Cllr David Gibson

BH2022/03810 – 15-26 Lincoln Cottages

15^th January 2023:

Please place on record my objection as one of the Ward Councillors to the above application for the following reasons:

· It is overdevelopment. This is already one of the most densely packed areas of Brighton with narrow streets and little buffer between houses.

· The scale, massing and density is too much.

· It is of a poor architectural design and out of keeping with the character of the area. Possible maintenance issues in terms of green roofs. Poor window designs highlight the attempt at overdevelopment.

· It will significantly impact neighbouring properties; in terms of overlooking/the loss of privacy, the loss of daylight/sunlight, too much noise and light pollution. No back to back garden for the Lincoln Street side of the development. No sound insulation in Hanover homes or streets as noise ricochets off closely packed buildings built from poor materials.

· It will lead to a loss of existing employment floorspace – the artist's studios and workshops which are in current use, and the impact on the running of the Hanover Garage Car repair business.

· It provides insufficient landscaping and drainage strategies.

· There will be a transport and traffic impact: deliveries and visitors will increase given the car-free development, and the steep hill. Restricted access to the site in terms of a narrow 9 ft unadopted road unsuited to potential development use.

· Emergency vehicles restricted access. Fire hose might be ok, but what if a fire engine is needed? This is very important.

· An inappropriate and insufficient bin storage arrangement: 18 big bins blocking the alleyway and relying on residents to drag them back and forth every week is unacceptable. It will further restrict access of emergency vehicles.

If officers are minded that this is heard at committee, then please extend an invite so that I can voice this points in person.

28^th March 2023:

Following conversations with residents (who have taken planning advice, I wish to submit further comments following recent amendments to the plans:

· A major concern is still overdevelopment. Developers had an opportunity to put forward a plan on a smaller scale, with more varied living units, but failed to do this.

· The amendments put forward in response to the Urban Design recommendations do not take into account the views articulated by those directly affected by the proposals.

· The properties in the revised plans are the same height and density to those in the original proposals, despite the numerous concerns raised previously.

· The three storey, flat roofed buildings are too large for site and the number of dwellings is too great.

· The density of the development will impact neighbouring properties, particularly the new street front close to the backs of homes on Lincoln Street.

· The terrace of buildings would also create more overshadowing on the Lincoln Street side.

· While the development is car free, an increase in traffic servicing the site is likely to negatively impact those living in nearby streets.

· The new proposals do not respond to community's request for greater landscaping in a meaningful way.

· The refuse storage is insensitively positioned against the wall of a property in Lincoln Cottages. This could lead to piles of rubbish gathering in a narrow lane impacting this property and other properties nearby.

· The proposed amendment will put angled windows, with opaque glass, on both upper floors facing Lincoln Street. This unusual design will offer an extremely compromised outlook to those who come to live in this proposed development. 

· The architectural design differs from other properties nearby, thus altering the character of the area.

The small adjustments to the plans do not address the significant problems and concerns of residents. This dense development could still cause significant harm and loss of amenity to the local community and therefore the plans should be rejected.

I am concerned about

1.         The failure of the developers to engage meaningfully with local residents

2.         That they have failed to devise a scheme which provides for affordable housing and appear to have designed a scheme to avoid providing affordable units for our community

3.         That they have not engaged constructively with the council and adopted an antagonistic stance by pressing on with an appeal for non determination.

Please reject the application