Cllr. Steph Powell

BH2021/00770 – 43-45 Bentham Road

29^th March 2021:

I should like to lodge my objection as one of the ward councillors, to the above planning application.

My objection is on the following grounds:

1.         The proposed development fails to respect the character and appearance of the host building by virtue of the position and arrangement of the proposed front window openings and the design and material of the 2no UPVC lean-to conservatory structures would not integrate well with the host building, resulting in harm to the host building, street scene and wider area, contrary to policy CP12 of City Plan Part One.

2.         The proposed development fails to provide a mix of units, and would represent an overdevelopment of the site by virtue of the number and cramped size of the studio units. The size and enclosed nature of the amenity space would be neither useable nor private. I’m very concerned about potential fire hazards.

Further, the bin store area is located a fair way from where City Clean collect waste and recycling. The size of the bin store is inappropriate for nine units (potentially up to 20 people - max two people per studio and four people in the two bed unit). This is likely to result in harm to the host building, street scene and wider area. The development would fail to achieve a good housing mix and would provide a poor standard of accommodation for future occupants, contrary to policies CP14 and CP19 of City Plan Part One and QD27 and HO5 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan.

3.         The proposed development would represent an unneighbourly form of development by virtue of the high concentration of smaller units which would cause noise and disturbance to adjoining occupiers and thus would be contrary to policies SU10 and QD27 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan.

4.         Finally, a huge and majestic Elm tree sits right at the front of the current site. This absolutely must be retained. The biodiversity survey as listed in the documents does not acknowledge the bats and foxes which I believe have been spotted on the site, as well as a number of different species of birds. If this development were to go ahead then I believe that it would be contrary to the biodiversity and carbon reduction policies as set out in City Plan Part 2.

As such there appears to be little or no change to the provision or layout of the units in this resubmission, and I would be grateful if you would please add my comments to the Planning Portal.

I would also like to request that this planning application (BH2021/00770) is heard by the Planning Committee if you are minded to reject it, and I would like to be invited to speak at committee in order to stress my objection.