Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 18^th June 2019.

(Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to committeeservices@horsham.gov.uk at least 24 hours before the meeting.  Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 18 June were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/19/0327 – Councillor Nigel Jupp declared a conflict of interest in this application because he was a friend of the applicant.  He withdrew from the meeting and took no part in the determination of this item.

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

There were no announcements.

Applications for determination by Committee:

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

Ward: Pulborough and Coldwaltham (Historic)

Applicant: Mr Graham

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the change of use of an outbuilding from ancillary accommodation to a self-contained residential dwelling, with a parking space and amenity area.  Permission DC/17/2108 had limited occupation of the outbuilding to ancillary purposes only. There would be no external alterations to the building.

The application site was located outside the built-up area on the junction of Mare Lane and Batts Lane and was set in large grounds. The proposed dwelling would have its own vehicle access point.  

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been four representations objecting to the application. Since publication of the report, a further objection had been received stating that the Highway Authority had not visited the site before making their consultation response. The Committee were advised that the Highway Authority had since visited the site and confirmed that they stood by their consultation response.  The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were:  the principle of the development; its impact on the visual amenities of the countryside; the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties; and parking and traffic conditions.

Members discussed how much impact the change of use from ancillary may have on traffic safety at the junction of Batts Lane and Mare Hill Road, and how much weight could be given to a previous appeal decision made in 1995 that considered this access to be of poor quality.  Members concluded that a site visit to the junction and further discussion with the Highway Authority should be sought before the Committee determined the application.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/0209 be deferred to allow for:

(i)    A site visit with Planning Committee South members; and

(ii)   A site visit with the Chairman, Cabinet Member for Planning & Development, Local Members and WSCC Highways Authority officer;

to consider the safety of the junction of Batts Lane with Mare Hill Road.

Ward: Pulborough and Coldwaltham

Applicant: Mr and Mrs N Hamilton  

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a 3-bedroom detached chalet bungalow.  Part of the detached garage belonging to Grey Oak would be demolished to provide access from Tudor Close for the new dwelling.  A large parking and turning area in front of the dwelling was proposed.   

The application site was located outside the built-up area between Pulborough and West Chiltington Common.  It was part of the back garden of Grey Oak, a detached dwelling, on the southern side of Tudor Close, which was part of the small settlement of Mare Hill.  

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been 27 representations objecting to the application, and 12 supporting the proposal.   Two members of the public spoke in objection to the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council also spoke in objection to it.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of the development; the character and appearance of the proposal; the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties; and highways impacts.

Members concluded that the proposal was unacceptable in principle and would compromise the semi-rural character of the area.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/0327 be refused for the following reasons:

01   The development would be located outside of a built-up area boundary, on a site not allocated for development within the Horsham District Planning Framework or in an adopted Neighbourhood Development Plan. The proposed development would not be essential to the countryside location and is therefore be inconsistent with the overarching strategy for development within the District, and is therefore contrary to policies 1, 2, 3, 4 and 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

02   The proposed backland development on previously undeveloped garden land would compromise the layout and semi-rural character of the application site and surrounding area, distorting the existing arrangement of properties on the southern side of Tudor Close.  The resulting impact would not be sympathetic or appropriate to the existing character and appearance of the locality, resulting in harm to the established semi-rural character of the area.  The proposed development is therefore contrary to policies 25, 32 and 33 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

Ward: Chantry (Historic Ward)

Applicant: Mr and Mrs Powell

The Head of Development reported that this application sought retrospective permission for the erection of a two-storey side extension with roof extensions, the installation of two front dormer windows, one front rooflight and five rear rooflights.

The alterations had been carried out largely in line with planning permission DC/18/0152 but there were a number of aspects that differed from the approved plans, including changes to fenestration.  These changes included five clear glazed openable rooflights set higher in the rear roof than the approved four rooflights (conditioned to be obscure glazed and fixed shut).

The application site was located within the built-up area of Storrington in an area with generous sized gardens and woodland.  

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been seven representations objecting to the application.  One member of the public spoke in objection to the application. The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.  

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were:  the principle of the development; character, design and appearance; and the amenity of adjacent properties.

Members discussed concerns regarding overlooking from the rooflights and concluded that they were of a sufficient height and distance to ensure there was no harmful impact on neighbouring amenity.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/0417 be granted subject to the Approved Plans List condition.