Agenda and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/20/0854 – Councillor Chris Brown declared a prejudicial interest as he knew the applicant and would not participate in the debate and vote for this item.

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

There were no announcements.

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

Ward: Billingshurst

Applicant: Mr and Mrs L Dace

The Head of Development reported that this application sought retrospective planning permission for the bailing and storage of agricultural plastics for subsequent despatch and recycling at Copped Hall Farm.

Agricultural plastic waste material would be imported into the site and unloaded before being stored into stockpiles. Some bailing would occur on site.  The material would then be sent to recycling facilities, while unsuitable items would be exported for recovery or disposal.

The application site was located in Copped Hall Farm, Billinghurst and was situated to the south of Okehurst Lane. The site was not within any defined built up area boundary with the surrounding landscape being classified as rural.

35 letters of representation had been received, 17 of which were in support of the application and 18 objecting to the application. 3 Members of the public spoke in objection to the application and 1 member of the public addressed the committee in support. The applicant and the applicant’s agent also addressed the committee in support of the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; landscape character and visual impact; Heritage; environmental protection and amenity; highway matters; and environmental issues.

Members were concerned with the impact on local amenity and concluded to defer the application to allow a noise assessment to be undertaken of the proposed site use.

          RESOLVED

That application DC/20/0854 be deferred to allow a noise assessment to be undertaken.

Ward: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington

Applicant: Clare Bartlett

The Head of Development reported that this application sought full planning permission for the demolition of 2 attached agricultural buildings and the erection of 3 chalet bungalow style dwellings.

The application site was comprised of a steel framed agricultural barn with half-height block walls and timber slat walls above, and a corrugated steel roof.

The applicant’s agent addressed the committee in support of the application.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; landscape character and visual impact; impact on neighbouring amenity; quality of the resulting environment for future occupiers; highway matters; climate change; and ecology considerations.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/1870 be approved subject to the conditions as set out in the officer’s report.

Ward: Storrington and Washington

Applicant: Mr and Mrs Page

The Head of Development reported that this application sought full planning permission for the conversion of the existing building to a commercial unit.

The application site was located to the west of School Hill, within the built-up area and conservation area of Storrington.

8 letters of objection had been received from 5 different address’ and Storrington and Sullington Parish Council spoke in objection.

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

Members felt that the application site was unsuitable for a commercial use and should be used as an office only.

A motion was made to amend the officers’ recommendation to include a condition allowing the site to be used as an office only. This motion failed.

Another motion was made to refuse this application on the grounds of significant harm to the appearance of the Storrington Conservation area.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/2519 be refused for the following reason:

The proposed external alterations, with the addition of a new shopfront, would be harmful to the appearance of Storrington Conservation Area contrary to policies 33 and 34 of the Horsham District Planning Framework  (2015).

Ward: Henfield

Applicant: Aerco Services Ltd

The Head of Development reported that this application sought retrospective planning permission for the change of use of a building from an ancillary office to a beauty salon.

The application site was located to the west of the High Street and to the south of Cagefoot Lane, within the built up area boundary of Henfield.

13 letters of objection from 9 address’ had been received.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; design and appearance; impact on designated conservation area; amenity impacts; and highways impacts.

            RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/1864 be approved subject to the conditions as set out in the officer’s report and that an informative be sent to the applicant strongly advising them to notify clients via their website and when booking appointments that they would need to park in nearby local carparks.