Agenda item

Ward: Cowfold, Shermanbury and West Grinstead

Applicant: Reside Developments Ltd

The Head of Development & Building Control reported that this outline application sought to amend the reasons for refusal being considered under the current appeal by the Planning Inspectorate.

The outline application was for the erection of 81 dwellings, associated public spaces, landscaping, vehicular access, drainage and highways infrastructure works. All matters were reserved apart from access.

The application site was located to the north-west of Partridge Green to the west of Church Road and north of the Rosary. The Downs Link (Bridleway 3566) marks the western boundary of the site and Church Road (B2135) marks the eastern boundary. Jolesfield and Littleworth are located to the north and north-east. All protected trees on the site would be retained.

Since the refusal of planning permission, four new material considerations had arisen relating to; water neutrality, the introduction of four custom/self build dwellings in the proposals, the West Grinstead Neighbourhood Plan and the Council’s five year housing land supply position.

The report had been returned to committee to consider revisions for refusal for application DC/20/1697 which was subject to a current appeal by the planning inspectorate and it was recommended that:

(a)  The current reason for refusal relating to the principle of development, owing to the Council’s lack of five year housing land supply should be withdrawn.

(b)  A new reason for refusal relating to the adverse impact of the development on the Arun Valley SAC/SPA and Ramsar sites should be introduced as the development had not demonstrated to be water neutral.

Members noted the planning history of DC/20/1697. The Parish Council objected to the proposal. 22 letters of objection had been received from 19 households and two letters of support, four further letters were received from three households neither objecting or supporting the proposal.

Since the publication of the report an additional representation had been received raising concerns on heritage, landscape and impacts of safety on the northern pedestrian point. WSCC Highways had reviewed these safety concerns and concluded that the proposed pedestrian crossing was still acceptable.

Members supported the officer recommendations. It was reported that a Section 106 agreement was currently being discussed and agreed.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/20/1697 will advise the Planning Inspectorate that it will:

(a)   No longer be seeking to defend the reason for refusal no. 1 regarding the principle of development given the Council’s five year housing land supply position; and

(b)   Will be defending the refusal of planning permission instead on the following grounds:

1.    Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate with a sufficient degree of certainty that the proposed development would not contribute to an existing adverse effect upon the integrity of the internationally designated Arun Valley Special Area of Conservation, Special Protection Area and Ramsar sites by way of increased water abstraction, contrary to Policy 31 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), Paragraphs 179 and 180 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

2.    The proposed development has not been accompanied by a completed s106 Legal Agreement, thereby does not secure the 35% of units required to be provided as affordable housing units, nor an agreement for improvement works to PROW 1840 or a requirement for the provision of 4 custom / self build units. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 16 and Policy 40 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015) as it has not been demonstrated how the affordable housing needs of the District would be met, nor how the development can be appropriately integrated with the wider network of routes.