®Planning appeal decision
Melita Nursery, Chalk Lane, Sidlesham, PO20 7LW
Planning appeal 3371769 at Melita Nursery, Chalk Lane, Sidlesham, PO20 7LW (Chichester District Council) was dismissed on 5 August 2026 by Inspector Kirby R, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether suitable living conditions would be provided to occupiers of the site, having regard to the layout of it and number of caravans.
- Authority
- Chichester District Council
- Appeal type
- Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Major traveller and caravan pitches
- Inspector
- Kirby R
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether suitable living conditions would be provided to occupiers of the site, having regard to the layout of it and number of caravans
- Whether the site could be suitably drained with particular regard to surface water
- Whether the location of the appeal site is suitable for the development having regard to flood risk
- The effect upon biodiversity, with particular regard to bats
- Whether or not there are any material considerations that outweigh any identified harms or conflict with the development plan
What decided it
The substantial harm to the living conditions of future occupiers and the significant harm arising from insufficient evidence on protected species (bats) were found, together with the lesser harms on drainage and flood risk, to outweigh the significant benefits of gypsy and traveller pitch provision.
the significant benefits of providing gypsy and traveller pitches, together with the equality implications and other benefits, were insufficient to outweigh the totality of harmful impacts on living conditions, drainage, flood risk and biodiversity when assessed against the Framework taken as a whole
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy H14Policy NE16Policy NE5Policy NE6Policy NE8Policy 36 of the ACLPPolicy 42 of the ACLP
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 139Paragraph 170Paragraph 173Paragraph 175Paragraph 176
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 appliedThe 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.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Chichester
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026
- Dismissed6 July 20266003763Unit 1 The Old Army Camp, Cemetery Lane, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
- Dismissed6 July 20266003762The Old Army Camp, Cemetery Lane, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
- Dismissed6 July 20266003760Land South of Unit 1, Cemetery Lane, Woodmancote, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
- Dismissed6 July 20266003759The Old Army Camp, Cemetery Lane, Woodmancote, Westbourne Emsworth, PO10 8SB
- Allowed27 February 20263372880Land East Inlands Road and South of Railway Line, Inlands Road, Nutbourne, West Sussex, PO18 8RJ
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.