Rottingdean Coastal Ward

App Type:

Householder Planning Consent



11 Arundel Drive West Saltdean Brighton BN2 8SJ    



Roof alterations incorporating hip to gable extension and raising of ridge height, 11no rooflights to front, rear and side slopes, revised fenestration, demolition of existing conservatories and associated alterations.




Steven Dover, tel:

Valid Date:



Con Area:


Expiry Date: 



Listed Building Grade:  N/A




Archangels ARCHITECTS Ltd   3 Dorset Place    Brighton   BN2 1ST                 


Justine and Peter Crawley   11 Arundel Drive West   Saltdean   Brighton   BN2 8SJ              




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:



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



Date Received

Proposed Drawing


14 January 2021

Proposed Drawing


14 January 2021

Location and block plan


14 January 2021


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 development of the works here by approved 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 zinc roofing to be used, including details of seaming,                             thickness and colour.

            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 policies QD14 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the    Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.


4          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. 


5          No extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwellinghouse as provided    for within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes B and C 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.



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          Where possible, bee bricks should be placed in a south facing wall in a sunny      location at least 1 metre above ground level.



2.               SITE LOCATION 


2.1.          The application relates to a single storey detached bungalow located on the western side of Arundel Drive West. The area has an eclectic mix of styles and sizes of housing comprised of modest single storey bungalows and two storey houses. To the north lies a higher two storey detached house. To the south is public highway (Abbotsbury Close) and then two and three storey houses. To the west (rear) are the rear of two-storey detached properties which front onto Chichester Drive West; these properties are elevated and overlook the application site. 



3.               RELEVANT HISTORY 


3.1.          The application site has no planning history.


15 Arundel Drive West  

3.2.          BH2016/05772 - Remodelling of existing bungalow including erection of additional storey incorporating rooflights with garage and porch extension to front elevation. Approved 01/03/2007





4.1.          Planning permission is sought for roof alterations incorporating hip to gable extension and raising of ridge height, 11no rooflights to front, rear and side slopes, revised fenestration, demolition of existing conservatories and associated alterations.



5.               REPRESENTATIONS 


5.1.          Seven  (7) total received comprising five (5) unique letters, one (1) repeat letter and one (1) discounted letter have been received objecting  to the proposed development on the following grounds:  

·      Height

·      Amenity harm

·      Overshadowing

·      Overdevelopment 

·      Would affect views

·      Poor design

·      Impact on Listed Building


5.2.          As five valid objections have been received, the application can no longer be determined under delegated powers and is referred to Planning Committee for a decision.


5.3.          The repeat letter, and letter discounted due to distance from the proposed development, have both been considered in the assessment of the application, but are not counted in the total needed to trigger determination by planning committee.



6.               CONSULTATIONS  






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.               RELEVANT POLICIES 


The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 


Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One 

SS1              Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development


Brighton & Hove Local Plan (retained policies March 2016): 

QD14           Extensions and alterations

QD27           Protection of Amenity

CP10            Biodiversity


Brighton & Hove City Plan Part Two 

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. The weight given to the relevant CPP2 policies considered in determining this application is set out in the Considerations and Assessment section below where applicable.


DM20           Protection of Amenity 

DM21           Extensions and alterations 


Supplementary Planning Documents: 

SPD12         Design Guide for Extensions and Alterations

SPD11         Nature Conservation & Development





9.1.          The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the impact of the proposed development on the appearance and character of the building and the wider area; and the impact on the amenities of adjacent occupiers.  


Design and Appearance 

9.2.          The remodelling of the existing bungalow would see a change in form, creating a larger property that is extended in height, with a very contemporary appearance. It is recognised, and has been pointed out in various objections, that the bulk and massing would increase over the existing dwelling. The proposal would also remove existing small front and rear extensions which would not be replaced but are proposed as terraced areas.


9.3.          The property currently comprises a L shaped hipped form of roof. The proposed gable roof would improve the appearance of the host building, offering a more integrated design, with the increased glazing creating a more contemporary façade. Gable roofed properties are in close proximity, such as neighbouring No.13 to the side and No.4 & No.6 Chichester Drive West to the rear, it would therefore be in keeping. The proposed works would not extend the building any further towards the rear or front boundary. 


9.4.          The raising of the ridge height, together with the increase in the bulk of the roof, would increase the prominence of the building. However, its overall height would only increase by approximately 1 metre, and it would still be lower than  surrounding properties and development in the area so is considered to be in keeping. 


9.5.          The new elevations, although very different from the existing, are also taking cues from forms of development in the area, mixing established with modern design and this approach is supported. The area has no predominant design style and form with an eclectic mix of one and two storey properties with varying forms of roof, elevational material and colour.


9.6.          The footprint of the property would not increase and would involve the removal of small extensions to the front and rear which are considered to improve the overall appearance, with the creation of clearer less articulated elevations. The terrace created to the front elevation, after removal of the extension, is considered in keeping with proposed design.


9.7.          The amount of rooflights would increase over the existing and such a number would not normally be acceptable, but as the existing property already has a substantial number and the design seeks to reduce the perceived degree of overlooking and need for rear dormers by utilising rooflights to allow light into the additional accommodation created, it is considered the number proposed would not to warrant refusal on this occasion. 


9.8.          The proposed works would be constructed in brick with white painted render. The new roof would be finished in seamed zinc of a grey colour. The new fenestration would be aluminium and finished in a grey colour.  The new rooflights would be low profile. The materials are considered acceptable and would not appear incongruous. The surrounding area has a mixture of material finishes and styles with the use of brick, timber and render for elevations, of varying colours from white to black. The surrounding roof finishes are predominantly tiled, with brown, red and green colours. The fenestrations in the streetscene are varied with a white, brown and black upvc of mixed styles and the occasional black timber leaded window. The proposed works materials and colour would therefore complement the existing varied streetscene and cause no disruption. The full details of the materials and final forms would be conditioned to be provided prior to commencement of the proposed works.


9.9.          The existing building offers little architectural merit and its retention as existing is not considered necessary. The remodelled property would not appear incongruous or disruptive through design or form in the existing varied streetscene. The proposal is not considered to be out of keeping of development in the wider area. 


9.10.       Some comments received have raised that the proposed design would have an adverse impact on the Grade II* Listed Saltdean Lido. Due to the distances involved and the visibility the proposed works, the application is not considered to have any detrimental impact on the setting of the Saltdean Lido. 


9.11.       Therefore, the proposed extensions and works are considered to be a suitable addition to the building that would not harm its appearance or that of the wider area, in accordance with policy QD14 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan, Policy DM21 of CPP2,  and SPD12 guidance.  


Impact on Amenity 

9.12.       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. 


9.13.       The position of the extensions and new roof design, although increasing the amount of fenestration, would not lead to substantially increased overlooking or harm to the privacy of neighbouring properties. The new front facing fenestration would only overlook front gardens and open space, limiting any harm to private amenity. The new side windows on the north elevation are located at ground level and provide no substantial views. The new rear ground floor windows are not considered to provide vantages and overlooking in excess of that already existing or what would normally be expected from residential gardens in this area


9.14.       The new rear rooflights windows increase the opportunity of elevated overlooking of neighbouring properties, however due to the relatively small-scale skyward facing windows - serving only bedrooms and bathrooms, with a degree of mutual overlooking already existing, no substantial harm to privacy is expected.


9.15.       The new terrace on the front elevation is small scale, located at ground level and is replicated by other properties in close proximity, due to this and the location adjacent to highway not abutting surrounding properties, the terrace is considered to cause no significant harm to amenity.


9.16.       The raising of the roof height and new form would lead to a small reduction in the view for the properties that occupy Chichester Drive West to the rear, who have submitted the majority of objections to this scheme. However, a right to a view and retention of the same is not a material consideration in the determination of this application. 


9.17.       The proposed works would have no overbearing or overshadowing effects to the properties to the rear, due to the distances involved and the elevated position of these properties in comparison to No.11 Arundel Drive West. The neighbouring property to the side No.13 would see an increase in the bulk and massing to their southern boundary, with the proposed gable end having the most impact. However, any overbearing effects are not considered to cause substantial harm due the continued separation between the properties and raising of the roof being only 1 metre. Any overshadowing effects would appear to be contained to midday with morning and afternoon largely unaffected, from an assessment of the plans, and therefore not considered to cause such harm to warrant refusal.


9.18.       Therefore, it is not considered that the proposed extension and works would cause any significant harm to amenity, in accordance with Policy QD27 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and Policy DM20 of CPP2.  


Other Matters 

9.19.       A condition requiring a bee brick has been attached to improve ecology outcomes on the site in accordance with the Policy CP10 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and Supplementary Planning Document SPD11 Nature Conservation and Development.    


9.20.       To ensure that the appearance of the host property is maintained and to limit any potential impacts on amenity, permitted development rights for additions and alterations to the roof would be removed (Classes B & C), which would enable the LPA to fully assess and control any further works to the roof. A condition would be attached to that effect.


9.21.       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, which, along with aerial photographs and other material, is considered sufficient for a robust recommendation to be made by officers. 



9.22.       The proposed development is considered to enhance the host property and bring improvements to the streetscene. No significant harm to neighbouring amenity is identified. Approval is therefore recommended.





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 £0, due to the residential extension exemption submitted. 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