|
No: |
BH2021/01326 |
Ward: |
Hove Park Ward |
||
|
App Type: |
Full Planning |
|
|||
|
Address: |
39 Dyke Road Avenue Hove BN3 6QA |
|
|||
|
Proposal: |
Erection of part one, part two storey rear extension with glazed link and associated works to provide an additional 10no. bedrooms to existing care home. |
|
|||
|
Officer: |
Helen Hobbs, tel: 290585 |
Valid Date: |
12.04.2021 |
|
|
|
Con Area: |
Tongdean |
Expiry Date: |
07.06.2021 |
||
|
Listed Building Grade: |
|||||
|
EOT: |
|
||||
|
Agent: |
Dowsettmayhew Planning Mocatta House Trafalgar Place Brighton BN1 4DU |
||||
|
Applicant: |
Oaklands Care Hove Ltd C/O Dowsettmayhew Planning 63A Ship Street Brighton BN1 1AE |
||||
|
|
|||||
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 |
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601-109B |
10 June 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601-107C |
10 June 2021 |
|
|
Location Plan |
C0601- 100A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Block Plan |
C0601 - 107A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 132A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 108A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 130A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 131A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 135A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 136A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 137A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601 - 140A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 145A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 146A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 147A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 148A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 149A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 150A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
C0601- 155A |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
RCO373 / 01 01 |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
RCO373 / 02 00 |
12 April 2021 |
|
|
Proposed Drawing |
RCO373 / 03 00 |
12 April 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 above ground floor slab level of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until samples/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) samples/details of all brick, render and tiling (including details of the colour of render/paintwork to be used)
b) samples/details of all hard surfacing materials
c) samples/details of the proposed window, door and balcony treatments
d) 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 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 and CP15 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
4. The landscaping scheme detailed on drawing no. RCO373/0101 and RCO373/0200 received on 12/04/2021 shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the building/use hereby permitted or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policies QD15 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 and CP13 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
5. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced (including demolition and all preparatory work) until the protection measures identified in the submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment received on the 12/04/2021 are in place and retained throughout the construction process. The fences shall be erected in accordance with British Standard BS5837 (2012) Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations and shall be retained until the completion of the development and no vehicles, plant or materials shall be driven or placed within the areas enclosed by such fences.
Reason: As this matter is fundamental to protecting the trees which are to be retained on 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.
6. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the cycle parking facilities shown on the approved plans have been fully implemented and made available for use. The cycle parking facilities shall thereafter be retained for use by the occupants of, and visitors to, the development 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 first occupied until details of dedicated disabled car parking provision for the occupants of, and visitors to, the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme 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 the development provides for the needs of disabled staff and visitors to the site and to comply with policy TR18 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and SPD14: Parking Standards.
8. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted a bee brick shall be incorporated within the external wall of the development 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.
9. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted 11 swift bricks/boxes shall be incorporated within the external walls of the development 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.
10. Within 6 months of first occupation of the development hereby permitted a BREEAM Building Research Establishment issued Post Construction Review Certificate confirming that the non-residential development built has achieved a minimum BREEAM New Construction rating of 'Very Good' shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the development is sustainable and makes efficient use of energy, water and materials and to comply with policy CP8 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
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. Where possible, bee bricks should be placed in a south facing wall in a sunny location at least 1 metre above ground level.
3. 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 where appropriate.
4. The applicant is advised that details of the BREEAM assessment tools and a list of approved assessors can be obtained from the BREEAM websites (www.breeam.org).
2. SITE LOCATION
2.1. The application relates to a large two-storey detached property currently in use as a 20 bed care home for the elderly. The building is situated in the Tongdean Conservation Area and the plot is subject to a Tree Protection Order.
3. RELEVANT HISTORY
3.1. BH2019/03379 Erection of part one part two storey rear extension to facilitate three new blocks on existing care home. Refused 8 January 2020 for the following reason:
The proposed extension, due to its excessive scale and massing, would not be subservient to the existing building and would result in the overdevelopment of the site which would be inappropriate and fail to preserve or enhance the Tongdean Conservation Area which is characterised by large plots with trees. Furthermore, the public benefits of the proposed development do not outweigh the harm identified. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies QD14 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.
3.2. BH2017/03152 Erection of part one part two storey rear extension to facilitate three new blocks on existing care home. Refused 02/08/2018. Appeal Dismissed. Refused for the following reasons:
1) The proposed extension would not be subservient to the existing building and would result in the overdevelopment of the site which would be inappropriate and fail to preserve or enhance the Tongdean Conservation Area which is characterised by large plots with trees, contrary to policies QD14 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One. The benefits of the proposed development do not outweigh the harm caused.
2) The proposed extension would adversely impact on the two horse chestnut trees on the adjoining site to the north west, contrary to policies QD16 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan The benefits of the proposed development do not outweigh the harm caused.
4. PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE
4.1. PRE2020/00280 Response summary, following a complete re-design of the proposal after previous refusal and pre-application response:
· At the meeting the history of the site was discussed and it was acknowledged that the main concern of the previous schemes have related to the scale and design of the extension. This response therefore centres the design considerations of the development;
· The design approach is considered a significant improvement on previous schemes;
· The scale of the extension remains similar to previously refused schemes, although it is noted that some of the massing would be less visible from the public vantage points within the conservation area and its relationship with the main building has been significantly improved;
· The previous appeal decision for the 2017 remains a relevant consideration of any future application in which the Inspector dismissed the appeal due to the impact of the extension on the conservation area and the overdevelopment of the plot.
4.2. PRE2020/00032 Response Summary;
· The previously refused application established that the main concern of the proposal related to scale and design of the extension;
· The recent appeal decision gave limited weight to the additional bed spaces being created and any public benefit gained from the proposal, stating that it would not outweigh the harm to the conservation area.
· The current proposal is still considered overly large and poorly designed
5. APPLICATION DESCRIPTION
5.1. Erection of part-one, part two-storey rear extension with glazed link and associated works to provide an additional 10no. bedrooms to an existing care home.
6. REPRESENTATIONS
6.1. Five (5) letters have been received objecting to the proposed development for the following reasons:
· Loss of view
· Noise disturbance
· Overdevelopment
· Design
· Commercial nature of the premises
· Impact on traffic
· Increase in parking
· Overlooking
· Overshadowing
· Overbearing
· Loss of privacy
· Overlooking
· Impact on wildlife and flora
· Impact on conservation area
7. CONSULTATIONS
7.1. Arboriculture: Comment
No objections to the proposal. Clarification required on two points;
· Ground protection - the proposed scaffold boards are acceptable, however these should be required to be lain over geotextile with a minimum of 100mm of compacted wood chip / bark
· Decompaction treatment needs clarification, ie terravent etc
7.2. With those confirmed and included within the submission there would be no arboricultural objection, the standard conditions would be sufficient.
7.3. Brighton and Hove Archaeological Society No objections
7.4. County Archaeologist No objections
7.5. Heritage: Comment: Summary: Design is greatly improved but some reservations regarding the scale and site coverage remain. The evolution of this scheme has resulted in undoubted improvements to the design of the proposed extension, however the degree to which the site coverage impacts the original generous provision of garden space for this property is still considered to result in harm to the character of the conservation area. This harm would be considered to be less than substantial, however it remains necessary for any public benefits resulting from this proposal to be balanced against this harm.
7.6. Sustainable Transport: Comment: Summary: The proposal would not have a severe impact on the transport network. Clarification needed regarding car parking and cycle storage. [Note: applicant has now provided drawings of cycle storage, and has confirmed no additional car parking spaces are proposed.]
7.7. No trip generation information has been submitted as part of this application. In the absence of this information we have undertaken our own trip rate assessment using TRICS. The extension of the care home could generate an additional 30 two-way daily vehicle movements with 3 two-way vehicle movements in the AM peak and 2 two-way vehicle movements in the PM peak. Therefore, we would not consider the development to have a severe impact on the highway and surrounding transport network in this instance.
7.8. Southern Water: Comment:
The applicant has not stated details of means of disposal of foul drainage from the site. Southern Water requires a formal application for any connection to the public foul sewer to be made by the applicant or developer.
8. MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
8.1. 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
8.2. 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 JAAP (adopted October 2019).
8.3. 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.
9. POLICIES
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One
SS1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
CP8 Sustainable buildings
CP9 Sustainable transport
CP10 Biodiversity
CP12 Urban design
CP15 Heritage
Brighton and Hove Local Plan (retained policies March 2016):
TR7 Safe Development
TR14 Cycle access and parking
QD5 Design - street frontages
QD14 Extensions and alterations
QD15 Landscape design
QD16 Trees and hedgerows
QD18 Species protection
QD27 Protection of amenity
HO20 Retention of community facilities
HE6 Development within or affecting the setting of conservation areas
Supplementary Planning Documents:
SPD03 Construction & Demolition Waste
SPD06 Trees & Development Sites
SPD09 Architectural Features
SPD11 Nature Conservation & Development
SPD12 Design Guide for Extensions and Alterations
SPD14 Parking Standards
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. 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.
DM4 Housing and accommodation for older persons
DM18 High quality design and places
DM19 Maximising Development Potential
DM20 Protection of Amenity
DM21 Extensions and alterations
DM22 Landscape Design and Trees
DM26 Conservation Areas
DM33 Safe, Sustainable and Active Travel
DM36 Parking and servicing
DM40 Protection of the Environment and Health - Pollution and Nuisance
DM44 Energy Efficiency and Renewables
10. CONSIDERATIONS & ASSESSMENT
Executive Summary:
10.1. The scheme is considered to be a significant improvement on the previous proposals and would not cause substantial harm to the character and appearance of the existing property, streetscenes or the surrounding conservation area. The benefits of additional specialist care home provision are a positive of the scheme which balance against any limited harm to the conservation area. Residential amenity would not be compromised. The proposal would have limited impact in terms of transport. The proposal would be sustainable and valuable trees would be protected.
Main Considerations:
10.2. The main considerations relating to the application are the principle of the development, the design and appearance of the proposal on the surrounding Tongdean Conservation Area, the impact of the extension upon neighbouring amenity, the standard of accommodation proposed, the impact on trees and transport issues.
Background:
10.3. The application relates to a two-storey detached property on Dyke Road Avenue. The property is Edwardian, built in 1901 with Old English vernacular consisting of red brick, tile hanging and half-timbering, with stone mullions and dressings to some windows. The building is situated within the Tongdean Conservation Area, and is described in the Tongdean Character Statement as the 'most notable of the surviving Edwardian houses', albeit the property is not listed. The plot is subject to a Tree Protection Order.
10.4. The property is currently in use as Oaklands Care Home for the elderly (use class C2) providing 22 bedspaces. Planning permission is sought for the erection of a part single-, part two-storey rear extension to the northwest of the site, facilitating 15 bedrooms. Some of the existing bedrooms would be converted to communal space or additional bathrooms within the main building, therefore resulting in a net gain of 10 new bedrooms.
10.5. The site has had a number of refused applications, the first of which (BH2017/03152) was refused on 18/07/2018 and subsequently dismissed at planning appeal for failing to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Tongdean Conservation Area (appeal ref: APP/Q1445/W/18/3214431).
10.6. The Inspector stated on the 2017 application that "The proposal would be viewed as an unduly dominant and bulky addition, which would detract from the character and appearance of the host property. The applicant submitted a Care Needs Assessment Document with the 2017 application setting out the need for the additional care home accommodation. The Inspector concluded however that 'Whilst additional accommodation for elderly residents would constitute a public benefit, including for primary care services, it can only be afforded limited weight…the appeal premises do not appear more suitable than any other less sensitive site. The appeal scheme would also generate additional employment opportunities locally. However, these public benefits would be clearly outweighed by the harm which the proposal would cause to the Tongdean Conservation Area."
10.7. Whilst the subsequent 2019 (refused) application had reduced the scale and overall floor area and had altered the design, these did not fully address the concerns of the appeal Inspector. The present application, therefore, seeks to overcome those concerns and has resulted from significant pre-application advice.
Principle of Care Home Use and Standard of Accommodation:
10.8. The site is an existing care home located in a residential area. The principle of an extension is supported, to allow a more efficient use of the site.
10.9. The application would allow for the provision of a net gain of 10 bedrooms in the property. All of the new rooms would have en-suite bathrooms and access to natural light and outlook. The floorspace of the new rooms measure approximately 20m². The proposed bedrooms would have a good amount of circulation space.
10.10. Policy HO11 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan seeks to secure appropriate amenity space for residents and states that the amount of amenity space should allow 25m² per resident, although a lower standard would be accepted for care homes where residents are less mobile. In this instance, the communal areas are being extended within the existing ground floor layout and a garden room is being provided within the proposed extension. The communal areas would total more than 120m2 and therefore would be acceptable for the proposed number of occupants.
10.11. It is noted that the proposed extension would consume a large area of the existing garden. It is however considered that the remaining garden area would allow for sufficient amenity space for residents in this instance, in accordance with Policy HO11.
10.12. In light of the above, overall the proposed layout is considered to represent a good standard of accommodation for residents.
10.13. Emerging policy DM4 (Housing and Accommodation for the Elderly) in City Plan Part Two is considered to hold significant weight and will replace policy HO11. DM4 seeks to ensure there is a sufficient supply and range of housing and accommodation suitable for older people and is underpinned by the Older People's Housing Needs Assessment which includes projections of need for specialist housing and accommodation for older people in Brighton & Hove over the period to 2030 and beyond. The study recommends that to meet the full range of needs of older people, it will be necessary to plan for a mix of housing and care models, including specialised housing for older people that will cater for growing number of people living with dementia and complex care needs, including hybrid housing and nursing care models that can cater for people living with dementia and other complex care needs to end of life.
10.14. On the basis of the above, the provision of additional specialist care beds is welcomed.
Design and Appearance:
10.15. When considering whether to grant planning permission for development in a conservation area the council has a statutory duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area. Case law has held that the desirability of preserving the character or appearance of a conservation area must be given "considerable importance and weight".
10.16. The current scheme follows detailed pre-application advice on a scheme that has been significantly re-designed since the previous refusals. The design of the proposed extension, whilst still large in scale, integrates far better with the main building due to the detailing, roof forms and use of materials.
10.17. The maximum depth of the extension would be 34m, projecting from the rear building line of the existing building. Whilst this is a similar depth to the previously-refused proposals, significant changes have been made to the design to reduce mass and bulk, particularly along the northern boundary and at second floor level.
10.18. The extension is divided into three blocks which would step down in height as well as step in away from the side boundary to reduce the visibility of the proposal from the road and other public vantage points. The tallest block would measure 8.9m in height, the central block 8.4m in height and the single storey block 4.5m. The extension would be connected to the main building by a glass link extension which would integrates far better than previous proposals.
10.19. The Heritage Officer raised concern over the proposed scale of the extension at pre-application stage. The applicant has provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate why the additional bedrooms are required, and the room sizes have been reviewed to ensure that they would provide suitable accommodation without extending the building more than is required. As a result the proposed extension has been slightly reduced since that proposed at pre-application stage.
10.20. The application includes visualisations that indicate limited visibility of the proposed extension from the public realm due to the reduced scale and stepping of the planform progressively from the northern boundary. The visibility of the extension was a key concern of the Planning Inspector and it is considered that this current scheme successfully addresses these concerns.
10.21. The current scheme no longer significantly impacts on the surrounding conservation area due to its reduced visibility, and whilst the Heritage Officer has identified some harm due to the site coverage of the development, the harm is considered to be less than substantial. With schemes where the harm would be less than substantial, the NPPF states that it should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, which in this case is the benefit of securing specialist care accommodation. This is given significant weight.
Impact on Trees:
10.22. Policy HE6 requires the retention and protection of trees, gardens, spaces between buildings, and other open areas which contribute to the character of the conservation area.
10.23. The proposal includes the removal of two existing trees on site. A cherry tree is proposed for removal due to its poor condition and a holly is proposed for removal due to the proposed development. The larger trees on the site, notably a row of conifers along the south boundary and the horse chestnuts located on the neighbouring property to the west ,would be retained. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed removal of trees would have minimal impact on the setting of the conservation area. Further, mitigation is proposed by way of the planting of three additional trees along the southern boundary.
10.24. The Arboriculturist has not raised any objections. A condition would ensure that the retained trees are protected during the construction works and that the proposed planting schedule and replacement landscaping scheme is carried out appropriately.
Impact on Neighbouring Amenity:
10.25. The proposed extension would be situated opposite the rear elevations of properties along Chalfont Drive to the south, but set well back from them. The tallest block of the extension would be approximately 30m from the nearest property on Chalfont Drive. The central block and single storey block would be approximately 23m.
10.26. It is noted that an extension of this size and bulk would have some impact on the amenity of no.s 26, 28 and 30 Chalfont Drive. The proposed two-storey blocks would introduce windows at first floor level where a perception of mutual overlooking between the application site and the properties along Chalfont Drive would result. In addition, there would be a perception of overlooking to the rear garden areas of these properties.
10.27. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that given the separation distance between building lines and rear garden boundaries, a significant level of overlooking between properties would not result, and certainly not one that would be uncharacteristic of dwellinghouses in residential areas. For example, there is a similar separation distance between rear building lines for the properties on the opposite side of Chalfont Drive. On this basis it is considered that the harm caused by perceived and actual overlooking between the extension and the rear elevations of 26, 28 and 30 Chalfont Drive is not of a magnitude to warrant refusal in this instance. Additional screening in the form of three new tress and planting is also included along this boundary which would also screen some of the impact identified above.
10.28. It is unlikely that significant overshadowing or loss of light would occur to neighbouring properties in this instance. A sun path analysis has been undertaken of the proposed care home extension utilising topographic information and roof heights, and it does not identify any direct overshadowing impact on the windows of neighbouring properties. Loss of light to gardens would also be minimal.
10.29. Similarly, it is considered that the separation distance between the extension and properties along Tongdean Place is sufficient to ensure that no significant harm to the amenity of these properties would occur given the level of screening that is provided between the properties, in the form of mature trees and vegetation.
Sustainable Transport:
10.30. National and local transport policy seeks to promote use of sustainable modes of transport and also ensure highway safety and appropriate car parking (including disabled) provision where required.
10.31. The applicant has provided additional information in response to the comments of the Transport Officer. The existing site provides 11 car parking spaces at the front of the building, some of which are suitable for disabled users. It is not proposed to make any changes as part of the proposal to car parking facilities.
10.32. The proposal could result in an increase in staff numbers and visitors to the site, however this is not considered to be a significant increase given the scale of the development. The site is located within a controlled parking zone and therefore if any overspill were to occur as a result of the proposal, this would be managed through the CPZ. A condition is recommended to ensure that adequate dedicated and laid out disabled parking bays are provided within the car parking area. The site is well located to take advantage of local bus routes.
10.33. The additional information provided shows that bicycle storage would be provided at the front of the site and it would be secure and conveniently located. It is therefore considered acceptable and its provision is secured by condition.
10.34. No trip generation information has been submitted. The extension could generate additional two way daily vehicle movements, however, the Transport Officer has made an assessment and, given the scale of the proposal , they deem this not to have severe impact on the highway or the surrounding transport network.
Other Considerations:
Sustainability and biodiversity:
10.35. Policy CP8 Sustainable Buildings expects that all new development will incorporate sustainable design features to avoid expansion of the city's ecological footprint, help deliver the principles of the One Planet approach, radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO2 emissions, and mitigate against and adapt to climate change.
10.36. The design of the building would be underpinned by a low energy and sustainable ethos centring upon the industry recognised energy hierarchy (Be Lean, Be Clean, Be Green). Policy CP8 requires that minor commercial developments of less than 1000sqm shall meet a BREEAM 'very good' standard, and this is to be secured by condition.
10.37. 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, a condition is recommended to ensure a bee brick and swift bricks/boxes are to be incorporated within the development.
11. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
11.1. 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. 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.
12. EQUALITIES
12.1. All bedrooms would be provided with accessible en-suite rooms.