Planning Committee

Minutes

HASSOCKS PARISH COUNCIL

DRAFT Minutes of the PLANNING COMMITTEE Meeting held on Monday 24 June 2024 at 7.30pm in the Parish Centre, Adastra Park, Hassocks

Attendees: Parish Councillors: Cllr Robert Brewer, Cllr Lesley Cruickshank-Robb and Cllr Don McBeth.

In Attendance: Deputy Clerk – Tracy Forte, two members of the Public.

P24/14 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE. Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Kristian Berggreen, Bill Hatton and Angus Neil.

P24/15 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST.  There were no declarations of interest.

P24/16 ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.  In the light of absences, it was proposed and agreed that the election of a Chair and Vice Chair should be deferred until the next meeting.

P24/17 In the absence of the outgoing Chair and Vice Chair, Cllr Robert Brewer indicated that he would be happy to act as Chair for the current meeting.  All Members present supported this and Cllr Robert Brewer was appointed as Chair for the meeting.

P24/18 MINUTES. It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 24 June 2024 be signed by the Chair as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

P24/19 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. Mr and Mrs Steel, 28 Stanford Avenue, Hassocks spoke in opposition to application DM/22/1159 26 Stanford Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JJ.   A written summary of their objections and representation is attached as Appendix 1.

P24/20 The Chair proposed considering application DM/22/1159 26 Stanford Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JJ first which was agreed by the Committee.

P24/21 Mr and Mrs Steel left the meeting.

P24/22 APPLICATIONS

DM/22/1159 26 Stanford Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JJ Retrospective application for the demolition of existing conservatory, side extension, and garage and replace with a new single-storey rear and side extensions, with replacement garage. – Corrected plans received 11/06/24 following quashing of original decision.  Response: RECOMMEND REFUSAL.  The Council’s views remain unchanged on this application.  The application is detrimental to the street scene and is therefore contrary to Policy DP26: Character and Design of the District Plan and Policy 9: Character and Design of the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan.  Furthermore whilst the Committee is not sufficiently informed to comment on the accuracy of the revised plans, it is aware of the ongoing concerns raised by the neighbours at 28 Stanford Avenue and would ask that these are fully reviewed by the Planning Officer.

DM/24/1247 The Gate House 26B Lodge Lane Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8NA Installation of 11 solar panels on south facing roof. Response: RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

DM/24/1299 5 Stonepound Ridge Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JG Proposed velux to front elevation and side window to dining. 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.

DM/24/1362 Rear Of 13 And 14 Fir Tree Way Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8BT 2 x Oak Trees – Crown lift by 9m. (T1) Removing lowest 2 limbs towards 13 Fir Tree Way. Response: No Objection

DM/24/0714 52 Parklands Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JZ Proposed single storey rear extension and rear deck. Amended Plans received 07.06.2024 showing reduced depth and reconfiguration of raised rear deck and addition of new screen fencing on northern garden boundary adjacent to flats at Heron Tye. Response: RECOMMEND REFUSAL. Whilst the Council acknowledges there have been some amendments to this application, its previous comments remain unchanged. This application presents potential overlooking issues and therefore is considered unneighbourly.

DM/24/0424 Land To The Rear Of Ockley Grange Ockley Lane Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8NU Proposed erection of detached single storey 1 bed building to be used as a self-contained holiday let. Amended and additional plans received to show parking area and removal of front window to holiday let building. Drainage plan and details received 22.05.2024. 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.

DM/24/0272 36 Hurst Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 9NL Erection of 1 No. dwelling with car parking. Revision to DM/23/2126 comprising formation of new vehicular access to serve new dwelling. Existing access retained to serve No.36 Hurst Road. (Amended plans received moving access 07.06.2024). 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.

DM/24/1355 The Oaks Southdown Farm Lodge Lane Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8LX Demolition of existing changing room and construction of new changing room lounge and link. 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.

DM/24/1471 15 The Minnels Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8QW 1 x Oak – remove epicormic growth to 2m above fork and reduce crown by approx. 1-2m. Response: No Objection

DM/24/1422 Westcroft 9 Stanford Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JJ Proposed extensions to existing car port and part conversion into an office workshop. Response: RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

DM/24/1276 13 Priory Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8PS Proposed single-storey flat roof rear 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.

Barn Cottage Ockley Lane Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8NX      New two-storey, three bedroom dwelling with vehicle parking. Response: RECOMMEND REFUSAL. The Council’s previous comments on this application remain unchanged. This dwelling should have been built in line with the approved plan.  This proposed application represents overdevelopment of the site, being overbearing and unneighbourly. It is also out of keeping with existing local properties and is detrimental to the street scene. Therefore it is considered that this application is contrary to Policy DP26: Character and Design of the District Plan and Policy 9: Character and Design of the Hassocks Neighbourhood Plan.

DM/24/1497 12 North Court Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JS      Oak Tree (T22) – Reduce Crown by 2 metres.  Response: The Council defers to the MSDC Tree Officer’s assessment and decision on this application.

P24/23 APPLICATIONS FOR DISCHARGE OF PLANNING CONDITIONS.

DM/24/1461 The Paddock London Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 9NA Discharge of conditions 3 (Drainage) and 5 (Landscaping) relating to planning reference DM/21/2148.  This was noted by the Committee.

P24/24 RESOLVED that the observations on the planning issues as agreed above be submitted to the relevant Planning Authority for consideration.

P24/25 PLANNING AUTHORITY DECISION NOTICES

The following decisions were noted:

Application details	Hassocks PC recommendation to Planning Authority	Planning Authority Decision (MSDC/SDNP)
DM/24/1140 5 Ewart Close, Hassocks	Defer to MSDC Tree Officer	Permission Granted
DM/24/1075 9 North Court, Hassocks	Recommend Approval	Permission Granted
DM/24/1099 24 Wilmington Close, Hassocks	Recommend Approval	Permission Granted

P24/26 APPEAL HEARING NOTIFICATION. AP/24/0030 68 And 70 Keymer Road Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8QP.  Members were invited to note correspondence received from MSDC regarding the above appeal hearing.  (Full details provided in Appendix 1 of the agenda).   This was noted by the Committee.

P24/27 DATE OF NEXT MEETING. Monday 15 July 2024 at 7.30pm

There being no other business the Chair closed the meeting at 8.20pm.

Signed………………………………Date……………………………………………..

---

APPENDIX 1

DM/22/1159 26 Stanford Avenue Hassocks West Sussex BN6 8JJ.

Retrospective application for the demolition of existing conservatory, side extension, and garage and replace with a new single-storey rear and side extensions, with replacement garage. – Corrected plans received 11/06/24 following quashing of original decision.

All associated documents referenced in the following correspondence were shared with the Committee for information prior to the meeting, and were available for viewing at the meeting.

---

DM/22/1159

24 June 2024

Dear Hassocks Parish Council Planning Committee

This application is back before you for consideration of retrospective approval. You recommended refusal in May 2022 as the plans were ‘clearly wrong’. You recommended refusal in March 2023 on the merits, based on character appearance (DP 26 & Policy 9) We told you in March 2023 that the planning officer was of the view the plans were ’sufficiently accurate’ to deal with this on the merits, so whilst observing the plans were wrong, you did not comment on this in your refusal recommendation.

Redetermination following quashing retrospective approval

We are sorry to be back before you again in relation to our neighbour’s retrospective planning application DM/22/1159. Since we last came before you in March 2023, MSDC granted approval on 15 March 2023. Nigel judicially reviewed this (JR) and the decision was quashed on 13 December 2023 and sent back to MSDC for redetermination. (See D7 above).

Attached at D1 Part B are the Decision Notice, Sign off sheet and Delegated Decision Reasons issued by MSDC in March 2023 These have been removed by MSDC from their portal.  You will see as well as the plans being wrong, Jacob Lane said there were “no representations” received on this application and the side extension was built in an “identical location” to originally approved under DM/21/0821. Jacob Lane left the council a few weeks later.

Plans still wrong

We still consider the plans are incorrect for this validated application, both in terms of the original projection of the garage and as to the height of the glass roof window in the side extension as built, which is above the first floor window, not below it.

Merits of the application

The side extension is built on higher ground, where the garage was meant to be built. The garage was meant to project around 1m to the rear of our garage. The extension is built marginally ahead of our garage.  The land has had to be built up at the rear to accommodate the extension. The side extension had a pitched roof previously and now the construction is considerably more overbearing as it is built higher than originally approved and closer to the boundary. We do not have access to an A3 plan to know the distance from the boundary at the back where it narrows and is immediately by our patio area. This means we are constantly overlooked as our neighbours pass so close to our property.

In terms of the garage, this has been moved forward by 2.4m at the rear, rather than the 25cm referred to in CMK’s Planning report. This garage was to be on lower ground, so we now have a mass of extension further along the site by our side windows. At the front, the garage projects 1.75m ahead of the front elevation. No other properties on the southern side of Stanford Avenue have any structures projecting ahead of their front elevation. The applicant DID NOT HAVE a garage projecting in front of his front elevation originally as he mis-states in the current plans.

Misrepresentations made to MSDC

Since 15/3/23 it has become apparent that other misrepresentations have been made by the applicant in his retrospective planning application and in party wall matters. In particular:

(1) The information provided in CMK’s planning report is misleading as to the reason for moving the garage forward. It was not because Southern Water had required them to.

(2) The applicant has admitted that his original plans conflicted, and it was not possible to build anything in compliance with planning approval under DM/21/0821

(3) We have evidence he was informed in August 2021 by his party wall surveyor, via us, that if he built his garage 1.8m out he would be breaching planning approval and went on to build his structures at the wrong locations in breach of planning permission and the party wall awards.

(4) the plans submitted were still materially misrepresenting what had been built.

We ask you to refuse this both on the merits and on the basis of wrong plan again. On the merits due to character and appearance and the overbearing nature of this development.

Kim and Nigel Steel