Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Hearing held on 19 & 20 July 2022 Site visits made on 20 July 2022 by Richard Clegg BA(Hons) DMS MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 7 December 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, PO10 8JZ • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission • The appeal is made by Seaward Properties Limited against Chichester District Council. • The application Ref 21/03665/FUL, is dated 10 December 2021. • The development proposed is the construction of nine dwellings. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the construction of nine dwellings on land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, PO10 8JZ, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03665/FUL, dated 10 December 2021, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule. Procedural matters 2.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision In response to comments by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) on the design and layout of the scheme, the Appellant submitted revised plans at appeal stage, which include a different house type on plots 4 and 5. In addition, revised elevations for plots 6 and 7 show a change in materials. The change proposed to plots 4 and 5 would involve the use of a narrower house-type, providing slightly more space between dwellings, and with the garages positioned to the side of the dwellings and further from the bungalow known as Selwyn, which is on Inlands Road to the east, than the double garage originally proposed. No objection was raised by the LPA to the revised plans, and the extent of the changes proposed is modest. I am satisfied that no prejudice would be caused to any party by my consideration of the revised plans, and I have taken them into account in determining this appeal. 3. In a suggested condition identifying plans which are relevant to the appeal proposal1, the main parties have referred to plan reference P117 which shows plans and elevations of a double garage for plots Nos 4 and 5.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision As a consequence of the change in house type on these plots (above, para 2), the double garage no longer forms part of the proposal, and plan reference P117 has been superseded. 4. A planning agreement between the LPA, South Downs National Park Authority, the Appellant and Messrs S P and P J Renwick (the Nitrates Mitigation Land- Owners) has been submitted (Document O24). The agreement includes 1 Condition No 2 in Document O23. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision As a consequence of the change in house type on these plots (above, para 2), the double garage no longer forms part of the proposal, and plan reference P117 has been superseded. 4. A planning agreement between the LPA, South Downs National Park Authority, the Appellant and Messrs S P and P J Renwick (the Nitrates Mitigation Land- Owners) has been submitted (Document O24). The agreement includes 1 Condition No 2 in Document O23. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 obligations concerning payment of a recreation disturbance mitigation contribution, and a nitrates mitigation scheme. 5. The lawful use of the land east of Priors Orchard (excluding the proposed access) is as a traveller site, with access along a narrow drive from Inlands Road. At the hearing, the Appellant submitted a swept path analysis of a vehicle towing a touring caravan entering the access track from Inlands Road. It was agreed that a further swept path analysis of a low loader transporting a static caravan would be submitted after the hearing closed (Document A7), and the Appellant also submitted a later version of the touring caravan swept path analysis (Document A8). The main parties, Southbourne Parish Council and the occupiers of the dwellings on each side of the access have been given the opportunity to comment on these swept path analysis plans. 6. The implications of the development for the deposit of nitrates in Chichester Harbour was discussed at the hearing.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision On 20 July 2022, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs issued a Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) entitled Statement on improving water quality and tackling nutrient pollution, which, amongst other matters, refers to the impact of nutrient neutrality on housing land supply. The main parties and the Parish Council have been given the opportunity to submit comments in respect of the written ministerial statement. Main Issues 7. The appeal was lodged against the failure of the LPA to determine the planning application within the prescribed period. The LPA advised that, if it had been in a position to determine the application, permission would have been refused for reasons concerning the loss of a gypsy site, the impact of nitrates on Chichester Harbour, and recreational disturbance within the buffer zone of the Chichester and Langstone Harbour Special Protection Area (SPA)2. 8. Having regard to the deemed reasons for refusal, and the representations of the parties, I consider that the main issues in this appeal are: i) The effect of the proposed development on the provision of gypsy and traveller accommodation in Chichester.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision ii) Whether there is a five years supply of housing land in Chichester (outside the National Park). iii) The effect of the proposed development on sites of nature conservation importance. Reasons Gypsy and traveller accommodation 9. In 2014, planning permission was granted for a three pitch gypsy site on the greater part of the appeal site together with the access drive from Inlands Road (which does not form part of the appeal site) (Document O15). The gypsy site includes the land to the rear of the housing on Inlands Road, where it is proposed that the nine dwellings would be built, but does not encompass an additional strip of land to the west over which access would be provided 2 Paragraph 1.3 of the LPA’s statement. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 from Priors Orchard3. Later in the same year, a further permission was granted for a revised scheme including an additional two pitches (Document O19). I heard that caravans had been stationed on the land, which was occupied for a period of time prior to its sale to the Appellant. 10. I note that the Appellant obtained a lawful development certificate in 2021, in respect of the use of the land east of Priors Orchard for agriculture. Agriculture has not been introduced onto the land, and the gypsy site has not been replaced with another permanent use. The Appellant has stated that the land will not be made available for use as a gypsy site: nevertheless it has a lawful use for this purpose. 11. Policy 36 of the Chichester Local Plan Key Policies 2014-2029 (the Local Plan, Document O16) sets out a requirement for 59 additional gypsy and traveller pitches, and also seeks to safeguard existing pitches for as long as there is a need for such accommodation. The requirement for additional pitches in Policy 36 is derived from the Gypsy and Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Assessment of 2013.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision More recent information is available in the Coastal West Sussex Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment of 2019 (GTAA, Document O4), and I agree with the main parties that this provides the relevant starting point for assessing need in this case. The GTAA identifies a need for 94 pitches within Chichester4 during the period 2018-2036. It is the LPA’s position, not disputed by the Appellant, that, against this need, there is a shortfall in provision of 29 pitches in the period up to 20235. 12. Given the need for gypsy accommodation, Policy 36 intends that existing traveller sites should be safeguarded. However, there is a practical difficulty associated with the use of the land off Inlands Road. That concerns the access, which is taken along a narrow drive from Inlands Road. The width of the access track was measured by the parties, and the agreed dimensions range between 3.29m and 4.3m. The swept path drawings (Documents A7 & A8, above, para 5) show the path of vehicle movements into the access drive from the south where, after a short distance, Inlands Road connects directly with the main road network, and is the direction from which I would expect vehicles with caravans to approach the gypsy site.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The drawings indicate that vehicle movements involving caravans would over-run the boundary with the front of the property to the south of the access drive and would be obstructed by an existing fence post there. Comments from the Local Highway Authority, submitted by the LPA, agree that there would be obstruction due to the fence post, and also suggest that a similar problem would occur in vehicle movements from Inlands Road to the north6. 13. Representations from the occupiers of the dwellings on each side of the access refer to the previous manoeuvres of caravans into the drive having impinged on third party land on the opposite side of Inlands Road, and point out that a front garden wall has subsequently been built in this position (Document O3). 3 The extent of the gypsy site is shown on the location plan included in Document O8, and the extent of the appeal site is shown on location plan reference 20066-S101-B submitted as part of the planning application for the proposed development. 4 The GTAA indicates that the assessment excludes that part of the District within the South Downs National Park, which is included within the assessment for the National Park.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision 5 Figures 36 and 37 of the GTAA set out the need for pitches in Chichester. In its statement, the LPA referred to a shortfall of 33 pitches in the period up to 2023, and at the hearing it advised that planning permission had been granted for a further four, reducing the number outstanding to 29. 6 Email of 28 July 2022 from West Sussex County Council included in Document L6. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision 5 Figures 36 and 37 of the GTAA set out the need for pitches in Chichester. In its statement, the LPA referred to a shortfall of 33 pitches in the period up to 2023, and at the hearing it advised that planning permission had been granted for a further four, reducing the number outstanding to 29. 6 Email of 28 July 2022 from West Sussex County Council included in Document L6. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 In any event, it is not disputed by any party that caravans could not be manoeuvred into the access drive to the gypsy site without transgressing onto third party land. 14. The LPA refers to the previous use of third party land to gain access for static caravans to the land to the rear of Inlands Road, and suggests that it may be possible to reach an agreement to temporarily remove the fence post at the front of Selwyn, or to provide access from Priors Orchard. There is nothing before me to indicate either of these suggestions could be achieved. Indeed, given that removal of the existing fence to achieve access from Priors Orchard would require the agreement of the Appellant which does not intend to make the land available as a gypsy site, and that the occupiers of the dwelling to the south on Inlands Road are opposed to use of the access drive, the information before me points clearly to the unavailability of any alternative means of access to the gypsy site. 15.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Consequently, although the greater part of the land east of Priors Orchard has a lawful use as gypsy site, it is not served by an access which is capable of accommodating caravans, and there is no evidence to indicate that an alternative access of a suitable standard is capable of being achieved. 16. There is a need for additional gypsy pitches to be provided in Chichester, a circumstance which underlines the importance of that part of Policy 36 which seeks to safeguard existing traveller sites. However, although the appeal proposal would involve the loss of a lawful traveller site, it is one which is not capable of being accessed by caravans, a basic requirement for such accommodation. Given this situation, the site does not offer a meaningful contribution to traveller accommodation. I conclude that the proposed development would have no practical effect on the provision of gypsy and traveller accommodation in Chichester, and I give little weight to the loss of the lawful gypsy site between Priors Orchard and Inlands Road. The supply of housing land 17. It is common ground between the main parties that, since the Local Plan is over five years old, the standard method for calculating housing need applies to Chichester.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Part of the District, but not including the appeal site, lies within the South Downs National Park, for which a separate assessment of housing need has been made7. With a downwards adjustment to reflect that position, the main parties agree that the five years requirement for the remainder of the District is 3,350 dwellings, at a base date of 1 April 20218. 18. There is disagreement about the extent of housing land supply. It is the LPA’s position that there is land for 3,356 dwellings, sufficient for 5.01 years. In contrast, the Appellant argues that a five years land supply cannot be demonstrated, with land available for 2,795 dwellings and 4.17 years9. Reference has been made in the representations to three previous appeal decisions which addressed the question of housing land in Chichester. Whilst I have taken these decisions into account, the evidence at those inquiries is not before me, and it is the evidence submitted for this appeal upon which I place 7 Document O2, paras 2.4-2.6. 8 Document O2, para 2.7 and Document L3, para 1.1.5. 9 Document O2, para 4.1. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 most reliance. I consider below the principal differences in the assessments of supply made by the main parties. Windfall sites 19. The LPA includes windfall contributions from major and minor sites (respectively relating to proposals for 10 or more dwellings and nine or less dwellings). It is the Appellant’s case that the allowance of 280 dwellings from large windfall sites should be removed in its entirety, and that, insofar as minor sites are concerned, the allowance of 142 dwellings should be reduced by 2010. i) Major windfall sites 20. The Appellant argues that many of the developments which have been taken into account by the LPA in establishing an allowance for major windfall sites have taken place on greenfield land. It is pointed out that policies in the Local Plan restrict development outside settlements, and the Appellant continues by contending that such developments would, for the most part, have been permitted when full weight could not be given to the Development Plan (and therefore its policies restricting development in the countryside) due either to its age or the absence of a five years housing land supply.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Going forward, reference is made to the Local Plan Review being in place during 2023, and in this situation it is postulated that the development of greenfield sites would either be restricted or the subject of allocations. In consequence, they would not represent a source of supply of windfall development. 21. I note that, during the seven years from 2014-15 to 2020-21, 1,149 dwellings in major windfall applications were permitted on greenfield/ agricultural sites, whereas a smaller number of 432 came forward from other sources11. That, however, does not present the full picture. A Critical Friend Review (CFR, Document O6), undertaken for the LPA, provides an assessment of windfall housing completions over the ten years period 2011-12 to 2020-21. This study records that, over the ten years, the number of windfall completions on previously developed land exceeded the number on greenfield sites in all but two years12. Whilst those figures cover all windfall sites, further analysis identifies a consistent pattern of windfall completions on agricultural (greenfield and conversion) sites involving 10-50 and 51-100 dwellings, and also on residential and other sites for 10-50 dwellings13. 22.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The LPA has also provided evidence that during the ten years period covered by the CFR, planning permission was granted for major windfall development irrespective of whether there was an adopted local plan and a five years housing land supply14. Moreover, I heard that it is not intended to submit the Local Plan Review for examination until some time during 2023, and the LPA did not specify an anticipated date for adoption. Reliance cannot be placed on the Appellant’s argument that the prospect for windfall development will be reduced due to the Review being in place in the near future. 23. The Appellant is critical of the contribution of residential and other sources to major windfall development, suggesting that there is a lack of evidence as to 10 Document A2, table 2. 11 Document L3, table 5. 12 Document O6, table 13. 13 Document O6, table 20. 14 Document L3, table 4. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 how they will continue to provide a supply of housing land. However, these categories have been a consistent source of windfall development comprising sites of 10-50 dwellings, and in these categories it is only completions on schemes up to that threshold that have been taken forward to use in the calculation of a future allowance. Whilst the Appellant asserts that sites from such sources are likely to be more constrained and challenging to deliver, that does not mean that they will not come forward. ii) Minor windfall sites 24. There is no dispute between the main parties that an allowance should be included for minor windfall sites in assessing housing land supply. After excluding sources of windfall completions where no consistent pattern was evident, the CFR considered the average annual contribution made during the ten years study period. Taking all ten years into account, the average number of dwellings provided was 64. In two years, 2014 and 2021, the number of completions was particularly low, and these figures clearly represent outliers from the general level of housing coming forward on minor sites, which otherwise amounts to at least 45 dwellings annually15.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The two highest figures were also removed as outliers. In consequence, the average annual contribution from minor windfall sites rises to 71 dwellings. 25. Whilst the Appellant agrees with the principle of a review of outlier years, its position statement on housing land suggests that if removal of outlier years results in a higher overall average, the average for all years should be used, particularly as one of the years with low delivery occurred at the end of the period. It would not be appropriate to adjust the methodology in order to achieve a particular outcome, and the presence of an outlier year at the end of the study period is insufficient reason to avoid its exclusion. 26. In support of adopting a precautionary approach, the Appellant refers to delays caused by nutrient neutrality requirements and to uncertainties flowing from the covid-19 pandemic and from wider economic factors affecting the construction industry. The WMS makes it clear that sites affected by nutrient pollution forming part of housing land supply calculations are capable of being considered deliverable.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The LPA has provided evidence of the ability to address nitrate neutrality in residential schemes16, and, given that windfall allowances are only included in years 4 and 5 of the five years supply period, I would not expect additional work on this matter to unduly prolong lead-in times. In this regard I note that the appeal site itself is affected by nutrient neutrality, and that the Appellant has put forward mitigation measures in the planning agreement with the intention of enabling development to proceed. 27. At six, the low level of completions in one of the outlier years, 2021, may well have been due to the impact of covid-19, but over the period assessed that is an atypical figure. Ten years is a sufficiently long period over which to consider the level of windfall completions, taking account of fluctuations in performance, and I am satisfied that the LPA’s approach in discounting outlier years is appropriate. 28. Neither do I support the Appellant’s position that there should be a 5% reduction in the minor windfall allowance due to potential delays arising from 15 Document O6, chart 1 and table 21. 16 Document L3, para 4.8.11. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 water neutrality issues in part of the District. There is evidence of recent applications which address the issue of water neutrality17 and indicate that this matter should not lead to protracted delays. iii) Conclusions on windfall allowances 29. The question of windfall allowances has been examined in some detail by the CFR, which has analysed windfall completions in an effort to identify likely future trends. That exercise has not merely extrapolated the past trend of windfall development, but has discounted those sources of windfall which have not demonstrated a consistent pattern in recent years. Paragraph 71 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes it clear that where an allowance is to be made for windfall sites as part of anticipated housing land supply there should be compelling evidence that they will provide a reliable source of supply. Having regard to the evidence presented by the LPA, I am satisfied that the levels of windfall allowance included in the LPA’s housing land supply indicate a reliable source of major and minor sites. Minor housing sites 30.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Category A of the LPA’s schedule of housing sites comprises minor sites with planning permission at the base date of 1 April 2021. Annex 2 of the NPPF (when defining deliverable), makes it clear that such sites should be considered deliverable until permission expires, unless there is clear evidence that homes will not be delivered within five years. Consequently I do not accept the proposition, advanced by the Appellant that a lapse rate of 20% should be applied to this category to reflect the prospect that a proportion of sites will not be implemented within five years: such an approach does not provide clear evidence in respect of individual sites. 31. However, I note that planning permission has expired on a number of minor sites. Although the LPA argues that sites should not be removed from the supply because their permission has expired, on the ground that evidence taken into account should relate to the base date, the NPPF qualifies the deliverability of sites which do not involve major development by reference to the duration of their permission (above, para 30). The information before me is that planning permission has lapsed for sites involving 16 dwellings18.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision However, in respect of one site for a single dwelling (17/01405/FUL), the LPA has advised that construction has commenced under a subsequent permission. In another case (18/00243/FUL), a further application for a single dwelling was submitted prior to expiry of the permission. As the principle of a dwelling in this location has been established, and a proposal is being actively pursued, this site should contribute to the supply of housing land. Having regard to these factors, I consider that 14 dwellings should be removed from the supply provided by minor housing sites. Major housing sites 32. The main parties dispute the contribution of four large sites to housing land supply in Chichester. The combined capacity of the sites is 397 dwellings, but the Appellant maintains that only 199 should be taken into account. 17 Document L3, para 4.8.10. 18 Document L3, table 2. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 7

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 33. The planning permission for 50 dwellings on land at Highgrove Farm, Bosham has expired. However the site is included as an allocation in the Site Allocations Development Plan Document, and an application for full planning permission for 300 dwellings has been submitted19. This is evidence that the site is being actively pursued by a major housebuilder, and it should remain in the supply. 34. The site at Manor Road, Selsey has full planning permission for 119 dwellings and outline permission for a further 74 dwellings. The latter element is disputed by the Appellant on the basis that an application for reserved matters had not been submitted and that delays in delivery on phase 1 would be likely to effect delivery on phase 2. Construction is, though, underway, and some pre-commencement conditions which relate to the whole development have been discharged20. Given that the site is being progressed by a major housebuilder, I am satisfied that the 74 dwellings in phase 2 can be expected to be delivered within the five years period. 35. Outline planning permission for 24 dwellings exists on land south of Loxwood Farm, Loxwood.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision This site has been affected by the issue of water neutrality. Although the Appellant suggests that there is considerable uncertainty as to when a solution will be reached, email correspondence from the developer explains that work on a strategy involving off-site mitigation and on-site measures is in hand21. The email also makes clear that the developer is keen to keep the reserved matters application for the proposal alive, and it should remain as part of the supply. 36. At Cooks Lane, Southbourne, the Appellant seeks the removal of 50 of the 199 dwellings which have outline planning permission. A reserved matters application was under consideration at the date of the hearing, and the Appellant acknowledged that no issues were insurmountable. However it was considered that the trajectory for delivery was unrealistic, with further delay expected due to the matter of nutrient neutrality. An analysis of lead-in and build-out times in included in the CFR. For sites of 101-250 dwellings, a lead- in time from the first permission to completion of the first dwelling is calculated as 11.22 months, with a build-out rate of 42.67 dwellings per year22.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Inclusion of 130 dwellings by the LPA within years 3-5 would be consistent with these figures, and is below the rate which had been indicated on behalf of the developer23. Given that nutrient neutrality is not an unfamiliar issue in the Chichester area, I anticipate that the more cautious rate of delivery advanced by the LPA than the developer would enable this matter to be resolved. The Cooks Lane site should remain within the housing land supply. Conclusions on housing land supply 37. I am satisfied that the windfall allowances put forward in the LPA’s assessment of housing land supply are appropriate and that the four major sites in dispute would provide the level of housing indicated. However, 14 dwellings should be removed from the category of minor sites, reducing the supply to 3,342 dwellings which amount would be sufficient for 4.99 years. I, therefore, 19 Document L3, paras 4.3.1-4.3.3. 20 Document L3, paras 4.4.2-4.4.6. 21 Email dated 25 November 2021 from Martin Grant Homes to ECE Architecture, in Document A3, appendix 4. 22 Document O6, tables 5 & 10. 23 Document L3, paras 4.5.6 & 4.5.7. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 8

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 conclude that there is not a five years supply of housing land in Chichester (outside the National Park). Sites of nature conservation importance 38. The appeal site is just under 1km from Chichester Harbour which is the subject of the following nature conservation designations24: • Chichester & Langstone Harbour Special Protection Area (SPA) • Chichester & Langstone Harbours Ramsar site • Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC) • Chichester Harbour Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The SPA, Ramsar site and the SAC are all European sites which are designated under, and subject to, the protection of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the Habitats Regulations). The SAC was designated due to sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water at all times, mudflats and sandflats not covered by sea water at low tide, and coastal lagoons. In the case of the SPA, the qualifying features for designation are a variety of bird species, and the Ramsar site was designated due to the presence of internationally important wetland types and numbers of water birds25. 39.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The proposal for residential development of the site has the potential to affect qualifying features of the European sites due to the discharge of treated effluent and recreational disturbance in conjunction with these effects from other residential development. Likely significant effects 40. The appeal site has a lawful use as a gypsy site (above, paras 9 & 10). A condition on the planning permission which increased the number of pitches to five, limits the number of caravans to ten, of which no more than five are to be static caravans. Referring to this permission, the Appellant has suggested that the ten caravans which could be stationed on the site can be viewed as the equivalent of ten dwellings. On that basis the proposal would result in a net reduction of one dwelling, and if that were the case, there would be no addition to the cumulative impact of wastewater discharge and recreational disturbance from the development. 41. However, on gypsy sites the unit occupied by a household is a pitch, not a caravan. Typically a pitch will accommodate a static caravan and a touring caravan which is used by members of the household when they travel to seek for work.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Therefore, comparison of the appeal scheme with the gypsy site on the basis of units of occupation results in an increase of four due to the proposed development. 42. There is one further scenario to take into account. Although the land has a lawful use as a gypsy site, and has been occupied in the past, I have found that it does not offer a meaningful contribution to traveller accommodation (above, para 16), since it cannot be accessed by caravans. That is the reality 24 Plans showing the location of the appeal site in relation to the designations are in Document O7. 25 Details of the qualifying features for the European sites are set out in Document O7. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 9

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Therefore, comparison of the appeal scheme with the gypsy site on the basis of units of occupation results in an increase of four due to the proposed development. 42. There is one further scenario to take into account. Although the land has a lawful use as a gypsy site, and has been occupied in the past, I have found that it does not offer a meaningful contribution to traveller accommodation (above, para 16), since it cannot be accessed by caravans. That is the reality 24 Plans showing the location of the appeal site in relation to the designations are in Document O7. 25 Details of the qualifying features for the European sites are set out in Document O7. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 9

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 of the existing situation, and the true comparison with the appeal proposal is that housing on the site would result in an increase of nine residential units. 43. Wastewater from housing on the appeal site would, following treatment, discharge into Chichester Harbour. In its summary advice on achieving nutrient neutrality for new development in the Solent Region26 (which includes Chichester Harbour), Natural England has explained that there are high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus in the water environment, with evidence that these nutrients are causing eutrophication: the resulting mats of green algae are reported to be having an adverse impact on protected habitats and bird species. Work is taking place to examine the potential to accommodate future housing growth without having a detrimental effect upon the water environment, but there is currently uncertainty as to whether capacity exists to accommodate new housing. 44. Nevertheless there is the potential for cumulative residential development to cause further deterioration in the water environment of Chichester Harbour, to the detriment of the habitats and bird species for which the European sites have been designated.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The courts have held that in such circumstances the precautionary principle applies: that is, unless there is objective evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that the effect would be significant. 45. Given the proximity of the site to Chichester Harbour, it is likely that future residents will make recreational visits there. Although the numbers from the appeal site would be relatively small, the cumulative impact from the presence of more people, including those walking dogs, is liable to cause disturbance to birds. 46. The increase in residential accommodation at the appeal site, would have a likely significant adverse effect on the European sites at Chichester Harbour due to the discharge of treated wastewater and an increase in visitor numbers. I consider that the proposal would also be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the SSSI, which extends across the Harbour and is designated for a wide range of intertidal and terrestrial habitats and important numbers of waterbirds. Appropriate assessment 47. Having identified a likely significant effect, an appropriate assessment is required in accordance with the Habitats Regulations.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Natural England has published a condition review of Chichester Harbour, which found that, in 2019- 20, 93.23% of the area of the SSSI, which overlaps with the European designations, was in unfavourable condition27. The report refers to an excess amount of opportunistic microalgae, which is an indicator of nutrient enrichment, adversely affecting bird prey and intertidal habitats. Natural England has separately reported that the unfavourable condition of SAC features, including the estuary, mudflats, sandflats, and sandbanks, is in part due to impacts from elevated nutrient levels, and that declines in a number of bird features in the SPA and Ramsar site have possible links to nutrient loading28. On the evidence before me, I do not doubt that, without mitigation, 26 Attached to Natural England’s consultation response of 14 February 2022 on the planning for the proposed development. 27 Document O18, pages iv & v. 28 Section 3 of Advice on Achieving Nutrient Neutrality for New Development in the Solent Region, Natural England, 2020. Attached to Natural England’s consultation response to the planning application. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 10

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 the construction of housing on the appeal site would contribute to an elevated level of nutrients in Chichester Harbour, the effects of which would be contrary to the conservation objectives of the SAC and SPA to at least maintain the extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and the populations of qualifying features. 48. There are internationally important numbers of waterbirds at Chichester Harbour, which are qualifying features for both the Ramsar site and the SPA. Disturbance from people and dogs can adversely affect feeding and breeding of the birds, and, where visitors deviate from paths, trampling of habitats could occur. These effects would be detrimental to the conservation objectives of the SPA and Ramsar site29. 49. In accordance with advice from Natural England to achieve nutrient neutrality, the Appellant proposes a nitrates mitigation scheme, by which land at Chilgrove Farm, to the north-east of Southbourne, would be taken out of agricultural use, with fertiliser application ceasing, and planted as woodland.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The scheme would be secured by a planning obligation and both Natural England (Document O29) and the LPA are satisfied that this approach would provide appropriate mitigation for the nutrient implications of the proposed development. 50. The planning agreement is structured to provide for alternative levels of mitigation related to the number of additional dwellings which would be delivered by the scheme (Document O25). I have reached the view that the appropriate figure is nine (above, para 42), and accordingly nitrates mitigation requirement B applies, involving the provision of mitigation measures specified in schedule 2 on the larger area of land shown on Plan 4. 51. Another obligation would provide for a recreation disturbance mitigation contribution to the Solent Recreation Mitigation Strategy. This payment would be pooled with other developer contributions to assist in providing funding towards project staff, including warden and specific projects such as habitat provision, bird refuges and visitor management30.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision This is an established arrangement, and Natural England and the LPA are both satisfied that the provision of a financial contribution approach would provide appropriate mitigation for potential recreation disturbance from the proposed development. 52. In similar fashion to the obligation concerning nutrient neutrality, that concerning recreation disturbance provides alternative levels of contribution related to the increase in the number of dwellings. As the relevant increase in the number of dwellings is nine, the contribution of £6,056 specified in paragraph 1.3 of the First Schedule in the planning agreement applies in this case. 53. The planning agreement also provides for the payment of fees towards the cost of monitoring the obligations by the LPA and the South Downs National Park Authority (the Nitrates Mitigation Land Authority). I am satisfied that these obligations and those relating to nitrates mitigation requirement B and the recreational disturbance mitigation contribution of £6,056 are necessary and meet the statutory tests in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure 29 Table 1.1 in Document O18 explains that the conservation objectives for the Ramsar site are combined with those for the SPA.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision 30 Examples of the use of developed contributions are given in Document O21. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 11

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision 30 Examples of the use of developed contributions are given in Document O21. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 11

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 Levy Regulations. These provisions of the planning agreement are material considerations in this appeal. For the avoidance of doubt, the alternative obligations concerning nitrates mitigation requirement A and the recreation disturbance mitigation contribution of £2,796 specified in paragraph 1.2 of the First Schedule are not fairly and reasonably related in scale to the proposed development and are not material to my consideration of the appeal. 54. I conclude that, subject to the planning obligations relating to an increase of nine dwellings, the proposed development would not damage the integrity of Chichester & Langstone Harbour SPA, Chichester & Langstone Harbours Ramsar site, Solent Maritime SAC, or Chichester Harbour SSSI. There would be no conflict with Policy 50 of the Local Plan which seeks to safeguard the SPA. Other Matters 55. The appeal site lies within the settlement boundary of Southbourne, which is identified as a settlement hub by Policy 2 of the Local Plan. Settlement hubs are intended to accommodate a range of homes, amongst other development, and there is no objection to the principle of housing on the appeal site. 56.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision The LPA pointed out that the housing mix was not wholly consistent with the Housing & Economic Needs Assessment, as it provides one too many three- bedroom dwellings (four instead of three) and there is no one bedroom unit. Nevertheless, it was acknowledged that the mix was acceptable and it is agreed as suitable in the statement of common ground. I have no reason to take a different view on this matter. 57. Occupiers of the two properties on Inlands Road which are situated adjacent to the existing access to the site referred to disturbance and intrusion from its previous use, and expressed concern if it were to be used by large vehicles in the future. Access to the proposed housing would be gained from Priors Orchard on the western side of the site, and with the construction of the house on plot 4, the existing access would no longer lead onto the site. That would address concerns about disturbance and damage. To ensure that this strip of land, which is within the control of the Appellant, does not become neglected and detract from its surroundings, a scheme for its treatment is required, and it would be appropriate for this to be secured by means of a condition. 58.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Concerns were expressed by the Parish Council and by a local District councillor about the implication of the development for a green ring which had been proposed as part of work on the Southbourne Parish Neighbourhood Plan. The eastern side of the green ring was envisaged in the vicinity of the Priors Orchard development and the appeal site. The access road would cross an area of open space at Priors Orchard which is in the general position of the green ring. However an area of open space would be provided as part of the development, close to this location, which would have visual continuity with the green strip on Priors Orchard. The proposal would not adversely impact on the intention to establish a green ring of open space in Southbourne. 59. Southbourne Parish Council and a number of local residents are concerned about the suitability of Priors Orchard, including the arrangement of the proposed junction, to accommodate traffic from the proposed development. In addition a representative of the Chichester & District Cycle Forum has objected on the ground that additional turning movements at the junction of Priors https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 12

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 Orchard with the A259 would reduce highway safety. The number of traffic movements generated by nine dwellings would be relatively modest, and I note that the Local Highway Authority does not consider that the development would create any significant capacity impacts, and points out that there have been no incidents which have raised highway safety concerns. No objection has been raised by the LPA to the proposed access from Priors Orchard. On the information before me, I consider that the proposed development would have a safe and adequate means of access, in compliance with Policy 39 of the Local Plan. Conditions 60. I have considered possible conditions in the light of the advice in Planning Practice Guidance and the discussion on conditions at the hearing31. Those conditions which I consider would be necessary for the development to proceed are listed in the schedule, together with the reasons for their imposition. In accordance with section 100ZA(5) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990, the Appellant has agreed to those conditions which would be pre- commencement conditions (Document O28). 61.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision A local resident argued that work on site should not commence before 07:30 hours, rather than the earlier time of 07:00 hours suggested by the main parties. Given that the boundary of the site is for the most part shared with existing dwellings, I consider that the later start time of 07:30 on weekdays is necessary to avoid disturbance to adjacent residents from construction work. Concern was also expressed at the hearing about the prospect of overlooking of existing properties. In view of the position of the proposed dwellings in relation to the site boundary and the length of the gardens of adjoining properties this is not a concern that I share, and a condition requiring measures to address overlooking would be unnecessary. Conclusions 62. The provision of a relatively small-scale housing development at the sustainable location of a settlement hub would be consistent with Policy 2 of the Local Plan. Although, redevelopment of a lawful traveller site would conflict with the terms of Policy 36, no actual harm would occur given that no vehicular access for caravans is available, and l give little weight to this conflict.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision With the application of mitigation measures, the proposal would not adversely affect nearby nature conservation sites at Chichester Harbour, and it would not conflict with Policy 50 of the Local Plan. Other relevant policies of the Local Plan include those concerning access (Policy 39) and layout (Policy 42). There is nothing before me to indicate that the requirements of these policies would not be met. I conclude that the proposed development would accord with the Development Plan considered as a whole. 63. I have found that there is not a five years supply of housing land in Chichester (outside the National Park). Footnote 8 of the NPPF explains that in that situation the policies (in the Development Plan) which are most important for determining the proposal are deemed to be out-of-date. In this case the most important policies are Policies 2, 36 and 50 of the Local Plan. That does not alter my view that the proposal would accord with the Development Plan. It 31 Possible conditions agree by the main parties are listed in Document O23. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 13

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 does, though, mean that the tilted balance set out in paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the NPPF applies in this case. 64. The construction of nine additional dwellings on the appeal site would contribute to the provision of a five years supply of housing land, in accordance with paragraph 74 of the NPPF. As this is only a modest development, that contribution carries only limited weight. However there would be no adverse effect on sites of nature conservation importance which paragraphs 180(a) & (b) of the NPPF seek to protect, and in the particular circumstances of this case the loss of a lawful traveller site would cause no actual harm. Having regard to the policies in the NPPF, there are no adverse impacts to set against the benefit of additional housing provision. Material considerations support a decision on this appeal being taken in accordance with the Development Plan considered as a whole. 65. For the reasons given above, and having regard to all matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 14

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 14

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 Schedule of conditions 1) The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans: • Location plan ref 20066 S101 B • Proposed site plan ground level ref 20066 P101 T • Proposed site plan roof level ref 20066 P102 T • Proposed coloured site plan ref 20066 / C101D • Plot 1 plans and elevations ref 20066 P110 B • Plots 2 and 3 plans and elevations ref 20066 P111 B • Plots 4 and 5 plans and elevations ref 20066 P112 E • Plots 6 and 7 plans and elevations ref 20066 P113 E • Plots 8 and 9 plans and elevations ref 20066 P115 D • Coloured street elevations ref 20066 / C102C • Tree root protection plan ref LLD2099-ARB-DWG-002 rev 02 Reason: To provide certainty. 3) No development shall take place above slab level until a schedule and samples of all materials and finishes to be used for the external walls and roofs of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Upon submission of the details to the Local Planning Authority samples of the proposed materials and finishes shall be made available for inspection on site. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule of materials and finishes. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this part of Southbourne. 4) No development shall commence until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP shall include details of the following: i) The anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction. ii) The provision made for the parking of vehicles by contractors, site operatives and visitors. iii) The loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste. iv) The storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development. v) The erection and maintenance of security hoarding. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 15

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 vi) The provision of road sweepers and/or wheel washing facilities to mitigate the impact of construction upon the public highway. vii) Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction. viii) Measures to control the emission of noise during construction. ix) External lighting to be used during construction, and measures to limit the disturbance from any such lighting. x) Appropriate storage of fuel and chemicals, in bunded tanks or suitably paved areas. xi) Waste management including prohibiting burning. The approved CEMP shall be implemented and adhered to throughout the entire construction period. Reason: In the interest of highway safety, to safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents, and to ensure that construction works do not have a harmful environmental effect. 5) No development shall commence until a site-wide surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg The scheme should be prepared in accordance with the hierarchy of preference for different types of surface water drainage disposal set out in Approved Document H of the Building Regulations and the SuDS Manual published by the Construction industry Research and Information Association. Winter ground water monitoring to establish highest annual ground water levels and percolation testing, in accordance with BRE Digest 365, is required to support the design of any infiltration drainage. No dwelling shall be occupied until the surface water drainage system serving that property has been implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily drained. 6) No development shall commence until works set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation [Wsi] for an Archaeological Investigation at Land East of Priors Orchard, Southbourne, PO18 8RJ dated 4 November 2021 have been undertaken, and until the report referred to at paragraph 3.8 has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The site is of potential archaeological significance.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg 7) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations set out in the thermenergy Sustainability Statement (report ref: ZK-15). It shall thereafter be retained in this form. Reason: To minimise the impact of the development upon climate change. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 16

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg 7) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations set out in the thermenergy Sustainability Statement (report ref: ZK-15). It shall thereafter be retained in this form. Reason: To minimise the impact of the development upon climate change. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 16

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 8) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until the vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with plans and details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety. 9) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until the existing vehicular access onto Inlands Road has been permanently closed in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety. 10) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until the vehicle parking and turning spaces have been constructed in accordance with the approved site plan ref 20066 P101 T. These spaces shall thereafter be retained for the parking and passage of vehicles. Reason: In the interest of highway safety. 11) Prior to the first occupation of each of the dwellings, refuse and recycling storage facilities to serve that dwelling shall be provided in accordance with a scheme that has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Thereafter the refuse and recycling storage facilities shall be retained as approved and kept available for their approved purposes. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area, and to encourage the sustainable management of waste. 12) Prior to the first occupation of each of the dwellings, covered and secure cycle parking facilities to serve that dwelling shall be provided in accordance with details which have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the cycle parking facilities shall be retained for that purpose. Reason: To encourage the use of alternative travel options to the use of the car in accordance with sustainable transport policies. 13) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the Landscape Appraisal & Design Strategy, ref LLD2099-LAN-REP- 001 Rev 02, and the Landscape Masterplan Strategy, ref LLD2099-LAN- DWG-001 Rev 02. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this part of Southbourne. 14) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the methodology and mitigation measures shown on the Tree Root Protection Plan reference LLD2099-ARB-DWG-002 Rev 02.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Reason: To protect trees within and adjacent to the site. 15) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures and ecological enhancements in sections 5 and 6 of the Ecological Impact Assessment, prepared by Lizard Landscape, ref LLD2099 Rev 01. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 17

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Reason: To protect trees within and adjacent to the site. 15) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures and ecological enhancements in sections 5 and 6 of the Ecological Impact Assessment, prepared by Lizard Landscape, ref LLD2099 Rev 01. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 17

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 Reason: In the interests of safeguarding biodiversity and wildlife. 16) The following ecological mitigation measures shall be adhered to at all times during construction: i) If any works need to take place to the trees or for vegetation clearance on the site, they should only be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season which takes place between 1st March - 1st October. If works are required within this time an ecologist will need to check the site before any works take place (within 24 hours of any work). ii) The removal of any existing structures should take place outside of the bird breeding season which takes place between 1st March - 1st October. If works are required within this time an ecologist will need to check the site before any works take place (within 24 hours of any work. If nesting birds are found, works in the area will need to be avoided and the nest protected until after the young have fledged. iii) Due to the potential for hedgehogs and reptiles to hibernate or shelter within the brush pile, compost and debris piles noted on site, these shall not be removed between mid-October to mid- March inclusive and shall undergo a soft demolition.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg iv) During construction, any trenches deeper than 1.0m, or drainage pipework greater than 200mm diameter, shall be covered or capped overnight to prevent badgers or other mammals becoming trapped. All excavations must be checked each morning for the presence of any mammals or other species. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding biodiversity and wildlife. 17) Demolition work or construction of the development shall not take place outside 07:30 to 18:00 hours from Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 to 13:00 hours on Saturdays, and there shall be no demolition or construction work at any time on Sundays, bank holidays or public holidays. Reason: To safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents. 18) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until external lighting has been installed in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this part of Southbourne, and to avoid any adverse effects on bats. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 18

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 19) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until a scheme for the treatment of the access drive between the site and Inlands Road, including a timetable for implementation, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved timetable. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this part of Southbourne. END OF CONDITIONS https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 19

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 19) None of the dwellings shall be occupied until a scheme for the treatment of the access drive between the site and Inlands Road, including a timetable for implementation, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved timetable. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this part of Southbourne. END OF CONDITIONS https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 19

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr P Cleveland MRTPI Head of Planning, Henry Adams LLP. Mr N Billington BA(Hons) MSc Associate Director, Tetra Tech Planning. MRTPI Mr T Watkins Land, Technical & Planning Assistant, Seaward Properties. FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY: Mr C Thomas MA Senior Planning Officer, Chichester District Council. Mr A Robbins MA MRTPI Senior Planning Officer, Chichester District Council. Mr S Hemming Director, Lambert Smith Hampton. INTERESTED PERSONS: Councillor J Brown Member of the District Council for Southbourne Ward. Councillor A Tait Chair of the Planning Committee, Southbourne Parish Council. Mr P Rosoman Local resident. Mrs C Stunt Local resident. Mr P White Local resident. THE APPELLANT’S DOCUMENTS A1 The Appellant’s statement of case and appendix. A2 Mr Billington’s statement. A3 Appendices to Document A2. A4 Nitrate Mitigation Proposal in relation to the appeal proposal. A5 Nutrient balancing assessment (reduction of one dwelling). A6 Nutrient balancing assessment (increase of four dwellings). A7 Swept path analysis of low loader with static caravan entering the access track to the appeal site from Inlands Road (plan ref 104386-T-003).

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg A8 Swept path analysis of vehicle towing a twin axle caravan entering the access track to the appeal site from Inlands Road (plan ref 104386-T-002 rev B). A9 Email dated 25 July 2022 from Mr Cleveland to the LPA and The Planning Inspectorate relating to the WMS Statement on improving water quality and tackling nutrient pollution. A10 Letter dated 4 August 2022 from Irwin Mitchell LLP to The Planning Inspectorate concerning Document O24. A11 Email dated 14 September 2022 from Mr Cleveland to The Planning Inspectorate in response to Document O26. THE LPA’S DOCUMENTS L1 The LPA’s statement of case. L2 Appendices to Document L1. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 20

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg A8 Swept path analysis of vehicle towing a twin axle caravan entering the access track to the appeal site from Inlands Road (plan ref 104386-T-002 rev B). A9 Email dated 25 July 2022 from Mr Cleveland to the LPA and The Planning Inspectorate relating to the WMS Statement on improving water quality and tackling nutrient pollution. A10 Letter dated 4 August 2022 from Irwin Mitchell LLP to The Planning Inspectorate concerning Document O24. A11 Email dated 14 September 2022 from Mr Cleveland to The Planning Inspectorate in response to Document O26. THE LPA’S DOCUMENTS L1 The LPA’s statement of case. L2 Appendices to Document L1. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 20

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 L3 Mr Hemming’s statement. L4 Email dated 15 July 2022 from Mr Thomas to The Planning Inspectorate concerning mitigation calculations. L5 Email dated 21 July 2022 from Mr Robbins to The Planning Inspectorate relating to the WMS Statement on improving water quality and tackling nutrient pollution. L6 Email dated 24 August from Mr Thomas to The Planning Inspectorate concerning Documents A7 and A8. OTHER DOCUMENTS O1 Statement of common ground between the Appellant and the LPA. O2 Statement of common ground between the Appellant and the LPA on a five years housing land supply. O3 Email dated 28 June 2022 and photographs from Dr & Mrs Stunt and Mr & Mrs Peterson in response to Document L1. O4 Coastal West Sussex Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment, 2019. O5 Statement and appendices from Dr & Mrs Stunt and Mr & Mrs Peterson. O6 Chichester District Council 5 Years Housing Land Supply Critical Friend Review; Lambert Smith Hampton; 2021. O7 Details of Chichester & Langstone Harbour nature conservation designations prepared by the LPA and plans of the designated areas. O8 Plans relating to planning permission for a three pitch gypsy site on land off Inlands Road.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg O9 Plans relating to planning permission for an additional two pitches at gypsy site on land off Inlands Road. O10 Photograph of Inlands Road looking south across access to the appeal site. Submitted by Mrs Stunt. O11 Appeal decision for 140 dwellings on field south of Raughmere Drive, Lavant. O12 Appeal decision for 70 dwellings on land west of Church Road, West Wittering. O13 Appeal decision for up to 165 dwellings on land within the Westhampnett/ North-east Chichester strategic development location. O14 Chichester Local Plan Area – Five Year Housing Land Supply 2021-2026 – Updated position at 1 April 2021, Chichester DC. O15 Planning permission ref SB/13/03608/FUL for a three pitch gypsy site on land off Inlands Road. O16 Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies 2014-2029. O17 Email dated 20 July 2022 from Mr Thomas to The Planning Inspectorate providing the titles of designated nature conservation sites. O18 Condition review of Chichester Harbour sites: intertidal, subtidal and bird features; Natural England Research Report 090; 2021. O19 Planning permission ref SB/14/01678/FUL for revisions to gypsy site including two additional pitches on land off Inlands Road.

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg O20 Planning permission ref SB/04/00934/DOM for a dropped kerb at Tree Tops, Inlands Road. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 21

Land east of Priors Orchard, Inlands Road, Southbourne, Chichester, West Sussex, PO10 8JZ — Chichester District Council — Richard Clegg O20 Planning permission ref SB/04/00934/DOM for a dropped kerb at Tree Tops, Inlands Road. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 21 Appeal Decision APP/L3815/W/22/3296444 O21 Solent Recreation Mitigation Partnership – Seventh Annual Report on Implementation; 2021. O22 Southbourne Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2014-2029. O23 Revised list of possible conditions agreed by the Appellant and the LPA (attached to email of 1 August 2022 from Mr Cleveland). O24 Planning agreement relating to the appeal proposal. O25 Letter dated 4 August 2022 from Irwin Mitchell LLP to The Planning Inspectorate concerning Document O24. O26 Email dated 5 September from Mrs Stunt and Mr Peterson concerning Documents A7 and A8. O27 Regulation 2(4) notice from The Planning Inspectorate concerning possible pre-commencement conditions. O28 Email dated 14 September from Mr Cleveland to The Planning Inspectorate concerning Document O27. O29 Email dated 14 October 2022 from Natural England in response to consultation by The Planning Inspectorate concerning an appropriate assessment. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 22