6 metre flagpole at Bishops Place, Albourne, Hassocks

“Purpose of Report 1.1 To consider the recommendation of the Assistant Director for Planning and Sustainable Economy on the application for planning permission as detailed above. Executive Summary 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a 6 metre high flagpole at Bishops Place, London Road, Albourne. The application has come to committee as the applicant is Cllr Zeidler, the member for Downland Villages.”

“There are a number of public footpaths within the vicinity of the property, including a footpath which runs north to south along the access track to the property and a footpath which runs east to west through the field to the north of the property. Due to the position of the surrounding footpaths, there are clear public views of the property.”

“This will be achieved by ensuring that: - A thorough understanding of the significance of the listed building and its setting has been demonstrated. This will be proportionate to the importance of the building and potential impact of the proposal; - Alterations or extensions to a listed building respect its historic form, scale, setting, significance and fabric.”

“The introduction of domesticating features within the setting of a listed former farmhouse and/or historic farmstead may be regarded as contentious. However, a flagpole is not a purely domestic feature, and is also in itself a relatively minor intervention which in this case is to be located within the domestic garden around the house rather than its wider rural setting.”

“Therefore, the proposal complies with Mid Sussex District Plan policies DP12, DP26 and DP34, policy ALC1 of the Albourne Neighbourhood Plan and the relevant provisions of the NPPF. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted. Recommendation 3.1 It is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to the conditions outlined at Appendix A. Summary of Representations 4.1 No letters of representation have been received.”

“The Chairman took Members to a vote on the recommendation, which was proposed by Councillor Sweatman and seconded by Councillor Kennedy. This was agreed with 11 in favour and none against.”

“Planning permission was approved subject to the conditions outlined at Appendix A.”