Three dwellings at Butlers, Tower Hill, Horsham

What was proposed

Permission in principle was sought for three two-bedroom dwellings arranged around a cul-de-sac, accessed from a private lane.

“The application would consist of permission in principle for 3 dwellings which according to submitted drawing no. 2022-P-599-002 would contain 2-bedrooms each. An indicative layout has been submitted with the application which shows the dwellings arranged to form a cul- de-sac.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is within Tower Hill’s settlement but outside the built-up area, comprising grass, a tennis court and mature boundary vegetation near housing.

“The application site is located in the existing settlement of Tower Hill, which falls outside of a defined built-up area boundary and is therefore considered a countryside location for planning purposes. The site is part of the existing residential unit of Butlers and is in close proximity to other residential development.”

“Surrounding residential development varies in scale with a mix of large, detached dwellings and smaller semi-detached dwellings and cottages. There is little uniformity in terms of design and appearance, with many dwellings exhibiting individual character. Southwater Public Right of Way (ref. 1636) sites adjacent to the proposal’s southern boundary.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An identical three-dwelling proposal was refused in 2024 and dismissed at appeal in 2025, with ecological impacts and limited housing suitability contributing to the outcome.

“DC/24/1086 Outline application for the erection of 3No single storey dwellings with all matters reserved. Application Refused on 09.09.2024 Dismissed on appeal 12.08.2025.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the site had previously been judged acceptable in location and no other adverse impacts significantly outweighed the benefits of three homes.

“It is however important to acknowledge the appeal decision for a similar application on this site (ref. DC/24/1086) within which limited harm was attributed to the suitability of the site for housing. Though the Inspector did highlight poor pedestrian access in their decision, they also considered the location of the site to be well related to the settlement of Horsham and have reasonably good access to facilities.”

“It is therefore concluded that although the proposal is contrary to the overarching spatial strategy due to its location outside of a built-up area boundary, the fact that the location has previously been judged as acceptable by the Planning Inspectorate coupled with the absence of any other adverse impacts which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of three dwellings means that the application is recommended for approval.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no in-principle objection subject to further information, while rights of way requested details about protecting and maintaining the public footpath.

“WSCC Highways: Comment [Summary] In principle, the LHA would not raise any objections to an application at this site, subject to the submission of sufficient information at Technical Details stage.”

“WSCC Rights of Way: Further Information Required [Summary] It appears the vehicular access to the 3no. dwellings is via Public Footpath 1636. Further information is required to clarify how Public Footpath 1636 will be accommodated, protected and maintained during and following the proposed development.”

Officer report

What people said

Two objections concerned road safety, construction, precedent and local character, while one supporter cited limited visibility and access to services.

“- Two Mile Ash Road is overused and dangerous. - Access point would be in short distance of a blind bend. - Construction activity will block the road and cause issues with existing access arrangements. - Will set a precedent for further development at the site. - Will not be in keeping with existing character of the area. - Tower Hill is an unspoilt gap between Southwater and Horsham which should be maintained.”

“- Would not be a detrimental impact on character or appearance as properties will not be visible from Tower Hill. - Is a sustainable location close to existing services and Horsham town centre.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in support of the application, and the ward member did not vote.

What members discussed

Members discussed the design layout, the contribution to local housing need and ecological improvements in the recommendations.

“Members noted the planning history of the application.”

“Members discussed the design layout, the contribution to local housing need, and noted the ecological improvements included in the recommendations.”

Minutes

The committee decision

The committee approved the application in accordance with the officer recommendation.

“That DC/26/0735 be approved in accordance with officer recommendation.”

Minutes