14 agricultural worker chalets at Nyton Rest Nyton Farm Shop, Aldingbourne

Earlier permissions and use

Two temporary permissions followed an earlier permanent travelling showperson permission, and the current use had operated continuously for almost six years.

“The site is one of the permanent travelling show persons plots approved by AL/47/14/PL. This allowed 4 no. permanent plots for travelling show people with a pony paddock. Each plot was to be bordered by 2m high close boarded fencing with permeable hardstanding. The permission was subject to a condition limiting the occupancy of each plot to 1 household with no more than 8 mobile homes and 12 touring caravans stationed across 4 plots.”

“AL/61/20/PL was extended for a further 3 years by AL/94/22/PL as granted in August 2022. AL/94/22/PL has thus expired, and the applicant is seeking a permanent permission. The use has now been operating continuously for 5 years and around 8 months. REPRESENTATIONS Aldingbourne Parish Council object and the following is a summary of their objections:”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal would not cause landscape, highway safety, residential amenity or biodiversity harm despite policy conflicts.

“The continued use of the site is contrary to development plan policy in respect of development in the countryside and in respect of the site being largely vehicle reliant. However, this should not automatically result in a refusal unless there is corresponding harm. This report demonstrates there will be no visual harm to the landscape, no harm to highway safety, no harm to residential amenity and no material impact on biodiversity.”

“Whilst previously it was argued that the temporary nature of the permissions would ensure no permanent harm to the countryside, it is clear from this assessment that there is no harm to the countryside and therefore no need to prevent the use from becoming permanent. It is recommended that the permission is granted in accordance with the following conditions.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The Parish Council objected over sustainable access, firefighting water, flooding and drainage, while most consultees raised no objection and conditions addressed foul drainage and biodiversity.

“- The Parish Council has concerns regarding flooding and drainage as there is extensive flooding in the parish at the moment and the submitted report states the site has a permeable surface which is free- draining. Should extreme rainfall events occur which exceed the grounds capacity to drain efficiently, surface water flooding may occur.”

Officer report

The applicant’s response

The applicant said there had been no flooding or complaints, workers needed the accommodation, and fire safety could be managed without a permanent water tank.

“- The applicant has operated the very same subject development without cause for complaint over a period of almost 6 years. A rolling 3-year temporary period of planning permission is of limited value, and the absence of a permanent permission undermines their confidence in investing further in the site, additional landscaping or upgrading the caravans.”

“- Fire separation distances between caravans are on the over generous side in the event of a fire (5m or more). - The access gate is 5.2m wide (a standard fire vehicle needs an operating width of 3.7m). - The permeable ground surface is suitable for use/access by large vehicles. - Static fire extinguishers are provided on the site.”

Officer report

Who spoke

One public speaker attended: the agent.

Members’ questions

Members questioned foul-drainage approval, environmental licensing, compliance checks and monitoring of agricultural-worker occupancy.

“A Member raised questions regarding foul-drainage arrangements and ongoing compliance. Clarification was sought on who would verify that the proposed effluent-treatment measures were properly implemented and whether checks would be carried out with Portsmouth Water and the Environment Agency. It was also asked how compliance would be monitored to ensure the site was occupied by agricultural workers as intended.”

“The Officer advised that full drainage details would be required by condition and assessed by the Council before installation. Any follow-up checks would be undertaken by enforcement officers if concerns were reported, which was the standard approach. The same process would apply to verifying agricultural-worker occupancy. It was noted that the site had operated for several years without issues, and routine monitoring had not been deemed necessary.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application conditionally after the recommendation was put to a vote.

“As no further comments were made the Chair then put the recommendation to the vote.”

“That the application be APROVED CONDITIONALLY.”

Minutes

Main conditions

Conditions secured approved plans, agricultural-worker occupancy, foul-sewage details and biodiversity enhancements.

“The proposal would have a neutral impact on the protected characteristics. CIL DETAILS This application is not CIL liable as caravans are excluded from the regulations. RECOMMENDATION APPROVE CONDITIONALLY 1The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:”

“Reason: To ensure that the proposed development has a satisfactory means of disposing of foul sewerage and that there is no impact on protected groundwater supplies in accordance with Arun Local Plan policies W DM1 and W DM3.”

Officer report