Agenda item - BH2024/01649 - 20 Denmark Villas, Hove - Full Planning

35.1       The planning manager introduced the application.

Speakers

35.2       Simon Evans, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application, citing its minimal impact on the character of the neighbourhood and conservation area. Simon Evans stated that they were sensitive to the character of the neighbourhood expressed that the works would not result in an overdeveloped appearance at the property. Simon Evans stated that their property was the only in a row of 6 to not have a driveway, sharing the reason for this was due to a tree that had since been removed by the Council. Simon Evans stated that the driveway enhances the symmetrical and uniform character of the street and shared that neighbours had signed a petition in support of the development. Simon Evans drew attention to the driveway being crucial in the installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging point, citing concerns regarding low numbers of EV charging points in the area.

Answers to Committee Member questions.

35.3       Councillor Shanks was informed of the process regarding the installation of a crossover driveway in a conservation area. Councillor Shanks was also informed that the nearest EV charging points to the property were located at Hove Station.

35.4       Councillor Thomson was informed that there were no EV charging points on Denmark Villas.

35.5       Councillor Theobald was informed that the proposed driveway was identical to those of neighbouring properties.

35.6       The Chair was informed that the EV charging point had not yet been installed at the property.

35.7       Councillor Galvin was informed that the EV charging point would be for private use.

35.8       The Chair was informed that a precedent would not be set were the application to be agreed by members.

35.9       Councillor Robinson was informed that drainage on the driveway had been managed and installed by Council Approved supplier, Sussex Driveways.

35.10   Councillor Thomson was informed that the tarmac outside of the drive stood out as it had not been in place long enough to weather. Councillor Thomson was informed that weathering would prevent the tarmac standing out.

35.11   Councillor Theobald was informed that the applicant would prefer to install traditional tiling on the driveway.

35.12   Councillor Thomson stated that a precedent had already been set by other houses installing their own driveways.

35.13   Councillor Earthey was informed that all driveways on the street were later additions to the properties.

Debate

35.14   Councillor Allen provided an overview of the history of Denmark Villas and referred to the 1984 character statement of the area that described unfortunate harms original roofs, elevation details and the loss of garden walls. Councillor Allen stated that the application would have an impact on the keeping of the area and stated that they would not be supporting the application.

35.15   Councillor Shanks agreed with Councillor Allen and raised concerns regarding the impact of concrete driveways on urban flooding. Councillor Shanks stated that they would not be supporting the application.

35.16   Councillor Thomson stated that the application would not cause significant harm on the area and stated that while they disagreed with the paving over of the driveway they stated that if a soakaway or runoff were to also be installed the issue of flooding would be negated. Councillor Thomson stated that they would be supporting the application.

35.17   Councillor Allen drew attention to the planning policy, stating that an application must preserve or enhance the character of its area and reiterated their statement that they would not be supporting the application.

35.18   Councillor Earthey cited five properties on Denmark Villas that had already installed driveways and the impact they had on the keeping of the area.

35.19   Councillor Robinson stated the conflict of upgrading buildings while also considering the planning objective of preservation and enhancement. Councillor Robinson stated that they were minded not to support the application.

35.20   Councillor Winder stated that it seemed reasonable to protect the area and stated their support for the officer recommendation to refuse the application.

35.21   Councillor Theobald expressed concerns that the granting of the application would set a precedent for others to convert their front gardens into driveways and stated that they would not support the application.

Vote

35.22   A vote was taken with 7 in favour and 2 against the officer recommendation.

35.23   It was resolved that the committee agreed with the officer recommendation to refuse the application.