Planning Committee

Minutes

HASSOCKS PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of the PLANNING COMMITTEE Meeting held on Monday 12 June 2023 at 7.30pm in the Parish Centre, Adastra Park, Hassocks

Attendees: Parish Councillors: Cllr Carolyn Barton, Cllr Robert Brewer, Cllr Bill Hatton, Cllr Angus Neil and Cllr Peter Richardson.

In Attendance: Deputy Clerk – Tracy Forte. Cllr Sue Hatton

P23/14 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE. Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Kristian Berggreen.

P23/15 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST. There were no declarations of interest.

P23/16 MINUTES.

It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 22 May 2023 be signed by the Chair as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

P23/17 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. There were no members of the public present.

P23/18 APPLICATIONS

DM/23/0002 Byanda Brighton Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 9LX Demolition of Byanda (a single residential property and ancillary buildings) and the erection of a 60 bedroom residential care facility, with associated access, ground works, car parking, servicing, private amenity space, landscaping, construction of substation unit and boundary treatment. (Updated Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy received 06/04/2023).

The Committee considered the updated Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy for this application and after a lengthy discussion was in full agreement that this did not alter any of the previous concerns raised by Hassocks Parish Council.  Therefore in addition to the comments already submitted, Hassocks Parish Council RECOMMENDS REFUSAL for the following reasons:

LAND AT BYANDA BRIGHTON ROAD HASSOCKS

1 SUMMARY

1.1. Hassocks Parish Council has given the most careful consideration to this proposal and has held a number of meetings with the applicant. The Parish Council considers the proposal to be un-neighbourly overdevelopment, very detrimental to the amenities and environment of the area. The access to the building from the A273 Brighton Road is completely unsuitable for a development of this size and type. The proposal is contrary to the policies of the District Plan and the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan for the reasons set out below.

2 THE SITE

2.1. The site has an area of approximately 0.4 ha and is on the edge, but outside of the built up area of Hassocks. The southern boundary of the South Downs National Park lies approximately 300m to the south west.

2.2. There are two dwellings on the site, Byanda and a bungalow in the north western corner of the site. The site is surrounded by mature trees, It is approximately 4m lower than the two detached houses, Dean House and South Dean House, on its western boundary.

2.3. Access to the site is from the A273 Brighton Road via a narrow – 4m wide private drive which serves Byanda, Faerie Glen and two detached houses to the east of the site. The access on to the A273 is very narrow – 4m wide – which is 100m south of the busy Stonepound Crossroads, which are also the subject of an AQMA.

2.4. The site and surroundings form a verdant and attractive low density transition between the village and the countryside to the west.

3 THE PROPOSAL

3.1. It is proposed to replace the existing buildings on the site with a four storey residential care facility containing 60 bedrooms, associated facilities and 20 parking spaces. A total of 35 staff would be employed in the nursing home.

3.2. The parking would be located on the western side of the site. Vehicular access would be from the access road in the north western corner of the site.

4  PLANNING POLICY

4.1. The Parish Council contends that this proposal clearly conflicts with key policies of both the Mid Sussex District Plan and the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan. The District Plan was approved in March 2018 and the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan was “made” in July 2020.

4.2. In particular the proposal is contrary to the following District Plan Policies:-

DP18 Setting of the South Downs National Park

DP26 Character and Design

DP29 Noise Air and Light Pollution

DP39 Sustainable Design and Construction

4.3. It is also contrary to the following Neighbourhood Plan Policies:-

HNP5 Enabling Zero Carbon

HNP 8 Air Quality Management

HNP9 Character and Design

These Policies are set out in detail below.

4.4. District Plan Policy DP18: Setting of the South Downs National Park

This Policy reads as follows:-

Development within land that contributes to the setting of the South Downs National Park will only be permitted where it does not detract from, or cause detriment to, the visual and special qualities (including dark skies), tranquillity and essential characteristics of the National Park, and in particular should not adversely affect transitional open green spaces between the site and the boundary of the South Downs National Park, and the views, outlook and aspect, into and out of the National Park by virtue of its location, scale, form or design.

Development should be consistent with National Park purposes and must not significantly harm the National Park or its setting. Assessment of such development proposals will also have regard to the South Downs Partnership Management Plan and emerging National Park Local Plan and other adopted planning documents and strategies.

4.5. District Plan Policy DP26: Character and Design

This Policy sets the following criteria against which all development must be evaluated and states:-

All development and surrounding spaces, including alterations and extensions to existing buildings and replacement dwellings, will be well designed and reflect the distinctive character of the towns and villages while being sensitive to the countryside. All applicants will be required to demonstrate that development:

• is of high quality design and layout and includes appropriate landscaping and greenspace;
• contributes positively to, and clearly defines, public and private realms and should normally be designed with active building frontages facing streets and public open spaces to animate and provide natural surveillance;
• creates a sense of place while addressing the character and scale of the surrounding buildings and landscape;
• protects open spaces, trees and gardens that contribute to the character of the area;
• protects valued townscapes and the separate identity and character of towns and villages;
• does not cause significant harm to the amenities of existing nearby residents and future occupants of new dwellings, including taking account of the impact on privacy, outlook, daylight and sunlight, and noise, air and light pollution (see Policy DP29);
• creates a pedestrian-friendly layout that is safe, well connected, legible and accessible;
• incorporates well integrated parking that does not dominate the street environment, particularly where high density housing is proposed;
• positively addresses sustainability considerations in the layout and the building design;
• take the opportunity to encourage community interaction by creating layouts with a strong neighbourhood focus/centre; larger (300+ unit) schemes will also normally be expected to incorporate a mixed use element;
• optimises the potential of the site to accommodate development.

4.6. District Plan Policy DP29: Noise Air and Light Pollution

This Policy states, in relation to Air Pollution, that a development will only be permitted where:-

• It does not cause unacceptable levels of air pollution;
• Development on land adjacent to an existing use which generates air pollution or odour would not cause any adverse effects on the proposed development or can be mitigated to reduce exposure to poor air quality to recognised and acceptable levels;
• Development proposals (where appropriate) are consistent with Air Quality Management Plans.

4.7. District Plan Policy DP39 Sustainable Design and Construction

This Policy states that:-

All development proposals must seek to improve the sustainability of development and should where appropriate and feasible according to the type and size of development and location, incorporate the following measures:

• Minimise energy use through the design and layout of the scheme including through the use of natural lighting and ventilation;
• Explore opportunities for efficient energy supply through the use of communal heating networks where viable and feasible;
• Use renewable sources of energy;
• Maximise efficient use of resources, including minimising waste and maximising recycling/ re-use of materials through both construction and occupation;
• Limit water use to 110 litres/person/day in accordance with Policy DP42: Water Infrastructure and the Water Environment;
• Demonstrate how the risks associated with future climate change have been planned for as part of the layout of the scheme and design of its buildings to ensure its longer term resilience.

4.8. Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP6: Development Proposals Affecting the South Downs National Park

This Policy reads, inter alia:-

Development proposals on land outside of, but contributing to, the setting of the South Downs National Park will be supported where proposals:

• Do not detract from, or cause detriment to, the special qualities and tranquillity of the South Downs National Park; and
• Do not unacceptably harm the South Downs National Park or its setting. 22 Paragraph 184 of the NPPF

4.9. Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP9: Character and Design

This Policy was formulated after a detailed appraisal of the urban characteristics of the village. The preamble reads as follows:-

• 59 The Appraisal concludes the overall finding is that the village of Hassocks has a particular character derived from its location, views, topography, spatial qualities and historical development which makes it distinctive. The Appraisal confirms it does not have the homogeneous character of its medieval neighbours due to its continuous development in the 19th, 20th and 21^st century. The Appraisal confirms this variety enlivens the village and give a spacious village centre, compared with the villages either side of Hassocks.
• 60. The Appraisal confirms the use of local materials, especially local soft-coloured red brick with plain, soft brown, clay roof and red wall tiles give the built form cohesion and local distinctiveness. Furthermore, it confirms small-scale housing with generous front gardens and wide grass verges give a spacious feel that is typical across the major part of the village.

Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan – Made Version

• 61. It is considered that the spatial and architectural character of the Parish contributes to its sense of place and quality. These merit protection in conjunction with future development proposals.
• 62. The Village Design Statement supports Policy 9 and provides guidance on local design and characteristics.

Policy 9: Character and Design

Development proposals will be supported where they have regard to the Hassocks Townscape Appraisal, and where their character and design takes account of the following design principles as appropriate to the nature, scale and location of the particular proposal:

1. Is of high quality design and layout;
2. Contributes positively to the private and public realm to create a sense of place;
3. Respects the character and scale of the surrounding buildings and landscape;
4. Protects open spaces and gardens that contribute to the character of the area;
5. Protects valued townscapes and the separate identity and character of Hassocks, Keymer and Clayton;
6. Does not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of existing nearby residents and future occupants of new dwellings, including taking account of the impact on privacy, outlook, daylight, sunlight and security;
7. Creates safe, accessible and well connected environments;
8. Protects existing landscape features and contributes to the village’s Green Infrastructure network;
9. Incorporates the use of local materials which are appropriate to the defined Local Townscape Character Area; and
10. Positively responds to the local vernacular character of the defined Local Townscape Character Area.

Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan – Made VersionPage 30

4.10. Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP5: Enabling Zero Carbon.

This Policy reads as follows:-

Development proposals will be supported that maximise the opportunity to include sustainable design features, providing any adverse local impacts can be made acceptable.

Residential development proposals that modify existing buildings (including extensions) should seek to maximise the inclusion of energy-saving measures and renewable energy generation.

Proposals which make provision for charging electric vehicles at each dwelling (where feasible) and on-street; and making parking areas charging ready will be supported.

4.11. Neighbourhood Plan Policy NP8: Air Quality Management,

The preamble to this Policy reads as follows:-

• 47. The Parish contains a designated Air Quality Management Area located at the Stonepound Crossroads. The AQMA was designated in March 2012 as a result of the high levels of nitrogen dioxide being likely to breach the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 (as amended). This area includes a number of residential properties that are immediately to the south-east of the crossroads (1-6 Overcourt; The Coach House; and Shooldarry).
• 48. The main reasons for the crossroads being affected by air pollution is the volume of road traffic and the stop-start routine of driving conditions at peak times, caused by the queuing traffic at the traffic lights.
• 49. In 2013 MSDC approved an Action Plan, noting that a ‘do-nothing’ option would fail to bring about improvements in nitrogen dioxide levels. The Action Plan includes three main measures to (i) change light sequencing to reduce stationary times; (ii) minimise HGV movements through advisory alternative route signage; and (iii) reduce pollution from queuing vehicles by encouraging drivers through signage to turn-off engines when stationary. There were also a series of other measures proposed that were noted to be less likely to have a significant impact.
• 50. HPC supports proposals which will reduce nitrogen dioxide levels within its area, and reduce the harmful impacts on its residents.
• 51. The District Council note that for the AQMA to be revoked, annual air quality monitoring data will need to show levels of air pollution at consistently below the target level.
• 52. HPC consider that development should not be supported where it has an unacceptable adverse effect on the AQMA, or where a proposed use or users within the AQMA would be unacceptably adversely effected by the air quality.
• 53. HPC do not wish to support proposals which could lead to unacceptable adverse effect upon air quality within the AQMA, in line with European Union air quality standards.
• 54. HPC consider this position should be maintained unless, and until, the levels of air pollution are demonstrably below the target level in the Regulations, sufficient to enable the AQMA to be revoked.

Policy 8: Air Quality Management

Development will be supported where it would not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon air quality within the Air Quality Management Area.

5 ASSESSMENT AGAINST POLICY

The proposal conflicts with Statutory Policies of the District and Neighbourhood Plan set out above for the following reasons:-

Character and Design

1. It is an overdevelopment of this site and completely out of character with this edge of village area. The site lies outside the built up area of Hassocks surrounded by low density development which helps the village to merge in with the adjoining countryside. It does not respect the character and scale of the surrounding buildings and landscape. This is contrary to Policies HNP9.3 and DP26
2. It will be noted that the South Downs National Park Authority have objected to this proposal on the grounds that this large building will be clearly visible both from the area of the Park adjoining the village and also from the Downs, particularly Wolstonbury Hill. The Park Authority also expressed concern over the lighting of the building. These are shared by the Parish Council. This development would have a most adverse effect on the setting of the National Park and is therefore contrary to Policies HNP6, DP18 and 26.
3. The contrast with the adjoining development could not be more stark. It fails to respect the character and scale of the surrounding buildings and landscape This is contrary to HNP9.3.and DP26
4. It would involve the felling of all the trees within the site and, by virtue of its large footprint (over 50% of the area of the site), leave little space for planting to soften the impact of the building. This is contrary to HNP9.4 and DP26.
5. It would cause very unacceptable harm to the amenities of existing residents by bulk of building – it would dominate the area – by overlooking and overshadowing. The building would be 11.1m in height. Although it would be set at a lower level, approximately 4m, than the two detached houses, Dean House and South Dean House on the western side of the site and be approximately 20m from the boundary it would dominate and overlook them to an entirely unacceptable degree, this is contrary to HNP9.6 and DP26.
6. It would also overlook and adversely affect the amenities of Faerie Glen and the two adjoining detached houses on the east of the site. The eastern boundary is defined by a tall hedge, approximately 6m high, of cupressus leylandi. The 11m high block would approx. be but 4m from this hedge, would tower over it and overlook Faerie Glen and the adjoining properties. As the building would be less than 4m from this hedge it is most unlikely that this valuable screen would survive. This is contrary to DP9.6 and DP26.

Access and Traffic

7. As stressed by local residents in their letters of objection, access to the site is extremely difficult and dangerous, particularly at peak times. There was a fatal motorcycle accident next to the access in 2021. The proposal will generate a significant amount of additional traffic on an already dangerous access which by virtue of its narrow width and poor visibility will create a danger to road users. This is contrary to HNP9.7
8. The access to the proposed development site joins the A273, 200m south of the busy Stonepound Crossroads, which is the only Air Quality Management Area in Mid Sussex due to the high levels of air pollution. The proposal will generate a significant level of additional traffic. This will adversely impact on the levels of pollution at Stonepound Crossroads. This is contrary to DP29 and HNP8.
9. The vehicular access to the site is substandard for a development of this size. It is 5m wide and waiting vehicles will force pedestrians either to wait or to walk out into the carriageway. This is contrary to HNP9.7
10. Furthermore the gradient of the access road is steep. Elderly people will find it very difficult to walk up it and it would be very difficult indeed to push a wheelchair up it. This point is important because in the supporting documents the applicants stress that residents would be able to live independently if they wish. This also conflicts with NP9.7
11. The Parish Council would challenge the applicant’s assertion that only 15 members of staff will be on site at any given time. The proposal is for a 60 bedroomed care home, including provision for high dependency clients, therefore it is considered highly unlikely that the ratio of care staff to clients could be approximately 1:4. It is also assumed that in addition to care staff, there would be a need for domestic staff such as cleaners, cooks, and maintenance persons. The proposed parking space provision for all visitors and staff would therefore appear to be wholly inadequate. This conflicts with DP29 and HNP9.7

Flooding and Drainage.

12. Concerns over flooding and drainage have been raised by residents who live in the immediate vicinity of the development site and are familiar with issues around flooding in the area. The District Council, in recommending this application be permitted, stated that the currently unresolved flooding and drainage problems could be dealt with by way of condition. This abrogation of responsibility is, in the submission of the Parish Council, completely unsatisfactory. It basically puts the ball back into the residents’ court and abandons them to the vicissitudes of the legal system. The Parish Council accepts that technical issues such as this can be resolved. But this must be done fairly and by agreement. As it stands the proposal should be rejected because no solution has been found to the surface water drainage problem of the site. The proposal is therefore contrary to HNP6 on these grounds also.
13. It should also be noted that in the Draft West Sussex Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2021-26 (LFRMS), Hassocks is one of the first five areas of focus within the LFRMS having been identified as being within the areas most risk of surface water flooding in West Sussex. Hassocks Parish Council has grave concerns over any additional development which potentially further increases this risk of surface water flooding either at that site or elsewhere within the village.

Sustainable Design.

14. The application provides insufficient information to be certain of compliance with HNP Policy 5 – Enabling Zero Carbon; It is also not compliant with Policy DP39 of the District Plan – Sustainable Design and Construction and Policy 5 of the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan. A design which only complies with Approved Document L2A of the building regulations (2013 edition with 2016 amendments) is not sustainable, contrary to the assertion made by the applicants. The Sustainability Statement is a generic document which claims compliance with Policies HNP 5 and DP 39. It is full of very laudable aims but this does not amount to compliance with these policies. The building has not been designed to meet these standards and for this reason the proposal is contrary to Policies HNP5 and DP39.

The Question of Need

15. The Parish Council is not satisfied that the case for additional C2 provision has been made in the context of this site. Careful consideration has been given to the Mid Sussex District Plan 2021 – 2039 Review Consultation Draft (Regulation 18) DPH27. This consultation document states that the type and yield from the site will be confirmed following Regulation 18 consultation and that the objectives are:-

• Suitable vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access from Brighton Road
• Retain existing mature trees and hedgerows along site boundaries
• Mitigate risk from surface water flooding

There is no need to repeat the Parish Councils views on the suitability of the site again here but it is absolutely vital to stress that, contrary to the view put forward in the applicants Statement of Appeal, there is no presumption in this document that this site is suitable for a development of this nature, The purpose of consultation is to listen, learn and take informed decisions, No reliance whatsoever can be placed on the inclusion of Byanda in this document.

This proposal, which attempts to circumvent the rigorous statutory process, is premature and should be rejected on these grounds as well.

Impact on Hassocks Health Centre.

16. The population of Hassocks has increased very rapidly over the past 10 or so years and the provision of health services of all types is now overstretched. A study of waiting times and also the number of patients per GP in Mid Sussex published by Sussex World in October 2022 states that Mid Sussex Healthcare, the Hassocks NHS provider, had 20,278 patients and 12.7 full time equivalent doctors equalling 1633 patients per doctor.

Another study published by the same author stated that waiting times in the Mid Sussex Healthcare area are the 6^th longest in Mid Sussex.

The Parish Council has tried to research these claims in more detail on the NHS Website but was unable to do so.

Whilst it could therefore be asserted that Hassocks is in a better position than some of its neighbours it should also be noted that the population served by this GP practice is still rising rapidly and will increase by at least 3000 in the next 5 years.

The Parish Council is therefore very concerned that the proposed development could lead to the current health care facilities in Hassocks being further overstretched and create a need which cannot be met.

6 CONCLUSION

The assessment of this proposal against the Policies of the Development Plan clearly demonstrates that the proper planning of Hassocks can only be served by refusing permission for this development.

It is also premature pending an evaluation of other sites put forward for C2 development in the District Plan Review and this reason alone should be sufficient to reject it.

Cllr Sue Hatton left the meeting.

DM/23/1309 5 Stonepound Ridge Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JG Proposed loft conversion (LDC) This application has been withdrawn.

DM/23/1308 83 Parklands Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JY Proposal seeks to raise the roofline and to include changes to the fenestration of the previously approved planning application (DM/22/3384). (Amended plans received 5th June showing a new rooflight and air source heat pump.) Response: RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

DM/23/1310 5 Stonepound Ridge Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JG Proposed front dormer. The Deputy Clerk informed the committee that this application has been amended and will be considered at the Planning meeting to be held on 2 July 2023.

DM/23/1365 2 Dale Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8LW T1 Acacia – Reduce branches to clear building by 2.5m by removing secondary and tertiary branches. Response: NO OBJECTION.

DM/23/1393 80 Friars Oak Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8PY Removal of existing conservatory and replacement with full width rear single storey extension. (LDC) Response: NOTED.

DM/23/1405 7 Elm Tree Close Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8AU  Proposed rear and side single storey extension.  Response: RECOMMEND APPROVAL. The applicant is advised that Government has committed to adopt a ‘Future Buildings Standard’ during 2021 which will change the Building Regulations requirements for alterations and extensions to homes to bring these alterations closer to that of a ‘zero energy building’.  This is supported by Policy 5 ‘Enabling Zero Carbon’ of the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan which states that proposals that modify existing buildings (including extensions) should seek to maximise the inclusion of energy-saving measures and renewable energy generation.  Energy saving measures include floor, roof and wall insulation, and low u-value windows (which may need to be triple glazed).  These requirements may require amendments to your design which could affect the drawings submitted for planning permission. The applicant may wish to note that alterations that are built to a Nearly Zero Energy standard, are unlikely to need further retrofitting to minimise the carbon emissions that the nation is required to reduce to zero by 2050.  As retrofitting an existing home to be highly energy efficient is more complex than doing so for a new building, applicants may wish to look at the ‘EnerPHit’ standard that the Government is understood to be considering as the applicable “Nearly Zero Energy’ standard in this context, or at the Architypes published by the London Energy Transformation Initiative for u-values for your extension walls, windows etc. and for ventilation and overheating prevention standards to be achieved.

P23/19 APPLICATIONS FOR DISCHARGE OF PLANNING CONDITIONS. None

P23/20 RESOLVED that the observations on the planning issues as agreed above be submitted to the relevant Planning Authority for consideration.

P23/21 PLANNING AUTHORITY DECISION NOTICES

The following decisions were noted:

Application details	Hassocks PC recommendation to Planning Authority	Planning Authority Decision (MSDC/SDNP)
DM/23/0955 8 The Crescent, Hassocks BN6 8RB	Recommend Approval	Permission Granted
DM/23/1088 3 Stanford Avenue, Hassocks BN6 8JL	Recommend Approval	Permission Granted
DM/23/1139 11 Kymer Gardens, Hassocks BN6 8QZ	Defer to MSDC Tree Officer	Permission Granted

 

The committee noted that the following applications had been withdrawn:

DM/23/1309 5 Stonepound Ridge, Hassocks BN6 8JG

SDNP/23/00480/FUL Site of Former Landfill, Clayton Hill, Hassocks.

P23/22 NEW STREET NAMES – Members were invited to consider a request from Mid Sussex District Council to provide suggestions for street names for the new development on the land to the rear of the Friars Oak Pub.  The development will consist of 130 dwellings with the creation of 6 new streets, therefore the request is for six preferred names and two reserve options. The Deputy Clerk reminded Members that the use of butterfly or wild flower names was previously suggested as a potential option for consideration for this site.

Some Members were keen to continue with naming roads after local people who had made a positive contribution to the village, as had been the case for Ockley Park.  After some discussion it was decided that all Councillors would be invited to express their preference for naming the roads on this particular site after wildflowers or butterflies or to continue with naming after local people; in either case all Members would be invited to make suggestions for their preferred category.  The Deputy Clerk was requested to send out an email to all Councillors to this effect.

P23/23 SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY (SDNPA) Consultation on Local Validation List.  Members were invited to note correspondence received from the SDNPA regarding a consultation on the review of the SDNPA Local List and to consider any comments for submission on behalf of Hassocks PC.  The consultation was noted by the Committee.

P22/24 Urgent Matters at the discretion of the Chairman for noting and/or inclusion on a future agenda.

P23/25 DATE OF NEXT MEETING. 3 July 2023

There being no other business the Chair closed the meeting at 8.30pm.