Landscape Architect has verbally raised no objection to the scheme.

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

3.3 Natural England has no objection as the proposal is unlikely to affect any statutorily protected sites.

3.4 Environment Agency has no comments to make.

3.5 The District Valuer has found the commercial units unlikely to be viable in their existing uses. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 5

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.6 The South Downs Society objects to the application. The erection of two dwellings on this site would represent two new developments in a prominent and sensitive part of the South Downs National Park and outside of the village settlement area.

3.7 No other representations have been received to public notification on the application at the time of writing this report. Any further comments received will be reported verbally at the committee meeting.

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The main issues in determination of this application are considered to be the principle of the development and the effect of the development on the visual amenities and the character of the area being located within the South Downs National Park.

History

6.2 The site has been subject to two similar planning applications, DC/11/1878 for the demolition of the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site for 4 detached houses, garages and associated works and application DC/12/0528 for the change of use from B1 (Business) to C3 (Dwellings) including the demolition of the existing commercial units and redevelopment of the site for 3 detached houses, garages and associated works.

6.3 Application DC/11/1878 was refused in November 2011 and was subsequently dismissed on appeal having been heard by way of an Informal Hearing. The Inspector dismissed the appeal on the following grounds:

 There is no convincing evidence that the large type of units would meet local need and it had not been demonstrated that they would benefit the rural community by contributing to its vitality;  The visibility of the houses in views from local footpaths and the wider countryside would detract from the landscape and scenic beauty of the National Park.  The proposal would give rise to substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area, failing to comply with CS Policy CP1 and General Development Control Policies DC2 and DC9 which seek to protect local character including that of the National Park.  It has not been demonstrated that all options for a viable commercial use have been pursued and this matter would not outweigh the harm to the character and appearance of the area.  Conflict with policy relating to housing in the countryside. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 6

Principle of Houses in a Countryside Location

6.4 The dwellings would be sited outside of the built-up area boundaries allocated in Policy CP5 of the Core Strategy DPD (2007). The policy defines land outside of the built-up area boundaries as countryside, where development is strictly controlled to protect the rural nature of the District. Government guidance seeks to strictly control development including new dwellings in the countryside to protect the countryside for its own sake. Paragraph 55 of the Framework restricts dwellings within countryside locations stating that Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances.

6.5 Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 states:

Outside built up area boundaries, development will not be permitted unless it is considered essential to its countryside location and in addition meets one of the following criteria:

 supports the needs of agriculture or forestry;  enables the extraction of minerals or the disposal of waste;  provides for quiet informal recreational use; or  ensures the sustainable development of rural areas.

Any development permitted must be of a scale appropriate to its countryside location and must not lead, either individually or cumulatively, to a significant increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside. The site is in a countryside location and the erection of two dwellings at this site would fail to meet the requirements of the above policy as they would not support the needs of agriculture or forestry, would not provide for quiet informal recreational use, the extraction of minerals or the disposal of waste and would fail to meet sustainable development criteria.

6.6 It is considered that the development would represent sporadic development which would be to the detriment of the visual amenities and rural character of the South Downs National Park. The agent within Paragraph 4.10 of his Planning Statement states that “It is accepted that the proposal sits outside the settlement of Small Dole and therefore could be considered to be in an unsustainable location.” The overall result of the development and the associated residential paraphernalia would be to erode the rural character and visual amenities of this rural area. The agent acknowledges in Paragraph 4.3 of the Planning Statement that “The site is located outside the settlement of Small Dole and therefore in pure technical terms it is viewed as being in open countryside.”

6.7 The proposal appears to be unrelated to any form of linked agricultural or other rural land use activity. The only justification put forward by the applicant for dwellings is that the current commercial use is not viable as outlined in Para.6.13. It is therefore considered that the dwellings would not meet the requirements of Paragraph 55 of the Framework or Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.

6.8 Policy CP5 (Built-Up Areas and Previously Developed Land) contains the settlement lists for Category 1 and Category 2 settlements, stating that Category 2 proposals should be related to ‘local need’. Policy CP12 (Meeting Housing Needs) also sets out that in settlements with a population less than 3,000, permission will only be granted for schemes providing 100% affordable housing, unless it is demonstrated that market housing is required. The agent states at paragraph 4.20 that the “applicant has been in discussion with several leading Estate Agents and surveying companies (Savills, Knight Frank) who have all confirmed that there is a lack of supply of large family homes in the area and that there is a demand for a proposal such as this.” It is considered that the proposal is contrary to both Policy CP5 and CP12 of the Core Strategy (2007) as no evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that these units fulfil a ‘local need’. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 7

6.9 It is acknowledged by the agent that the “proposal for housing has not come about as a result of a need to meet a specific local need, but is derived from the failing commercial use of the site resulting in a brownfield site becoming available” and he considers the site a “windfall site and should be viewed as being in addition to the council’s housing provision and no need to demonstrate need.” However, Policy DC30 deals with ‘Exceptions Housing Schemes’ and states “In exceptional circumstances limited amounts of land may be released, in addition to the provision of Core Strategy Policy CP4, for the development of homes solely for affordable housing on land which would not otherwise be released for general market housing.” The agent has stated in Paragraph 4.20 of the Planning Statement that “Due to the sensitivities of the site and its location, the site does not lend itself to a larger, denser form of development that could provide smaller homes or affordable housing, that would perhaps meet a local affordable need.” The Inspector in the previous appeal decision stated that “there is no convincing evidence that the large type of units proposed would meet local need and it has not been demonstrated that they would benefit the rural community by contributing to its vitality. The weight to be attached to the contribution of the houses in meeting the housing land shortfall is therefore limited.” The proposal is not for affordable housing and therefore fails to meet the requirements of this policy. However, it must be recognised that since the previous appeal decision in 2011, it has been accepted that the Council has a ‘substantial shortfall’ in housing supply as first identified by the Inspector in the RMC appeal (DC/10/1457) a view endorsed by another Inspector in relation to the appeal at Daux Avenue (DC/11/2385).

6.10 The agent states that discussions have taken place with neighbouring properties and the Chair of the Local Parish Council who wish to see a positive use for this site and that there is a desire to see housing on the site. However, no evidence has been submitted with this application to demonstrate such a desire and the weight to be attached to the contribution of this site to housing delivery remains limited when weighed against the landscape impact as addressed below.

Landscape Impact

6.11 The site is located within the South Downs National Park, the District Council deals with such applications on behalf of the National Park Authority (NPA) but the NPA has the power to call in applications where deemed necessary. The South Downs National Park Authority has been consulted and they have advised that they are happy for this application to be determined by Horsham District Council. The agent has stated that the footprint of the existing buildings has been used for the new dwellings to try to reduce the impact of the development. Although the dwellings are no larger than the built form on site they would still be visible from the public footpaths to the north and west of the site. The Inspector in the previous appeal decision states “The visibility of the houses in views from local footpaths and the wider countryside would detract from the landscape and scenic beauty of the National Park, which are its most important characteristics.” The residential dwellings would have ancillary residential paraphenalia which could potentially have a greater visual impact on the surrounding area.

6.12 The Inspector in the previous appeal decision states that “the scale of the proposed development, when seen together with the adjacent houses would change the character to a more concentrated residential one, thereby eroding its open and rural nature.” The Inspector concluded that the previous proposal for dwellings gave “rise to substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area, failing to comply with CS Policy CP1 and General Development Control Policies DC2 and DC9 which seek to protect local character including that of the National Park.”

6.13 The conclusions drawn by the Inspector in the previous application (DC/11/1878) remain relevant in this case with the houses themselves having an impact on the scenic quality of the National Park as set out in Para.6.11 above which in this case is not outweighed by the acknowledged need for housing. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 8

Other Issues - Viability of Commercial Units

6.14 The Local Planning Authority has commissioned the District Valuer to assess the submitted viability assessment which has been prepared by Oakley Property on behalf of the applicant. The District Valuer states in their report that “Oakley’s have carried out an analysis of the market in the locality and based on this and my own investigations I am satisfied that the rents which have been sought for both Enterprise House and the Dragons building are not unrealistically high at circa £8.50/ft2 for Enterprise House and £5.12/ft2 for the Dragons building as a whole (with somewhat higher levels for individual suites from £6.46 to £8.00/ft2). These asking rents are not in my opinion at a level which would be likely to deter interest from a prospective tenant. In this respect it is interesting to note the fact that the more recent Dragons building asking rent of £35,000 per annum (entirety) is £25,000 per annum less than the rent paid by the previous occupier and the rent being asked in 2011 and also significantly less than the Rateable Value.” Therefore based on the District Valuer’s assessment of the submitted information, it is considered that, at this moment in time, the site is unlikely to be viable in its existing use but this does not justify the redevelopment of the site for residential use when balanced against its location and the landscape impact set out above. It is considered that the applicant has marketed the site in accordance with Policy DC19.

Contamination

6.15 The Public Health & Licensing has raised concerns that there is the potential for residual contamination from the historic uses to present unacceptable risks to future occupiers. There is also the risk that residual contaminants may be causing pollution to ground and surface waters. These potential risks require investigation and there has been no submissions with this application which relate to site investigation or risk assessment.

6.16 The Inspector within the previous appeal decision assessed the contamination issues and stated in the decision notice that “The appellant has produced a preliminary desk study identifying former uses and potential risks. Animal waste and incinerator ash are not noted as being at the site but the fuel tanks, septic tank, asbestos removal and other chemicals are identified. On the basis of the information provided about the previous animal quarantine facility, I am of the view that further analysis and mitigation could be controlled by condition, to ensure that there would be no risk to the health of the future occupiers.” It is acknowledged that no risk assessment has been submitted in support of the current application but, as the Inspector on the previous appeal considered that the issues could be dealt with by condition, an objection on contamination grounds would not be raised.

Conclusion

6.17 It is acknowledged that the location of the site within the South Downs National Park and the restricted access to the site limits what can be developed on this site. However, the material factors that the applicant raises are not considered to overcome the principal objections raised in the assessment.

6.18 It is considered that there is an in principle objection to the erection of houses within the countryside and within the South Downs National Park. It is acknowledged that the proposal for housing has not come about as a result of a need to meet a specific local need, but is derived from the failing commercial use of the site resulting in a brownfield site becoming available. However, the NPPF and the countryside policies within the Horsham District Development Framework restricts new residential development within countryside locations unless there is an essential need which in this case has not been demonstrated. Whilst there would be benefits to be derived from the proposal in terms of meeting the housing shortfall, it is not considered that these would be sufficient to outweigh the identified harm to the scenic quality of the landscape. APPENDIX A/ 3 - 9

6.19 Therefore, the proposal is contrary to the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework, the South Downs Management Plan 2008 – 2013, DEFRA’s Circular March 2010 “English National Parks and The Broads”, the South Downs Planning Guidelines 2008 which seek to give maximum protection to the most valuable landscapes. The proposal is also considered to be contrary to the aims of Policy DC1, DC2 & DC4 of the General Development Control Policies 2007 and policy CP1 & CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007 as the development is not considered essential to its countryside location.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 It is recommended that planning permission be refused on the following grounds:

1. The site lies in a rural area, outside the limits of any existing town or village and the proposed residential development is not considered essential to this rural location being unrelated to the needs of agriculture, forestry or the extraction of minerals, if permitted, would consolidate an undesirable element of sporadic development in a rural area which would result in visual intrusion into the countryside to the detriment of the rural character of the area and the South Downs National Park. Therefore the proposal is contrary to Policy DC1, DC2 & DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007, Policies CP1, CP3, CP5 and CP15 of the Core Strategy 2007 & the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.

2. The applicant has failed to demonstrate how the development would meet specific local needs on the basis of the contribution to meeting identified local requirements for housing including affordable housing, the retention or enhancement of community facilities and services and the extent to which the addition of new development would not reinforce unsustainable patterns. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies CP5, CP12 & CP15 of the Core Strategy (2007) and policies DC1 & DC40 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.

Background Papers: SDNP/13/03314/FUL, DC/12/0528 & DC/11/1878

Contact Officer: Kathryn Sadler Works

Upper Horton Horton Horton Hill Business Park Farmhouse

South Col House

27.5m Adur Vale

Tiggy Dale CG

Cattle Grid

Produced using ESRI (UK)'s MapExplorer 2.0 - http://www.esriuk.com APPENDIX A/ 4 - 1

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT

TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18 February 2014 DEVELOPMENT: Erection of a triple garage and covered link SITE: Rambledown Court Rambledown Lane West Chiltington Pulborough WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/13/2301 APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Goswell

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Number of letters contrary to Officer Recommendation

RECOMMENDATION: To Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a triple garage and link to the southern elevation of Rambledown Court. The proposed garage would measure approximately 11.4 metres in width and 6.5 metres in depth and have a maximum height of 4.5 metres. The proposal would provide three garage bays. In addition to this there would be a link approximately 3 metres in width which would contain a log store. The proposed building would be constructed in materials to match the main dwelling house with roller shutter doors on the garage bays and gates on the front of the proposed link. It would not be possible to access the proposed garage directly from the main dwelling house.

1.2 The proposed garage would be set down from the ridge of the main dwelling by approximately 0.8 metres. The proposed garage would be approximately 5.8 metres from the southern boundary of the site, and approximately 10 metres from the road (Rambledown Court) at its closest point.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.3 The application site is located within the built up area boundary and West Chiltington Common Character Area.

Contact Officer: Emma Greening Tel: 01403 215122 APPENDIX A/ 4 - 2

1.4 The application site contains a large detached single storey dwelling house located within a residential area of West Chiltington. Planning permission was granted under DC/13/0313 for extensions to the existing dwelling house which are currently under construction and nearing completion.

1.5 The property itself sits on a large plot with the dwelling house located to the north of the site with the main garden for the property located to the south and west. To the east of the application site is parking for a number of cars and is currently laid to hardstanding.

1.6 Neighbouring properties are located on all sides of the application site with the general street scene made up of properties of varying designs and plots of varying sizes.

1.7 It was noted on the site visit, that the applicant is currently living in a caravan located on the south east boundary of the site whilst works are taking place and in addition to this, there are a number of shipping containers on the site. The applicant has indicated that the caravan and containers will be removed once the previously approved development has been completed.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 Relevant Government Policy is contained within the National Planning Policy Framework published in March 2012

2.3 Relevant sections include: 7 (Requiring Good Design)

RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY

2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework, Core Strategy (2007): CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character) and CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development),

2.5 Horsham District Local Development Framework, General Development Control Policies (2007): DC9 (Development Principles) and DC15 (Heath Common and West Chiltington Character Area)

PLANNING HISTORY

DC/12/2076 Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of single Refused detached dwelling and erection of further detached dwelling on plot 7 pursuant to extant consent WC/15/61

DC/13/0313 Extension to all elevations of existing property with Permitted associated alterations and re-pitching of roof

APPENDIX A/ 4 - 3

DC/13/0914 Approval of Reserved Matters relating to appearance, Pending landscaping, layout and scale following Outline permission Consideration WC/15/61 (Layout of 15 Plots and Estate road) for the erection of a detached bungalow on Plot 7

DC/13/1859 Erection of garage and pool room (Certificate of Proposed Refused Lawful Development)

DC/13/2308 Proposed sun/pool room (Lawful Development Certificate - Permitted Proposed )

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

3.1 West Chiltington Parish Council: No Objection but would like conditions to ensure adequate soakaways are provided to avoid exacerbating surface water run-off problems on the site and any permitted development rights attaching to the new building to be removed to avoid alterations without gaining further planning permission in the interests of neighbours.

3.2 Neighbour comments: 7 letters of objection received from 6 addresses, raising concerns over:  Surface water drainage and that further development on the site would exacerbate the problem  Object to design, scale and layout  Impact of the proposal on the street scene and it would not be in keeping with the surrounding houses  Within the last year, permission has been granted for a large extension and the proposed garage is considered too large in relation to the existing bungalow  The property already has an attached garage and this proposal currently under consideration should be seen as overdevelopment  The Council should make it clear that residential use of the southern part of the site would not be appropriate  Concerns that the proposed garage may be converted to residential use in the future.

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

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

5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder. APPENDIX A/ 4 - 4

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The National Planning Policy Framework has a golden thread running through it which seeks to ensure a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The National Planning Policy Framework seeks to ensure that the planning system performs an economic, social and environmental role. The Framework requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan. It is considered that the policies contained within the Horsham District Local Development Framework are still relevant in this case.

6.2 The main issues in the consideration of this application are: (a) the design of the proposal, (b) the impact on neighbour amenity and (c) the street scene. Each issue is addressed below having regard to the requirements of Policy CP3 and DC9 which sets out the criteria against which development proposals will be assessed to secure high quality design for the District, whilst having regard to locally distinctive character along with the amenity of occupiers/users of nearby properties.

Design

6.3 The proposed garage would be 11.4 metres in width, however, since it would be set down from the ridge line of the main dwelling house and incorporate a hipped roof, it would appear subservient to the dwelling. In addition to this, the proposed garage would be set back from the road by 11 metres and with significant space to the southern boundary (13 metres). In the circumstances and given the relatively large scale of the plot the proposal would not represent over development of the plot and would therefore relate sympathetically to its surroundings in accordance with the requirements of Policy DC9 ©.

Impact on neighbour amenity

6.4 Policy DC9 part (b) requires that development should not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of nearby occupiers/users of property. In this case the proposed garage block would be approximately 5.8 metres from the southern boundary at its closest point and 15 metres to the nearest dwelling house. Given that the garage would be single storey and that there is close boarded fencing on the boundary, it is not considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties by reason of overbearing. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in this regard and complies with the requirements of Policy DC9.

6.5 It is acknowledged that neighbouring residents have raised concerns that given the scale of the proposed garage that it may be converted into residential accommodation in the future, however, this is not within the scope of the current application and the use of the garage could be controlled by condition to ensure that it would only be used for parking purposes.

Impact on the street scene

6.6 Parts © and (d) of Policy DC9 relate to the design, appearance and character of any proposed development. In this case, the main dwelling is of an individual design located on a large plot with a wide street frontage. Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed garage and link coupled with the dwelling house would result in a relatively extensive level of built form across the front of the plot, there would still be approximately 13 metres to the southern boundary. In addition to this as previously advised at paragraph 6.3, the proposed garage would be set down from the ridge line of the dwelling house which would help reduce the bulk of built form on the site so that the proposal does not result in overdevelopment of the plot or have an adverse impact on the street scene or wider character of the area. APPENDIX A/ 4 - 5

Conclusion

6.8 In conclusion, whilst the proposed garage and link would be large in scale and clearly visible from the street scene, nevertheless it is considered that the proposal would sit comfortably on the plot and relate well to the existing dwelling. Further given the separation distances to neighbouring properties the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers. It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the aims of policy DC9 and it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 That planning permission is granted with the following conditions attached

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

2. The materials and finishes of all new external walls and roofs of the development hereby permitted shall match in type, colour and texture those of the existing dwelling house. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

3. The garage hereby approved shall be used for parking purposes only and for no other purpose. Reason: To maintain control over the development in the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).

Note to applicant:

1. The surface water from the garage roof shall go to a suitable soak away.

Background Papers: DC/13/2301 DC/13/2301

Rambledown Court

Scale : 1:1250

SLA Number 100023865 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 1

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT

TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 18th February 2014 Formation of a new vehicular access for Sake Ride Farm and erection of DEVELOPMENT: new entrance gates. SITE: Sake Ride Farm Wineham Lane Wineham Henfield WARD: Cowfold,Shermanbury and West Grinstead APPLICATION: DC/13/2113 APPLICANT: Mr Brian O'Connell

REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: The property is owned by a District Councillor.

RECOMMENDATION: To GRANT planning permission.

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

To consider the planning application.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

1.1 The proposal seeks full planning permission to create a new vehicular access road off Wineham Lane, which is a classified public highway. The new driveway will sit to the south of the existing access drive, which currently serves both Sake Ride Farm and the neighbouring residential property known as 'The Diary'.

1.2 The original driveway would continue to serve 'The Dairy' and would be adapted to a width of 4m, which reflects the existing width between fences, widening out to an overall 'forecourt' width of 9.3m within the plot, which allows for turning space, and would be enclosed by a close-boarded timber fence.

1.3 The proposed new driveway serving 'Sake Ride Farm' would also have a width of some 4m and would have a new boundary enclosure comprising a 1.4m high timber post and rail fence to the southern side, overlooking the wider farm land.

1.4 There would be a landscaped island about 4m wide between the two driveways, which would stop about 2.6m short of the highway edge and would allow visibility across each of the accesses.

Contact Officer: Nicola Pettifer Tel: 01403 215382 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 2

1.5 Each property would be provided with a pair of inward-opening entrance gates, set about 6m off the property / verge boundary, and an overall distance of some 9m off the edge of the public highway / roadway.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

1.6 The application site is situated on the western side of Wineham Lane and comprises a new-build bungalow called 'The Dairy', and the wider original buildings known as 'Sake Ride Farm'.

1.7 Both properties are currently accessed off the original gravel track that is bordered on both sides by a high timber fence. The site adjoins the public highway by a grassed verge and drainage ditch, some 2m wide, and a high, dense hedge.

1.8 In 2012, permission was granted for a new chalet bungalow to replace the former 'Dairy' property (DC/12/1305). The new property, now also called 'The Dairy', includes a double car-port directly abutting the access track, resulting in vehicles backing out and potentially causing conflict with other vehicles using the track.

1.9 The site falls outside of the defined built-up area boundary but is otherwise not subject to any constraints or designations.

2. INTRODUCTION

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY

2.2 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) (NPPF)

 Section 4: Promoting Sustainable Transport  Section 7: Requiring Good Design  Section 11: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY

2.3 Local Development Framework: Core Strategy (2007) policies:

 CP1: Landscape and Townscape Character  CP2: Environmental Quality  CP3: Improving the Quality of New Development

2.4 Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) policies:

 DC1: Countryside Protection and Enhancement  DC2: Landscape Character  DC9: Development Principles  DC28: House Extensions, Replacement Dwellings and Ancillary Accommodation  DC40: Transport and Access APPENDIX A/ 5 - 3

2.5 The Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) Preferred Strategy was approved by Council for consultation on 25th July 2013. The consultation period ended on 11th October 2013 and a summary of the responses received was considered by Council at it's meeting on 11th December 2013 for information.

The next stage in the plan preparation, the Proposed Submission, is due to be considered by Council in April 2014. Until this time, the Preferred Strategy is a material consideration in the assessment of this planning application in accordance with paragraph 216 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which confirms that weight can be given to policies in emerging plans following publication.

PLANNING HISTORY

DC/09/1896 Change of use of two buildings to indoor stables and indoor WDN turn out area, retention of sand school, livery use and amend Condition 7 on Consent SH/10/93 (agricultural occupancy condition) to include a person working in equestrian employment.

DC/11/2378 Conversion of building to a dwelling house (Certificate of Lawful PER Development - Existing)

DC/12/0599 Non compliance of condition 7 of consent SH/10/93 - PER Agricultural occupancy condition (Certificate of Lawful Development - Existing)

DC/13/0200 Erection of a homeworking office PER

3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS

OUTSIDE AGENCIES

WSCC Strategic Planning (summarised):

 Given national speed limit of 60m.p.h, typical visibility requirement would be for 215m. However, vehicles are unlikely to be travelling in excess of this speed in this location and therefore a reduced distance may be acceptable in this instance.  The proposal will not see a material increase in vehicular movements.

Further comments have been received in response to the amended plans showing the visibility splays and the boundary hedge-line;  A condition is suggested to require the maximum achievable visibility splays to be implemented within 6 months of any work being implemented.

PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

Shermanbury Parish Council: The Parish Council did not make any representations to this application.

No letters of representation were received. APPENDIX A/ 5 - 4

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

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

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

6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS

6.1 The key issues for consideration in relation to this proposal are:

 The principle of the development  Impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area  Highway impacts

Principle of the development

6.2 The proposal to create independent accesses to each of the dwellings arises owing to vehicles which currently emerge from the car-port at ‘The Dairy’ conflicting with oncoming vehicles and farm traffic travelling to/from Sake Ride Farm.

There are no objections in principle to the creation of a second access onto Wineham Lane.

Impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area

6.3 Policies CP1 and CP3 of the Core Strategy require new development proposals to maintain and enhance landscape and townscape character, as well as providing a safe, attractive, accessible and functional environment, and complement the varying character of the District. Within the General Development Control Policies it is DC9 which requires new development to respect the character and setting of the surrounding area, and presume in favour of retaining existing important landscaping and natural features, such as hedges.

6.4 The proposal would result in the loss of a stretch of about 5m of mixed hedging along the street-facing boundary, in order to create the second vehicular access. In the wider context of the site, this loss would be acceptable and would not lead to any undue intensification or urbanisation of the setting.

6.5 In order to achieve the required safe visibility splays from the proposed new access onto Wineham Lane, a limited amount of hedge trimming would need to be undertaken, involving the reduction of the depth of the hedge by about 0.5m. However, the length of boundary hedging would not be affected and so would retain much of the existing rural character of the lane.

6.6 The proposal would accord with the requirements of these policies as the loss of the boundary hedge has been minimised to retain this locally distinctive feature as much as possible. APPENDIX A/ 5 - 5

Highways Impact

6.5 The policy context in considering proposals for new vehicular accesses is DC40 of the General Development Control Policies, which requires developments to provide a safe and adequate means of access, and s integrated with the wider network of routes.

6.6 Wineham Lane is a classified highway, which carries the national speed limit of 60m.p.h. In this location, the lane does not include many other access points with the closest being some 120m to the north and about 135m to the south. The lane is reasonably straight, particularly to the south, where clear sightlines of 100m can be achieved to the south, and some 60m to the north.

6.7 The WSCC Highways Officer notes that:  Given national speed limit of 60m.p.h, typical visibility requirement would be for 215m. However, vehicles are unlikely to be travelling in excess of this speed in this location and therefore a reduced distance may be acceptable in this instance.  The proposal will not see a material increase in vehicular movements.

Highway Officers do not consider that the proposed new access, which is noted to be adjacent to an existing access, would lead to any adverse highway safety issues. The proposed gates, set at least 6m back from the highway, would be satisfactory in allowing a vehicle to stop clear of the highway whilst the gates are opened. However, should approval be granted for the proposal, then it would be advised that planning conditions be added to secure maximum achievable visibility splays within a 6 month period following implementation.

6.8 The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policy DC40 in providing a safe vehicular access to the existing highway network.

Conclusion

6.7 In this instance, the creation of a secondary access to serve one of the two dwellings currently accessed by the existing single driveway, would be acceptable subject to appropriate conditions, given there would be no adverse impact on the character of the area or on highway safety.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

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

1) A2 – Full Permission 2) H1 – Visibility splays to be implemented prior to first use of approved access 3) M1 – Approval of gate details 4) Development to be in accordance with approved plans

Background Papers: DC/13/2113

DC/13/2113

Sake Ride Farm

Scale : 1:2500

SLA Number 100023865