Agenda item

Ward: West Chiltington, Thakeham and Ashington.

Applicant: Ms Claire Holloway.

The Head of Development & Building Control reported this application sought permission for the erection of a rural workers 3-bed residential dwelling and attached agricultural building used as a commercial store/sales room.

The building was located to the west of the site near to the shared boundary and immediately north of the existing access. It comprised an H shaped building and a number of pitched roof features adjoined by flat green roof.

The site of the application and wider land was currently used as an alpaca farm and small vineyard. The applicant benefitted from a temporary residential cabin where temporary planning had been approved and this would be removed as part of the current proposal. An agricultural building was located to the east of the cabin used for the established agricultural enterprise.

The wider area was characterised by sporadic residential, and agricultural development with woodland and fields. The site was located immediately adjacent to the built-up area of West Chiltington Common and Old Haglands a Grade II Listed Building located directly to the west.

The Parish Council objected to the proposal. 35 letters of support had been received from 33 households, 12 were received from households within the Horsham District and 21 from outside the District.

16 letters of objection were received from 13 separate households within Horsham District. A further 6 letters of representation were received neither supporting or objecting.

Since the publication of the report a further letter of support had been received.

The applicant spoke in support of the application. A representative from the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application citing concerns with the design and size of the proposed building and near location to the listed building.

It was noted that since the report was published the applicant had submitted amendments with some changes. Due to a lack of supporting information; it was acknowledged that a dwelling was required however a new design would be required to overcome concerns.

Members generally agreed that the current proposal was too large and although supportive of the business, concerns were raised regarding an increase in traffic on Haglands Lane. It was suggested that any further application may consider better access to the site.

Members discussed gaining greater understanding in supporting the change of agricultural use in the area to vineyards. It was suggested that specific vineyard requirements would enable clarity in the planning process and a possible policy or set of sub policies should be considered.

Members considered the consultees’ responses and officer’s planning assessment which included the following key issues: principle of development, design and appearance, heritage impacts, impact on the amenity; water neutrality, highways impact and climate.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/21/1375 be refused for the following reasons:

1          The proposed development due to its scale and nature has the potential to result in an intensification of activity within the countryside, with the proposal representing new-build development where it has not been demonstrated that existing buildings are not suitable for conversion. Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that the development would result in substantial environmental improvement, nor that the development would reduce the impact on the countryside. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policies 10 and 26 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

2          The proposed development would be of a scale, extent and siting that would result in a dominant and prominent feature within the immediate context, and would be of a design and form that would appear as an awkward and intrusive addition. The proposal would fail to reflect the locally distinctive character of the wider area, and would dilute the understanding and appreciation of the setting of the nearby Grade II Listed Building. As such, the proposal would fail to protect, conserve, and enhance the key features and characteristics of the landscape character and countryside setting, contrary to Policies 25, 26, 32, 33, and 34 of the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015).

3          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).