Download Report

AGENDA ITEM 06
Chichester District Council
Planning Committee
Wednesday 1 April 2015
Report of the Head of Planning Services
Schedule of Planning Appeals, Court and Policy Matters
This report updates committee members on current appeals and other matters. It would
be of assistance if specific questions on individual cases could be directed to officers in
advance of the meeting.
Note for public viewing via Chichester District Council web site To read each file in
detail, including the full appeal decision when it is issued, click on the reference number
(NB certain enforcement cases are not open for public inspection, but you will be able to
see the key papers via the automatic link to the Planning Inspectorate)
WR
H
I
( )
*
1
–
–
–
–
–
Written Representation Appeal
Hearing
Inquiry
Case Officer initials
Committee level decision
NEW APPEALS
Reference/Procedure
Proposal
*CC/14/02201/FUL
WR (P Kneen)
Garage Compound South of 39 To 45 Cleveland Road
Chichester West Sussex - Proposed residential development
to form 3 no 3 bedroom detached houses with associated
gardens and garages.
*CC/14/02308/FUL
WR (M Tomlinson)
36 Stirling Road Chichester West Sussex PO19 7DT Replacement of redundant old garage with a single dwelling
of chalet design.
CC/14/03359/PDE
WR (H Chowdhury)
18 Juxon Close Chichester West Sussex PO19 7AA - Single
storey rear extension (a) rear extension - 4.0m (b) maximum
height - 3.7m (c) height at eaves - 2.3m.
CH/14/02138/OUT
I (V Colwell/J Bell)
Land East of Broad Road Hambrook West Sussex Residential development of 120 single and two storey
dwellings comprising 48 affordable homes and 72 market
price homes, garaging and parking together with retail unit,
sports pavilion, community facility, new vehicular and
pedestrian access to Broad Road, emergency and
pedestrian access to Scant Road West, sports facilities, 2
tennis courts, football pitch and 4 cricket nets, childrens play
area, public open space and natural green space on a site of
9.31 ha.
EWB/14/03933/DOM
WR (C Boddy)
Fairholme East Bracklesham Drive Bracklesham Chichester
West Sussex PO20 8JH - Proposed new rear kitchen/dining
room extension including rooms in the roof creating 2 no
bedrooms with ensuite.
*SDNP/14/01085/FUL
WR (D Price)
Wassell Barn Ebernoe Petworth GU28 9LD – Replacement
dwelling.
SDNP/14/03530/HOUS
WR (C Cranmer)
Baldwins Ropes Lane Fernhurst Haslemere West Sussex
GU27 3JD – Erection of detached outbuilding.
SDNP/14/04890/HOUS & Wheelwrights House Hill Grove Lurgashall Petworth GU28
SDNP/14/04891/LIS
9EW - Demolition of existing two storey addition and
WR ( C Cranmer)
conservatory; erection of two storey extension and
conservatory at rear.
SI/14/00012/CONMHC
WR (R Hawks)
Willowdene Fletchers Lane Sidlesham Chichester West
Sussex PO20 7QG – Mobile home.
WR/14/02859/FUL
WR (M Tomlinson)
Roosters Store Durbans Road Wisborough Green
Billingshurst West Sussex RH14 0DG - Removal of condition
4 of planning permission WR/99/00567/FUL.
2
DECISIONS RECEIVED
Reference/Decision
Proposal
BI/14/01362/LBC
WR (N McKellar)
PART ALLOWED PART
DISMISSED
Hammonds Farm Westlands Lane Birdham - demolition of
existing extension and conservatory and construction of
single storey rear extension and conservatory with associated
works. Two no dormer windows in connection with loft
conversion. Closing existing pedestrian access to Westlands
Lane.
"... Appeal A is dismissed insofar as it relates to a single storey rear extension and
conservatory and associated works. The appeal is allowed insofar as it relates to new
bedroom and bathroom in roof space with 2 new dormer windows and associated works,
demolition of small extension and existing conservatory, reduced ground levels as
shown on plan with levels and closing up of existing pedestrian access onto Westlands
Lane at Hammonds Farm, Westlands Lane. ... Appeal B is dismissed insofar as it relates
to single storey rear extension and conservatory and associated works. The appeal is
allowed insofar as it relates to new bedroom and bathroom in roof space with 2 new
dormer windows and associated works, demolition of small extension and existing
conservatory, reduced ground levels as shown on plan with levels and closing up of
existing pedestrian access onto Westlands Lane at Hammonds Farm, Westlands Lane.
...
Lowering of garden level
... Flag stones will be disturbed by the ground work, but the works have a beneficial
effect because they would reduce water penetration. Hence the harm to the historic
fabric caused by the lifting and replacing of the flagstones is outweighed.
Demolition of conservatory and porch
The modern conservatory is incongruous in the context of the modest, plain house.
Moreover it obscures the rear elevation and part of the south elevation of the listed
building. ... The Council says that the demolition of the existing conservatory is
acceptable and I see no reason to disagree. The porch appears to have been altered,
possibly as part of the 20th century changes and appears to have little historic fabric or
interest and thus its demolition would not harm the listed building.
Access to Westlands Lane
Its loss would not be significantly harmful. ...
The steeply pitched roof of the main house would be replicated in the proposed kitchen
extension. But because of the width and depth of the proposed room this would result in
an awkward and disproportionately high roof form. Consequently there would be an
uncomfortable junction between the kitchen and the lower link to the historic single
storey part of the building. In contrast, the proposed pyramidal roof of the conservatory
would have a very shallow pitch and its relationship and abutment to the kitchen roof
would appear incongruous. Accordingly the complexity of the proposed roofscape would
fail to echo the simple form of the two storey house. The kitchen and conservatory
would extend the footprint of the dwelling to the north and the enlarged wing by reason
of its size would be overly dominant at odds with the current linear form of Hammonds
Farm. Turning to the detailing, there appears to be no comprehensive approach to the
fenestration. Hammonds Farm has a relatively uniform consistent style of casement
windows, in which the mullions form a distinctive pattern in this simple building. But
those proposed in the two extensions would have a strong vertical emphasis and the
differing designs would appeal incoherent. ... This muddled approach is emphasised by
the glazing style of the proposed conservatory which would be different again. Taking
these altogether, I consider the scale. design and detailing of the proposed kitchen/diner
and conservatory would be harmful and dominant addition to his simple vernacular
building and thus undermine its significance. ..."
SDNP/12/00426/
UNAWKS
(Boxgrove
WR (R Hawks)
DISMISSED
Warehead Stud Thicket Lane Halnaker, Boxgrove – erection
of a pole barn, unauthorised container, hardstanding – appeal
against enforcement notice.
"... The appeal is dismissed and the enforcement notice is upheld. Planning permission
is refused on the application deemed to have been made under section 177(5) of the Act
as amended. The main issue in this case is whether the works conserve the landscape
and scenic beauty of the South Downs National Park in which the site is located. ... In its
south-east corner are the container, hardsurface and pole barn subject of this appeal. ...
Indeed, even if they are relatively small in themselves, the incremental introduction of
such developments could lead to a cumulative erosion of the landscape and scenic
beauty of the area. ... The container, the hardsurface and any vehicles parked there are
not well concealed. ... Their isolated location and their functional urban nature mean they
relate poorly to this rural setting and detract from its landscape and the scenic beauty. ...
I see no functional reason why the barn, container and hardsurface associated with the
Appellant's tree surgery business need be in this isolated location rather than on a site
with a stronger relationship to existing buildings. ... I conclude, inappropriate
encroachment of built form into the South Downs National Park that erodes its
landscape and scenic beauty. ... Therefore I conclude the appeal should be dismissed"
CC/14/01782/FUL
WR (N McKellar)
DISMISSED
1-43 Peter Weston Place 6-24 (evens) Velyn Avenue and 6682 (evens) The Hornet Chichester – replacement windows.
"... The buildings are of relatively recent construction. ... Nevertheless, considerable care
has clearly been taken to ensure that they relate well to the traditional architectural
characteristics of the historic development in the Conservation Area with regard to
matters such as siting, scale height, form, proportions and materials. ... I saw at my site
visit that because of the age of the buildings, wooden window frames are a significant
feature of the Conservation Area. the Appellant suggests that the adjacent buildings at
50-64 The Hornet have been substantially re-built. However, they have grade two Listed
Building status, whilst is clearly reflected in their architectural quality with the wooden
sliding sash windows, being an attractive and harmonious feature. ... As a result I
consider the wooden windows at the appeal site to be an important feature, with the two
blocks contributing positively to the settling of both the Conservation area and adjacent
Listed Building at 50-64 The Hornet. The proposal would replace the existing frames
with UPVC windows. I saw at my site visit that the existing frames do not have the same
degree of unnatural and characterless smoothness inevitably found in plastic frames and
the presence of the wood is fairly obvious. The use of plastic would provide a
disharmonious and incongruous contrast with the wooden openings at the immediately
adjacent Listed Building and in relation to those found in the wider historic environment
of the Conservation Area. This would be unacceptable even if the detailed design of the
new windows, in terms of matters such as glazing bars, would be appropriate. ... The
proximity of the buildings to the adjacent streets means that the unsympathetic materials
would also be fairly obvious to passers-by. ... St Agnes Place and 109-115 The Hornet,
consider that rather than providing a precedent to justify the proposed alterations, they
illustrate the obviously disharmonious impact of such features. ... It is concluded that the
proposal would harm the setting of the Conservation Area and therefore fail to preserve
or enhance its character or appearance. .. The scheme would also adversely impact on
the setting of the adjacent Listed Building at 50-64 The Hornet. ...It is claimed that plastic
windows would have benefits in relation to matters such as reducing noise, heat loss
and the need for maintenance. Nevertheless there is no especially detailed or technical
information in relation to any of these matters showing any particularly compelling need
to replace the wooden windows. .. I find the arguments as to whether plastic or timber
windows are more sustainable to be inconclusive, despite the obvious need to paint
wood. I am not persuaded that any benefits would be sufficient to overcome the adverse
effects that would arise in relation to heritage assets. ..."
CH/13/03157/OUT
WR (J Bell)
DISMISSED
Pottery Field Main Road Nutbourne – erection of 26 dwellings
(2 no 1 bed apartments, 3 no 2 bed bungalows, 5 no 2 bed
houses, 12 no 3 bed houses, 4 no 4 bed houses and new
access from A259, landscaping, children’s play area, open
space and junior sports field.
"... The main issue in this appeal is whether the presumption in favour of granting
planning permission (paragraph 14 of the Framework) is overcome by any other
considerations - specifically the effect of the proposal on the area's character and
appearance, bearing in mind the appeal scheme's relationship to the Chichester Harbour
(AONB) and its location within a Strategic Gap. ... The appellant has submitted a
Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). ... For the Council, the findings of the
assessment have been challenged by West Sussex County Council's landscape
architect. ... As a result of the lack of visual enclosure on its western and northern sides,
the appeal site has a significantly greater visual linkage with the open countryside, of
which it clearly forms a part, than with the built-up area, from which it appears distinctly
separate. ...The site's relationship to the A259 means that the proposed residential
development and access would be easily seen from that road. The A259 has
agricultural land on both sides. to the south, the fields lie within the AONB. I therefore
disagree with the LVIA's view that the site has a context that is discrete from the AONB.
To my mind, the site's open nature and degree of visibility from the A259 are attributes
that do not differ significantly from land within the AONB to the south of the road.
Bearing in mind the A259's well-used nature, I therefore share the Council's view that
the LVIA underestimates the sensitivity of the receptor at that point: I agree that a score
of 'high/medium' would be more appropriate that 'medium/high'. Furthermore, it seems
to me that replacing an open arable field that has open boundaries on two sides with a
residential development including an access road would amount to a major change in
character. The site's proximity to, and visibility from, the A259 means that this change
would be seen by most (if not all) passers-by. In addition, I disagree with the appellant's
assessment of the scheme's effect when seen from a public footpath within the AONB.
... On my visit I saw that the houses built to the north of the site can be seen from that
position across the appeal site and the intervening field to the sough of the A259.
However, they are distant and do not appear as prominent features. In contrast, the
present scheme would bring the edge of the settlement significantly closer. As a result,
the proximity of built development to the AONB would be seen more easily. ... I consider
that the appeal scheme would create a 'substantial/major' visual effect in views from the
A259. While bearing in mind that a residential access road is proposed at this point, it is
likely that the proposed expansion of the built-up areas would be clearly apparent. The
proximity of such development to the open countryside of the AONB would harm the
AONB's setting. This harm would be amplified by the scheme's visibility from within the
AONB itself. ... In respect of the Strategic Gap, the appeal scheme would be seen as an
expansion of the built-up area along part of the northern side of the A259. This would
reduce the degree of separation between the settlements of Nutbourne East and West
along that road. However, open fields would remain to the west of the site and, as such,
coalescence between Nutbourne East and West would be avoided. An obvious open
and undeveloped gap would remain. ... Bearing in mind the intended scale of the
scheme and the resulting absence of coalescence, the harm arising from the scheme's
conflict with LP policy RE6 would be limited. ... Paragraph 115 of the Framework
attaches great weight to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in AONB's. ... I
consider that the harm that would be caused to the setting of the AONB, would represent
a clear and statutory duty. I conclude that this matter is sufficient to overcome the
presumption in favour of granting planning permission set out in paragraph 14 of the
Framework. ..."
CH/14/02042/FUL
WR (P Kneen)
DISMISSED
Land North of High Tide Chidham Lane Chidham – erection
of detached cottage to replace extant planning permission for
boat house.
"The main issues are whether the proposal would:
a) conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the Chichester Harbour Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
b) adequately address the risk of flooding of the site;
c) represent sustainable development, having regard to the development plan and
national planning policy. ...
The character of the AONB takes its cue largely from the wider pattern of development,
its flat and open landscape and expansive views which may be obtained of the harbour
and its associated tidal inlets. ... I can therefore appreciate why the Council may have
sought to exercise a policy of restraint over new residential development. .. Successive
dwellings would only serve to erode further the special character of the area. ... I
conclude that, on its own and as regards the extent to which it would set an undesirable
precedent for further residential development, similarly justified, it would fail to conserve
the natural beauty of the AONB, and thereby harm its character and appearance. The
proposal would conflict with Policy RE4 of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review
(1999). ...The Council is of the view that the appeal site falls within Flood Zones 2/3.
The appellant argues that taking into account recent flood defence works, it can be
classed as falling within Zone 1. ... The key paragraph in the NPPF is paragraph 103,
which relates to individual proposals. .. I am satisfied that the appellants' FRA is in line
with the bulleted requirements in this paragraph but it is equally clear that the sequential
test should be undertaken. ... I conclude that the proposal fails adequately to address
the risk of flooding in that consideration has not been given to locations less at risk of
flooding and a sequential test applied. To that extent, it conflicts with paragraph 103 of
the NPPF. ... I note the parties' emphasis under this heading on sustainable transport
links and access to facilities. ... There are three dimensions to sustainable development,
economic, social and environmental.
The economic role is of some, albeit limited
relevance … the environmental role. the proposal, must, in the light of my conclusions
on its effect on the AONB, be regarded as failing to protect and enhance the natural
environment. The interests of the protection of the natural and built environment would
be better served by a dwelling located in an area less at risk from flooding. ... The social
role, the proposal would make a contribution to housing supply in the District. ... The site
lies within what the Council describes as "the defined Rural Area" to which policies of
restraint against development in the open countryside apply. No essential need for
prospective occupiers to live in the countryside is advanced nor is the proposal justified
with regard to its exceptional or innovative design. The key consideration is whether it
would be accessible to local services. ... In my view, while the country lane leading
to/from the A259 might make for a pleasant walk on a fine day, it would not be conducive
to walking or cycling on a day-to-day basis to access public transport or local facilities. ...
Occupiers would therefore become reliant on the private car. ... The proposal would fail
to perform the social role envisaged in paragraph 7. ... I conclude that the proposal
cannot represent sustainable development, it conflicts with the Policy RE1 of the local
plan, and runs counter to the aim of emerging policies 1 and 45 of the key policies to
support sustainable development, including in the countryside. ... "
SDNP/14/03584/HOUS
Easebourne
WR (C Cranmer)
Trumpers Upperfield Easebourne West Sussex GU29 9AE construction of a two-bay garage.
"... The proposed garage would be of attractive design being of oak frame construction
with timber boarding to elevations and tiled roof to match the existing house. However, it
would be of a substantial size, 6.25 metres by 5.35 metres and around 3.8 metres to
ridge height. It would have a long catslide roof with low rear eaves level of around 1.25
metres. ... Generally, garaging appears to be either integral to the dwellings, as on the
appeal site, or set well back in the plot either adjacent to or behind the dwellings.
Therefore, even with the permanent screening, the proposed garage would be seen,
albeit from limited points, as an uncharacteristic feature of the streetscene. Without it, it
would certainly be an unduly prominent and incongruous built feature in the wider
streetscene. ... I find that the proposal would have a harmful impact on the character and
appearance of the streetscene. this would be in conflict with Policies BE11 and BE13 of
the Chichester District Local Plan First Review (1999) which seek to ensure that new
development does not detract from its surroundings, does not damage the character of
the built environment by virtue of an increase in the scale or mass of built development
insufficiently related visually to adjacent building line fronting a highway. I also find that
it would fail to satisfy policies in the National Planning Policy Framework which seek to
ensure that development responds to local character and reflects local identity. ..."
FU/14/02204/FUL
WR (F Stevens)
DISMISSED
1 Clearwater Ratham Lane West Ashling – erection of new
single storey utility building to replace extant permission for 2
storey utility building.
"... The proposal is for a new permanent building to be constructed in brick, with a tiled
roof, to replace the 2 sheds. ... The proposed building would include a kitchen, utility
room, disabled wc, office, children's play/TV room and an adults' games room.
Clearwater is an isolated development in an attractive, rural area. Most of the mobile
homes and out-buildings are largely hidden from public view because they are set back
from Ratham Lane behind an internal access drive and because of the screening
provided by the hedge and fence along the lane. However, the shared entrance to the
plots provides views of part of plot 1 and there are also glimpsed views, at least in
winter, of the plot from the minor lane to the north of the site. The proposed building
would be large, the size of a small bungalow. ... The comparatively large size of the
building would add considerably to the bulk of development on this plot and consolidate
buildings on this pocket of development in the countryside. In a modest, but material
way it would erode one of the intrinsic characteristics of the countryside which is the
general absence of built development. I consider that the development would conflict
with policy BE11 of the Chichester District Local Plan First Review (1999) for
development not to detract from its surroundings. Whilst this policy predates publication
of the National Planning Policy Framework, I consider that its aim is consistent with the
Framework. ... Whilst I do not question the principle of having an amenity block/day
room on this plot, I consider that no need for a building of this substantial scale has been
demonstrated. Accordingly, there is conflict with policy RE1 of the Chichester District
Local Plan First Review. ... So far as is relevant to this appeal. I consider that the aim of
the policy is consistent with the Framework which seeks recognition of the intrinsic
character and beauty of the countryside. ..."
SDNP/12/02760/FUL
Harting
H (N Langford)
In progress
Ship Inn North Lane South Harting – change of use of
building from A4 (drinking e4stablishment) to C3 (single
dwellinghouse).
"...The appellant's specialist evidence is that the asking prices for both rent and sale of
the Ship Inn were reflective of the use, size and condition of the property. No alternative
valuations based on such specialist knowledge of the public house market are put
forward. ... Detailed criticisms of the appellant's quantitative evidence on likely
profitability of an owner-occupier do not undermine the fundamental point that this
makes on the poor business prospects. The Authority fairly suggests the scope for
diversification and innovation in running a successful business at the premises, such as
the inclusion of overnight guest accommodation. However, the marketing exercise
would have exposed the property to potential interests of that nature. No specific
business models or operations are put forward. ... It is possible to speculate that
continues marketing could have led to disposal to a public house operator. However,
and taking into account Government advice on viability which requires a realistic
assessment that has regard to evidence, overall I conclude that the marketing that took
place complies with the requirements of policy BE2. ... It is relevant that there are no
third party objections to the proposal, and in particular the Parish Council withdrew its
earlier objection. This suggests that limited local value is placed on the existing use,
despite the apparent popularity of the establishment in the past. With the location in the
National Park and the number of visitors to this there is a wilder market for such
facilities, but the evidence on other public houses in the area indicates that there is
reasonable choice available in this respect. There is no requirement in the policy for
alternative community use of the premises to be considered. ... I am satisfied on the
basis of the submitted plans and inspection that the residential use could be
accommodated without requiring harmful major alterations. ... Nevertheless, the
proposed change of use would erode an element of the building's significance and its
contribution to the Conservation ~Area by way of loss of the original use and its public
and community value on that respect. ... Responsibilities and powers exist relating to
safeguarding of the fabric. Nevertheless, long term vacancy is not desirable, and there
is a need for a viable future use that would secure the building while safeguarding its
physical interest. ... While the loss of the long-standing public house use is to be
regretted, I consider that the proposal represents the optimum viable use of the building.
The public benefit of securing this use outweighs the less than substantial harm to the
significance of the heritage assets. It also outweighs any conflict with policies BE4 and
BE5. ... I have had regard to the statutory duties arising from the National Park
designation. Based on the above consideration, securing the conservation of the
building as heritage asset by allowing the change of use is consistent with these. ..."
SB/14/01672/OUT
WR (P Kneen)
DISMISSED
Dunkirk South Lane Southbourne – erection of 5 no
dwellings.
"... Main Issues
The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
and secondly, whether the proposed development represents sustainable development
and would be appropriately located. ... Significant trees within the site could be retained
and it is likely that this could be further supplemented by new landscaping which would
be considered at any reserved matters stage. This would help retain the attractive,
open, semi-rural character of the site and its surroundings. The northern boundary
hedge would be retained. ... Due to the distances involved there would be limited views
of the development form Stein Road. These factors would combine to limit visual
coalescence of development with the ribbon of housing further north of the site in South
Lane. ... I conclude that the proposed development would not therefore have a
significant adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would thereby
comply with saved policies BE11 and H4 for the Chichester District Local Plan First
Review April 1999. ... It would also comply with draft policy 33 of the emerging LP which
seeks to ensure that new residential development satisfies a range of criteria. ... The
appeal site is located adjoining but outside of the northern settlement boundary for
Southbourne defined within the LP. ... The Council cannot demonstrate a five year
supply of deliverable housing sites. ... I therefore am required to assess the proposal
against the relevant policies within the Framework. ... With regard to the economic
dimension, the proposed development would provide some limited short term job
opportunities during construction and would in social terms, make a modest contribution
to the supply of housing within Southbourne. In respect of environmental matters, ..
service ... to the north of the railway line are insufficient to encourage any meaningful
level of trips from the appeal site by foot. ... The environmental strand of sustainability
also extends to the consideration of biodiversity issues and wild life protection. ... The
site is located 1.9 km from the SPA. ... I am unable to conclude that the proposal would
not adversely affect the integrity of the SPA. Therefore, acting in accordance with the
precautionary principle, I find this adds further to the harm I have identified in respect of
the environmental strand of sustainable development. ... The Southbourne Parish
Neighbourhood Plan 2014-2029 Submission Plan 2014 has not yet been examined by
an Inspector. ... The proposal would therefore be unacceptable in these terms and this
contributes further towards my findings on the inappropriateness of the site's location. ...
The proposal would be inappropriately located and would not amount to sustainable
development. ..."
3
OUTSTANDING APPEALS
Reference/Status
Proposal
BI/13/00316/FUL
H (J Bell)
Awaiting decision
Birdham Pool The Causeway Birdham – conversion of
building to 4 no dwellings, replacement workshop building,
re-arrangement of existing boatyard.
Installation of
replacement modern crane. Re-arrangement of existing
marina layout. Relocation of marina office
BO/14/02085/DOM
WR (S Locke)
In progress
Pheasant Lodge Old Park Lane Bosham – proposed
entrance porch.
BO/14/02894/FUL
WR (F Stevens)
In progress
Mariners The Drive Bosham - demolition of existing 3bedroom two-storey detached house with linked garage and
replacement with new two storey, low carbon 4 bedroom
house with associated attic space.
CC/14/00770/DOM
WR (A Weir)
In progress
Pippins Rew Lane Chichester - first floor extension.
CC/14/01793/ADV
WR (A Miller)
In progress
Cote 63 South Street Chichester – hanging sign to be
placed at the corner of building.
CC/14/03646/TPA
WR (H Whitby)
In Progress
7 Donegall Avenue Chichester West Sussex PO19 6DE - fell
1 no Lime tree (tag T642) within Group, G1 subject to
CC/06/00025/TPO.
CH/13/03978/FUL
WR (S Harris)
In progress
Land on The East Side of Cot Lane Chidham - residential
development comprising 25 no dwellings, change of use of
land to form area of off-site public open space and
associated work.
* LX/13/03809/OUT
I (N Langford)
Public Inquiry to be held
8-11 Sept, CDC Com Rm
2 at 10 am
Land South of Loxwood Farm Place High Street Loxwood –
erection of 25 no residential dwellings comprising of 14 no
private residential dwellings and 11no affordable residential
dwellings, associated private amenity space and parking.
SDNP/14/02271/HOUS
Midhurst
WR (M Mew)
In progress
The Old Cottage Bepton Midhurst GU29 0JB – conservatory
Linked to SDNP/14/02272/LIS
Reference/Status
Proposal
SDNP/14/02272/LIS
Midhurst
WR (M Mew)
In progress
The Old Cottage Bepton Midhurst GU29 0JB - conservatory
Linked to SDNP/14/02271/HOUS
SDNP/14/04317/HOUS
Milland
WR (C Cranmer)
In progress
Dunner Hill Farm Iping Midhurst – proposed single storey
extension to kitchen.
SDNP/13/04972/FUL
Northchapel
H (J Saunders)
In progress
Hillgrove Stud Farm London Road Northchapel West
Sussex GU28 9EQ - retention of agricultural workers mobile
home for temporary period of three years.
NM/13/03929/OUT
WR (P Kneen)
In progress
Land Adjoining Stoney Lodge School Lane North Mundham
- erection of 4 no dwellings with re-use of existing access
point.
PS/14/01968/OUT
WR (P Kneen)
In progress
Land West of The Lane Ifold Loxwood – residential
development comprising four dwellings with associated car
parking and landscaping. Formation of new access from
The Lane.
PS/14/03297/OUT
WR (F Stevens)
In progress
Bradstow Lodge The Drive Ifold Loxwood Billingshurst demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 3 no
detached dwellings.
PS/14/02579/FUL
WR (M Tomlinson)
In progress
Kings Copse Loxwood Road Plaistow Billingshurst RH14
0PE - construction of tennis court with 2.7m high chain link
fence.
SDNP/14/04194/HOUS
Rogate
WR (M Mew)
In progress
Tollgate Cottage Durleigh Marsh Petersfield Hampshire
GU31 5AX - single storey rear extension and various works.
Linked to SDNP/14/04195/LIS
SDNP/14/04195/LIS
Rogate
WR (M Mew)
In progress
Tollgate Cottage Durleigh Marsh Petersfield Hampshire
GU31 5AX - single storey rear extension and various works.
Linked to SDNP/14/04194/HOUS
TG/14/03148/COUPJ
WR (S Harris)
In progress
Exeter House 220 City Fields Business Park Tangmere Part 3, Class J: Change of use of existing building (approx.
816 sqm) from Class B1 (offices) to Class C3 (dwelling
houses), 12 no apartments comprising two no one-bed unit
and 10 no two-bed apartments (six units on each floor).
Reference/Status
Proposal
TG/14/03149/COUPJ
WR (S Harris)
In progress
Salisbury House Tangmere Chichester - change of use of
existing building (approx. 1,055 sqm) Class B1 offices, to
Class C3, 11 no apartments comprising one no one-bed unit
and 10 no two-bed apartments.
TG/14/03166/COUPJ
WR (S Harris)
In progress
Lincoln House City Fields Way Tangmere Chichester change of use of existing building two- storey office building,
Class B1, (approx 672 sqm ) to Class 3, 8 no units
comprising 4 no one-bed units and 4 no 2 bed apartments.
Sawmills Farm Monks Hill Emsworth - kitchen extension.
WE/14/00940/DOM
WR (S Locke)
In progress
WW/13/00232/CONCOM
WR (S Archer)
In progress
Bramber Plant Centre Chichester Road West Wittering –
portacabins being used as office – appeal against
enforcement notice.
WR/14/01765/FUL
WR (M Tomlinson)
In progress
Westholme
Farm
Newpound
Wisborough
Green
Billingshurst West Sussex RH14 0QJ - removal of condition
no 7 of application 05/04886/FUL.
WR/14/01365/FUL
WR (M Tomlinson)
In progress
Winterfold Durbans Road Wisborough Green – replacement
dwellinghouse to copy existing building with original external
finishes (as amended by granted WR/13/01722).
4
VARIATIONS TO SECTION 106 AGREEMENTS
NONE
5
CALLED-IN APPLICATIONS
Reference
Proposal
Stage
NONE
6
COURT AND OTHER MATTERS
Injunctions
Site
NONE
Breach
Stage
Prosecutions
Site
Breach
Stage
Decoy Farm
Aldingbourne
Failure to comply with
planning enforcement
notice.
Decoy Farm – prosecution completed
and
defendants
found
guilty.
Sentenced to approximately £10K
including full costs to the Council.
Nell Ball Farm,
Plaistow
Failure to comply with
planning enforcement
notice
Prosecution was prepared, but due to
the ill-health of the defendant the
matter was suspended. A planning
application has now been submitted
with new information on agricultural
need and so prosecution will not take
place pending determination of that
application.
Site
Breach
Stage
11 Milland Lane,
Liphook
Section 43 Listed Building Compliance works started. Court
Act breach
proceedings prepared, Court trial date
set to 5 June 2015 for trial if
compliance is not achieved
beforehand.
12 Second
Avenue
Emsworth
Failure to comply with
section 215 notice.
Court proceedings prepared
authorised, court date requested.
Land at
Brackenwood
Failure to comply with
planning enforcement
notice
Court proceedings prepared and
authorised. Court date requested.
Defence statement sought from
defendant.
Site
Breach
Stage
The Barnyard
Display of
adverts.
Prosecutions
and
Prosecutions
unauthorised Court proceedings prepared and
authorised. Court date requested.
High Court
Site
Matters Prohibited by the
Order
Planning injunction
NONE
Stage
Magistrates Court
Site
Breach
2 White Hart
Cottages
Appeal against section 215 First appeal hearing held. Application
notice by the subject of
statements lodged with Council 17
that notice.
March 2015, being reviewed by Legal
Services.
7
POLICY MATTERS
NONE
Stage