Agenda item - BH2023/03432 - Flat 13, St Gabriels, 18A Wellington Road, Brighton - Full Planning

1.         The Case Officer introduced the application to the committee.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

2.         Councillor Shanks was informed that the application dwelling was a flat.

3.         Councillor Miller was informed that the committee needed to look at the application before them and there was a shortage of cheap housing in the city. It was noted the living room window would face east and the external changes to building were to be kept to a minimum. It was also noted that the existing flats were constructed 5 years ago so the thermal insulation was good. The case officer noted that conditions needed to be reasonable and a new rooflight by condition would not be reasonable.

4.         Councillor Winder was informed that the kitchen and communal space covered 37sqm and this was acceptable. The storage space was 5sqm, the small bedroom was 15sqm and the double bedroom was 18sqm. There was also a shower room and a bathroom.

5.         Councillor Loughran was informed that the building regulations would cover the insulation of the property. It was noted that the flat existed and access would remain the same. The application is to extend the flat. Sound insultation would be provided by condition and the building regulations. There would be a maximum of 5 persons, where there is 3 at present. It was not considered there would be much cumulative impact on the communal stairs.

6.         Councillor Nann was informed that the House of Multiple Occupancy (HMO) would be for 5 people. It was noted 3 studio flats already exist in the space.

7.         Councillor Robinson was informed that there would be a dormer window in the living room area.

8.         Councillor Loughran was informed that there were 13 flats in the building at present, there was no outside space for the flats, however there were parks nearby.

9.         Councillor Sheard was informed that the space to be converted was void.

Debate

10.      Councillor Cattell noted that the building consisted of bedsits, and this was low-cost accommodation, for which there was a demand. Outside space would be good, however, here it is not possible. The councillor supported the application.

11.      Councillor Sheard declared that they were undecided, and the design was a concern, with a studio flat being turned into a 3-bed flat. Lack of communal space was a concern; however, housing was needed.

12.      Councillor Robinson agreed that cheaper housing was required, however, they considered this space a challenge. The councillor did not support the application.

13.      Councillor Winder expressed concerns for future occupiers and considered a more flexible house would be better. The councillor had doubts about the application.

14.      Councillor Miller noted that housing was needed, however, it needed to be good quality. The councillor had concerns over space and the impact on future occupiers. The councillor did not support the application.

15.      Councillor Shanks considered there were no planning reasons to refuse the application. The councillor noted that HMOs were needed. The councillor supported the application.

16.      Councillor Nann expressed concerns for the residents below the proposals.

17.      Councillor Loughran expressed concerns that a site visit had not taken place.

18.      Councillor Theobald considered the size of the rooms to be adequate and they therefore had no issues with the application.

19.      Councillor Earthey proposed a motion to defer the application till a site visit could be made by the committee Members. Councillor Miller seconded the motion.

Vote

20.      A vote was taken and by 9 to 1 the committee agreed to defer the application until a site visit could be arranged.