|
No: |
BH2020/02285 |
Ward: |
Hove Park Ward |
||
|
App Type: |
Full Planning |
|
|||
|
Address: |
7 Woodland Drive Hove BN3 6DH |
|
|||
|
Proposal: |
Erection of 1no two bedroom detached house (C3) to rear of existing dwelling, incorporating new vehicular crossover and associated landscaping and parking. |
|
|||
|
Officer: |
Michael Tucker, tel: 292359 |
Valid Date: |
26.08.2020 |
|
|
|
Con Area: |
N/A |
Expiry Date: |
21.10.2020 |
||
|
Listed Building Grade: N/A |
|||||
|
EOT: |
|
||||
|
Agent: |
Absolute Town Planning Ltd C/O Parkers At Cornelius House 178-180 Church Road Hove BN3 2DJ |
||||
|
Applicant: |
City Partnership Housing Limited C/O Absolute Town Planning Ltd Parkers At Cornelius House 178-180 Church Road Hove BN3 2DJ |
||||
|
|
|||||
1. RECOMMENDATION
1.1. That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out below and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the following Conditions and Informatives:
Conditions:
1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings listed below.
Reason:For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
|
Plan Type |
Reference |
Version |
Date Received |
|
Location and block plan |
19036-001 |
17 August 2020 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
19036-004 |
17 August 2020 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
19036-005 |
17 August 2020 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
19036-006 |
A |
13 October 2020 |
|
Proposed Drawing |
19036-007 |
A |
13 October 2020 |
|
Other |
NJCL 808_01_061020 |
13 October 2020 |
|
|
Other |
NJCL 808_02_061020 |
13 October 2020 |
|
|
Other |
ARBORICULTURE ASSESSMENT AND OUTLINE METHOD STATEMENT |
13 October 2020 |
2. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains the right to review unimplemented permissions.
3. No extension, enlargement, alteration of the dwellinghouse as provided for within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C and D of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) other than that expressly authorised by this permission shall be carried out without planning permission obtained from the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: The Local Planning Authority considers that further development could cause detriment to the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties and to the character of the area and for this reason would wish to control any future development to comply with policies QD14 and QD27 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
4. The residential unit hereby approved shall not be occupied until the residential unit built has achieved an energy efficiency standard of a minimum of 19% CO2 improvement over Building Regulations requirements Part L 2013 (TER Baseline).
Reason: To ensure that the development is sustainable and makes efficient use of energy to comply with policy CP8 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
5. The residential unit hereby approved shall not be occupied until the residential unit built has achieved as a minimum, a water efficiency standard of not more than 110 litres per person per day maximum indoor water consumption.
Reason: To ensure that the development is sustainable and makes efficient use of water to comply with policy CP8 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
6. Notwithstanding the approved drawings, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of secure cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory facilities for the parking of cycles are provided and to encourage travel by means other than private motor vehicles and to comply with policy TR14 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and SPD14: Parking Standards.
7. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the crossover and access has been constructed.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policies TR7 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP9 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
8. The hard surfaces hereby approved shall be made of porous materials and retained thereafter or provision shall be made and retained thereafter to direct run-off water from the hard surface to a permeable or porous area or surface within the curtilage of the property.
To reduce the risk of flooding and pollution and increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with policies CP8 & CP11 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
9. The vehicle parking area shown on the approved plans shall not be used otherwise than for the parking of private motor vehicles and motorcycles belonging to the occupants of and visitors to the development hereby approved and shall be maintained so as to ensure their availability for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that adequate parking provision is retained and to comply with policy CP9 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and SPD14: Parking Standards.
10. No development above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until details of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, including (where applicable):
a) details of all brick, render and tiling (including details of the colour of render/paintwork to be used)
b) details of all cladding to be used, including details of their treatment to protect against weathering
c) details of all hard surfacing materials
d) details of the proposed window, door and balcony treatments
e) details of all other materials to be used externally
Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and to comply with policy QD14 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and policy CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
11. A bee brick shall be incorporated within the external wall of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: To enhance the biodiversity of the site and to comply with Policy CP10 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and Supplementary Planning Document SPD11 Nature Conservation and Development.
12. Three (3) swift brick shall be incorporated within the external walls of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: To enhance the biodiversity of the site and to comply with Policy CP10 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and Supplementary Planning Document SPD11 Nature Conservation and Development.
13. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the dwelling hereby permitted has been completed in compliance with Building Regulations Optional Requirement M4(2) (accessible and adaptable dwellings) and shall be retained in compliance with such requirement thereafter. Evidence of compliance shall be notified to the building control body appointed for the development in the appropriate Full Plans Application, or Building Notice, or Initial Notice to enable the building control body to check compliance.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory provision of homes for people with disabilities and to meet the changing needs of households and to comply with policy HO13 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan.
14. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the refuse and recycling storage facilities indicated on the approved plans have been fully implemented and made available for use. These facilities shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.
Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory facilities for the storage of refuse and recycling and to comply with policy QD27 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan, policy CP8 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and Policy WMP3e of the East Sussex, South Downs and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Local Plan Waste and Minerals Plan.
15. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a plan detailing the positions, height, design, materials and type of all existing and proposed boundary treatments shall has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatments shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained at all times.
Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development in the interest of the visual and residential amenities of the area and to comply with policies QD14 and QD27 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
16. Notwithstanding the approved documents, prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved (including demolition and all preparatory work), a scheme for the protection of the retained trees, in accordance with BS 5837:2012, including a tree protection plan (TPP) and an arboricultural method statement (AMS) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development thereafter shall be implemented in strict accordance with the approved details.
Reason: As this matter is fundamental to protecting the trees which are to be retained adjacent to the site during construction works in the interest of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policies QD16 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and SPD06:Trees and Development Sites.
Informatives:
1. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SS1 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One the approach to making a decision on this planning application has been to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority seeks to approve planning applications which are for sustainable development where possible.
2. The applicant is advised that accredited energy assessors are those licensed under accreditation schemes approved by the Secretary of State (see Gov.uk website); two bodies currently operate in England: National Energy Services Ltd; and Northgate Public Services. The production of this information is a requirement under Part L1A 2013, paragraph 2.13.
3. The water efficiency standard required is the 'optional requirement' detailed in Building Regulations Part G Approved Document (AD) Building Regulations (2015), at Appendix A paragraph A1. The applicant is advised this standard can be achieved through either: (a) using the 'fittings approach' where water fittings are installed as per the table at 2.2, page 7, with a maximum specification of 4/2.6 litre dual flush WC; 8L/min shower, 17L bath, 5L/min basin taps, 6L/min sink taps, 1.25L/place setting dishwasher, 8.17 L/kg washing machine; or (b) using the water efficiency calculation methodology detailed in the AD Part G Appendix A.
4. The planning permission granted includes a vehicle crossover which requires alterations and amendments to areas of the public highway. All necessary costs including any necessary amendments to a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO), the appropriate license and application fees for the crossing and any costs associated with the movement of any existing street furniture will have to be funded by the applicant. Although these works are approved in principle by the Highway Authority, no permission is hereby granted to carry out these works until all necessary and appropriate design details have been submitted and agreed. The crossover is required to be constructed under licence from the Head of Asset and Network Management. The applicant is advised to contact the Council's Streetworks Team (permit.admin@brighton-hove.gov.uk 01273 290729) for necessary highway approval from the Highway Authority prior to any works commencing on the adopted highway to satisfy the requirements of the condition.
5. The applicant is advised that advice regarding permeable and porous hardsurfaces can be found in the Department of Communities and Local Government document 'Guidance on the permeable surfacing of front gardens' which can be accessed on the DCLG website (www.communities.gov.uk).
6. Where possible, bee bricks should be placed in a south facing wall in a sunny location at least 1 metre above ground level.
7. Swift bricks/boxes can be placed on any elevation, but ideally under shade- casting eaves. They should be installed in groups of at least three, at a height above 5m height, and preferably with a 5m clearance between the host building and other buildings or obstructions. Where possible avoid siting them above windows or doors. Swift bricks should be used unless these are not practical due to the nature of construction, in which case alternative designs of suitable swift boxes should be provided in their place.
8. It is advised that the updated AMS should be specifically tailored to the development proposed,and should specify detailed information on both tree and ground protection measures which should be conducive to heavy plant access within the RPA. Any excavation works within the RPA should only to be undertaken with direct arboricultural supervision.
2. SITE LOCATION
2.1. The application relates to a two-storey detached property on the eastern side of Woodland Drive, on the southern side of the junction with Benett Avenue. Benett Avenue slopes upwards from Woodland Drive to the east, where it meets Benett Drive.
3. RELEVANT HISTORY
3.1. BH2020/01039 - Erection of 1no two storey detached dwellinghouse (C3) incorporating new vehicular crossover and associated landscaping. Refused The reason for refusal was:
"The proposed dwelling, by reason of its height, bulk, flat roof form, materiality and detailing would be in stark contrast with and relate poorly to the adjacent properties and local context. The proposed plot size would be uncharacteristically small and narrow for the surrounding area. The proposal would therefore be of a cramped and incongruous appearance that would harm the character and appearance of the streetscene and wider area, failing to raise the standard of architecture within the city and contrary to Policy CP12 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One."
3.2. BH2015/00639 - Certificate of lawfulness for proposed erection of outbuilding, creation of hard standing, removal of wall and insertion of timber gate to rear of property. Refused.
3.3. BH2014/03358 - Erection of 1no two bedroom dwelling with off street parking accessed from Bennett Avenue. Refused, appeal dismissed.
3.4. BH2013/04035 - Erection of 1no three bedroom dwelling with off-street parking accessed from Benett Avenue. Refused.
3.5. BH2003/01916/FP - Replacement of boundary fence with brick built boundary wall to Benett Avenue elevation. Approved.
4. APPLICATION DESCRIPTION
4.1. Planning permission is sought for the subdivision of the plot and the erection of a single-storey detached dwelling (C3), incorporating a new vehicle crossover and landscaping. The proposed dwelling would front onto, and form a part of, Benett Avenue.
5. REPRESENTATIONS
5.1. Thirteen (13) letters have been received, objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:
· Additional traffic
· Overdevelopment
· Poor design
· Loss of privacy
· Excavation could impact stability of earth
· Damage to trees
· Undersized garden
· Inaccuracies in submitted planning statement
· Errors on drawings
5.2. Seven (7) letters have been received, supporting the proposal for the following reasons:
· Good design
· Provides more housing in area
· Responded to previous reasons for refusal
5.3. Councillor Brown has objected to the application, a copy of this correspondence is attached to this report.
6. CONSULTATIONS
6.1. Arboriculture: Comment
Significant concerns are held regarding the impact of the development (including excavation and plant movements) on the high value street tree directly outside the site, which is now subject to a TPO.
6.2. If consent is granted, an updated Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) should be secured by condition prior to commencement.
6.3. East Sussex Fire & Rescue: No comment received
6.4. Sustainable Transport: No objection
No objection subject to conditions relating to porous hard surface materials, a crossover licence, the retention of the parking area, and the submission of cycle parking details.
6.5. Environmental Health: No comment received
7. MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
7.1. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, this decision has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in the National Planning Policy Framework, the Development Plan, and all other material planning considerations identified in the "Considerations and Assessment" section of the report
7.2. The development plan is:
· Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One (adopted March 2016)
· Brighton & Hove Local Plan 2005 (retained policies March 2016);
· East Sussex, South Downs and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Plan (adopted February 2013);
· East Sussex, South Downs and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Sites Plan (adopted February 2017);
· Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan (adopted October 2019);
7.3. Due weight has been given to the relevant retained policies in the Brighton & Hove Local Plan 2005 according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF.
8. POLICIES
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
Brighton & Hove City Plan Part 2
Policies in the Proposed Submission City Plan Part 2 do not carry full statutory weight but are gathering weight as the Plan proceeds through its stages. They provide an indication of the direction of future policy. Since 23 April 2020, when the Plan was agreed for submission to the Secretary of State, it has gained weight for the determination of planning applications but any greater weight to be given to individual policies will need to await the outcome of the Regulation 19 consultation which ended on the 30 October 2020.
Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One
SS1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
CP1 Housing delivery
CP8 Sustainable buildings
CP9 Sustainable transport
CP10 Biodiversity
CP12 Urban design
CP13 Public streets and spaces
CP14 Housing density
CP16 Open space
CP19 Housing mix
Brighton and Hove Local Plan (retained policies March 2016):
TR7 Safe Development
TR14 Cycle access and parking
SU10 Noise Nuisance
QD14 Extensions and alterations
QD15 Landscape design
QD16 Trees and hedgerows
QD18 Species protection
QD27 Protection of amenity
HO5 Provision of private amenity space in residential development
HO13 Accessible housing and lifetime homes
Supplementary Planning Documents:
SPD03 Construction & Demolition Waste
SPD06 Trees & Development Sites
SPD11 Nature Conservation & Development
SPD12 Design Guide for Extensions and Alterations
SPD14 Parking Standards
9. CONSIDERATIONS & ASSESSMENT
9.1. The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the principle of the development, the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling and the impact of the proposal on neighbouring amenity. The standard of accommodation to be provided, transport and sustainability are also material considerations.
9.2. The City Plan Part 1 Inspector's Report was received in February 2016. The Inspector's conclusions on housing were to agree the target of 13,200 new homes for the city until 2030 as a minimum requirement. It is against this minimum housing requirement that the City's five year housing land supply position is assessed annually.
9.3. The council's most recent housing land supply position published in the SHLAA Update 2019 shows a five year housing supply shortfall of 1,200 (equivalent to 4.0 years of housing supply). As the council is currently unable to demonstrate a five year housing land supply, increased weight should be given to housing delivery when considering the planning balance in the determination of planning applications, in line with the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF (paragraph 11).
Principle of Development:
9.4. The site is located within an established residential area, in which new residential uses are generally acceptable in principle. The proposal would result in the provision of 1no additional housing unit which would make a contribution to the housing supply of the city at a time when the LPA is unable to demonstrate a five-year housing supply, and this is given increased weight in accordance with the "tilted balance" in favour of housing delivery.
9.5. The current application follows several previous refused applications for a new dwelling on the site, including BH2020/01039 and the earlier BH2014/03358 which was also dismissed at appeal.
9.6. The officer for BH2014/03358 found the subdivision of the plot to be unacceptable in principle, due in part to the small size of the created plot appearing out of character and counter to the established urban grain of the area. In deciding the subsequent appeal, the Inspector did not find the plot size itself to be harmful, with the appeal dismissed due to the design of the dwelling and the quantum of outdoor amenity space. The narrow plot width was, instead, only considered to exacerbate the harm caused by the incongruous design of the dwelling.
9.7. The reason for refusal of the more recent BH2020/01039 (which has not been appealed) included reference to the plot size, however similarly to the appeal decision for BH2014/03358 this was cited in combination with significant concerns regarding the proposed design.
9.8. As such, whilst it remains considered that the proposed plot size is considerably smaller than is typical for the surrounding area, subject to the design of the dwelling (and all other material considerations) being acceptable and in view of the need for additional housing in the city, the plot size itself would not, on balance, be considered to constitute a sound reason for refusal which would likely be successful at a subsequent appeal.
9.9. It is further noted that the currently proposed plot size is slightly enlarged since the 2014 refusal, at approx. 230sqm with a frontage width of approx. 10m compared to the previously proposed 210sqm at a frontage width of approx. 9m.
9.10. As such, in view of the previous appeal decision and the need for additional housing in the city, the proposal is considered acceptable in principle, subject to an assessment of other material considerations as below.
Design and Appearance:
9.11. The proposed dwelling would be viewed as part of the Benett Avenue streetscene, which on the southern side is comprised of a row of bungalows of uniform appearance with near-identical roof forms. The matching design of these bungalows is not limited to Benett Avenue, extending for some distance along the southern side of Benett Drive. The consistency in the roof forms of these bungalows give a strong sense of rhythm to the streetscene.
9.12. The design of the proposed dwelling is markedly different than for the previous refused application. The dwelling would be single-storey with a hipped roof and projecting front hip similar to the neighbouring bungalows. The dwelling would be in facing brick with a tiled roof. The design has been amended since initially submitted to reduce the roof pitch to better match the neighbouring bungalows and immediate streetscene.
9.13. It is considered that the proposed design, as amended, has successfully overcome the reason for refusal of BH2020/01039 and the Inspector's design concerns regarding BH2014/03358. Whilst the design would not be a facsimile of the existing bungalows, it would nevertheless be in keeping with the streetscene and would not disrupt the rhythm of the bungalows. The building would appear as a single-storey with a hipped roof, follow the front building line, be in appropriate materials (of which final details can be secured by condition), and would reference design features of the neighbouring bungalows. Following amendments, the eaves and ridge heights would follow the downwards sloping ground levels. As noted by the previous Inspector, that the building would occupy the majority of the width of the plot would not be out of keeping with the neighbouring bungalows which occupy a similar proportion of their respective plot widths.
9.14. It is therefore considered that the design of the proposed dwelling would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the area and would be in accordance with Policy CP12 of the CPP1. A condition is recommended to require the submission of a scheme for landscaping and boundary treatments.
Impact on Amenity:
9.15. Policy QD27 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan states that planning permission for any development or change of use will not be granted where it would cause material nuisance and loss of amenity to the proposed, existing and/or adjacent users, residents, occupiers or where it is liable to be detrimental to human health.
9.16. Whilst the provision of an additional residential unit would be likely to result in some increase in noise disturbance due to increased activity on the site, such activity would be domestic in nature which would be compatible with the residential character of the area. Given the two-bedroom scale of the proposed dwelling, any increase is unlikely to be of such significant a degree as to warrant the refusal of the application.
9.17. Existing boundary treatments include high, thick hedge-like planting on the south-east (side) and north-east (front) boundaries of the proposed site.
9.18. Given this existing planting and the lower ground level of the proposed plot, the proposed building would be unlikely to result in an increase in overshadowing or overbearing impact on the side-facing windows of the neighbour at no. 8 Benett Avenue compared to the existing arrangement. The proposal would be sufficiently spaced from no. 7 Woodland Drive to avoid overshadowing or loss of light towards that property.
9.19. The removal of the rear part of the planting raises the potential for overlooking from the rear of the proposed dwelling. No side-facing windows are proposed towards no. 8 Benett Avenue, and whilst some overlooking into the rear garden may be possible, this would be from a ground floor vantage and would not be to a greater degree than is to be reasonably expected in a residential area. The concerns raised by an objector to the scheme are noted, however particular lifestyle choices of residents are not material planning considerations.
9.20. An obscure-glazed side-facing window is proposed towards no. 7 Woodland Drive, serving a shower room. This would not result in harmful overlooking.
9.21. The steps giving access to the rear garden would not be likely to be in intensive use due to the relatively small width and depth limiting space for furniture and so is unlikely to be a significant source of noise disturbance or overlooking.
Standard of Accommodation:
9.22. The proposed dwelling would have a total area of approx. 131sqm, spread over the ground floor and a lower ground floor (not visible from the street). the ground floor would contain an open-plan kitchen/living area with a separate dining room. The two bedrooms would be on the lower ground floor and would each be approx. 13.8sqm in area, with access to separate dressing rooms and en-suites.
9.23. Each habitable room would be of a regular layout providing space for furniture and circulation. Access to natural light and outlook would be acceptable for the rooms on the ground floor, and whilst this would be somewhat limited for the bedrooms on the lower ground floor, the large windows and external excavation would nevertheless allow an acceptable level of natural light and outlook for these bedrooms.
9.24. Although not adopted policy, the Government's Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS) provide a useful indication as to the suitability of a proposed dwelling. The proposal exceeds the minimum area of 79sqm for a comparable two-bedroom, four-person, two-storey dwelling set out in the NDSS.
9.25. The proposal includes a rear garden area of approx. 76sqm. Although this is smaller than proposed under BH2020/01039, and considerably smaller than other rear gardens in the area, the proposed garden remains larger than that considered to be unacceptable by the Inspector and is considered sufficient for the scale of dwelling proposed and not to warrant the refusal of the application.
Arboriculture:
9.26. The initial comments of the Council's Arboriculture team raised concerns regarding the impact of the development (including due to plant movements during construction and excavation for the lower ground floor) on the high-value street tree directly outside the site. This tree is now subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) affording it statutory protection.
9.27. In response to the Arboriculture comments, a Tree Survey and Arboriculture Outline Method Statement (AOMS) were submitted by the applicant and have been reviewed by the Council's Arboriculture team.
9.28. The Arboriculture team considered that, whilst the new development and construction of is, in principle, possible without harming the tree, there were several concerns with the detail of the submitted AOMS, including that the AOMS did not sufficiently address the excavation and heavy plant movements within the RPA necessary to accommodate the lower ground floor and driveway. The RPA shown within the submission was also considered to be misleading.
9.29. An updated Arboriculture Method Statement (AMS) will therefore be secured by condition, prior to the commencement of the development. The updated AMS should be specifically tailored to the development proposed and should provide detailed information on both tree and ground protection measures which should be conducive to heavy plant access within the RPA. Any excavation works within the RPA should only to be undertaken with direct arboricultural supervision. This will ensure that the construction process does not cause unacceptable harm to the tree.
Sustainable Transport:
9.30. The proposal is unlikely to result in a significant increase in trip generation.
9.31. The proposal includes a cycle store however there is a lack of detail and so further details will be secured by condition.
9.32. The proposal includes 1no car parking space, in accordance with SPD14 standards. The site is located within Controlled Parking Zone P which has a permit uptake rate of 22%. It is therefore not considered necessary to remove future occupiers' rights to car parking permits.
9.33. The proposed crossover would not result in a danger to highway safety. Conditions are recommended to ensure the crossover is constructed prior to occupation of the dwelling, and that all hard surfaces are porous and/or permeable.
Sustainability:
9.34. Suitably worded conditions are recommended to ensure the dwelling meets energy and water efficiency standards in accordance with Policy CP8 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One.
Other Considerations:
9.35. Suitably worded conditions are recommended to require the incorporation of a bee brick and a three swift bricks within the development.
9.36. In view of the ongoing COVID-19 travel restrictions and in lieu of a site visit, photos of the site have been obtained from the applicant.
9.37. It is considered that in order to prevent harm to the character and appearance of the area and neighbouring amenity, any future extensions and alterations will need to be carried out in a considered manner. It is therefore recommended to remove permitted development rights for the dwelling.
Conclusion:
9.38. In view of the need for additional housing and the findings of the previous Inspector, the proposed development is, on balance, considered to be acceptable in principle. The proposed design is considered to have responded positively to the reasons for refusal of the previous applications and is considered acceptable. No significant concerns are held regarding the impact upon neighbouring amenity and standard of accommodation to be provided. Arboriculture, transport, sustainability and ecological matters can be satisfactorily addressed through suitably worded conditions. Approval is therefore recommended.
10. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
10.1. Under the Regulations of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 2010 (as amended), Brighton & Hove City Council adopted its CIL on 23 July 2020 and began charging on all CIL liable planning applications on and from the 5 October 2020. It is estimated that the amount of CIL liability for this application is £22,925.00. The exact amount will be confirmed in the CIL liability notice which will be issued as soon as it practicable after the issuing of planning permission.
11. EQUALITIES
None identified