Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed1 November 20223285978

Bethwines Farm, Blackboy Lane, Fishbourne, PO18 8BL

Planning appeal 3285978 at Bethwines Farm, Blackboy Lane, Fishbourne, PO18 8BL (Chichester District Council) was dismissed on 1 November 2022 by Inspector Bristow T, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Appeal A: (i) whether the site is an appropriate location for the development proposed, with particular regard to local character, (ii) the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of those nearby, with particular regard to noise (iii) the effect of the proposal on the safe and efficient operation of the surrounding highway network, and (iv) whether suitable provision would be made for surface water drainage and waste management.

Appeal A: change of use of land to provide facility for 'doggy day care', including the provision of 3 no. portakabins and perimeter fence. Appeal B: change of use of 501 sqm of the existing agricultural building to storage use (B8). Appeal C: re-grading of existing agricultural land to create natural grass and wetlands to reduce nitrogen load at Chichester Harbour.

Authority
Chichester District Council
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
other · Change of use
Inspector
Bristow T
Postcode
PO18 8BL

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Appeal A: (i) whether the site is an appropriate location for the development proposed, with particular regard to local character, (ii) the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of those nearby, with particular regard to noise (iii) the effect of the proposal on the safe and efficient operation of the surrounding highway network, and (iv) whether suitable provision would be made for surface water drainage and waste management.
  • Appeal B: (i) whether or not it has been demonstrated that the scheme would be permitted development, and (ii) the transport, highways and noise impacts of the development proposed.
  • Appeal C: (i) whether the proposal amounts to a material change of use in the land requiring planning permission, (ii) whether the appeal site is a suitable location for the development proposed, and (iii) whether it was reasonable for the Council not to have validated application Ref. 22/00142/FUL.

What decided it

Appeal A: the proposal fails to demonstrate a requirement for a countryside location and would cause significant harm to local character and living conditions. Appeal B: irresolvable ambiguities in the application prevent a conclusion that the scheme would be permitted development, and highways and noise impacts are not adequately demonstrated to be acceptable. Appeal C: the proposal constitutes a material change of use, the site is not demonstrated to be non-BMV land, and there is no compelling justification for the scheme.

No balancing exercise was undertaken in respect of any of the three appeals; each was dismissed on the basis of conflicts with the development plan and material considerations without weighing benefits against harms.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Local Plan policy 2Local Plan policy 3Local Plan policy 8Local Plan policy 9Local Plan policy 40Local Plan policy 45Local Plan policy 48FNP policy E1FNP policy E2FNP policy D1FNP policy SD3
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 84Paragraph 174Paragraph 130Paragraph 185Paragraph 188Paragraph 111Paragraph 167Paragraph 112Paragraph 68Paragraph 74Paragraph 11
Judgments
Fishbourne Developments Limited v Stephens [2020] EWCA Civ 1704

How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.

See how each was applied

The decision letter

Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.

Appeals plan, £15 a month

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

33 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Chichester

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022

  1. Dismissed5 August 20263371769
    Melita Nursery, Chalk Lane, Sidlesham, PO20 7LW
  2. Notice varied and upheld3 August 20263372472
    Littlemead Business Park, Tangmere Road, Tangmere, West Sussex, PO20 2EU
  3. Dismissed6 July 20266003763
    Unit 1 The Old Army Camp, Cemetery Lane, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
  4. Dismissed6 July 20266003762
    The Old Army Camp, Cemetery Lane, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
  5. Dismissed6 July 20266003760
    Land South of Unit 1, Cemetery Lane, Woodmancote, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB

The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.