chichester district council planning committee...

1

AGENDA ITEM 05

Chichester District Council

Planning Committee

Wednesday 4 February 2015

SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

THE BACKGROUND PAPERS RELATING TO THIS REPORT CONSIST OF REPRESENTATIONS FROM THIRD PARTIES,

REPORTS BY COUNCIL AND OBSERVATIONS FROM STATUTORY AND OTHER CONSULTEES

RECOMMENDATIONS APPEAR IN CODED FORM

THE FULL TEXT OF CONDITIONS OR REASONS IS AVAILABLE ON REQUEST AT THE COUNCIL OFFICES OR CAN BE VIEWED ONLINE AT

WWW.CHICHESTER.GOV.UK QUOTING THE APPLICATION REFERENCE NUMBER THE APPLICATION REFERENCE NUMBER

2

How applications are referenced

a) First 2 Digits = Parish

b) Next 2 Digits = Year c) Next 5 Digits = Application Number d) Final Letters = Application Type

Application Type

ADV Advert Application AGR Agricultural Application (following PNO) CMA County Matter Application (eg Minerals) CAC Conservation Area Consent COU Change of Use CPO Consultation with County Planning (REG3) DEM Demolition Application DOM Domestic Application (Householder) ELD Existing Lawful Development FUL Full Application GVT Government Department Application HSC Hazardous Substance Consent LBC Listed Building Consent OHL Overhead Electricity Line OUT Outline Application PLD Proposed Lawful Development PNO Prior Notification (Agr, Dem, Tel) REG3 District Application – Reg 3 REG4 District Application – Reg 4 REM Approval of Reserved Matters REN Renewal (of Temporary Permission) TCA Tree in Conservation Area TEL Telecommunication Application (After PNO) TPA Works to tree subject of a TPO

CONACC Accesses CONADV Adverts CONAGR Agricultural CONBC Breach of Conditions CONCD Coastal CONCMA County matters CONCOM Commercial/Industrial/Business CONDWE Unauthorised dwellings CONENG Engineering operations CONHDG Hedgerows CONHH Householders CONLB Listed Buildings CONMHC Mobile homes / caravans CONREC Recreation / sports CONSH Stables / horses CONT Trees CONTEM Temporary uses – markets/shooting/ motorbikes CONTRV Travellers CONWST Wasteland

Committee report changes appear in bold text. Application Status ALLOW Appeal Allowed APP Appeal in Progress APPRET Invalid Application Returned APPWDN Appeal Withdrawn BCO Building Work Complete BST Building Work Started CLOSED Case Closed CRTACT Court Action Agreed CRTDEC Hearing Decision Made CSS Called in by Secretary of State DEC Decided DECDET Decline to determine DEFCH Defer – Chairman DISMIS Appeal Dismissed HOLD Application Clock Stopped INV Application Invalid on Receipt LEG Defer – Legal Agreement LIC Licence Issued NFA No Further Action NODEC No Decision NONDET Never to be determined NOOBJ No Objection NOTICE Notice Issued NOTPRO Not to Prepare a Tree Preservation Order OBJ Objection PCNENF PCN Served, Enforcement Pending PCO Pending Consideration PD Permitted Development PDE Pending Decision PER Application Permitted PLNREC DC Application Submitted PPNR Planning Permission Required S64 PPNREQ Planning Permission Not Required REC Application Received REF Application Refused REVOKE Permission Revoked S32 Section 32 Notice SPLIT Split Decision STPSRV Stop Notice Served STPWTH Stop Notice Withdrawn VAL Valid Application Received WDN Application Withdrawn YESTPO Prepare a Tree Preservation Order

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item No

Application No Site Address/Proposal Page No

1. BI/14/03697/DOM Skylarks Pescotts Close Birdham Chichester PO20 7HD

New porch, raise existing roof and insertion of small dormer windows and roof-lights and rear extension

5

2. BX/14/02703/FUL Church of St Mary and St Blaise Church Lane Boxgrove West Sussex

Reconstruct approximately 24.75m of churchyard wall between the western gate pier and the south-west corner of the churchyard, including the return angle in this corner, bonding into the existing gate pier at one end and into the western churchyard wall, beyond the return angle, at the other. The height of the wall to Church Lane is approximately 1.75m, retaining 900 mm on the churchyard side.

11

3. CC/14/02535/DOM

97 Oving Road Chichester West Sussex PO19 7EW Erection of a steel fabricated building. Cladded in steel sheeting to extend the existing garage

19

4. CC/14/02857/DOM 25 Kings Avenue Chichester West Sussex PO19 8EA

Part-single storey and part-two-storey rear extension and loft conversion

25

5. CC/14/03332/FUL 19 Orchard Street Chichester West Sussex PO19 1DD

Demolition of existing concrete garage and erection of two no two-storey two-bedroom semi-detached private houses

32

6. E/14/03295/OUT Millside Bell Lane Earnley Chichester PO20 7JD

Replacement of existing dwelling, timber chalet and mobile home with two no detached dwellings

43

4

7. PS/14/03055/FUL The Rear Shelly The Drive Loxwood Billingshurst RH14 0TD

Erection of new detached chalet style dwelling with cycle store

51

8. SB/14/02303/FUL 134 Main Road Emsworth Hampshire PO10 8HA

Installation of new and replacement stores, amendments to gravel drive and creation of children's play area (retrospective application)

60

9. SB/14/02326/FUL Land East of 181 Main Road Southbourne Hampshire Erection of 20 dwellings, associated access and parking, secure cycle storage and landscaping

69

10. WE/14/03174/LBC Westbourne House North Street Westbourne Emsworth West Sussex PO10 8SN Alterations and extension

93

5

Parish: Birdham

Ward: West Wittering

1 BI/14/03697/DOM

Proposal New porch, raise existing roof and insertion of small dormer windows and

roof-lights and rear extension

Site Skylarks Pescotts Close Birdham Chichester PO20 7HD

Map Ref (E) 482229 (N) 100106

Applicant Mr and Mrs Chamberlain RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE

Note: Do not scale from map. For information only. Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Crown Copyright. License No. 100018803

6

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Applicant is a Member/Officer of Council, or spouse/partner 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The application site lies to the southern side of Pescotts Close, a private close within the designated Settlement Policy Area (SPA) of Birdham and the Chichester Harbour AONB. The area is residential in character, with Pescotts Close comprising of detached bungalows, with roof conversions. 2.2 The site comprises a detached bungalow, set on an elevated position to the roadside. It is set back from the roadside, following a unified road frontage and is partially screened by a 2 metre hedge. Access to the property is via a concrete driveway to the east of the property, accommodating approximately three cars in tandem, with single storey flat roof garage set to the rear of the property. It is brick facing to the front elevation and stone facing to the rear, with steeply pitched clay tiled roof and white painted crittal windows. To the rear the garden is a good size, laid mostly to lawn, with 1.8 metre close board fencing to the east and west boundaries. To the south there are mature trees with temporary 1.5m mesh fencing forming the boundary to the primary school. To the east of the site (Cornerside) is a modest bungalow, of similar proportions to the application site and to the west (Holly Tree Cottage) a detached bungalow.

3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The proposal seeks extensions and alterations to the existing bungalow. The ridge height would be raised from 5.45m to 6.1m, providing first floor accommodation. Two flat roof dormers would be positioned to the front roof slope, allowing for additional headroom. To the rear it is proposed to erect a 1.5 storey extension to the east, retaining the low eaves height of 2.15m and a ridge height of 6m. It would project 3m from the existing property and accommodate a master bedroom at first floor and living room at ground. There would be a single storey flat roof extension to the west with an eaves height of 2.7m, set 1m from the boundary.. The front door to the property would be relocated to the north (front) elevation, with open sided porch and the existing entrance would be utilised as a boot room/utility space. 3.2 The proposal would be textured rendered in an off white colour, with weatherboarding to the gables and dormers in a grey/green colour. The roof would remain clay tiled and the dormers would have lead roofs and weatherboarding to the cheeks. The existing garage would be demolished, but the driveway parking arrangements would be unaltered.

4.0 History Nil

5.0 Constraints

Rural Area NO

AONB YES

6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council No comments received.

7

6.2 Chichester Harbour Conservancy The Local Planning Authority is advised that the Conservancy has no objection to this application, but asks that the following matters be negotiated if possible Schedule/samples of materials to be agreed prior to construction Amended Plans- No objection 6 Third Party Objections from 4 households The porch is out of keeping, extending forward of the front build line. The dormers are out of keeping, resulting in overlooking to neighbouring amenity. Materials are out of keeping with the street scene and character of the area. The rear extension is bulky, unneighbourly and impinges on privacy. 4 Third Party Objections from 3 households on amended plans The dormers remain unacceptable and the rear addition appears more sympathetic. The rear extension will block light and result in overlooking. The front dormers are out of keeping and result in overlooking. Comments on original scheme regarding overlooking, out of character remain. 1 Third Party Support The alterations appear in keeping with the existing property, however query the use of slate for the roof tiles. Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information The ridge height has been lowered and the rear addition has been reduced to sit below the main ridge. The dormers to the front have been replaced with flat roof dormers to offer a more subservient appearance when viewed in the street scene. We have also revisited the site and viewed the proposals again in the wider context, a number of bungalows have been extensively remodelled with rooms in the roof and some have rooflights and feature round windows, there has also been the use of projecting gable ends with windows on the front and rooflights in the slope, with large dormers in the rear accommodating first floor accommodation. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE11 New Development BE12 Alterations, Extensions and Conversions RE4 Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant.

8

Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 43: Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), 56, 58, 115. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: PGN3: Design Guidelines for Alterations to Dwellings and Extensions (September 2009). 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 - Managing a changing environment D3 - Housing fit for purpose 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: i) Impact upon the character and appearance of the area ii) Impact on neighbouring residential amenities Assessment i) Impact upon the character and appearance of the area 8.2 Following concerns regarding the visual prominence of the proposal, due to the increase in ridge height, two large dormers to the front elevation and the scale and massing of the rear addition, amendments were sought to address these concerns. 8.3 The reduction in the ridge height to 6.1m has bought the proposal down to a height in line with the form of the other residential properties in the street scene. The two dormers to the front have been reduced in height and width, thereby reducing their scale and mass. Dormers windows to the front are not a feature found in the close however the street comprises of a number of properties with converted roof space and gable ends with first floor windows, , The proposed dormer windows are not considered harmful to the appearance of the area, due to the presence of varying roof forms in the locality and their design and bulk which is visually subservient to the host dwelling. Additionally

9

the property would retain its 1.5 storey appearance in keeping with the prevailing single storey and 1.5 storey nature of the properties in the close. 8.4 To the front of the property an oak framed porch would be constructed over the relocated entrance door. This would project 800mm from the front of the property and whilst forward of the front build line, due to its small scale and projection, it would not cause significant harm to the uniform building line in the street. It is not considered the proposals would detract from the character and visual amenity of Pescotts Close or the wider Chichester Harbour AONB. The proposal therefore complies with national and local policy requiring high quality design. ii) Impact on neighbouring residential amenities 8.5 The proposed 1.5 storey rear addition would be formed off centre to the rear of the property. It would be set 3.4m from the western boundary and 3.3m from the eastern, projecting 3m at ground floor level from the rear wall of the existing property. The ridge height at 6m and the use of a half hip would significantly reduce the scale and massing of the rear extension. It is considered the distance from neighbouring boundaries and the combination of low eaves at 2.15m would mitigate any overbearing impacts that may occur on neighbouring residential amenities. 8.6 To the rear there would also be a flat roof dormer to serve a bathroom. Due to concerns about overlooking it would be appropriate to impose a restrictive condition requiring obscure glazing and for the window to be fixed shut below 1.7m above the finished floor level. To the front of the property the two dormers would serve first floor bedrooms and there would be an acceptable 24m front to front separation between the property to the north (Palmers) and an acceptable 18m, at an oblique angle to The Corner's rear boundary. A rooflight would be inserted into the south roofslope providing light into the master bedroom ensuite and would be set 1.8m above finished floor level to mitigate any overlooking impacts. To the eastern elevation there would be a feature length window at first floor level to the gable end, also providing light to the ensuite. Due to the nature of the use of the room it would be serving and the distance from the boundary, it would be considered appropriate to condition to be obscure glazed and fixed shut, to mitigate overlooking impacts. Significant Conditions 8.7 Conditions will be attached relating to the following matters: i) Prior to commencement of the works, external materials and finishes shall be submitted to

the Local Planning Authority for approval. ii) The rear dormer window to the south elevation and feature window to the east wall shall at

all times be obscure glazed and fixed shut below 1.7m finished floor level. iii) No additional windows or openings in the east and west elevations of the roofslopes or

gable ends, without the permission of the Local Planning Authority. Conclusion 8.8 Based on the above assessment it is considered the proposal complies with development plan policies BE1, BE11 andBE12 and the Design Guidelines for Alterations to Dwellings and Extensions. Therefore the application is therefore recommended for approval. Human Rights 8.9 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate.

10

RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 A01F Time Limit - Full 2 B01G No Departure from Plans 3 U90904 - materials 4 U90900 - dormer obscure 5 U90903 – windows INFORMATIVES W01F Disclaimer - Other Consents For further information on this application please contact Caitlin Boddy on 01243 534734

11

Parish: Boxgrove

Ward: Boxgrove

2 BX/14/02703/FUL

Proposal Reconstruct approx 24.75m of churchyard wall between the western gate

pier and the SW corner of the churchyard, including the return angle in this corner, bonding into the existing gate pier at one end and into the western churchyard wall, beyond the return angle, at the other. The height of the wall to Church Lane is approx 1.75m, retaining 900mm on the churchyard side.

Site Church of St Mary and St Blaise Church Lane Boxgrove West Sussex

Map Ref (E) 490827 (N) 107504

Applicant Mr Richard Chevis RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


12

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Statutory Consultee Objection - Officer recommends permit 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 This application relates to the churchyard wall of the Grade 1 Listed Priory Church in Boxgrove. The church lies at the eastern end of Church Lane, to the east of The Street, within the Boxgrove Conservation Area. 2.2 The area of churchyard wall which is the subject of this application is the western end of the southern wall, which abuts Church Lane. The wall is a flint wall with galleting to a height of approx. 1.75m, and it retains the churchyard behind which sits at a higher level than Church Lane. The wall is in a poor state of repair, with some of it having fallen away, and there is evidence of earlier repairs to the wall which have included the use of cement mortar. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 Reconstruct approx 24.75m of churchyard wall between the western gate pier and the SW corner of the churchyard, including the return angle in this corner, bonding into the existing gate pier at one end and into the western churchyard wall, beyond the return angle, at the other. The height of the wall to Church Lane is approx 1.75m, retaining 900mm on the churchyard side. 4.0 History 14/01081/PLD REF Repair/rebuild the western part of

the south side churchyard wall at Boxgrove.

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building YES

Conservation Area YES

Rural Area YES

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO

Tree Preservation Order NO

South Downs National Park NO

SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 NO

- Flood Zone 3 NO

Historic Parks and Gardens NO

6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council Boxgrove Parish Council supports this application.

13

6.2 English Heritage The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. 6.3 Ancient Monuments Society Welcome the consolidation and rebuilding of the boundary wall at this historically very significant site 6.4 The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) 22/12/2014 - Confirm our previous advice that in the Society's view total rebuilding of the wall as proposed would be "wholly unnecessary". The Council should not grant permission for the works as proposed in the application and we advise that a more conservative repair approach is adopted which seeks to retain the character, charm and significance of the historic wall which is part of this nationally important mediaeval site. 14/10/14 - The churchyard walls are with the curtilage of the Grade I Listed Priory Church, which is one of the most important buildings in the county and "one of the most evocative and intimate monastic churches anywhere in England" (Henry Thorold Collins Guide to Cathedrals, Abbeys and Priories of England and Wales 1986). It is not apparent whether any alternative options for repairs of this wall have been considered. The wall will lack authenticity, appear mechanical, lacking character and charm, out of sympathy with medieval sits and would distract from the extraordinary quality and setting of the Priory Church. Galetting is fundamental to the vernacular detail which should be retained. 6.5 CDC - Historic Buildings Adviser 08/01/2015 - No objection. Further to receipt of the comments from SPAB (14 October 2014) and the subsequent structural information (17 November 2014), whilst there may generally be a preference for the wall to be traditionally rebuilt, the proposed more robust method of rebuilding was considered acceptable in light of the retaining nature of the wall, holding back up to 800m of ground on the churchyard side. Conditions remain as per previous comments. 30/09/2014 - No objection. Recommend conditions requiring sample panel of wall and details of coping and abutments in accordance with sections 3.4 and 3.5 of specification. 6.6 CDC - Archaeological Officer No objection. Condition G13 (Archaeological safeguards) required. 6.7 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information During the course of the application additional information has been submitted by the applicants including; (i) Email from agent dated 16th October 2014 in response to the SPAB comments stating (in summary): - No details of alternative repair options have been provided, this does not mean that alternatives were not considered - Anxious, as always to retain authenticity wherever possible but in this instance the wall is beyond repair

14

- hard mortars may be a contributory factor but the rotation of the wall caused by the thrust of the raised churchyard levels and the separation of the entire outer face of the wall, held only by the straining wire on the services pole are main issues - Localised re-building will not address this wholesale detachment and rotation is such that consolidation of the remainder cannot be achieved without re-building. - We will replicate the coursing of the flintwork as best we can. We appreciate that galleting survives in some of the older parts of the wall but this has not been replicated in areas previously repaired. Failure of previous generations to replicate the craftsmanship of their forebears is something the SPAB rightly deplore and as a life member I sympathise. The church itself is galleted almost throughout and we would of course repeat the process in any repairs necessary there but the churchyard is enormous and the retaining boundary walls so extensive (and galleting so compromised by large proportion of non-galleted earlier repairs) as to make this technique an expensive addition to the cost and hard to justify in areas where galleting no longer exists. The Priory Church is a large and magnificent structure; the parish that supports it is tiny and its resources finite! - We will try to repair the gates as suggested. They gates are not ancient and the stiles will require scarfing to provide the tenons into which the bottom rails are morticed but if possible we will save what we can. (ii) Structural report from Andrew Waring Associates (Civil and Structural Engineer) dated 17th November 2014 stating: - Wall retained approx. 800mm of ground. - Wall is partially collapsed near centre with no tying or cross-bonding between the

inner and outer skins. - Most significant lean is just to the west of the collapse where the wall is propped

against a telegraph pole and restrained by its wire stay. The pole now leans outwards due to pressure from the wall.

- Greater rotation at low level and localised bulging which indicates separation of the skins.

- There are no weep holes and likely to be no foundations. - Lean varies up to 260mm with over 70% of the wall leaning by more than 150mm - Faces of flintwork poorly bonded with almost no tying, and fill where collapse has

occurred is in poor order. - Lack of weep holes exacerbates the effects and causes saturation of the wall core

which further contributes to a loss of bonding and degradation of the fill. - Once movement of partial collapse has occurred it is difficult to repair as the wall

tends to 'unzip' once disturbed. Very difficult to stitch flintwork effectively. - Wall is unsafe and liable to collapse at any time. - Impossible to repair with any certainty without re-setting the line of the wall which

will involve re-building it for much of its length. - Wall need to comply with modern requirements; properly designed foundations

and provable. Only viable solution is to reconstruct with exposed surfaces in flintwork.

7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Boxgrove at this time

15

7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE3 Archaeology BE4 Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit BE5 Alterations to Listed Buildings BE6 Conservation Areas BE11 New Development 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 47: Heritage National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), 56, 58, 126, 131. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.7 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Boxgrove Conservation Area Character Appraisal 7.8 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 - Managing a changing environment

16

8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: (i) Impact upon heritage assets Assessment (i) Impact upon heritage assets 8.2 The application relates to the re-building of part of the Churchyard wall around the Priory Church of St Mary and St Blaise, a 12th Century Grade I Listed Building. The wall which is the subject of this application is not listed in its own right, however it is curtilage listed due to its location around the edge of the churchyard and the age of the structure. The wall lies within the Conservation Area of Boxgrove, and to the east of the Settlement Policy Area (SPA). The heritage assets to be considered are therefore the listed building, the conservation area, and, by virtue of the age of the church and churchyard, archaeology. 8.3 S. 66 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. S. 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. In addition, the NPPF stresses the importance of protecting heritage assets, stating that LPA's should take account: of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of a heritage asset, the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities and to the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. 8.4 Development Plan policies of particular importance include policy BE4 of the Local Plan (LP) which states that the LPA will place a high priority on protecting the character and appearance of all buildings of architectural or historic interest, preserving listed buildings unless a convincing case can be made for demolition or alteration, and policy BE6 which states that appearance of Conservation Areas shall be preserved or enhanced. Furthermore, policy 47 of the emerging local plan requires new development to recognise, respect and enhance local the distinctiveness and character of the area and heritage assets. 8.5 The proposed development would result in the loss of the historic flint churchyard wall on to the south west of the Church, directly adjacent to Church Lane, and its replacement with a flint faced masonry wall. The application is supported by a range of documents that outline the deficiencies with the existing flint wall and explain why the option of repairing or partially re-building sections of the flint wall would not resolve the underlying instability of the wall. 8.6 It is accepted that the proposal would result in the loss of a historic wall which is an important feature within the conservation area and also is critical to the setting of the listed church. However, the historic wall is failing, and indeed has failed across much of its length previously, as is apparent from the repairs to the wall. Based on the information submitted it is considered that the wall is in such a poor condition that it is unable to effectively retain the churchyard in its current form and it is likely to suffer from further structure deterioration if works to resolve the problem are not carried out.

17

8.7. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) has objected to the proposal in terms of the principle of the development and also the design of the proposed replacement wall, which would not include galleting between the flints. The appearance, and also the historic value, of the existing wall has to an extent been degraded by the inappropriate repairs with cement mortar that have been carried out previously. The Council's Historic Buildings Advisor (HBA) does not raise any objections to the proposals, although further comments in response to the application indicate that galetting should be provided in the replacement wall. Furthermore, it is considered that conditions should be imposed requiring a sample panel of the proposed flint facing and also a sample of the abutments to ensure that the flint, coursing, mortar treatment and detailing is appropriate in this highly sensitive location. The advice of SPAB and the Council's HBA has been taken into consideration, however on balance it is considered that subject to the flint work being high quality, the lack of galleting would not result in such harm to either the listed building or the conservation area to resist the proposal. 8.8 The Council's archaeology officer has advised that the proposal is unlikely to harm archaeological deposits, however a condition is recommended requiring the LPA to be informed in the event any such deposits are found during the course of the works to provide an opportunity for them to be inspected. 8.9 It is recognised that the proposal seeks to provide a long-term solution to the provision of a stable retaining wall for the churchyard, which would have the appearance of a flint wall, appropriate to sensitive location of the wall. Therefore, provided the wall has a high quality finish, it would serve to preserve and enhance the conservation area and would not have an adverse impact upon the setting of the Grade I listed building. The proposal would therefore accord with national and local planning policies in respect of its impact upon heritage assets. Other matters 8.10 Due to the location of the proposed wall it is considered that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the amenities of neighbouring dwellings on the southern side of Church Lane and there would be no impact upon the highway. Significant Conditions 8.11 The conditions requested by the Council's Archaeology and Historic Buildings Advisor are recommended to ensure that the finish of the wall and archaeology is safeguarded as set out in the report above. Conclusion 8.12 Based on the above it is considered the proposal complies with development plan policies BE3, BE4, BE6 and BE11 and policies 1 and 47 of the emerging local plan and therefore the application is recommended for approval. Human Rights 8. 13 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate.

18

RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 A01F - Time Limit - Full 2 B01G - No Departure from Plans 3 G13F - Archaeological Safeguards 4 U90956 – Materials and Flintwork INFORMATIVES W44F - Application Approved Without Amendment For further information on this application please contact Fjola Stevens on 01243 534734

19

Parish: Chichester

Ward: Chichester East

3 CC/14/02535/DOM

Proposal Erection of a steel fabricated building. Cladded in steel sheeting to extend

the existing garage.

Site 97 Oving Road Chichester West Sussex PO19 7EW

Map Ref (E) 487442 (N) 104957

Applicant Mr Daniel Clarke RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


20

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Applicant is an employee of Chichester District Council - Officer recommends Permit. 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The site is located on the southern side of Oving Road and comprises a semi-detached dwellinghouse with a rendered flat roof garage building sited within the garden area. The garden is long and narrow and backs onto Leatherbottle Lane. Behind the original garage, and 5metres away from Leatherbottle Lane, the Applicant has constructed a metal sheet clad building with a slightly sloping roof. The existing brick built garage abuts the new structure. The building is set approximately 1m away from a detached dwellinghouse to the east and adjacent to a pitched timber clad garage building to the west. The boundary adjacent to the Leatherbottle Lane currently comprises a pair of timber gates approximately 1.8m high. The eastern and western boundaries consist of a 1.8m high fence. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application seeks retrospective consent for the recently constructed metal clad garage. The building measures 3.2m in height by 7m in depth by 3.5m in width. The applicant has confirmed that the walls of the building would be clad in a timber shiplap boards. The building would be used for domestic purposes including the storage of vehicles and maintenance of the Applicants own vehicles. 4.0 History 77/00033/CC PER Garage.

99/00521/DOM PER Front porch, minor alterations to

existing windows & doors. Extension of existing garage. New boundary fence. Brick piers & gates to Leatherbottle Lane.

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO

Conservation Area NO

Rural Area NO

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 YES

- Flood Zone 3 NO


21

6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council - 14.11.14 - Objection on the grounds that the erection of this steel clad garage building would be harmful to the appearance of the street scene 18.12.14 - Objection to the size and appearance of the building in the street scene and concerned that it will be used as a vehicle workshop. 6.2 4no. Third Party objectors - Concern regarding use of building and high level of noise and smells from garage - Used as a car repair workshop - concern that this will escalate into a business use - Building is too high - Use of cladding is not sympathetic - No sound proofing - Does not enhance the street - Tools used within garage create a hazard 6.3 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information The applicant has provided the following information in writing in support of the planning application: - Garage will be used as a hobby garage for own vehicle repairs and will not be used for commercial purposes - Will be soundproofed with insulation to reduce noise levels - High opening to garage door to allow camper van to be stored - Applicant has 3no vehicles and a motorcycle - Building is to be clad with timber shiplap boarding. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Chichester at this time. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE11 New Development 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant.

22

Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 33: New Residential Development National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles) and paragraph 56 and 58. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Chichester District Council's Planning Guidance Note 3, Design Guideline for Alterations to dwellings and extensions (revised September 2009) (PGN3) 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 - Managing a changing environment 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: i) The impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling and on the visual amenity of

the locality; ii) Use of building; iii) Impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties.

23

Assessment i) The impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling and on the visual amenity of

the locality; 8.2 The building is sited adjacent to Leatherbottle Lane and therefore would be seen from public vantage points. The building extends 5 metres away from Leatherbottle Lane and is set in line with the front building line of the dwelling to the east. The building abuts the original garage, and is 3.5 metres wide. The roof is slightly sloping form and the walls of the building would be clad in a wooden shiplap cladding. The garage has a large opening which is required to accommodate the Applicants Camper Van. The use of shiplap cladding would be acceptable in this location; it would have a similar appearance to the garage situated to the west and would improve the appearance of the building as constructed. 8.3 The comments from the City Council and third party's have been considered, however the proposed garage would sit alongside the buildings on each side of the application site, and the scale and bulk of the building is minimised by the use of the sloped roof resulting in a building which is lower than the garage to the west. It is therefore considered that the proposed building does not appear incongruous within the street scene. Therefore the siting, design and scale of the proposed development would respect the general character of its immediate surroundings and as such would not detract from the character of the surrounding area and would not appear visually intrusive within the street scene. The proposal would therefore be acceptable in respect of its impact upon the character and amenity of the locality. ii) Use of building 8.4 Concerns have been raised by neighbours and the City Council regarding the use of the building as a vehicle workshop and the noise and smells which emanate from the building. The Applicant has confirmed that the building will be used for storage of his four vehicles and as a hobby garage for the Applicants own vehicle repairs. With regard to the noise, the building will be soundproofed with insulation to reduce noise levels. A condition to limit the use of the building to private domestic use only is recommended. iii) Impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties; 8.5 The garage is sited along the same building line as the dwellinghouse to the east and set slightly back from the garage to the west. It is considered, therefore, that the proposal would not cause loss of available light detrimental to neighbouring properties. With regard to the noise and smells reported by Neighbours, the garage will be conditioned to ensure that it remains in use as a private and domestic garage for the use of the Applicant to maintain their own vehicles. Significant Conditions 8.6 Conditions required to make development satisfactory relate to the use of timber cladding and that the garage will be used as a private and domestic garage. Conclusion 8.7 Based on the above assessment it is considered the proposal complies with development plan policies and therefore the application is recommended for approval.

24

Human Rights 8.8 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 U90885 - Approved plans 2 U90886 – Timber cladding 3 U90887 - Garage INFORMATIVES 1 U90933 - Proactive Statement For further information on this application please contact Sophie Locke on 01243 534734.

25

Parish: Chichester

Ward: Chichester South

4 CC/14/02857/DOM

Proposal Part single storey and part two storey rear extension and loft conversion.

Site 25 Kings Avenue Chichester West Sussex PO19 8EA

Map Ref (E) 485907 (N) 103847

Applicant Mr Robbie Sharma RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


26

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Red Card: Cllr Anne Scicluna - Exceptional level of public interest 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The site consists of a two storey semi-detached dwellinghouse sited along the northern side of Kings Avenue. The property is constructed of white render with plain roof tiles and white upvc fenestration. There are two single storey extensions to the rear of the dwellinghouse; one with a mono-pitched roof that slopes from the main house to a depth of 1.2m adjoining the neighbouring dwelling, the other with a dual pitched roof on the western side of the rear elevation measuring 3.6m in depth by 2.5m in width. 2.2 The western boundary of the rear garden consists of an approximately 1.8m high brick wall close to the dwelling , with the neighbours outbuilding sited on the shared boundary approx. 2m along. The remaining part of the boundary consists of vegetation and a 1.2m high wall with trellis above. The eastern boundary of the rear garden consists of fencing approx. 1.2m high and extensive vegetation, approx. 3m high closest to dwelling. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application seeks consent for a two storey and single storey addition to the rear. The two storey addition would measure 3m in depth by 4.2m in width by 6.5m in height to the ridge and 5.4m in height to the eaves. The single storey addition would extend 1.1m in depth from the two storey addition, 2.8m in depth from the existing single storey addition, and would extend along the entire width of the dwelling. A dormer window is also proposed on the rear roofslope and a rooflight is proposed on the front roofslope. The development would be sited within both Flood Zones 2 and 3. The Agent has confirmed within a Flood Risk Assessment that the floor levels within the proposed development will be set no lower than existing levels and flood proofing of the proposed development has been incorporated where appropriate. 3.2 The application has been amended since it was originally submitted due to concerns regarding the design of the additions, the dormer balcony, and the detrimental impact to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The third set of revisions, which were received on the 14th January sought to address the concerns, and these are the proposals described above. 4.0 History No relevant history 5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO


Rural Area NO

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO



SFRA Flood Zone

27

- Flood Zone 2 YES

- Flood Zone 3 YES


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council - 18.12.14 - Objection on the grounds that the rearward extent of the single storey extension will have an unneighbourly impact upon the neighbour to the east. 2.10.14 - Objection on the grounds that the rearward extent of the single storey extension will have an unneighbourly impact upon the neighbour to the east and the scale and design of the dormer window will be incongruous and out of character with the existing building. 6.2 CDC - Environmental Housing - No objection - House will require a license should it become 3 storey and with 5 or more occupants as a HMO (House in Multiple Occupation). Planning consent will be required for a HMO with more than 6 occupants. 6.3 Southern Gateway Residents Association - Objection (12.12.14 and 26.11.14 and 7.10.14) 18.12.14 - Views from 26.11.14 remain. 26.11.14 - Improvements in design, size of dormer, roof layout. Remain issues regarding overlooking, light pollution, parking and construction traffic. 9.10.14 - Extension is un-neighbourly to immediate neighbours, overlooking from Juliet balcony, no spare parking for increased family use, inappropriate reconstruction of roofline, adversely affect the character of the building from the rear elevation which can be seen from the public realm. 6.4 9 Third Party Objectors (additional comments from objectors received after 2 re-consultation exercises) - - Overlooking to immediate neighbours and Southbank Court parking area - Overshadowing - Loss of light - Pollution cause by rooflights - Increased litter - Increased traffic flow and parking congestion - Increased noise - Inadequate drainage - House has been let to students for 6 years and is being advertised as a student let

house - larger dwelling will result in increased aggravation - Intended to be used by students - Out of character with other buildings in the vicinity - Shared access to rear should not be blocked during construction

28

6.5 Applicant/Agent Supporting Information - - The property has been let to students (up to 5) since 2008. - Changes in personal and family circumstances have to led to Applicant re

considering use of property with no intention to re-let the property to students - Advert has remained on auto-renewal, with no viewings taking place since

01.07.2014. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Chichester at this time. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE11 New Development BE12 Alterations, Extensions and Conversions 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 33: New Residential Development National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles) and paragraphs 56 and 58.

29

Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Chichester District Council's Planning Guidance Note 3, Design Guideline for Alterations to dwellings and extensions (revised September 2009) (PGN3) 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 - Managing a changing environment 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: i) The impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling and on the visual amenity of

the locality; ii) Impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties' iii) Use of dwelling. Assessment i) The impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling and on the visual amenity of the locality; 8.2 The proposal seeks to provide additional accommodation to the ground and first floor with an additional bedroom within the loft space. The additions would be constructed in materials to match the existing, and have been significantly reduced in size in comparison to the proposal which was originally submitted. The revised proposal would result in a 2 storey extension to the rear of the dwelling, which would be set considerably lower than the ridge of the main roof, and would have a hipped roof to further minimise its mass and bulk, ensuring that the proposal would be subservient to the main dwelling. The proposed dormer window would also be set beneath the height of the main roof and due to its size and position on the rear roofslope this element of the proposal would not harm the appearance of the main dwelling. The single storey rear extension has also been reduced in size, and given its shallow pitched roof and siting, it would be subservient to the host dwelling. It is therefore considered that the design, scale and height of the proposed additions, to constructed of appropriate matching materials, would be in keeping with the existing dwelling. 8.3 The comments from the City Council and third party's have been considered with regard to the previous set of drawings. On balance the design and scale of the proposed development would respect the general character of its immediate surroundings and as such would not detract from the character of the surrounding area. Furthermore, due to the siting and scale of the proposed extensions, which are set to the rear of the dwelling, the proposals would not appear visually intrusive within the area and would therefore be acceptable in this respect.

30

ii) Impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties' 8.4 Having regard to Chichester District Council's Planning Guidance Note 3, Design Guideline for Alterations to dwellings and extensions (revised September 2009) (PGN3), the proposed extensions would now comply with the guidance in terms of the 45 degree and 60 degree guidelines when taken from the ground floor windows of both neighbouring properties. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed ground and first floor additions would not cause loss of available light detrimental to neighbouring properties. 8.5 The original proposal for a Juliet balcony has been removed and the proposed works now seek to provide a pitched dormer window sited within the existing roofscape. It is noted that some views will be available from the dormer window across to Southbank Court, which is a block of flats, to the rear, and immediate neighbours to the east and west. However, given that there are existing first floor windows in which views across to neighbouring properties can be sought, this would not result in any additional harm to the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. In any case it should be noted that the dormer window which would be sited in the original roofscape, would be considered permitted development under Schedule 2, Part 1, Class B of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended and therefore these works would not require planning permission. 8.6 For the reasons set out above it is considered that the proposal would have an acceptable relationship with the neighbouring dwellings and therefore the proposal not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity. iii) Use of dwelling 8.7 The concerns received regarding the impact of the property as a student let have been noted. Large Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs) where more than 6 people reside and share basic amenities such as a kitchen or bathroom require planning permission. The Agent has been made aware that if the property would be used as a student let for over 6 students, planning permission would be required. However, the agent has advised the Local Planning Authority that the additions are to facilitate the use of the property as a family home. Significant Conditions 8.8 Conditions required to make development satisfactory relate to the materials which should match the existing dwelling, the use of an obscurely glazed window serving the new toilet on the western elevation, and the provision of a construction method statement to be submitted prior to the commencement of development to ensure that buildings works would not detrimentally impact upon the shared access. Conclusion 8.9 Based on the above assessment it is considered the proposal complies with development plan policies and Chichester District Council's Planning Guidance Note 3, Design Guideline for Alterations to dwellings and extensions (revised September 2009) (PGN3) and therefore the application is recommended for approval.

31

Human Rights 8.10 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 U90876 - Time limit - Full 2 U90878 - Approved plans 3 U90880 - Materials to match 4 U90894 - Obscurely glazed window 5 U90937 - Construction method statement INFORMATIVES 1 U90938 - Proactive statement For further information on this application please contact Sophie Locke on 01243 534634.

32

Parish: Chichester

Ward: Chichester West

5 CC/14/03332/FUL

Proposal Demolition of existing concrete garage and erection of two no two storey

two-bedroom semi-detached private houses.

Site 19 Orchard Street Chichester West Sussex PO19 1DD

Map Ref (E) 485697 (N) 105029

Applicant Ms Rebecca Joy RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE

NOT TO SCALE


33

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Red Card: Cllr Apel - Exceptional level of public interest 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The application site is located on the western side of Orchard Street and presently comprises part of the rear garden of 19 Orchard Street, a Grade 2 Listed Building fronting Orchard Street. The part of the rear garden, the subject of the application presently comprises a detached, part derelict concrete garage with a corrugated sheeting roof, which has become overgrown with weeds. There is vehicular access, via a timber gate from the WSCC building car park to the north of the site and private access to the west. The boundaries comprise low-level metal railing fencing with mature trees and shrubs to the boundaries. The remainder of the garden area is laid to lawn. 2.2 To the east of the site lies the Chichester Family Church, which adjoins the northern elevation of 19 Orchard Street. The church building is 1.5 storeys, with a steeply sloping pitched roof. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application represents the re-submission of an earlier refused planning application (Reference: CC/13/02148/FUL) for an identical proposal, although the current application has been supported by additional information. The application seeks the erection of 2no. semi-detached, 2-bedroomed dwellings which would be accessed from the metalled rear access road serving the other properties in the terrace along Orchard Street. 3.2 The proposed houses would be of a modern, flat roofed design with flat, green Cedum roofs and red bricks and cedar clad elevations. The two properties would have balconies at first floor level on their west elevations, overlooking the existing playing fields to the west of the site. Each property would be provided with 1no. car parking space, and have rear gardens approximately 6.5 metres deep and 7 metres wide. 4.0 History 03/03184/LBC PER Replace existing sash windows to

match existing and bathroom floor. Restrengthen floor to master bedroom. Relocation of bathroom, vent for bathroom to eves detail. Replace internal doors to match existing. Replace kitchen wall and or butress kitchen wall to match existing. Place new dormer windows to rear elevation plus roof connection to valley, tiled to match for loft bathroom. Reinstate fire surrounds to blank chimney fascards. General renovation with rewiring and replumbing. New kitchen. New dormer window and flat roof to

34

rear. New small single storey extension to rear.

03/03185/DOM PER New dormer window to match

adjoining owners. New tiled flat roof collection to valleys to rear. Single storey small continuous extension to rear courtyard.

13/02148/FUL REF Demolition of existing concrete

garage. erection of new build semi detached 2 bedroom houses and car ports.

14/01476/DOM PER To create a new rear hard

standing access point due to WSCC closure of existing access to rear hard standing.

14/03332/FUL PDE Demolition of existing concrete

garage and erection of 2 no. 2 storey 2 bedroom semi detached private houses.

14/04271/DOM PCO New fence to restore original

formal garden. 14/00339/CONHH

PLNREC Enforcement Enquiry

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building YES

Conservation Area CC

Rural Area NO

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 YES

- Flood Zone 3 NO


35

6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council No objection and welcome the addition of two new properties of quality and an innovative design. 6.2 CCAAC The application is commended as enhancing the Conservation Area. 6.3 Environment Agency Thank you for consulting the Environment Agency on the above application which is located in Flood Zone 2 defined by the NPPF as having a medium probability of flooding. Refer to Standing Advice. 6.4 CDC: Historic Buildings Adviser Whilst this proposal appears to be sited in the grounds of a listed building, it appears clear from a cartographic assessment that the land did not become part of No.19 Orchard Street until after 1898 and before 1912. On this basis, the principle of developing here is not overly problematic in terms of the listed building's historic curtilage. Given the nature of the site and its context, we would suggest that the proposals for two quite individual houses in a modernist idiom is also not an issue, partly because it is a largely discrete location without any strong influence on setting, but also because the building form and individuality of the design helps to express the corner here. Spatially, there is a logic to its location within the broader context. It is not simply an in-fill to a garden which is to the detriment of the built environment around it. With respect to the design, it appears to be of an appropriate quality for the Conservation Area. Its scale and massing is limited and the material quality of the elevations in brick and timber will largely soften its impact. Further details of the elevations should be required in due course, particularly in terms of timber finish and the interface between materials. There is some concern with the use of PV cells as it is not clear exactly where these are to be sited, or the scope of them. Whilst renewable energy is to be supported, it should not be to the detriment of the design, or its amenity within the Conservation Area. 6.5 CDC: Archaeological Officer This is probably too far from the Roman, medieval and later deposits relating to the city of Chichester for archaeological intervention to be warranted. However, the slight change that something of interest might be revealed would justify standard condition G13F. 6.6 CDC: Tree Officer The property is within the Chichester Conservation Area. None of the trees on the site are subject to TPO.

36

Earlier this year (2014) I reviewed a proposal 14/01476/DOM, to create a new rear hard standing access point due to WSCC closure of existing for a new car space. This meant the loss of 1no. Holm Oak tree (average quality). On the potential loss of vegetation on the site to allow further development and details as per the assessment within the Tree survey/report, I conclude: a) To the west is a vegetative hedgerow/screen (outside the site) which would help screen/soften any activity within the site; b) Limited public amenity (no access); c) Limited visual loss/impact (of vegetation) due to the location of the site; and, d) Trees/hedgerow on the (western) boundary and/or within the site are of average quality and not significant but the proposal if approved, we could agree to the proposed mitigation planting (5/6 trees) and control this within a Landscape condition. Other standard conditions - Any protective fencing in accordance with BS 5837 (2012), pruning in accordance with BS 3998 (2010) and no fires/materials stored within the RPA's of any retained trees. 6.7 CDC: Environmental Strategy Bats: The lighting scheme for the site will need to take into consideration the presence of bats in the local area and the scheme should minimise potential impacts to any bats using the trees and hedgerows by avoiding unnecessary artificial light spill through the use of directional light sources and shielding. Birds: Due to the level of protection nesting birds hold, any vegetation clearance (including tree felling) should take place outside the nesting season (February-September). If this is not possible an ecologist should inspect the site and areas which will be disturbed no more than 24 hours prior to the works taking place. If no nesting birds or young birds are found works may begin. However, if any nesting birds or young are onsite work will have to be delayed until they have fledged. Recreational Disturbance: In combination effect: This proposal will have an in-combination effect on the Solent Maritime SAC in combination with all other residential developments within the 5.6km zone of influence. In line with the Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project Phase 3 report and Natural England's letter of the 31 May 2013 (below) avoidance measures will need to be secured. "Natural England's advice is that the SDMP work represents the best available evidence, and therefore avoidance measures are required in order to ensure a significant effect, in combination, arising from new housing development around the Solent, is avoided." The preferred method would be to collect a contribution towards the implementation of the joint project outlined in the Phase 3 report. The level of contribution to the interim scheme will be £172.00 per unit. Such a planning obligation should be payable at commencement in order to ensure that avoidance measures are in place before first occupation.

37

6.8 5no. Third Party Objection Five letters of objection have been received regarding the application. The key issues of concern are: a) Location of site within area at risk of flooding; b) Inappropriateness of the design; c) Overdevelopment of the site and immediate area; d) Impact on the character of the Conservation Area; and, e) Impact on the setting of the Listed Building. 6.9 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information The application for full planning permission has been supported by a number of accompanying documents, including a Design and Access Statement, Tree Survey, Sequential Test for Flooding and a Unilateral Undertaking to mitigate against recreational disturbance on the Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Area. The Design and Access Statement has regard to the context of the site within the immediately surrounding area, together with the issues of overlooking, design, views of the proposal, vehicular access, massing, surface water mitigation and flood risk assessment. The Sequential Test for flooding has regard to the potential of alternative sites within a defined study area, namely the Chichester City Settlement Policy Area as outlined in the Adopted 1999 Local Plan. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Chichester City at this time. 7.2 The principle planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE3 Archaeology BE4 Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit BE6 Conservation Areas BE11 New Development BE13 Town Cramming BE14 Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features BE16 Energy Conservation 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant.

38

Chichester Local Plan (Key Policies and Proposed Modifications) 2014 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 10: Chichester City Development Principles Policy 12: Water Resources in the Apuldram Wastewater Treatment Catchment Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 40: Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 42: Flood Risk Policy 47: Heritage Policy 50: Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Areas National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), together with Sections 6, 7 and 10 generally. 7.6 The government's New Homes Bonus (NHB) which was set up in response to historically low levels of housebuilding, aims to reward local authorities who grant planning permissions for new housing. Through the NHB the government will match the additional council tax raised by each council for each new house built for each of the six years after that house is built. As a result, councils will receive an automatic, six-year, 100 per cent increase in the amount of revenue derived from each new house built in their area. It follows that by allowing more homes to be built in their area local councils will receive more money to pay for the increased services that will be required, to hold down council tax. The NHB is intended to be an incentive for local government and local people, to encourage rather than resist, new housing of types and in places that are sensitive to local concerns and with which local communities are, therefore, content. Section 143 of the Localism Act which amends S.70 of the Town and Country Planning Act makes certain financial considerations such as the NHB, material considerations in the determination of planning applications for new housing. The amount of weight to be attached to the NHB will be at the discretion of the decision taker when carrying out the final balancing exercise along with the other material considerations relevant to that application.

39

Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.7 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Interim Statement on Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours Interim Policy Statement on Development and Disturbance on Birds in Special Protection Areas and Identified Compensatory Habitats Chichester Conservation Area Character Appraisal 7.8 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1: Managing a changing environment B2: Greener living B3: Environmental Resources D1: Increasing housing supply D2: Vibrant, safe and clean neighbourhoods D3: Housing fit for purpose E4: People will have easier access to services at a local level 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: a) - Flood Risk; b) - Impact on the Amenity of Neighbouring Occupiers; c) - Impact on Trees; d) - Design and Impact on the Conservation Area/Listed Building; and, e) - Access considerations. Assessment a) Flood Risk 8.2 Whilst the site is located within Flood Zone 1 of the Council's Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, this assessment was superseded by the Environment Agency updated flood maps, which designate the site within Flood Zone 2. The application represents the re-submission of an earlier application, refused by the Planning Committee in October 2013 solely on the failure to pass the Sequential Test for flooding as required by Section 10 of the NPPF. That application (CC/13/02148/FUL) had not provided any details of assessment of other sequentially preferable sites, but instead relied solely on the accompanying Flood Risk Assessment and that any potential flooding risk had been mitigated. However, Section 10 of the NPPF requires that the principle of developing a site within Flood Zone 2 or 3 for residential purposes should only be considered where no suitable alternatives can be identified. The requirements for a Sequential Test should therefore be based on a District-wide search for alternative sites at a lower risk of flooding before considering this site for development.

40

8.3 Whilst the Environment Agency (EA) do not object to the proposal, their comments are limited to the suitability of the flood risk assessment and not to the principle of developing the site, which is subject to a satisfactory sequential test concluding that there is no other suitable alternative site. The EA has raised no comment on the proposal only referring to the compliance with their Standing Advice, which would indicate that the flood risk mitigation proposed would ensure that the properties would be protected in the event of a flood on the site. 8.4 The applicant has undertaken a sequential assessment of other potential development sites which looks at alternative sites within the Chichester Settlement Policy Area only. However, a review of recent appeal decisions suggests that, as the housing need is District wide, the sequential assessment should encompass all potentially available sites in the District. Only where there was an identified localised need that could not be met through other sites throughout the District should the parameters of the search be localised to a specific area. As the sequential test submitted only considers an assessment of ten years' (2004-2013) worth of sites and planning applications within the Chichester Settlement Policy Area the requirements of the sequential test has not been met and, in accordance with the recently issued National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) the application should be refused as it has not been demonstrated that there are alternative sites that could meet the housing need on sites at lower risk of flooding. Nationally, several appeal decisions have been determined on this matter where the site size was considered irrelevant and the Inspector considered that a District-wide assessment be undertaken. 8.5 Whilst a sequential test that considers sites within the Chichester Settlement Policy Area only is inherently flawed, it should also be noted that there are also a number of sites identified where insufficient justification has been provided as to why they have been discounted. Without further evidence or justification it is considered that these sites may be able to accommodate the proposed development and are located outside the EA's Flood Zones 2 and 3. 8.6 It is therefore considered that whilst the applicant has completed a detailed Sequential Test, the study does not address the potential of other sites in the District as a whole and there remains question as to some of the sites discounted within the Chichester Settlement Policy Area, it has not been evidenced that the housing need cannot be met on other sites at lower risk of flooding. Any such sites should be considered in advance of the current site, and the sequential test therefore fails. b) Impact on the Amenity of Neighbouring Occupiers 8.7 The proposed dwellings are located to the west of the existing Chichester Family Church, which fronts Orchard Street, with the properties orientated in an east/west direction. Therefore, the impact of the development on the users of the church would be minimal. In terms of the impact on occupiers of the host dwelling (no.19 Orchard Street) and their neighbours, the separation distance between the rear elevations of the proposed dwellings and the host dwelling would be approximately 33m, although along this distance, the view would be partially obstructed by the church. The western side elevation of the dwellings would also be located 16m from the boundary of no. 17 Orchard Street, ensuring minimal impact on the users of the gardens along Orchard Street. Additionally, all side facing windows would be high level and given the orientation of the properties, any impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties would not be so significant to warrant a refusal in this case.

41

c) Impact on Trees 8.8 The application has been supported by an Arboricultural report. The western side of the site is presently bounded by a number of mature trees all of which would be lost as a result of the proposal. However, those trees are principally leylandii or other cypresses and as such contribute little towards the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 8.9 The proposal includes planting of 9no. new trees within the grounds of the host dwelling, and therefore the site could be subject to a suitable landscaping condition were permission to be granted. d) Design and Impact on Conservation Area/Listed Building 8.10 The proposed dwellings are of a modern design, comprising natural materials for the elevations and a flat cedum roof. The site is situated at the western end of the Conservation Area, with the access road being located outside the Conservation Area. The modern design is not in itself considered to be objectionable, with the site located in a discrete backland area of the city, on the periphery of the conservation area. Only intermittent views of the proposals would be visible along Orchard Street, and with the use of traditional materials for the elevations, the use of a flat roof ensures the overall visual appearance is minimised, softening the transition from the high density, historic built form common along Orchard Street to the open playing fields beyond. 8.11 As indicated by the Historic Buildings Adviser, the siting of two additional dwellings within the curtilage of the Listed Building is not considered to be detrimental to its setting. The application site was not historically within its curtilage, and given the distance between the proposed dwellings and the Listed Building (over 30m away), its setting, character and appearance is not considered to be overly compromised. e) Access Considerations 8.12 Access for the two dwellings would be along the current rear access that serves the host dwelling and the other properties along this part of Orchard Street. The access road is owned and maintained by West Sussex County Council (WSCC) with rights of way permitted to the owners of Orchard Street granted by licence. The applicant has been in discussions with WSCC to secure access rights for the two properties. If access licences are permitted, the two new properties would be required to enter and exit on the southern part of the access road as used by the other properties, which in turn enters Orchard Street via the road serving the County Records Office. This is a well-used and high traffic junction onto Orchard Street serving a large car park for the Records Office. The provision of two additional accesses from the access road is unlikely to result in a detrimental increase in the users of the access, to the detriment of highway safety. There are not therefore any highway safety grounds on which to object to the application. Conclusion 8.13 Based on the above assessment, it is considered that whilst all material considerations on the proposals comply with the relevant development plan policies, the proposal is contrary to the advice of Section 10 of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance and therefore the application is recommended for refusal.

42

Human Rights 8.14 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. 8.15 In reaching the above conclusion Officers have taken into account rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of Human Rights and concluded that the decision to refuse permission is justified and proportional to the harm that would be caused if planning permission were to be granted. RECOMMENDATION REFUSE 1 U90927 - Sequential Test INFORMATIVES 1 U90928 - Decision Plans 2 U90929 - Rec Dist Inf 3 W46F App Ref Following Discussion - NWF

For further information on this application please contact Peter Kneen on 01243 534734

43

Parish: Earnley

Ward: East Wittering

6 E/14/03295/OUT

Proposal Replacement of existing dwelling, timber chalet & mobile home with 2 no

detached dwellings.

Site Millside Bell Lane Earnley Chichester PO20 7JD

Map Ref (E) 481701 (N) 98339

Applicant Mr Tim Bloxham RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


44

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Parish Objection - Officer recommends Permit 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The site is located on the eastern side of Bell Lane, within the Somerley Conservation Area. The site is bounded by residential development to the north and south, and open countryside to the east. The site is bounded by screen fencing and walls and presently comprises the existing chalet bungalow, timber chalet, mobile home together with a number of other outbuildings. The timber chalet on the site has been previously investigated by the Council's Enforcement Team who concluded that it has been used as a dwelling, independent from that of the existing chalet bungalow for over 4 years. This site therefore has a lawful use as two independent dwellings. 2.2 The site is accessed via a timber gated entrance at the southern end of the site, leading into a gravelled parking courtyard. The garden wraps around the existing house and outbuildings, with a patio and large pond to the north of the site. There are a number of mature willow trees on the site, with two large trees along the northern boundary. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application, submitted in Outline with only access, layout and scale being considered proposes the demolition and clearance of the site of all the existing structures on the site, and the erection of two detached chalet bungalow style properties evenly spaced within the site. The application includes details of elevations for the two replacement dwellings, which given the nature of the application are only indicative and would be subject to a further reserved matters application in due course. 4.0 History E/10/86 PER Increased curvature of access

drive and widening. 09/05076/FUL PER Demolish existing dwelling and

garage. Construct new two storey replacement dwelling house and detached garage building.

14/03295/OUT PDE Replacement of existing dwelling,

timber chalet & mobile home with 2 no. detached dwellings.

45

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO

Conservation Area SO

Rural Area YES

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 YES

- Flood Zone 3 NO


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council Earnley Parish Council resolved to object to this application: 1. Division of site; 2. Intensification and urbanisation of the site which is of detriment of the Somerley Conservation Area; and, 3. Vehicular movements generated by two properties would be detrimental to highway safety close to the dangerous bends on the B2198 at the nearby junction of Bell Lane, Bookers Lane and Bracklesham Lane. 6.2 Environment Agency Thank you for consulting the Environment Agency on this application which is located in Flood Zone 2, defined by the NPPF as having a medium probability of flooding. Refer to Flood Risk Standing Advice. 6.3 WSCC: Local Development Division The existing access will serve the development onto Bell Lane. From an inspection of the plans and map information available visibility from the proposed access is considered acceptable. Having checked the WSCC accident records there is one recorded RTA (Road Traffic Accident) in the vicinity of this access onto Bell Lane. Having assessed the accident record the accident was not as a result of this access in its current use. In terms of parking the application form does not state how many spaces will be provided for the dwellings. Having entered the data into the WSCC PDC (Parking Demand Calculator) there would be a demand of 3 spaces per unit. On inspection of the site layout plan it would appear that the demand for spaces can be accommodated within the site. In terms of parking layout there would appear to be sufficient area to form a workable turn on site facility. It is acknowledged that this site has an existing residential use which does generate vehicular activity; this is a material consideration. Therefore with the proposal taken into account it is not considered that this application would have a detrimental impact on the local highway network.

46

Based on the submitted information there would appear to be no grounds to resist this application from the Highway point of view. If the LPA are minded to approve this application a condition securing car parking spaces should be included. 6.4 CDC: Historic Buildings Adviser The existing twentieth-century dwelling(s) on site do not currently make a contribution to the significance of the Somerley Conservation Area (nor does it necessarily detract), and as such their replacement in principle does not appear problematic provided the replacement dwellings 'conserve or enhance' the site, which is also potentially within the setting of the Grade II listed buildings known as Mill House to the south and Earnley Mill to the north. By virtue of their prominent size and generic design and poor fenestration, there is concern that the proposal will fail to appropriately 'conserve or enhance' the Conservation Area or relate to local distinctiveness. Their mirrored form, attached garaging and treatment of the site also appears unsympathetically suburban in character. The use of Sussex barn hips on domestic properties should be avoided. Given these concerns, this scheme should be 'strongly resisted on the basis that it does not comply with paragraphs 131, 132 and 137 of the Framework'. 6.5 1no. Third Party Other One letter from a neighbouring occupier has been received commenting, but not objecting to the proposals. They have raised concerns regarding potential surface water flooding, and its potential impact for future occupiers and the surrounding area. 6.6 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information In addition to the submitted planning application form and plans, the application has been supported by a brief Design and Access Statement, and a Flood Risk Assessment. The Design and Access Statement considers the amount of development proposed, the layout of the proposal, its scale, land levels due to flood risk considerations and a brief consideration of the appearance of the buildings. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Earnley Parish at this time. 7.2 The principle planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE4: Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit BE6: Conservation Areas

47

BE11: New Development BE14: Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features RE1: Rural Area Generally TR6: Highway Safety H12: Replacement Dwellings and Extensions in the Rural Area 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Key Policies and Proposed Modifications) 2014 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 42: Flood Risk Policy 45: Development in the Countryside Policy 47: Heritage Policy 48: Natural Environment Policy 50: Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Areas National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), and Sections 6, 7, 10 and 12 generally. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Interim Statement on Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours

48

Interim Policy Statement on Development and Disturbance on Birds in Special Protection Areas and Identified Compensatory Habitats Somerley Conservation Area Character Appraisal 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1: Managing a changing environment D1: Increasing housing supply D3: Housing fit for purpose E2: There will be improved cycling networks and strong links to public transport to ensure that cycling is a viable alternative to using the car E3: There will be a decrease in the numbers of road traffic collisions in the district E4: People will have easier access to services at a local level 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: a) Principle of the development; b) Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Conservation Area; c) Impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; d) Flood Risk; and, e) Highway Safety concerns. Assessment a) Principle of the development 8.2 The application seeks to demolish and remove all the existing structures on the site, and replace them with 2no. detached dwellings, the final design and appearance of which would be considered in a later reserved matters application. The site presently comprises a detached chalet bungalow, together with a timber outbuilding. Following careful consideration by the Council's Planning Enforcement Team it was agreed that this outbuilding has been used independently as a separate unit of residential accommodation for a period exceeding four years, and is therefore immune from Enforcement action. There is also a mobile home on the site, which would be permanently removed as a result of this proposal. 8.3 As the lawful status of the land is for residential use as two separate dwelling houses, the proposal represents the replacement of two dwellings and the principle of redeveloping the site in accordance with Policy H12 of the Local Plan is acceptable, subject to the standard assessment of other material considerations. b) Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Somerley Conservation Area 8.4 The site is located within the Somerley Conservation Area, sited between two listed buildings. The views of the Council's Historic Buildings Adviser have been sought, who acknowledges that the existing property on the site does little to preserve or enhance the Conservation Area. The objection raised by the HBA relates purely to the design and appearance of the buildings submitted with the application. However, the floor plans and elevations provided as part of the application are only indicative, and largely reflect the

49

design of the existing building on the site. The final design and appearance, including finished materials would be subject to the submission of a detailed planning application. 8.5 Whilst it is noted that the design of the two buildings, of a symmetrical appearance is of limited quality, the drawings demonstrate merely a broad scale and layout of the proposed replacements. Subject to appropriately designed dwellings, which would need to be uniquely designed and of an appearance and character sympathetic to the character of the Conservation and their proximity to two neighbouring Listed Buildings, it is considered that a suitable scheme can be achieved that could contribute significantly to enhancing the appearance of the site and the wider Somerley Conservation Area. c) Impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers 8.6 The existing site is well screened to the boundaries to the north and south by existing mature vegetation. The nearest properties are Mill House (to the south) and Earnley Mill (to the north). Mill House, to the south is situated over 30m from its mutual boundary with the application site, and would be located almost 40m from the southern elevation of the proposed southern dwelling. Earnley Mill is located 15m from the mutual northern boundary with the site, and would be located almost 23m from the northern elevation of the proposed northern dwelling. Based on the proposed floor plans and elevations provided, which include first floor windows on the northern and southern elevations, given the intervening vegetation and level of separation proposed; it is considered unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties. 8.7 Given that the existing drawings of the elevations and floor plans are only indicative, any future application to consider the detailed design of the two dwellings would need to have further regard to the potential impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. d) Flood Risk 8.8 The application site is located within Flood Zone 2, and has been supported by a Flood Risk Assessment, and includes details of the levels of the site and proposed finished floor levels of the replacement dwellings. Given that there are already two properties on the site, and the proposal merely seeks their replacement, there is no need for the applicant to pass the Sequential Test for flooding as required by the NPPF in the case of a net increase in the number of units. 8.9 The Flood Risk Assessment incorporates a response from the Environment Agency confirming the suitability of the finished floor levels proposed, and subsequently that they would have no objection to the proposals. All surface water would be disposed of via soakaways, with all hard landscaping comprising permeable surfaces. Given the proposed floor levels having the support of the Environment Agency, together with the provision of additional mitigation to tackle surface water disposal, it is considered that the proposals would not be at risk of flooding, and would not exacerbate the situation for neighbouring occupiers. e) Highway safety 8.10 The site currently provides a single point of access onto Bell Lane, which benefits from a 5m wide roadside verge between the entrance and the edge of the highway. The access lies approximately 50m to the north of the junction of Bell Lane with Bookers Lane (which provides access to Earnley. Bell Lane represents the main road connecting Chichester to East Wittering and Bracklesham and whilst busy most of the year, the volume

50

of traffic increases significantly during the summer months. The application has been considered by West Sussex County Council (WSCC) as the Highway Authority, which considers that the proposals would not result in harm to highway safety. Given that the site already provides two separate residential units, which share the same access point and which remains unchanged for this scheme, the application proposal would be unlikely to generate a significant increase in the level of use, and would not therefore adversely impact on the safety or function of the highway network. Significant Conditions 8.11 The application is recommended for approval subject to a number of appropriately worded conditions, including regarding the submission of a reserved matters application dealing with the appearance/design of the buildings and landscaping within three years of this decision. Additional conditions relate to the development being undertaken in accordance with the details of the Flood Risk Assessment, and the provision of appropriate levels of car parking, turning and secure cycle parking. Conclusion 8.12 Based on the above, it is considered the proposal complies with development plan policies and therefore the application is recommended for approval. Human Rights 8.13 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. 8.14 In reaching the above conclusion Officers have taken into account rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of Human Rights and concluded there would be no breach if planning permission were to be granted. RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 U90940 - Time Limit - Outline 2 U90939 - No Departure from Plans 3 L15F - Flood Risk Assessment 4 U90942 - Surface Water Disposal 5 U90944 - Car Parking 6 N34F - Bin Storage/Secure Cycle Parking 7 U90945 - Retention of Trees 8 U90948 - Removal of Mobile Home INFORMATIVES 1 W44F Application Approved Without Amendment For further information on this application please contact Peter Kneen on 01243 534734

51

Parish: Plaistow and Ifold

Ward: Plaistow

7 PS/14/03055/FUL

Proposal Erection of new detached chalet style dwelling with cycle store.

Site The Rear Shelly The Drive Loxwood Billingshurst RH14 0TD

Map Ref (E) 502731 (N) 131206

Applicant Mr Deryck Gaffney RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


52

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Parish Objection - Officer recommends Permit 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The application site lies to the rear of Shelly, a detached bungalow that lies on the eastern side of The Drive, a residential street within the settlement of Ifold. There are chalet bungalows to the north and south of Shelly and on the land to the east of the site there is land with extant planning permission for a development of 3 detached dwellings. 2.2 The application site is relatively flat, and has been cleared of most vegetation, with the exception of the trees and hedge along the northern boundary of the site and a tree adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. The east, south and west boundaries comprise of close boarded fencing approx. 1.8m in height. 2.3 The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of 1 and 2 storey dwellings of various styles and designs, however bungalows and chalet bungalows are prevalent in the locality. It is not uncommon to find dwellings in backland positions along the Drive, particularly in close proximity to the site, including the land adjoining the site to the east. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a 3 bed detached chalet style dwelling with cycle store. 3.2 The proposed dwelling would measure approx. 16m (w) x 6.5m (d) x 6.37m (h). The building would have a half-hipped roof with pitched roof dormer windows and 2 rooflights to the front roofslope (north elevation) and 5 rooflights to the rear roofslope (south elevation). The property also has a pitched roof porch to the front which extends approx. 0.9m forward of the front elevation. The proposed cycle store would be located to the north of the dwelling within the front garden area. 3.3 The dwelling would be finished with rendered elevations painted cream above a brick plinth with a tiled roof and double glazed timber windows. 4.0 History 06/05133/FUL PER 1 no. new bungalow and garage.

09/04919/EXT PER Application to extend

implementation period of existing Planning Permission reference PS/06/05133/FUL 1 no. new bungalow and garage.

10/04427/DOM PER Replacement of 1 no. front dormer

with 3 no. dormers. 11/02291/FUL REF Erection of new detached dwelling

and detached garage to north of 'Shelly.'

53

13/03587/FUL WDN Erection of new detached chalet style dwelling with integral garage and cycle store.

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO


Rural Area NO

AONB NO

Strategic Gap NO



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 NO

- Flood Zone 3 NO


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council Objection - Plaistow and Ifold Parish Council considers that the proposed development does not comply with the Saved Policy BE11, NPPF Paragraphs 55 and 53 of the NPPF, which states that local planning authorities should consider policies to resist inappropriate development of residential gardens, for example where development would cause harm to the local area. In 2010 the Government removed residential gardens from the definition of 'previously developed land', in order to curb building on garden land and transform Councils' ability to prevent unwanted development on gardens in order to protect the character of neighbourhoods. The Parish Council considers that the proposed development does not respect the setting, form and character of the area, and as such would cause harm to the existing settlement area. The proposal is unsustainable, given the inadequate road infrastructure, and sewerage network, particularly when taking into consideration the cumulative effect of applications which have already been permitted and those which are currently pending consideration by the council. Plaistow and Ifold Parish Council therefore requests that this application be refused. 6.2 WSCC - Strategic Planning No Objection - The nearest public highway is Plaistow Road to the south. The access onto this highway is suitable to support the increased traffic one dwelling would create. It is proposed to offer 2 parking spaces which would meet the standards set out for a dwelling of this size in the area. 2 cycle spaces are also included within a detached cycle store which is in accordance with current guidance. No concerns wished to be raised to this application from a highways perspective.

54

6.3 Southern Water Southern Water requires a formal application for a connection to the public foul and surface water sewer to be made by the applicant or developer. An informative is required. Council's Building Control or technical staff should be asked to comment on the adequacy of soakaways to dispose of surface water from the proposed development. Due to changes in legislation in 2011 regarding future ownership of sewers it is possible a public sewer crosses the site. Should any sewer be found during construction works, an investigation of its condition, the number of properties services and potential means of access will be required before further works commence. The applicant is advised to contact Southern Water for further information. 6.4 4 Third Party Objection (2 from same objector) - Over development - High-density housing out of character with Ifold - Combined with Kogala development it is 8 more cars and visitors coming into the

area - Problematic sewer system - Little space for trees and garden characteristic of Ifold - Soakaways not suitable due to slow infiltration rates increasing risk of flooding - Trying to squeeze a quart into a pint pot - The Drive is a bridleway and not a road, proposal will put users of the bridleway at risk - Inadequate infrastructure - Neighbourhood plan not in place yet 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE11 New Development BE13 Town Cramming BE14 Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant.

55

Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 2: Development Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy Policy 4: Housing Provision Policy 5: Parish Housing Sites 2012- 2029 Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 40: Carbon Reduction Policy Policy 48: Natural Environment Policy 49: Biodiversity National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), 58 - 60 (design) and 118 (biodiversity). 7.6 The government's New Homes Bonus (NHB) which was set up in response to historically low levels of housebuilding, aims to reward local authorities who grant planning permissions for new housing. Through the NHB the government will match the additional council tax raised by each council for each new house built for each of the six years after that house is built. As a result, councils will receive an automatic, six-year, 100 per cent increase in the amount of revenue derived from each new house built in their area. It follows that by allowing more homes to be built in their area local councils will receive more money to pay for the increased services that will be required, to hold down council tax. The NHB is intended to be an incentive for local government and local people, to encourage rather than resist, new housing of types and in places that are sensitive to local concerns and with which local communities are, therefore, content. Section 143 of the Localism Act which amends S.70 of the Town and Country Planning Act makes certain financial considerations such as the NHB, material considerations in the determination of planning applications for new housing. The amount of weight to be attached to the NHB will be at the discretion of the decision taker when carrying out the final balancing exercise along with the other material considerations relevant to that application. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are:

56

B1 - Managing a changing environment B2 - Greener living D1 - Increasing housing supply 8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are its impact on:

(i) Principle of development (ii) Design and visual amenity (iii) Residential amenity (iv) Impact upon highways (v) Drainage (vi) Trees and biodiversity

Assessment (i) Principle of development

8.2 The site is within the Settlement Policy Area of Ifold as defined by policy BE1 of the Local Plan where, in accordance with paragraph 14 of the NPPF, there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The application plot previously benefitted from planning permission for a bungalow (PS/06/05133/FUL), however this permission expired prior to it being implemented. Two subsequent applications for chalet bungalows on the site have been unsuccessful due to the scale of the buildings proposed, however following discussions with officers the current proposal for a smaller chalet bungalow has been submitted. 8.3 Ifold is a designated Service Village in the emerging Local Plan, and there it is an area that will be a focus for development outside of Chichester City and the settlement hubs of East Wittering/Bracklesham, Selsey, Southbourne and Tangmere. The emerging Local Plan has identified a need for the provision of 339 dwellings in the north of the plan area, of which 10 should be provided in Ifold between 2012 and 2029. These figures constitute minimum, rather than maximum numbers, and they demonstrate that Ifold is a settlement that has been assessed and it is capable of contributing to the housing supply. 8.4 The proposal would meet the three strands of sustainability set out in paragraph 6 of the NPPF; it is sustainably located within a built up area with a village store, it would support an existing community and it would not harm the local environment. Therefore the principle of the development of a single dwelling accords with the NPPF and the Local Plan which seeks to direct development to existing built up areas. (ii) Design and visual amenity

8.5 The proposed dwelling results in the sub-division of a plot and the creation of a backland plot. Ifold is characterised by both dwellings that front the main streets and backland developments, and therefore the appearance of access drives leading to dwellings at the rear of properties is not uncommon. Instead this form of built development is part of the character of the settlement. The proposed development would sit between a dwelling fronting The Drive and a backland development of 3 dwellings to the east.

57

8.6 The siting of the dwelling in a back lack plot is considered to be appropriate within its context. Although the sub-division of single plots may in some instances be problematic in terms of its impact upon the character of the area, due to the space provided around the building, the space between the proposal and the neighbouring properties, and also the location of the site between the existing dwelling and the residential development at the rear it is considered that the proposal would not result in a cramped form of development that would be harmful to the character of the surrounding area. The retention of the hedge along the north boundary of the site also serves to minimise the impact of the development upon the visual amenity of the locality. 8.7 The proposed dwelling is modest in terms of its scale and appearance, and therefore whilst the proposal would be seen from The Drive and the access to the development at Kogala, the proposal would not appear incongruous and would not detract from the visual amenity or character of the locality. Furthermore the proposal would provide a transition between the bungalow of Shelly fronting the Drive and the 2 storey dwellings that have been permitted at Kogala. The proposal therefore accords with policy BE11 and BE13 of the Local Plan and policy 33 of the emerging Local Plan. (iii) Impact on Neighbours 8.8 The proposed dwelling is located to the rear of a bungalow, known as Shelly. A rear to side distance of 20m is achieved between Shelly and the proposed dwelling, thereby ensuring that the proposal would have an overbearing impact upon the occupiers of Shelly. In addition, the proposal would only have ground floor windows on its side elevation and therefore subject to the provision of a boundary fence between the two properties the proposal would not result in overlooking. 8.9 The proposal is orientated north-south to provide an active frontage adjacent to the new development proposed to the east, and due to the distance between the proposal and the approved dwelling to the east the proposal would not have an unneighbourly impact upon the proposed dwellings. The dwelling is located almost centrally within the site and therefore a distance of approx. 9m is achieved between the rear elevation of the proposed dwelling and the garden of the neighbouring to the south (Little Orchards) and wall to wall there is a distance of approx. 13m between the proposed dwelling and Little Orchards. It is considered that provided the rooflights on the rear of the proposed dwelling are high level the proposal would not result in a loss of privacy for the neighbours to the south, and due to the distance of the proposal from the dwelling and its orientation the proposal would also not be overbearing or result in loss of light. 8.10 The garden to the north of the application site (associated with Maybank) is approx. 13m from the proposed dwelling and screened by the existing hedge along the northern boundary of the application site. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not be unneighbourly by way of overlooking. There would be a distance of approx. 22m between the dwelling known as Maybank and the proposal, and given this distance and the scale of the proposal it is also considered that the proposal would not result in loss of light or have an overbearing or oppressive impact upon the occupiers of Maybank. 8.11 For the reasons set out above the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the residential amenity of neighbours and therefore the proposal accords with policy BE11 of the Local Plan and policy 33 of the emerging Local Plan.

58

(iv) Impact upon highways 8.12 The Highways Authority has advised that it has no objection regarding the impact of the development upon the highway network. The access would sit alongside access points to both the development at Kogala and the existing dwelling on the site Shelly and therefore the access would be afforded adequate visibility splays for cars exiting the site, and there is space for a turning facility on site. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in respect of highway safety and the impact upon the highway network. (v) Drainage 8.13 The Parish Council and a third party have raised concerns regarding surface water and foul drainage. A condition is recommended requiring details of the proposed surface water drainage to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority to ensure that it is appropriate for the location. Southern Water has been consulted regarding the impact of the proposal upon the foul drainage network. Southern Water has not raised an objection to the proposal, however they have advised that consent will be required to connect the development to the public sewer. Informatives to this effect are therefore recommended. (vi) Trees and Biodiversity 8.14 The proposed development would not result in the loss of any trees or hedgerow, and the site has already been cleared of any notable vegetation. The proposal would therefore not have an adverse impact upon biodiversity. Significant Conditions 8.15 In addition to the conditions mentioned above concerning drainage conditions are also recommended to secure the retention of the planting along the northern boundary of the site and to restrict any extensions and alterations to the building in the interest of protecting the amenities of neighbours and to prevent the overdevelopment of the site. Conclusion 8.16 Based on the above assessment, it is considered the proposal complies with to development plan policies BE11, BE13, BE14 and TR6 of the Local Plan, policies 1, 2, 4, 5, 33 and 39 of the emerging Local Plan, as well as the relevant sections within the NPPF and therefore the application is recommended for approval. Human Rights 8.17 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate.

59

RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 A01F -Time Limit - Full 2 B01G - No Departure from Plans 3 U90005 - Materials 4 L04F - Surface Water Scheme 5 L05F - Foul Water Scheme 6 U90014 - Bin/cycle store 7 M03F - Walls/Fences 8 U90052 - Parking/turning 9 U90055 - Tree protection 10 U90058 - Hand digging 11 U90013 - Hedge retention 12 U90016 - Rooflights 13 H01F - No Extensions without Approval 14 H02F - No Outbuildings without Approval INFORMATIVES 1 W44F - Application Approved Without Amendment 2 U90910 - Sewer Connection For further information on this application please contact Fjola Stevens on 01243 534734

60

Parish: Southbourne

Ward: Southbourne

8 SB/14/02303/FUL

Proposal Installation of new and replacement stores, amendments to gravel drive and

creation of children's play area (retrospective application).

Site 134 Main Road Emsworth Hampshire PO10 8HA

Map Ref (E) 475946 (N) 105447

Applicant Mr Sam Warren RECOMMENDATION TO PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


61

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Parish Objection. Officer recommends Permit 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The site used by Emsworth New Life Church measures approximately 7.6ha in total, and is located south of the A259 between Emsworth and Southbourne. In policy terms the site is in the Rural Area, Chichester Harbour AONB and Chichester to Emsworth Strategic Gap. The area is also covered by an Article 4 Direction restricting camping activities. Vehicular access is gained from Thorney Road to the east. Pedestrian access can also be achieved from the public right of way to the north of the church buildings that links the site to the A259. This right of way then splits and runs east and west along the northern boundaries of the church and neighbour's property. There are further rights of way to the south, east and west of the site, the closest is 250m to the south of the site at its closest point. 2.2 The site was historically in agricultural use. The church has been operating on site since the early 1980s and the converted former farm buildings, additional structures and yard area to the immediate west of the primary building on site, Winsley House, are the focus for the church buildings and activity on the site. 2.3 Winsley House is a Grade II listed two storey property now used in part as warden accommodation and in part to provide office and meeting space for church staff. The listing description identifies the building as early 19th century. It has been subject to unsympathetic extensions to the rear during the 20th century and includes uPVC windows within these extended parts. 2.4 Congregation parking takes place to the south west of the main church buildings and informal recreational space lies to the south. There is residential development to the north west and one domestic property to the east (136 Main Road) which shares the northern access to the A259. The fields adjacent to the access road to the west are grassland, and there is open agricultural land to the south and south east. Emsworth Marina lies to the west of the site. 2.5 The site is relatively well screened to the north by mature trees, with further mature planting to the south eastern and southern boundaries. The eastern boundary with 136 Main Road is identified by a brick wall to the north, fencing to the south of the dwelling then planting to the remainder. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for the extended parking area and fencing and equipment within the children's play area to the north of Winsley House, and the retention of five smaller storage sheds to the east. The foundations for the proposed larger shed have already been constructed to the south. Storage sheds 3.2 Five small and one large storage shed form part of this application. The five smaller sheds are positioned adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site, close to the neighbour's large outbuilding, and are set up to 0.5m from the site boundary. These sheds are approximately 2.2m to ridge. Four are clad and roofed with dark green sheeting and the

62

smallest is timber clad finished green, with a felt roof. None have permanent foundations. To respond to neighbour concerns about maintenance access to the boundary, it is proposed the metal sheds (marked A on plan 008D) will be moved 400mm further from the boundary. Native hedging is also shown to the west of the sheds to help partly screen these sheds from the listed building. 3.3 The concrete plinth for the proposed larger shed has been constructed south east of Winsley House and immediately east of the sports pitch. This new plinth is sited approximately in the position of the previous storage shed. The proposed shed is intended for the storage of grounds maintenance equipment. Concerns raised about the use of metal cladding for this larger shed have been addressed and the use of timber cladding and a timber shingle roof is now proposed. As a result of the change to materials, the shed will now have a standard pitched roof with a ridge line running north/south and double timber doors to the south elevation. The shed will have a footprint of 6m x 5.05m, height of 4.4m to ridge and an internal floor area of 27.5sqm. Children's play area 3.4 The teardrop shaped children's play area lies to the north west of Winsley House and covers an area of around 770sqm. This application seeks to retain the 2m green mesh fencing enclosing the area and a range of children's play equipment that has been installed in this area. The current equipment does not exceed 3.2m in height. The application seeks consent for equipment up to 3.5m tall to allow for items to be replaced as and when required to ensure safe use of the area. Parking area 3.5 This application also seeks consent for an extended gravel parking area which lies immediately north of Winsley House. The additional 156sqm (approx.) of surfacing has been constructed to mirror the existing adjacent, with both surfaces slightly angled to drain to a central drainage trench which forms a soakaway feature. The gravel area measures approximately 6.5m deep and 24m wide and is supported by a hexagonal base stabilising structure. Floodlighting 3.6 The floodlights to the sports pitch were removed from this application following queries over the lawful use of the sports pitch and these elements will be subject to a separate application. 4.0 History 97/01256/FUL PER Extension to meeting hall.

06/05792/FUL PER Proposed entrance

lobby/reception to existing meeting hall.

09/01575/ADV REF Church main entrance signage

(retrospective). 09/02597/FUL PER Construct a track to enable

access to the front of the

63

residential area of which the main purpose is access for emergency vehicles and the set down of disabled people requiring access to this area.

14/02303/FUL PDE Installation of new and

replacement stores, amendments to gravel drive and creation of children's play area (retrospective application).

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building YES GRADE II


Rural Area YES

AONB YES

Strategic Gap YES



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 NO

- Flood Zone 3 NO


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Southbourne Parish Council The Parish Council objects to this application because it is considered the development is inappropriate and out of character in the Harbour AONB. It is believed the development would have a negative impact on the neighbouring property. 6.2 CDC Historic Buildings Adviser The storage sheds are overtly utilitarian and container-like in their appearance. This is not overly convincing in close proximity to the listed building, and results in a feeling of clutter to its setting. These should be re-sited, possibly closer to the 'replacement shed' to the south, or screened with an appropriate fence. No objections raised to the play area and revised drive. 6.3 1 no. Third Party Objection Loss of trees/hedges Noise from play area Impact on setting of listed building Parking adjacent to boundary Replacement shed over twice the size of the previous Sheds too close to boundary, impact on maintenance or repair of boundary

64

Application documents inaccurate Further comments expressing concerns about use of site more generally 6.4 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information - The fence around the children's play area is a maximum height of 2m - The maximum height of the existing play equipment is 3.2m. The proposed 3.5m maximum height limit is acceptable. - The Church wished the shed to have a low profile so proposed metal construction. The use of traditional timber with shingles will increase the pitch of the roof and height - The lighting will be excluded from the main application and will be dealt with separately 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all made neighbourhood plans. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE4 Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit BE11 New Development BE14 Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features RE1 Rural Area Generally RE4 Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty RE6 Strategic Gaps RE17 Community Facilities in the Rural Area R4 Public Rights of Way and Other Paths RE12 Rural Diversification 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies Pre-Submission 2014-2029 with modifications is undergoing Examination by the Secretary of State. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it has gained increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft Policy 38: Local and Community Facilities Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 40: Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 43: Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Policy 45: Development in the Countryside Policy 47: Heritage and Design Policy 48: Natural Environment Policy 49: Biodiversity Policy 54: Open Space, Sport and Recreation

65

7.4 The draft Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan has completed its Regulation 16 (Local Authority) consultation which ran from 4th September until 16th October. The Neighbourhood Plan therefore carries weight in accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF. The Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan objectives include: 1. To protect the scenic beauty of the AONB and the integrity of the gaps between settlements 3. To increase open space and recreation facilities and provide alternatives to existing facilities within or close to sensitive areas 4. To avoid increasing and where possible resolve, existing flooding and drainage problems 5. To respect the significance of heritage assets Applicable policies are: Policy 1: Spatial strategy Policy 7: Environment Policy 10: Community buildings National Policy and Guidance 7.5 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. Consideration should also be given to paragraphs 17 (core planning principles), 28 (rural economy), 69-70 (healthy communities), 115 (AONBs), 123 (noise), 129/131/134 (heritage), 183-5 (neighbourhood planning), Decision Taking and Annex 1: Implementation. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The Chichester Harbour AONB Management Plan 2014-2019 is a material consideration. 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 Managing a changing environment C3 A culturally enriched and empowered community D4 Understanding and meeting community needs E4 People will have easier access to services at a local level

66

8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are the effects of the development on the: (i) setting of the historic building (ii) surrounding rural landscape and AONB (iii) amenities of neighbouring dwellings Assessment 8.2 The NPPF recognises the value of local community facilities in achieving sustainable development and inclusive, supportive communities and social structures - paragraph 70 in particular refers. The supporting text to policy 38 in the emerging Local Plan confirms the Council will seek the retention and protection of local and community facilities that serve the local residents within the Plan area, to help meet the community needs and reduce the reliance on travel. 8.3 The development and facilities have been provided to assist in the safe operation and active management of the site and to upgrade existing equipment. Setting of the historic building 8.4 The setting of the Grade II listed Winsley House has changed substantially during the period of its use by the Church. Land and buildings which were once agricultural are now in active use by the community and there are associated parking areas, access routes, sports areas, play equipment and storage structures surrounding the listed building. Despite these alterations, the Grade II listed house retains its dominance on site due to its age, height, position and function as the administrative centre of the site and warden's accommodation. 8.5 The proposed extended gravel parking area to the north of Winsley House is sympathetic to the character and historic use of the house and will improve surface water drainage and circulation adjacent to the principal elevation of the building. 8.6 The 2m mesh fence subject of this application has been erected around the play area but does not visually or functionally encroach on the building's setting, and its mesh construction allows views through. Visually the items of play equipment are typical for childrens' play and are ancillary to a domestic use of the building so are considered acceptable. 8.7 The small sheds are no greater than 2.2m tall and viewed only indirectly alongside the listed building. They are required for the continued maintenance of the grounds and storage of ancillary sports equipment. The use of both timber cladding and metal sheeting (dark green) is acceptable on this former agricultural site on the scale of the smaller sheds and due to their position clustered with other buildings and structures. The small change in position comprising a shift of 400mm away from the boundary should address the concerns of the neighbours about maintenance access. Additional native planting along the eastern boundary of the access drive will offer partial screening for the sheds from the listed building and improve the existing relationship between these two elements. 8.8 The larger shed is sited over 50m from the listed building and screened by mature trees and hedging. The design and appearance has been amended during the assessment process to allow the use of timber. The resultant simple pitched roof form is considered to

67

more sympathetically relate to the setting of the listed building and reflects the position of this shed in the rural area, away from the cluster of other buildings on site. 8.9 The development subject of this application constitutes relatively minor additions to the site and reflects the character and use of this site as a place of community interaction and modern worship. None of the proposed elements will detrimentally affect the setting of this building or detract from its significance. The development is considered to comply with saved policy BE4, section 12 of the NPPF, section 18a of the NPPG and emerging policy 47 of the Local Plan. Surrounding rural landscape and AONB 8.10 Following the removal of the floodlights, the impacts of the development on the wider landscape and AONB will be negligible, as the remaining elements of the scheme are all relatively low level and well contained within the boundaries of the site. On this basis, the proposals are considered to be acceptable with reference to saved policies RE4 and RE6, emerging policies 43, 48 and 49 of the Local Plan, emerging policy 7 of the Neighbourhood Plan, paragraphs 115 and 125 of the NPPF and the Chichester Harbour AONB Management Plan. Amenities of neighbouring dwellings 8.11 The closest neighbour is 136 Main Road, sited immediately north east of the site. The property shares its western and southern domestic boundaries with the application site and uses the shared driveway/bridleway that connects the Church site directly to the A259 (the Church main entrance is on Thorney Road). 8.12 The small storage sheds are sited adjacent to the neighbour's boundary, but save for the smallest one abutting the brick wall, are currently sited a minimum of 0.5m from the boundary. The amended plan 14A_063 008D shows the four larger metal sheds will be moved 400mm north or west to increase the distance to the boundary. They are modest structures and are used for storage. The sheds are positioned near to the neighbour's large detached garage and over 20m from the dwelling so do not impose on the amenities of the occupiers. 8.13 The larger shed is around 50m from the dwelling, and again will be used for storage. The height has increased as a result of the change in materials to 4.5m however will allow a more traditional appearance sympathetic to the character of the site. Given the distance from the neighbour's dwelling it is considered the change is acceptable. The sheds will therefore not have a material impact on the amenities of the neighbour. 8.14 The gravelled parking area is screened from the neighbour's property by mature planting. Extending this and improving the drainage will not have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the neighbour. 8.15 The children's play area is sited over 75m from the neighbour's dwelling and around 65m from the boundary at the closest point. The use of the area for play is not development, it is the structures within and fencing around which form part of this application. The church and community activities will result in noise being generated. It is considered that the creation of an enclosed play area adjacent to the main church buildings will not result in excessive noise or disturbance. It does however provide a safe place for young children to play, with good natural surveillance from Church buildings and away from the vehicles.

68

8.16 The proposals will not have a discernible impact on the amenities of the dwellings to the north of the site. The development complies with saved policy BE11 and paragraphs 123 and 125 of the NPPF. Significant Conditions 8.17 The application is for the most part retrospective, however conditions are recommended to ensure that the circumstances and commitments against which this assessment and recommendation has been made are upheld. As such, conditions are advised to: (i) require approval of samples of the materials and finishes for the larger shed (ii) require the relocation of the small sheds within 1 month (iii) require full details of the native planting including densities, heights and management (iv) apply a maximum height for play equipment of 3.5m. Conclusion 8.18 Based on the above assessment it is considered the proposal achieves an acceptable balance between supporting church and community activities and site maintenance with protecting the setting of the Grade II listed building and its rural setting within the Chichester Harbour AONB, and the amenities of neighbours and public footpath users. The proposal complies with relevant saved and emerging Development Plan and emerging Neighbourhood Plan policies and therefore the application is recommended for approval. Human Rights 8.19 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. RECOMMENDATION PERMIT 1 U89705 - Plans 2 U89706 - Large shed material finish 3 U90966 - Shed relocation 400mm 4 U90965 - Planting 5 U89708 - Play equipment height INFORMATIVES 1 W45F Application Approved Following Revisions

For further information on this application please contact Naomi Langford on 01243 534734

69

Parish: Southbourne

Ward: Southbourne

9 SB/14/02326/FUL

Proposal Erection of 20 dwellings, associated access and parking, secure cycle

storage and landscaping.

Site Land East of 181 Main Road Southbourne Hampshire

Map Ref (E) 476326 (N) 105719

Applicant Mr Kevin Wawman RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER FOR SECTION 106 THEN PERMIT

NOT TO SCALE


70

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral The officer's recommendation is significantly contrary to the Development Plan. 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 The application site is on the north side of Main Road (A259) between Prinsted and Southbourne, adjacent to the western boundary of Southbourne village as defined by the Chichester District Local Plan. The site is in the rural area and lies within the Emsworth to Chichester Strategic Gap. The land to the south of the A259 falls within the Chichester Harbour AONB. The site is within the 5.6km Chichester and Langstone Harbour Special Protection Area Zone of Influence. 2.2 The site is 0.7ha, approximately flat and roughly rectangular in shape. There are trees, hedges and scrub of varying heights marking all boundaries, with a gap of 2-3m to the north east corner. Open cultivated agricultural land lies to the north, with residential properties to the immediate east and west along the A259. There are equine paddocks to the south. The site is identified to be Grade 1 agricultural land but has not been cultivated for some time and is overgrown with brambles and nettles. 2.3 There are bus stops in laybys outside the site on both sides of the road, with footway access east towards the village centre and west towards Prinsted. The A259 is part of the South Coast Cycle Route. A public footpath (no. 242) runs north/south alongside the eastern boundary of the site then turns eastwards around 120m north of the site towards Garsons Road. A further footpath (no. 241) runs north/south along Tuppenny Lane approx. 170m west of the site that continues northwards towards the railway line, which is around 300m north of the site. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The proposal comprises the development of 20 dwellings with associated access, landscaping and open space. It has been subject to negotiation and a series of amendments during the assessment process to seek to balance the aspirations of the emerging Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan with adopted and emerging planning policy and technical considerations. 3.2 8 of the 20 dwellings (40%) will be provided as affordable housing, with 2no. 1 bed flats and 2no. 2 bed flats in one building and 2no. 3 bed affordable rented houses grouped near the main road access, and a further 2no. 2 bed shared ownership houses near the north east corner. The market mix will deliver 4no. 2 bed 1.5-2 storey dwellings, 6no. 3 bed 2 storey dwellings and 2no. 4 bed chalet style dwellings. The total housing mix is therefore 2no 1 bed, 8no. 2 bed, 8no. 3 bed and 2no 4 bed properties. The overall density is 28.5 dwellings per hectare. 3.3 The site access is proposed towards the south east corner, close to the bus stop and the layby and bus stop position will be adjusted accordingly. This position offers good visibility to the east and west. The access position and spine road have been designed to take into account proposals within the emerging Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan for further links to sites to the north and the longer term aspiration of a road bridge over the railway. As such it is 6m wide and the layout allows for further widening and additional footways to the east should this be required in the longer term. The access point to the A259 has also been designed to accommodate additional traffic and potential future growth.

71

3.4 Within the site, the main spine of the access will continue northwards towards the north east corner, with all the dwellings sited to the west. Two secondary internal roads will be provided, one behind the southern boundary for access to properties 3-9 and one through the middle of the site for access to plots 1, 2 and 10-15. Plots 16-20 will front the spine road in the north east part of the site. 3.5 The land to the east of the main spine road will be used as informal open space, landscape setting and surface water drainage, and will include a graded attenuation pond to the north east corner. Connections will be made through to the public footpath to the east. A further small shared area of planted open space is shown to the centre of the site to the west of the flats. 3.6 Save for the point of access, the existing planted boundaries will be pruned but retained, and there is scope to enhance this planting, particularly to the south and west where adjacent land will be used for amenity purposes. 3.7 The dwellings will be of traditional construction and appearance, using facing bricks and render, some flint detailing, and either slate or clay tiled roofs. Dwellings will range in height from 6.8m to 8.4m and the building containing the flats near to the main access will have a ridge height of 8.4m. 3.8 Private rear gardens with a minimum length of 11m will be provided for each house, while the flats will be given a modest shared amenity area. Private parking spaces for all dwellings will be within their plots. Plots 9 and 12-14 will also have front gardens and 6 no plots (9, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 20) have attached single garages. A total of 46 vehicle parking spaces will be provided on site of which 6 will be within single garages and 6 will be visitor spaces. All dwellings will have access to private or shared secure cycle storage. 3.9 In addition to the highways works on and adjacent to the site, the developer will also be required to fund off-site foul sewerage improvements. Following an initial capacity check, the developer has approached Southern Water formally in respect of the technical requirements to resolve this issue. This has identified a need for the construction of 10m of 225mm diameter foul gravity sewer within Main Road and a further 480m of 225mm foul gravity sewer in the field to the south of the site and Main Road to connect the development to the existing pipework that flows to Thornham WTW. These works have been costed by Southern Water and will be delivered by Southern Water and funded by the developer. 4.0 History 02/01906/FUL REF Renovation of existing buildings to

be used for low key storage and stables.

02/02532/FUL PER Renovation of existing building to

be used as stables. 14/02326/FUL PDE Erection of 20 dwellings,

associated access and parking, secure cycle storage and landscaping.

72

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building NO


Rural Area YES

AONB Adjacent

Strategic Gap YES



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 NO

- Flood Zone 3 NO


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Southbourne Parish Council The Parish Council supports the application in principle but with the following conditions: - The road must be wide enough to allow future development north of the site to the satisfaction of the Highways Authority - A strip of land should be transferred into local authority ownership to facilitate possible future development north of the site - Adequate provision is made for drainage of the site under the A259 Main Road 6.2 Chichester Harbour Conservancy Original comments The proposed development of 23 dwellings is outside but immediately opposite the AONB and wish to raise concerns about the wider impact on the AONB of the proposed three-storey buildings, the erosion of the strategic gap and the increased recreational disturbance. The Chichester Harbour Conservancy objects to the proposed development, by reason of erosion of a strategic gap and the adverse impact of a three-storey development on the setting of Chichester Harbour AONB, particularly when viewed from the railway line to the north, adjacent public footpath system and from the A259. In the event of planning permission being granted, recreational disturbance mitigation for Chichester Harbour SPA should be sought through a planning legal agreement. Further comments The reduction in density and deletion of 3 storey built form is welcomed. The Conservancy however wish to maintain their objection as an intrusion into the Strategic Gap harming the open setting of the AONB, contrary to saved Local Plan Policies RE1, RE4 and RE6 and emerging policy 43. The Conservancy has objected to the Neighbourhood Plan allocation.

73

6.3 Southern Water Services Original comments Initial investigations show there is currently inadequate capacity in the local network to provide foul sewage disposal for the proposed development. Additional off-site sewers, or improvements to existing sewers, will be required to provide sufficient capacity to service the development. An informative is recommended should approval be given about formal sewerage infrastructure agreement. There are no public surface water sewers in the area to serve this development. Alternative means of draining surface water from this development are required, which should not involve disposal to a public foul sewer. The planning application form makes reference to drainage using Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDs), which rely upon facilities which are not adoptable by sewerage undertakers. Therefore, the applicant will need to ensure that arrangements exist for the proper long term maintenance of the SUDs facilities that will ensure the effectiveness of these systems is maintained in perpetuity. Conditions and informatives are recommended. Officer comments Southern Water has provided a Section 98 Sewer Requisition budget estimate to the developer for the infrastructure works deemed to be required to provide sufficient foul sewerage capacity for the proposed development. This report is dated September 2014. The scope of works set out in this document comprise: - Construction of 10m of 225mm diameter foul gravity sewer within Main Road and 480m of 225mm diameter foul gravity sewer in the field to the south. - Construction of 1no.1200mm diameter manhole on the existing 225mm diameter sewer on Main Road, 4no. 1200mm diameter manholes along the proposed 225mm diameter sewer in the field and 1no. 1350mm diameter manhole on existing 450mm diameter sewer in the field. The scope of works and budget estimate will be subject to further assessment on completion of full surveys and detailed design work. The next stages require significant investment from the developer and will continue after any grant of planning permission. This information supersedes the initial capacity check dated June 2014, the details of which were submitted with the application. 6.4 Natural England The proposals are unlikely to have a significant effect on any European site subject to the mitigation required in the Council's Interim Policy and can therefore be screened out of any further assessment under the Habitat Regulations. No objection subject to a contribution to the Solent Mitigation Project in line with the Council's Interim Policy, secured through a S106 agreement or other suitable mechanism. Natural England is satisfied there is not likely to be an adverse effect on the Chichester Harbour SSSI as a result of the proposals being carried out in strict accordance with the details submitted.

74

The Local Authority should have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Full regard should be had to the AONB Management Plan. Refer to Standing Advice for guidance on protected species. 6.5 Sussex Police The design and layout has achieved outward facing dwellings, in-curtilage parking and parking bays are overlooked by active rooms. Brick piers raise awareness one is entering a semi-public area and can generate a sense of ownership and pride in surroundings. The communal block will require a combination of railings and close boarded fencing to indicate the difference between public and private space. The pathways should be located to discourage unauthorised entry. Guidance is offered on perimeter fencing, gates and walls heights and construction, and position of gates to frontages. 6.6 WSCC - Local Development Division Original comments No objection to the principle of the development, but more information is needed and conditions are proposed. The ATC survey shows 85th percentile speeds of 37 mph to the east and 39.6mph to the west. The proposed visibility splays of 59m in both directions are in line with Manual for Streets. WSCC raise no objections to the position of the new access. A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit has been undertaken and designer's response provided which makes positive recommendations. There have been no recorded casualties related to the highway over a 5 year period. The TRICS survey highlights the proposed development would create 14 trips at peak: 1 every 4 minutes. WSCC do not consider the proposal to have a material capacity impact on the highway network. The submitted drawing shows that a private car can exit the access road safely with a bus in the layby. The footway should be re-aligned to provide a wider footway; there appears to be space in the highway to raise and re-align the kerb to achieve this here, to cater for the increase in bus use as a result of the development. Consideration should be given to the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan in relation to projects that have been identified for implementation both during the plan period and over the longer term. These include a road link to eventually link to an elevated crossing over the railway line and bus shelters with real time information. The current layout proposals for the internal site plan would not be suitable to link into a wider scheme in the future. Swept path diagrams for a larger refuge vehicle and private car have been submitted and approved. The footway connectivity appears fragmented - where a road has a housing frontage on one side, the footway should be provided on this side. 52 car parking spaces including 6 visitor spaces are shown. Cycle parking is provided in sheds and communal cycle stores. This is in line with WSCC standards.

75

The development site is in a sustainable location, with immediate access to local footpaths to the local shops, primary school and train station. There is a bus stop and the West Sussex Cycle Route adjacent to the site. Information required: - Extent of the adoptable highway - More detail on entrance features including tactile paving and surfacing to reduce

speeds - Additional details to justify the crossing proposed, without a pedestrian refuge - Extent and location of disabled parking spaces Suggested conditions relating to access details, visibility splays, use of garages, cycling provision, construction management and technical approvals. The S106 requirements should include clauses for private roads, S38 and S278 agreements and temporary works during construction. Further comments Further to the previous consultation, WSCC are satisfied with the additional details provided to cover the extent of the adoptable highway and confirm a refuge island is not required. WSCC are satisfied with the road proposals on the substitute layout plans. It is recommended that the trees on the eastern corner of the access should be clear stemmed up to 2m to provide the recommended forward visibility. Plans detailing the off-site highway works to the bus stop lay by will be required, to include raising and re-aligning the kerb to create a higher, wider footway and a better tie in on the radius at the end of the south east kerb line. 6.7 WSCC Infrastructure Total £119,800 Education primary £33,921 Education secondary £39,595 Libraries £3,549 Fire/rescue £335 + 1 hydrant TAD £42,400 6.8 WSCC - Public Rights of Way Original comments No direct impact on public footpath 242 so no objection but comments provided: - Consent required from WSCC for any obstruction, interference or moving of the

footpath - Safe and convenient public access required at all times - Hedges are to be maintained to ensure they do not encroach upon or reduce path

width. As access is proposed to the north east corner of the site, consideration should be given to improving the surface of FP242 for current users and occupiers of the new development

- Public use of the FP takes precedence over vehicular access, with surfacing made good

76

- No drainage system is to be installed through the surface of the path without WSCC approval.

Further comments The access link to the north east corner of the development onto the footpath (FP 242) will improve access and bring leisure benefits, as part of a quiet safe link to school, and as an alternative to walking along the A259. Appropriate surfacing should be considered. 6.9 CDC - Planning Policy Original comments The draft Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies (including proposed modifications) was formally submitted to the Secretary of State on 30 May 2014 for independent examination. The Local Plan examination started on 30 September 2014, and paragraph 216 applies. Policy 2 in the draft Local Plan identifies Southbourne as a service village and will be the focus for new development and facilities. The policy states that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development within defined Settlement Boundaries, which will be reviewed through Neighbourhood Plans and/or Development Plan Documents. The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies sets a draft housing target for the Plan area of 410 homes per year for the period 2012-2029. The most recent assessment of housing land supply in the Plan area is based on WSCC survey data for April 2014 updated to include additional housing sites recently permitted. When compared to the Local Plan target, this shows a shortfall of 488 net dwellings for the 5-year period 2015-2020, equivalent to 4.1 years of housing supply. In these circumstances, the NPPF (paragraph 14) is engaged. Southbourne Parish Council has formally submitted its Neighbourhood Plan to the Council, the Regulation 16 consultation runs from 4th Sept to 16th October 2014. The neighbourhood plan allocates specific sites to meet the housing and development requirements set out in the emerging Local Plan: Key Policies Policy 5. Given the advanced status of the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan and the proposed site is within the redrawn Settlement Boundary and identified for development in the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan, there is no policy objection to the principle of the proposal. Further comments Southbourne Parish Neighbourhood Plan was submitted to the Council and is now undergoing examination. The neighbourhood plan allocates specific sites to meet the housing and development requirements set out in the emerging Local Plan: Key Policies Policy 5. January 2015. The current projected housing supply position for the Chichester Local Plan area for the period 2015-2020 is based on the requirement of 435 homes per year proposed in the emerging Chichester Local Plan (as modified). This figure shows a shortfall of 442 net dwellings, equivalent to 4.3 years of housing supply. 6.10 CDC - Environmental Health Officer A desk study and site investigation report has been submitted with the application and no significant areas of contamination were identified. In order to allow for any undiscovered

77

contamination, a 'watching brief' should be put in place during construction works. All waste arisings must be disposed of in accordance with current Waste Regulations. A Transport statement has been submitted with the application which outlines sustainable (i.e. non car) modes of transport near the site. In order to reduce the impact on local air quality from the development (from vehicle emissions) measures to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport should be put in place such as secure cycle parking, information about public transport and car sharing options. During construction of the development, a code of considerate contractors should be put in place to minimise environmental impacts on nearby residents. Measures to be considered should include wheel washing, sheeting of loads, covering and dampening down stockpiles, silencing and maintenance of construction plant and vehicles, prohibiting on-site bonfires and compliance with Waste Regulations. 6.11 CDC - Housing Enabling Officer Original comments Affordable dwellings: Southbourne has a high housing need with 85 households on the register professing a local connection to the parish. A full 40% quota from the 23 total units is required in line with the Interim Statement on planning for affordable housing, i.e. 9.2 units. The 0.2 will be taken as a commuted sum. 30% (2 units) of the affordable units are required as intermediate housing. A better affordable housing mix, and one which would completely meet the SHMA recommendations, would be to have a 4-bedroom house in lieu of a 1-bedroom flat and to have more houses, better suited for families with children. On this particular site however, after considering local housing needs at this time, and larger developments in the planning system that could accommodate more 4 bed units, no objection is raised, however earlier discussion with the local housing authority (LHA) may have brought forward a better scheme. The flat sizes appear small and should comply with HCA minimum sizes. In two bedroom flats, the second bedroom is better if it can accommodate two people, as this is more flexible and cost effective. Floor areas should take into account roof slope and configuration. Market dwellings: Both the district's Housing Strategy and Economic Strategy seek to deliver more, smaller family homes as recommended in the SHMA to help address the imbalance in stock, to retain and attract more younger working families to the district and to accommodate older people wishing to downsize. The SHMA recommendations are for four 1 and 2-bedroom units but only two are proposed. None of the flats are for market sale. A market mix in line with the SHMA is wanted by the LHA. The SHMA has been published and used since 2012 and its recommendations should have been accounted for in any viability and offer. The affordable and the market housing must be externally indistinguishable in terms of materials, landscaping and layout. Further comments Southbourne has a high housing need with 59 households on the register professing a local connection to the parish. A full 40% quota from the 20 total units is required in line with the Interim Statement on planning for affordable housing (8 units).

78

The Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2012 (SHMA) requires 30% of the affordable units (two units) to be provided as intermediate housing and these should be 2-bedroom houses. Compared to the SHMA, the affordable rented proposed mix has one unit too many 1bedroom units and one too few 4-bedroom. However, the small numbers involved, compounded by some units being provided in a flat block make it difficult to achieve absolute compliance. There is currently only one family on the register in priority bands A-C with this need. On this particular site therefore, after considering current local housing needs, no objection is raised to the affordable mix. The unit sizes meet current HCA minima. I am very pleased to see the mix has now been amended to fully meet the aims of the district's Housing and Economic Strategies and SHMA for more, smaller family homes. The development now provides a good mix of market housing that meets the needs of the district. 6.12 CDC - Archaeological Officer The Archaeological Desk Based Assessment supplied with the application has established that a programme of trial trenching would be justified prior to development to identify significant archaeological deposits that might be present and to implement appropriate measures for their preservation. This would be most appropriately secured through a condition. 6.13 CDC - Drainage Engineer Original comments We require that the surface water system does not have to rely on pumping stations. The system should be redesigned so that upper parts of the development site can drain to features such as permeable paving or similar shallow soakage structures, these may also be tanked with pipes at a higher level in the sections of unadopted road if soakage is not feasible. Further comments The revised surface water drainage layout is acceptable in principle. Calculations will be required showing the 1/100 storm event + 30% from impermeable areas on site can be stored within the system. Full design details of the pond, discharge rates, flow control measures and pipe protection are required by condition, alongside conditions for surface water drainage design (without infiltration as this has already been discussed), discharging to a watercourse, and maintenance manual for the drainage system. 6.14 CDC - Environmental Strategy Original comments Reptiles: There is suitable reptile habitat on site and the submitted reports recommend further survey work. A full reptile activity survey is required, with a mitigation strategy if reptiles are found, prior to determination. Bats: Bats are using the hedgerows on site for foraging and commuting. The hedgerows will need to be retained and enhanced for bats, with buffer strips (5m) left and protection during construction. Any gaps should also be filled and hedges lost replaced using native hedge

79

species. The lighting scheme for the site will need to take into consideration the presence of bats in the local area minimise potential impacts. Birds: Any works to the trees or vegetation clearance on the site should only be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season (1st March to 1st October) or will require an ecologist to check the site 24 hours prior to works and undertake mitigation if required. Recreational Disturbance: This proposal will have an in-combination effect on the Solent Maritime SAC so avoidance measures will need to be secured. The preferred method would be to collect a contribution towards the implementation of the joint project outlined in the Phase 3 report. The level of contribution to the interim scheme will be £172 per unit. Such a planning obligation should be payable at commencement in order to ensure that avoidance measures are in place before first occupation. Further comments The mitigation proposed for reptiles is satisfactory and should be conditioned. 6.15 CDC - Design and Implementation Manager Original comments No objections raised in principle to the development of the site but there are issues with the amount, appearance and layout of the development. There does seem to be scope to rationalise the road layout and better integrate the open space into the development. Suggestions include improving the existing lane to reduce the amount of the site taken up with roads increasing the size of the open space which could be better located within the development. The larger houses could front onto the lane, and the smaller onto a well-positioned green. Rows of end-on parking in front of the houses should be avoided. The layout may work better with fewer units. Concerns about long, poorly overlooked side and rear alleyways and bin and recycling storage location to avoid impacting on safety, quality of the public realm and overall appearance of the development. I am unconvinced with 3 storey development in this location on the edge of a settlement which is characterised by predominantly 2 storey development. Terraces should be of traditional form and advice is offered about roof ridge and eaves heights and relationships, and floor plans. Multiple gables, half-hips to the roofs and use of render in conjunction with brick should be avoided. It is important to avoid this development looking too much like the new development on the south side of Main Road which rather stands out as out of character with the area. Units must be tenure blind. Further comments Earlier comments on the road layout still stand. I welcome the use of 1.5 storey development rather than 3 storey. Removal of units 10 and 11 would free up the layout and reduce pressure of parking on the public realm. The designs of the individual buildings are not reflective of the character of the area and other positive examples could be used to inform the design approach. Further suggestions

80

include deleting units 9 and 10 to remove an imposing gable on the adjacent gardens and a blank elevation to the road; providing units 5-8 as a terrace to give better spacing along the road frontage, revising the design approach for units 1-4 to give a villa type form and appearance and more clearly defining front gardens. Additional recommendations include removing soldier courses and amending window sizes to be larger and using simple material choices that are characteristic of the area. 6.16 Public Art In accordance with the Council's adopted Public Art Strategy, based on an application for 23 dwellings the developer should be required to commission, install and maintain public art to the value of no less than £8,062 based on 2014/15 tariffs. 6.17 Green Spaces and Street Scene Manager On smaller schemes it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between open areas as part of the setting and open space. It is my opinion that the scheme presented provides suitable open space I consider it to be well positioned within the development and the planting scheme is appropriate 6.18 CDC Corporate Information Officer A contribution towards community facilities of £35,180 (£1,759 per unit - 20 dwellings) should be sought for the extension or replacement of buildings in Southbourne for community use to ensure local residents have sufficient good quality facilities for community activities. This would be in accordance with Southbourne Parish's emerging Neighbourhood Plan, Policy 10 and the Council's SPG. 6.19 CDC Waste Services 2-4 bed properties will require either a 140l (up to 2 persons) or 240l waste and recycling bin each. The flats could be provided with communal bins of at least 1100l capacity. Concerns are expressed about the layout, as the refuse freighter would have to reverse after the initial turning head and could not pass the brick piers. Access and bin collection points need to be carefully considered. The communal bin storage areas need to be of a sufficient size and designed to enable crew members to access and remove the bins. Surfacing needs to be sufficient to withstand the weight of a 26 tonne freighter. 6.20 10no.Third Party Objections Site is outside the settlement policy area and in a strategic gap Local infrastructure has insufficient capacity Flood risk and drainage matters are a current not historic issue Natural stream through the site and well under the site, floods every winter Drainage under the A259 needs to be addressed, avoid displacing pooled water elsewhere Loss of natural soakage Will increase flooding to local dwellings Trees and landscaping are important to the area Poor design and layout, would be impractical Excessive density Scale, mass and bulk, 3 storey form inappropriate on the village edge Recreational disturbance to be addressed, not sufficient to seek only payment

81

Alternative sites should be considered that would not increase sprawl along the A259 Local road is extremely busy, increased traffic and risk to cyclists Impacts of works to bus stop on cycle safety and visibility splays, access routes and parking spaces for existing houses Approval would set a precedent to approve other sites outside the settlement boundary Development would be wholly damaging to the area, the site should remain in agricultural use Impact on views from the harbour AONB Support CHC objection, adverse effect on AONB and intrude into strategic gap, contrary to paragraph 14 of the NPPF 6.21 2no. Third Party Support with comments Site proposed in the SPNP, fully support the principle To consider in more detail sewerage disposal, surface water flooding, highways and access including securing future link to the north, detail of the 'green ring' and connection to the public footpath, dwelling height to be reduced, more tree planting and S106 contributions used for parish projects. 6.22 2no. Third Party Other No objection in principle but concerns about drainage and surface water management, ditch maintenance and viability of foul drainage proposals 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all made neighbourhood plans. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE3 Archaeology BE11 New Development BE13 Town Cramming BE14 Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features BE16 Energy Conservation RE1 Rural Area Generally RE4 Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty RE6 Strategic Gaps RE7 Nature Conservation (Designated Areas) TR6 Highway Safety TR8 Catering for Cyclists and Pedestrians H1 Dwelling Requirement H4 Size and Density of Dwellings H5 Open Space Requirements H6 Maintenance of Open Space H8 Social and Low Cost Housing in Settlement Policy Areas R4 Public Rights of Way and Other Paths 7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is undergoing Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material

82

consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 2: Development Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy Policy 4: Housing Provision Policy 5: Parish Housing Sites 2012- 2029 Policy 6: Neighbourhood Development Plans Policy 8: Transport and Accessibility Policy 9: Development and Infrastructure Provision Policy 20: Southbourne Strategic Development Policy 29: Settlement Hubs and Village Centres Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 39: Transport, Accessibility and Parking Policy 40: Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 42: Flood Risk and Water Management Policy 43: Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Policy 47: Heritage Policy 48: Natural Environment Policy 49: Biodiversity Policy 50: Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Areas Policy 52: Green Infrastructure Policy 54: Open Space, Sport and Recreation Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan 7.4 The Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan 2014-2029 Submission Plan has completed its Regulation 16 (Local Authority) consultation which ran from 4 September to 16 October 2014. An Independent Examiner has been appointed and commenced work on 1 December 2014. The Neighbourhood Plan therefore carries weight in accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF. Applicable policies are: 1 (Spatial Strategy), 2 (Housing Site Allocations), 3 (The Green Ring), 7 (Environment), 8 (Education) and 9 (Transport) National Policy and Guidance 7.5 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted.

83

7.6 Consideration should also be given to paragraphs 6-13 (Principles of Sustainability), 17 (Core Planning Principles), sections 3 (Rural Economy), 4 (Transport), 6 (Housing), 7 (Design), 8 (Healthy Communities), 10 (Climate Change), 11 (Natural Environment), 12 (Historic Environment), Decision Taking and Annex 1 (Implementation) 7.7 National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) is also a material consideration. 7.8 The government's New Homes Bonus (NHB) which was set up in response to historically low levels of housebuilding, aims to reward local authorities who grant planning permissions for new housing. Through the NHB the government will match the additional council tax raised by each council for each new house built for each of the six years after that house is built. As a result, councils will receive an automatic, six-year, 100 per cent increase in the amount of revenue derived from each new house built in their area. It follows that by allowing more homes to be built in their area local councils will receive more money to pay for the increased services that will be required, to hold down council tax. The NHB is intended to be an incentive for local government and local people, to encourage rather than resist, new housing of types and in places that are sensitive to local concerns and with which local communities are, therefore, content. Section 143 of the Localism Act which amends S.70 of the Town and Country Planning Act makes certain financial considerations such as the NHB, material considerations in the determination of planning applications for new housing. The amount of weight to be attached to the NHB will be at the discretion of the decision taker when carrying out the final balancing exercise along with the other material considerations relevant to that application. Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.9 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: The Provision of Service Infrastructure Related to New Development in Chichester District (Parts 1 and 2) Interim Statement on Planning for Affordable Housing Interim Policy Statement on Development and Disturbance on Birds in Special Protection Areas and Identified Compensatory Habitats 7.10 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: B1 - Managing a changing environment B2 - Greener living B3 - Environmental Resources C2 - Encourage healthy and active lifestyles for all D1 - Increasing housing supply D2 - Vibrant, safe and clean neighbourhoods D3 - Housing fit for purpose E2 - There will be improved cycling networks and strong links to public transport to ensure that cycling is a viable alternative to using the car E3 - There will be a decrease in the numbers of road traffic collisions in the district

84

8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are: - the principle of the development - access and highway safety - drainage and sewerage - housing mix and tenure - landscape impact - layout - scale, form and design of the new dwellings and relationships to existing development - other matters, to include archaeology, ecology and climate change Assessment 8.2 The site adjoins but is outside of the settlement boundary for Southbourne so there is no policy support in principle in the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan for additional residential development. However, the saved Local Plan is not up to date in terms of its housing policies because the District cannot demonstrate that it has a five year housing land supply (5YHLS) as it is required to do so by paragraph 49 of the NPPF. There have been a number of recent housing developments permitted across the District to address the supply issue but there remains a shortfall of approximately 442 net dwellings (based on the Council's updated proposed annual housing target of 435 homes per year), equivalent to 4.3 years housing supply (as of January 2015). The Council cannot rely on its saved housing policies and must continue to consider some new housing development on appropriate sustainable sites. 8.3 Paragraph 216 of the NPPF allows weight to be given to emerging Local and Neighbourhood Plans when applying the tests of paragraph 14, which sets out the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Accordingly, the District's emerging Local Plan can be given some weight in accordance with these criteria when regard is had to the advanced stage it has reached in the examination process. However, the weight is reduced by the presence of unresolved objections in relation to the policies (4 and 5) that set overall and parish housing numbers; 435 per year for the District overall (figure modified from 410 in Dec 2014) and 350 in total for Southbourne over the plan period. 8.4 The Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan (SNP) has reached an advanced stage in its preparation, having completed its Submission (Regulation 16) consultation on 16 October 2014. Although it has not yet passed referendum and been made and therefore cannot carry full weight as development plan policy, in light of its advanced position and the advice in paragraph 216 of the NPPF, the SNP is considered to carry significant weight as a material consideration. Secretary of State (SoS) decisions during 2014 confirm the weight that can be attributed to advanced neighbourhood plans. Additionally, due to the advanced stage of the SNP and the provisions of paragraph 185 of the NPPF, it is considered that its policies now carry greater planning weight as a material consideration than non-strategic policies in the adopted Local Plan and the emerging Local Plan. 8.5 The application site is identified as an allocated site in the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan to contribute 25 dwellings towards its minimum target of 350 within the Parish over the plan period (policies 1 and 2 of the SNP). In addition to the allocation of 25 dwellings, policy 2 (iii) requires the site to: (a) be accessed from the A259 Main Road by way of a new road along the eastern boundary of the site, the alignment and specification of which takes into account the provisions of Policy 9 of the SNP; and

85

(b) meet its public open space requirements by providing land to form part of the Green Ring proposed in Policy 3, comprising informal open space. 8.6 Following early discussions with the Parish Council and Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, the application was originally submitted to include 23 dwellings, a road and a green area to the east of the site. The road and green infrastructure requirements were however such that the remaining land available for the housing was significantly reduced and resulted in 2.5 - 3 storey development. This was considered to be inappropriate for the characteristics of the site and locality. Following further discussions with the Highways Authority (WSCC) to establish the highways infrastructure requirements, a meeting was held with the Parish and SNP representatives, officers and the developer. Through this process it was understood that there was scope to reduce the number of dwellings provided that the provision of the road and green space was secured. Regard was had to the need to make the most efficient use of the site, and the recommendation to approve an additional 7 dwellings on another of the allocated sites (Loveders Mobile Home Park Policy 3 (i)). As a result, the application proposal was amended to provide 20 1.5-2 storeys dwellings alongside the road and green ring. 8.7 This reduced number means that the development cannot comply in full with emerging policy 2 of the SNP, however in light of the above and the overall 5YHLS and wider policy position, a pragmatic approach has been taken. The formal consultation response from Southbourne Parish Council confirms their agreement to the scheme. The principle of the development is therefore considered acceptable. 8.8 The allocation of the site in the emerging SNP is considered to carry greater weight than the policies in the saved LP that resist housing development in the rural area and strategic gap in principle, and the loss of a 0.7ha self-contained parcel of Grade 1 agricultural land. The landscape impact of the development including whether it results in actual or perceived coalescence and has any detrimental impact on the adjacent AONB is however important and these matters are given weight by emerging policies 43, 47 and 48 of the Local Plan and will be evaluated below. Access and highway safety 8.9 The development site is in a sustainable location, with immediate access to local footpaths linking the site to the local shops and primary school. It is anticipated that the proposed development would create less than 14 trips in the am/pm peak hour, which WSCC considers will not have a material capacity impact on the highway network. 8.10 The site is immediately north of the A259 but presently has no point of vehicular access onto this highway. Survey data submitted with the application shows 85th percentile speeds of 37 miles per hour to the east and 39.6 miles to the west past the site. The proposed visibility splays have been designed to respond to these recorded speeds and WSCC confirm that visibility splays of 59m in both directions are in line with Manual for Streets recommendations and the access position is acceptable. 8.11 To comply with the emerging Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan (SNP) policies 2(iii) and 9, the access would need to be capable of safely accommodating the residential use from the application site (20 dwellings), and the future expansion to accommodate further allocated development (SNP policy 2). While the aspirations for the delivery of the elevated road/rail crossing do not fall within the plan period, the current emerging Neighbourhood Plan aims to ensure the opportunity of delivering this road is aided and not prejudiced by development taking place through the current plan period up to 2029. In

86

response, the access and spine road within the application site has been designed and tested to be suitable for planned use over the SNP period with allowances made for future use based on best estimates and current standards. 8.12 The proposed spine road will be 6m wide with a 2m footway to the western side. A dotted line on the layout plan indicates that there would be sufficient space to enlarge the road to 7.3m and include a corresponding footway of 2m to the eastern side should the need arise in the future. Two laybys are proposed along the eastern side to provide for visitor parking. Should access to the allocated Alfrey Close site to the north east be required at a future date, this could be accommodated by extending the spine road north before branching east. This is illustrated within the SNP. The turning head to the north east corner opposite plots 17-18 would not be used. 8.13 This spine road size and position will reduce the informal open space available to the occupants of the site, but the occupants will be close to the public footpath and benefit from the landscaping of the development including the additional smaller open space area to the centre, availability of private gardens and opportunities for further informal recreation in adjacent sites to the north. A visible green link will be retained along this eastern boundary to comply with SNP policy 3. 8.14 In accordance with SNP policy 2 (iii) the access to the A259 will be positioned close to the south east corner of the site, with a 17m wide bellmouth. This width reduces to 6m at a point 10m back into the site. It is expected that this access point and crossover will be adopted with the remainder under private management. 8.15 Taking all of the above into account, it is considered that the proposed arrangement would provide an acceptable balance between highway and open space and green ring requirements on this site and would comply with the access requirements in policy 2 (iii) and policy 9 of the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan. 8.16 The secondary roads within the site will narrow to approximately 4m and be privately managed and maintained. Each property is given sufficient parking spaces to accord with WSCC standards. Swept path diagrams for a large refuse vehicle and private car have been submitted and demonstrate that vehicles can turn on site and enter and exit in a forward gear. 8.17 WSCC has also reviewed the finer details of the development including layby/bus stop works, impacts on the public footpath and pedestrian crossing points and not identified any concerns at this stage. Further road safety audits and details are considered to be capable of being obtained and approved by condition and will also form part of the corresponding WSCC highways consents. 8.18 In terms of access, safety and parking the development is considered to comply with the emerging policies and longer term aspirations of the SNP, saved policies TR6 and TR8 and emerging policy 39 of the Chichester Local Plan and section 4 of the NPPF. Drainage and sewerage 8.19 Southern Water has confirmed that there is insufficient capacity in the local sewer network to provide adequate foul sewerage to serve the proposed development. The applicant is aware of this and has progressed a stage 2 preliminary enquiry with Southern Water which has set out the estimated scope of works and likely costs. This process has identified that it will be necessary to construct 10m of 225mm diameter foul gravity sewer

87

within Main Road and 480m of 225mm foul gravity sewer in the field to the south of the site and Main Road, and associated manhole provisions to connect to the existing network of pipes that flow to Thornham WTW. Final details are to be agreed with Southern Water following any grant of planning permission. These will include detailed site and capacity surveys, full design details, final costs and a timetable for implementation. It is therefore considered likely that there is a technical solution achievable to overcome the concerns raised by locals and Southern Water regarding foul drainage. 8.20 Surface water drainage management is an important consideration for this site, particularly given the existing pooling of surface water at the southern end of the public footpath and in the layby outside the site after periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall, a matter raised by the Parish Council and third parties. While the Council can require developers to ensure the surface water discharge from any development does not exceed greenfield runoff rates, it would be unreasonable to expect the developer to resolve existing problems on and off site through this application. The maintenance and management of land and infrastructure beyond the boundaries of the site is the responsibility of other parties. 8.21 The drainage strategy for this site has been subject of detailed review and was amended during the application to be a gravity fed rather than pumped system. It comprises underground storage contained within the sub-base of the road construction that will naturally flow to a balancing pond to the south east corner of the site. Discharge will then be controlled to a maximum level of 5 l/s into an existing piped watercourse in the verge along Main Road to the south of the site. The maximum depth of pond water is estimated to be around 550mm. 8.22 The Council's Drainage Officer has considered the information provided and recommend that the principle of this approach and discharge rates is acceptable. Further tests would need to be completed before agreeing the full details of a surface water drainage scheme and these are capable of being sought and approved by condition. Officers and consultees are confident that a suitable engineering solution can be found to manage water on site and to avoid run-off onto the highway or public footpaths. Arrangements for the management and maintenance of the SUDs system on site in perpetuity would also be required by condition or S106 obligation. It would be expected that the run-off rate for the development would be as a minimum no worse than the existing situation and where possible will result in an improvement. 8.23 Officers consider that sufficient information is available at this stage in the process to establish that the development will be adequately drained and served with foul infrastructure and there will be a practical engineering solution available to properly manage on site water and not increase flood risk to surrounding properties or the highway. All further technical details can be reasonably sought and agreed through conditions and if necessary S106 obligations. This element of the scheme therefore complies with emerging policy 42 and the NPPF. Housing mix and tenure 8.24 Revisions to the housing mix have taken place alongside negotiations relating to the number of units on site. The revised mix takes into account the policy recommendations of the SHMA assessment and the Interim Statement on Affordable Housing in addition to the evidence of local needs and other consented and allocated development.

88

8.25 The development meets its 40% quota for affordable housing and provides a range of accommodation, with 6 units (2no. 1 bed flats, 2no. 2 bed flats and 2no. 3 bed houses) for affordable rent grouped near the main access and a further 2no. 2 bed shared ownership houses near the north east corner. The development does not provide the 1no 4 bed rented unit recommended by the SHMA however this is considered acceptable in this instance given the limited size of the site and current local need. It is considered that the larger allocated sites will be capable of addressing any shortfall. The rented units will be retained as such in perpetuity. The site is not in a designated protected area for affordable housing so the shared ownership units could be owned outright over time if sufficient private finance was in place. 8.26 The market mix will deliver 4no. 2 bed 1.5-2 storey dwellings, 6no. 3 bed 2 storey dwellings and 2no. 4 bed chalet style dwellings. This mix accords with the SHMA recommendation and provides a good range of accommodation. The housing mix and tenure arrangements comply with the Interim Statement, the SHMA, emerging policy 33 and the NPPF. Landscape impact 8.27 This is of particular importance on this site given its location within the Emsworth to Chichester Strategic Gap, opposite the Chichester Harbour AONB boundary and directly fronting the A259 on the approach to Southbourne village (east) and the rural hamlet of Prinsted (west). The site is also visible from the public footpaths adjacent and to the north of the site, and at a distance from the railway. 8.28 In recognition of the sensitive location of the site, the retention and enhancement of the site's vegetative boundaries is an important part of the scheme, particularly the south (A259), north (agricultural) and east (public footpath) boundaries. 8.29 The houses will be set back by a minimum of 13m from the southern boundary behind existing vegetation so where views are achievable through gaps in the planting or during the winter, the development will not detract materially from the streetscene. This is considered fairly typical of an approach to or exit from a large village with a main road running through. The retention of this boundary will also help mitigate the urbanising effect of development on the setting of the AONB. Furthermore, the site is allocated in the SNP and this document now has significant weight. 8.30 Aside from plot 16 which sits 3m from the northern boundary, the remaining dwellings (plots 12-14) will be set back by a minimum of 11m from the northern boundary. Some pruning will be necessary as this boundary is currently overgrown but the gardens proposed are of a reasonable size and further planting can be included to mitigate the visual impact of the development and its boundary fencing. The heights of the buildings in this part of the site have been reduced to 1.5-2 storeys with a max ridge of 8m (plots 14-15). The change in character of the site from agricultural to residential will be apparent from the nearby footpaths and may be discernible from the train, but the site will be viewed against a background of existing residential and community development. The detail of the proposed development and extent of the boundaries are such that the impacts will not be materially detrimental from these public vantage points. 8.31 The positioning of the open space and soft drainage infrastructure along the eastern boundary will help to mitigate the impacts on users of the public footpath, and the development will bring opportunities to open up the footpath and provide clearer links into the

89

site and this amenity area. This meets the requirements of the SNP in relation to the green ring. 8.32 While the presence of the A259 and its associated infrastructure (including the width of the road, footways and bus stops) already brings a developed character to the area, this is the last of the greenfield sites between Southbourne and Prinsted and as a result, its development will on plan result in the coalescence of the two settlements. Immediately to the west are the semi-detached 179 and 181 Main Road which are set 20m back from and are well screened from the road. The adjacent site to the west (Tuppenny Barn) is not intensively used or residential in character, and both the application site and its neighbour benefit from fairly good vegetative screening from the A259. The perception of coalescence is therefore reduced. On the basis that this site is allocated for development in the SNP with a requirement for residential development and a formal access and road connection, it is considered that the proposed development has taken advantage of the positive characteristics of the site and uses all reasonable methods to reduce its impacts on the character and appearance of the area. On balance, despite some concerns about actual and perceived coalescence and the urbanisation of the village and AONB periphery, the landscape and visual impacts do not override the support given by the allocation of this site for housing development in the SNP which carries weight. Layout 8.33 The layout has been informed by the requirements of emerging policies 2 (iii) 3 and 9 to provide the road and green ring to the east of the site and housing development to the centre and west, and takes into account the sensitivities of the site as discussed above. The concerns of the Design and Conservation Manager are noted, however the layout does provide informal recreational space to the east of the site and improved connections through to the public footpath which meet the aspirations of the SNP in terms of the Green Ring. There is additional informal open space to the centre of the site. The layout also provides each dwelling with private garden areas no shorter than 11m in length and acceptable relationships to neighbouring existing and proposed plots which allow for good amenity standards. On plot parking is achieved for all of the houses with no more than 4 spaces grouped. On balance, given the circumstances of the site, the requirements of the emerging SNP and Local Plan policies, saved Local Plan policy BE11 and the NPPF, the layout is considered acceptable. Scale, form and design of the new dwellings, relationships to existing development 8.34 In addition to the saved and emerging LP policies BE11, BE13 and 33, SNP Policy 4 (housing design) requires the scale, massing and height of new development to reflect the architectural and historic character and scale of the parish. 8.35 A traditional approach has been used for the development, using 1.5-2 storey buildings faced with brick or render, with flint to the gables on plots 12 and 20. Roofs will be clay tiles or slate, with deep eaves, some of which will have exposed rafter feet. The design input of CDC's Conservation and Design Manager has been carried through into the revised scheme by reason of the simplification of the design approach, reference to positive local examples particularly the 19th century Victorian and villa type buildings on the village approach and near the church. 8.36 Within the site, the dwellings are considered to be appropriately set out, with an acceptable level of parking and private amenity space and separation between dwellings. The layout complies with CDC's guidance for residential development.

90

8.37 The change of use of the land from agricultural to residential will increase activity on site and potential noise and disturbance to adjacent dwellings. These dwellings are however positioned adjacent to a primary busy road and bus stops and the proposed development is an acceptable but not high density and the new dwellings are positioned a reasonable distance from domestic boundaries. Weight is also given to the allocation of the site in the emerging SNP. 8.38 None of the new dwellings will face directly into the neighbouring properties. While there will be 4 new dwellings (plots 9-12) side or rear on to the boundary of the garden to 181 Main Road, the nearest will be 18m from the dwelling itself and any views from windows will be at distance and at an oblique angle. The side and rear gardens for 181 Main Road are a generous size and existing planting to the boundary can be retained and enhanced. The retention of the planting along the western side of the public footpath and provision of the green space and drainage pond will protect the amenities of the adjacent neighbour to the east (203 Main Road) from overlooking. Overall the development is considered to comply with the saved and emerging LP policies BE11, BE13 and 33, SNP Policy 4, section 7 of the NPPF and the NPPG. Other Matters Ecology and trees 8.39 A reptile mitigation strategy to deal with the low population of slow worms on site has been submitted and assessed to be satisfactory. The mitigation will involve the relocation of the slow worms to a receptor site. The finer details and implementation of this strategy is capable of being appropriately covered by condition. Bats have been confirmed to be using the hedgerows on site for foraging and commuting and to protect this habitat, buffer strips of 5m should left and protected during construction. Any gaps should also be filled and hedges lost replaced using native hedge species, and the lighting scheme will need to be designed to minimise disturbance to bats. A similar strategy will be suitable for the on-site birds. 8.40 The site lies within the 5.6km buffer for the Chichester Harbour SPA and consequently, payment of £172 per dwelling is required through a S106 agreement to mitigate against recreational disturbance in the harbour area. Payment of this sum enables the scheme to comply with the Council's Interim Statement on birds, saved policy RE7, emerging policy 50 and the NPPF. 8.41 The archaeological potential of the site has been considered and it is deemed appropriate to require a written scheme of investigation to be produced including trial trenching to take place prior to development works. This will allow any finds of heritage importance to be properly assessed and recorded and will enable the development to comply with saved policy BE3, emerging policy 47 and the NPPF. 8.42 The development has been designed to be built to Code 3 in compliance with building regulations. Significant Conditions 8.43 As recommended by consultees and discussed above, specific conditions are recommended to address the following matters of detail amongst others, to enable this scheme to be acceptable in full:

91

(i) Construction management - including temporary access, hours of work,

contamination prevention, containing all activities within the site boundaries, avoiding PROW harm/disturbance

(ii) Drainage - full details of all on and off-site foul drainage works including a timetable for implementation

(iii) Drainage - full scheme for surface water drainage (iv) Access construction including visibility splays and construction details, with

relevant road safety audits as advised by WSCC (v) Archaeology - a written scheme of investigation to include trial trenching (vi) Adherence to tree protection and all ecological mitigation proposals/plans (vii) A full material/finish schedule with samples (viii) Planting implementation and maintenance (ix) Parking and turning and secure cycle facilities to be provided on site before first

occupation Section 106 Agreement 8.44 The applicant will need to enter into a S106 agreement to cover the following matters: - 8 affordable dwellings on site, including 2 intermediate tenure - Recreational disturbance mitigation £3,440 (£172 per dwelling) - Community facilities £35,180 - Public Art £6,672 - Education primary £33,921 - Education secondary £39,595 - Libraries £3,549 - Fire/rescue £335 + 1 hydrant - TAD £42,400 8.45 The bus stop works will also need to be secured, with consideration given to the aims of the Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan for bus shelters and real time indicators. Additional on site and non-financial obligations will include the maintenance and management of the private roads, drainage and public landscaping areas, play and open spaces. Conclusion 8.46 Based on the above, it is considered the proposal complies with relevant saved development plan and emerging Local Plan policies, the policies in the emerging Southbourne Neighbourhood Plan and the NPPF by providing 20 dwellings in a sustainable location. The site can be accessed safely, drained appropriately and wildlife and trees will be managed to ensure no material detrimental effects. The application makes efficient use of the site and will be compatible with the character of the area and not detract from the amenities of nearby residents. Green links will be enhanced and the layout allows space for the highway aspirations in the Neighbourhood Plan to be accommodated. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions including those detailed above and listed in full below, and the accompanying S106 agreement. RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER FOR SECTION 106 THEN PERMIT

92

Human Rights 8.47 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to permit is justified and proportionate. RECOMMENDATION DEFER FOR SECTION 106 THEN PERMIT 1 A01F Time Limit - Full 2 U91035 U91035 - Plans 3 U91036 U91036 - Foul drainage details 4 U91037 U91037 - Surface water drainage 5 U91039 U91039 - SuDS maintenance 6 U91040 U91040 - Discharge culverting watercourses 7 U91041 U91041 - Existing watercourses riparian 8 U91042 U91042 - Archaeology 9 U91043 U91043 - Construction Management 10 U91044 U91044 - Access 11 U91045 U91045 - Safety Audit 12 U91046 U91046 - Bus stop layby 13 U91047 U91047 - Contamination watching brief 14 U91048 U91048 - Reptile mitigation 15 U91049 U91049 - Levels and sections 16 U91050 U91050 - Materials and finishes 17 U91051 U91051 - Tree protection 18 U91052 U91052 - Landscaping 19 U91053 U91053 - Planting 20 U91054 U91054 - Public art on site 21 U91055 U91055 - Code 3 22 U91056 U91056 - Roads footways and parking 23 U91057 U91057 - Visibility 24 U91058 U91058 - Garages 25 U91059 U91059 - Cycle parking 26 U91060 U91060 - Parking and turning 27 U91061 U91061 - Boundary treatments 28 U91062 U91062 - Bins 29 U91063 U91063 - Lighting INFORMATIVES 1 U91064 - INF General 2 U91065 - INF S106 3 U91066 - INF Southern Water 4 U91067 - INF Private roads 5 U91068 - INF Off site works 6 U91069 - INF Adoptable highway 7 U91070 - INF Temp highway works 8 U91071 - INF PROW consents 9 U91072 - INF pos/pro working For further information on this application please contact Naomi Langford on 01243 534734

93

Parish: Westbourne

Ward: Westbourne

10 WE/14/03174/LBC

Proposal Alterations and extension.

Site Westbourne House North Street Westbourne Emsworth West Sussex PO10

8SN

Map Ref (E) 475647 (N) 107551

Applicant Mr and Mrs J Badcock RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE

NOT TO SCALE


94

1.0 Reason for Committee Referral Red Card: Cllr Mark Dunn Important information/opinion to raise in debate (This is an important 18th Century House, with many later additions. Aspects of the modernisation scheme proposed by the owners, and under consideration by officers, call for the Committee's guidance) 2.0 The Site and Surroundings 2.1 Westbourne House is Grade II* listed and the Gate Piers to the eastern side are individually Grade II listed. The house is sited on the western side of North Street within the Westbourne Conservation Area and Westbourne Settlement Policy Area. The site is also located within the Environment Agency's defined Flood Zone 2 and 3. 2.2 The property has been altered and extended in 5 specified phases over time resulting in a large property which is prominent within the street scene particularly. looking south. and elevated from the main highway level significantly, contributing to the character and appearance of the conservation area. 2.3 The main dwellinghouse sits within the south east of the site. There are several other features within the large curtilage of the site to the north which include a large stable block to the eastern side, which forms part of the eastern boundary, a walled vegetable garden sited centrally and garden area beyond to the north. There is also a tennis court which is sited in the north western corner of the site. The front eastern boundary consists of iron gates supported by a set of brick piers and flanked by dwarf brick walls and a hedge. Further to the north, access is also gained to the property by painted timber gates (vehicular and pedestrian) which are supported by brick piers. 2.4 The original part of the building dates from the 18th Century with later additions constructed after a fire in 1908. The façade consists of a Georgian style layout with a porch up six steps with fluted Ionic columns containing a doorway with rectangular fanlight and door of six fielded panels flanked by sash windows. The materials of the dwellinghouse consist of mainly red bricks with quoining detail under a tiled roof, which supports 5 separate chimney stacks. There is a two storey later addition to the north set slightly lower than the original house, constructed of similar materials. To the west elevation there is a shallow bay window sited centrally with a glazed conservatory set between the central and southern part. Linked to the north part of the dwelling sits a small single storey brick built structure under a tiled roof currently used as a store. 3.0 The Proposal 3.1 The application relates to alterations and a rear extension to the main house. The proposed rear addition consists of a single storey 'lean to' style addition with sloping roof which would extend from the rear of the later addition, linked to the side of the original part of the building. The addition would be 6.6m wide by 3.7m deep by 2.8m heighto the eaves which slopes up to 3.2m in height. The roof of the addition would be constructed of zinc and glazing and the walls constructed of timber and glazing. The proposed works also include part removal/rebuilding of the store building to the north of the dwelling in materials to match the exsiting. This is to facilitate a wider entrance through to a parking area which will be formed within the existing vegetable garden. A boiler room addition is also proposed to the store building with a gate which links the store building to the hedgerow. A 12mm double

95

glazed door is proposed to the rear entrance into the store building. A 12mm double glazed window is proposed to the front of the store building. 3.2 Internally there are also proposed changes to the current configuration, both to the ground and first floor. The works to the ground floor involve the formation of an entrance with a flat leaded canopy over on the northern elevation into a hallway currently used as a guest room. The door would be constructed of timber with 12mm double glazing, a wc cupboard and boot room is proposed within this space. Additionally there is an alteration to the partition to form a revised layout which includes a utility room, the internal entrance to the existing store area entrance would be blocked up. The door between the existing utility and inner 'side hall' would also be blocked up with a separate cloak room proposed, accessed only from the side hall. The formation of the rear addition would also result in the removal of 2no. windows serving the existing utility room and cloak room and removal of approximately 2.6 metres of the wall. The existing stone floor comprising of 15no. flagstones which currently exists within the utility area is also proposed to be removed from this area and relocated to the proposed boot room. The height of the chimney opening within the existing store will be increased from 141cm to 183cm. The window from the cloakroom would be relocated to the northern elevation serving the new wc. 3.3 The works to the first floor include the removal and reformation of internal modern partitions within the bathroom area serving the master bedroom, the installation of a partition in the guest room to form a dressing room to the master bedroom, the installation of another single glazed window to the guest room and formation of an internal door from the guest room into a bathroom to form an en-suite. The existing door to the bathroom would be blocked up. 3no. new access hatches are proposed within the roof, 2no. roof lights are proposed within the lower landing, 2no. rooflights and 1no. light tube is proposed within the cupboards situated on the upper landing. 3.4 A previously submitted scheme for the works within was refused/withdrawn and pre-application discussions have taken place which have sought to address the concerns raised, which includes alterations to the proposed extension and reduction in the level of works to the main house proposed. 4.0 History 00/02820/LBC PER Erection of a single storey

conservatory to replace existing which is to be demolished.

00/02822/DOM PER Erection of a single storey

conservatory to replace existing which is to be demolished.

14/00516/LBC WDN Alterations and extensions.

14/00517/DOM REF Alterations and extensions.

96

5.0 Constraints

Listed Building YES

Conservation Area YES

Rural Area NO

AONB NO

Strategic Gap YES



SFRA Flood Zone

- Flood Zone 2 YES

- Flood Zone 3 YES


6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.0 Representations and Consultations 6.1 Parish Council - Westbourne Parish Council is in full support of the proposals to this Listed Building which will see some restoration of the internal layout and features whilst also adapting it to modern family living. Provision for the turning of vehicles on-site in order to avoid reversing out onto North Street would be welcome in the interest of road safety due to the on street parking and consequential reduction in road width. 6.2 English Heritage - The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your expert conservation advice. 6.3 CDC - Historic Buildings Adviser - No Objection provided the following are addressed The amendments represent further improvement, however there remain elements of harm which cannot be justified, particularly in a grade II* listed building. With reference to the amendments I would make the following further comments: - The reference to replacement of the 'small window to the new ground-floor WC' should be removed from 4813-30A. It is noted that this has been amended on 4813-14A. - Nib should ideally be the depth of the worktop to correlate with it rather than be an arbitrary length. - The door to the north elevation is within the historic envelope of the building and should therefore be in single glazing. This is not comparable to the new door to the rear which is located in a modern extension linking to the outbuilding and therefore cannot set a precedent for the use of double-glazing. I would note that we have compromised on the use

97

of glazing to this door, which would be more appropriate as a solid door and potentially thermally more efficient. More problematically, the elements which have not been addressed remain outstanding. These remain fundamental to support for this scheme given that the building is listed grade II* (in the top 5.5% of nationally important buildings) for the possession of 'more than special interest'; the authority has to be particularly protective of its special historic character and interest, including the Victorian service wing. - Removal of brickwork to allow access to conservatory - The change in floor levels and resulting high window cills, appears to be a primary characteristic of the 'servants' area, and indicative of its status, providing privacy from the garden. This forms part of its significance. Given this, large scale opening up of the elevation, in addition to resulting loss of historic fabric, is contrary to the nature of this element and its intended visual separation from the garden. As discussed on site, the brickwork below the existing window in the 'kitchen' could be removed to allow access through to the conservatory; though any further removal constitutes detrimental erosion of the floor plan and inherent character of this element, as well as loss of historic fabric. Please note that English Heritage have also made the below comments in respect of this element. Whilst these were made in reference to the PE proposals (WE/14/01387/PE) the scope of the opening has been amended only marginally: The impact to the ground floor, involving loss of part of the west wall [and significant remodelling of the north wing] would be harmful to the plan form of this element of the building which appears to be a later addition….greater consideration should be given to fitting the desired functions more sympathetically within the historic plan form here. In respect of the plan form, English Heritage's PPS5 Practice guide (which remains government endorsed guidance pending English Heritage's publishing of good practice advice to supersede it) highlights that the plan form of the building is frequently one of its most important characteristics. Paragraph 182 states: The plan form of a building is frequently one of its most important characteristics and internal partitions, staircases (whether decorated or plain, principal or secondary) and other features are likely to form part of its significance. Indeed they may be its most significant feature. Proposals to remove or modify internal arrangements, including the insertion of new openings or extension underground, will be subject to the same considerations of impact on significance (particularly architectural interest) as for externally visible alterations. I am afraid we remain unable to support large scale opening of this area, particularly as access could be achieved through a more constrained opening and the justification therefore rests largely on gaining natural light to this element, which is of course compromised by the addition of built form here in the first place. Unfortunately this is not compelling as required by the NPPF. Even where it might be considered 'less than substantial harm' under Paragraph 134, the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal and given the appropriate great weight under Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which requires special regard to be given to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural interest which it possesses.

98

- Window details on drawing 4813-23 - The new window will be seen in immediate context with the historic windows in both the listed building and the curtilage listed outbuilding. Therefore, they should be appropriately detailed. The use of 12mm double glazing may be acceptable here, however, a storm profile as illustrated on 4813-23 will highlight this inconsistency and will be strongly resisted. - Repositioning historic flagstone floor - Repositioning of this floor remains fundamentally problematic, as does the newly raised reference to the introduction of a DPC, insulation and foundations whose potential impacts have not been quantified within this application. I have discussed this with Building Control who have confirmed that this will not be necessary. The alternative options proposed, based on the fact that the stone floor does not extend under the small area of floor below the concrete steps, are not acceptable. The 'best match' flooring that would be found to fill the remaining new entrance hall could equally be used to fill this small area of floor, retaining the historic flagstone floor in situ. 'Retention' through reuse elsewhere in the building fails to preserve the contribution the material makes to the significance of the building and cannot be supported. Paragraph 178 of the PPS5 Practice Guide states: The fabric will always be an important part of the asset's significance. Retention of as much historic fabric as possible is therefore a fundamental part of any good alteration or conversion…It Is not appropriate to sacrifice old work simply to accommodate the new. If a stone floor is desired within the hall, this could be achieved without removing the existing floor and would not be problematic. - Loss of fabric to guestroom wall - Whilst it is acknowledged that some of this corner of the plan has been altered (most of the alterations having taken place to the south-east corner of the Victorian wing), the room to the north-east corner retains its scale and proportions and is readily legible through the chimney breast and western wall. The proposed double doors results in unjustified loss of fabric and has a knock-on effect on the other side of the wall, with the dog-legged wall within the kitchen stepping away from the window, thus highlighting its incongruity. A single door through the wall here coupled with a more sympathetic form may be capable of support. Alternatively, the proposed WC could be sacrificed as there is already a cloak room just down the hallway. Please clarify the following statement: 'The second adjustment is to widen the opening into the main house…'. It is not clear what this relates to. I would also like to clarify the apparent 'inconsistency' in respect of 12mm versus 16mm double glazing, which has to do with the details achievable with the thickness of the glazing and also the variation in appearance of the double glazing which results from the thickness of the individual panes and air gap. It is acknowledged that there is less harm in this scheme, however that does not qualify the harm as proposed. Given that 'no objection' was conditional upon all of the requested amendments, I am afraid we remain unable to fully support this scheme.

99

6.4 Havant Borough Council Conservation Officer - Not considered to raise wider heritage issues necessitating specific comment from Havant Borough Council - Defer to Chichester District Council. 6.5 Applicant/Agent's Supporting Information - Amended plans provided by the Applicant which sought to address majority of the issues raised by the Historic Buildings Adviser and Officers. - Leaving a stone floor is not a viable option due to the need for a damp proof membrane (DMP) to meet building regulations. - Historically valid to reuse the floor in the same way as originally intended within an entrance area. - Does not involve loss of historic floor fabric - Seems to fit in with Paragraph 88 of English Heritage's Conservation Principles Policy and Guidance 2008 that "there is rarely a single and right answer". - Aware of other decision which involve loss of walling - Do not consider that the width of a 1.5m opening is a reasonable interpretation of the constructive conservation guidelines - "each generation should therefore shape and sustain the historic environment in a way that allows people to use and enjoy and benefit from it without compromising the ability of future generations". (English Heritage Principle no.1 Para 1.2). - 1.5m opening would not allow surveillance children in the garden required, sufficient light into kitchen and does not provide openness and beneficial flow or activity that is reasonable requirement of 21st Century family life. - Double cupboard required for storage space - although historic fabric is being removed the the existing line of the wall and floor plan is retained so that this area can be understood for future generations - The flooring, opening size and loss of fabric to existing guestroom wall does not strike at the heart of this listed buildings significance. - Balanced the requirement between protecting heritage of building and updating the house for modern family living. 7.0 Planning Policy The Development Plan 7.1 The Development Plan for Chichester District comprises the saved policies of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999 and all adopted neighbourhood plans. There is no adopted neighbourhood plan for Westbourne at this time. 7.2 The principal planning policies relevant to the consideration of this application are as follows: Chichester District Local Plan First Review 1999: BE1 Settlement Policy Areas BE4 Buildings of Architectural or Historic Merit BE5 Alterations to Listed Buildings BE6 Conservation Areas BE11 New Development BE12 Alterations, Extensions and Conversions BE14 Wildlife Habitat, Trees, Hedges and Other Landscape Features

100

7.3 The Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies and modifications has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination. The emerging Local Plan is a material consideration and following Submission it gains increasing weight for decision making purposes. As it progresses through the Local Plan process to adoption it will gain more weight, paragraph 216 of the NPPF is therefore relevant. Chichester Local Plan (Pre-Submission) Draft 2013 Policy 1: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy 33: New Residential Development Policy 47: Heritage National Policy and Guidance 7.4 Government planning policy now comprises the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), paragraph 14 of which states: At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking: For decision-taking this means unless material considerations indicate otherwise: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and - Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in (the) Framework indicate development should be restricted. 7.5 Consideration should also be given to paragraph 17 (Core Planning Principles), paragraph 128, 129, 131, 132, 134 and 137 (conserving and enhancing the historic environment) and paragraph 118 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment). Other Local Policy and Guidance 7.6 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance and Interim Statements are material to the determination of this planning application: Planning for the Historic Environment: Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide 2010 (English Heritage) 7.7 The aims and objectives of the Council's Sustainable Community Strategy are material to the determination of this planning application. These are: A4 - The district to be known as a centre for creative and innovative industries building on our rich arts and heritage base B1 - Managing a changing environment

101

8.0 Planning Comments 8.1 The main issues arising from this proposal are the impact of the proposed works on the character, historic fabric and floorplan of the building. Assessment 8.2 The rear addition proposed consists of a single storey 'lean to' style addition with sloping roof which would extend from the rear of the later addition, linked to the side of the original part of the building. A full description of the proposed works is set out in section 3. The external alterations proposed have been considered by the Historic Buildings Adviser and Planning Officer and, on balance, the works are considered acceptable as they would not result in significant harm to the listed building. 8.3 The internal works to the first floor would not result in undue harm to the listed building. The partition alterations are mainly related to modern partitions with the formation of a new door to form an en-suite to the guest room, not resulting in a significant level of harm to historic integrity of the listed building. 8.4 At ground floor level there are a number of internal alterations that are set out in full in section 3 of this report. The majority of the proposed changes would not have an adverse impact on the value of the heritage asset and are acceptable. Both the Officers and the Applicant have compromised to try and reach an acceptable outcome, however, there are two elements proposed that remain fundamentally problematic and are considered to result in undue harm to the grade II* listed building. These relate to the excessive opening up of the wall to the proposed extension and the relocation of the flagstone flooring. 8.5 The Historic Buildings Adviser (HBA) has raised concern regarding these elements and concerns that the loss of the brickwork to allow access to the rear addition and the loss of the flagstone floor in the existing utility area would spatially alter the ground floor eroding the floor plan which is important in understanding the history of the building and would result in an unjustified loss of historic fabric. The HBA has advised that the change in floor levels and resulting high window cills in this part of the house is a primary characteristic of the 'servants' quarter, and indicative of its status. A small amount of loss of the historic fabric in order to facilitate access to the proposed new extension would be appropriate however the removal of the majority of the wall would be unwarranted and would seriously erode the historic floorplan. Additionally the relocation of the Victorian flagstone flooring to the boot room would erode the delineation between the existing space and the new addition. Leaving the flooring in situ is important to understanding the historic context of the building and its narrative. The applicant has stated that these works would be necessary to facilitate the installation of a damp proof membrane, however, having discussed this with the Council’s Building Control Team, such works would not be necessary. The movement of the flagstone floor elsewhere in the building fails to preserve the contribution the material makes to the significance and understanding of this part of the building. 8.6 Concern has also been raised with regard the proposed double doors in the boot room area, to form a cupboard. Whilst it is acknowledged that some of this corner of the plan has been altered (most of the alterations having taken place to the south-east corner of the Victorian wing), the room to the north-east corner retains its scale and proportions and is readily legible through the chimney breast and western wall. There is concern that the proposed double doors result in unjustified loss of fabric and has a knock-on effect on the other side of the wall, with the dog-legged wall within the kitchen stepping away from the window, thus highlighting its incongruity. The HBA has advised that a single door through the

102

wall coupled with a more sympathetic form may be capable of support. On balance, and in the interests of forming a compromise with the applicants on other matters (the retention of the flagstone flooring and the provision of a smaller aperture between the kitchen and the proposed extension), this element was considered to be an acceptable compromise, although undesirable in its own right. However, the applicant has now declined to make suitable adjustments to the other more important elements which are fundamental to the acceptability of the scheme as a whole and the changes to the boot room are also an unwarranted harmful impact on the value of this grade II* listed building. 8.7 Paragraph 132 of the NPPF highlights that "significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification". Additionally paragraph 134 on the NPPF states that "where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal". In this case, the works will result in harm to the listed building which is less than substantial but that nonetheless requires sufficient justification for the works which outweighs the resultant harm which will be caused to the building. The needs of the family to create a more functional family space have been afforded some weight, which can be shown in the level of changes which are considered acceptable by Officers. Crucially, this need for flexibility in the future use of buildings does not, however, extend to the personal preferences of an individual. The proposal which results in the unnecessary loss of a significant amount of historic fabric and the removal of the flagstone flooring is not justified by any public benefit and would not outweigh the overall harm to the spatial arrangement and loss of historic fabric of this Grade II* listed building, contrary to the public interest in retaining the historical significance of this building. 8.8 Although the proposal seeks to retain part of the walling with the formation of nibs, the proposal would significantly change the pattern of the layout and result in the loss of original fabric, creating a more open and unconstrained space. The preservation of the historic interest of such buildings relies not only on the external appearance of the structure, but also of an accurate understanding of the internal spaces as they were historically formed. To lose this understanding significantly erodes the value of the heritage asset and does not meet the statutory tests of preserving or enhancing any features of architectural or historical interest. Conclusion 8.9 Based on the above assessment, it is considered the proposal does not comply with the local and national planning policies referred to above and that, this application should be refused. Human Rights 8.10 In reaching this conclusion the Human Rights of the applicants and nearby occupiers have been taken into account when reaching this recommendation and it is concluded that the recommendation to refuse is justified and proportionate. 8.11 In reaching the above conclusion Officers have taken into account rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of Human Rights and concluded that the decision to refuse permission/consent is justified and proportional to the harm that would be caused if planning permission/Listed Building Consent were to be granted.

103

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE 1 U90853 - Reason INFORMATIVES 1 U90856 - Proactive statement For further information on this application please contact Sophie Locke on 01243 534734.