Entrance gates and water changes at Stable Field, Wisborough Green

What was proposed

The application sought eight dwellings’ entrance gates and changes removing grey-water harvesting units from the water-neutrality wording.

“The proposal seeks planning permission to vary conditions 2 and 9 of WR/00618/FUL which granted permission for the construction 8 no. dwellings with associated works, infrastructure and green space outside of the Wisborough Green Settlement Boundary. The amendments relate to the installation of a new gate and changes to the approved water neutrality scheme. The proposed entrance gates are considered acceptable in relation to their scale and appearance.”

“The variation of condition 9 would result in additional wording to remove the requirement for grey water harvesting units. A Non-Material Amendment application (ref: WR/24/01172/NMA) accepted that the additional wording would not result in a material change in regard to the water neutrality for the site by reason of the grey water harvesting units not being included within the water neutrality calculations.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is under construction just beyond the settlement boundary, with trees, hedges, open space, a conservation-area corner and access from Kirdford Road.

“The application site is located to north of Kirdford Road, within the Parish of Wisborough Green, just beyond the northern edge of the Settlement Boundary and approximately 0.4km from the village centre. The south-east corner of the site is located within the Wisborough Green Conservation Area.”

“The north boundary is open with a post and rail fence. The site slopes down away from Kirdford Road towards the north east corner. There are no footpaths along this stretch of Kirdford Road, with the closest footpath from the village terminating at the playpark, on the entrance to Wyatt Close. There are grass verges, with a drainage ditch running both sides of Kirdford Road towards the south east corner of the site.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the gates suitably designed, safe for highways and open-space access, while removing grey-water units would not affect water neutrality.

“Any developments in Chichester District which fall within the Sussex North Water Resource supply zone will need to be tested through an HRA. This is because Natural England have advised that they cannot be certain that the abstraction of water from the Sussex North Water Resource is not having an adverse impact on integrity of the Arun Valley SPA, SAC and RAMSAR sites.”

“The variation to the wording of condition 9 to add "excluding grey water harvesting units" is considered acceptable and would not have a material impact on the site complying with the requirements to be water neutral because grey water harvesting units were not part of the calculations for water neutrality agreed under the original application. Consequently, there is no requirement for calculations to be repeated and for Natural England to be consulted.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected to the gates, three third parties raised objections, and the highway authority raised no objection.

“Please note that all representations are summarised. Comments can be viewed in full on the Council's public access system, and the latest comments from the Parish Council are provided at Appendix A to this report.”

“Three third party representations of objection have been received concerning the following matters:”

Officer report

Who spoke

The speakers included the parish council representative and two objectors, one of whom circulated a statement before the meeting.

Committee discussion

Members discussed access, gate opening, materials, electric operation and community cohesion; officers said a gate-design condition could require natural wood.

“Regarding the proposed material; [name withheld] agreed a condition could be included which required the applicant to submit full design details of the gate, to ensure it would be made of natural wood.”

“Responding to concerns that the development did not promote community cohesiveness; [name withheld] assured the Committee officers had considered the cohesiveness and explained how the NPPF promoted cohesive communities. It was officer opinion that the original application did promote the right level of cohesiveness, in addition there were no relevant polices that addressed gated communities.”

Minutes

The vote

The committee voted to support the recommendation to permit, with full gate-design details and an informative preferring indigenous timber gates.

“Following a vote, the Committee agreed to support the report recommendation to Permit, including the agreed condition for full design detail of the gates and an informative indicating a preference for indigenous timber gates.”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was granted subject to the stated conditions and informatives, with an additional condition requiring full design details for the gates.

“Resolved; Permit, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and the additional condition for full design detail.”

Minutes