Agenda item - BH2026/00064 - 165 Hollingdean Terrace, Brighton - Full Planning

1.    The Planning manager introduced the application to the committee.

Speakers

2.    Ward Councillor Fowler sent a speech to be read out by the Democratic Services officer as follows: I wish to object on the grounds of overdevelopment, the harmful impact on neighbouring residents and the surrounding environment. Having visited, I believe the proposal would result in overcrowding and the loss of a significant proportion of the garden space belonging to No. 165. The existing tree is highly valued by local residents, and it appears that birds regularly nest there. Residents would prefer to see the tree maintained rather than removed. Birds also nest in the bushes, and it would be unfortunate to lose this habitat. The proposed development would also have an adverse impact on neighbouring properties on Harrington and Quarry Bank. The scale and position of the building would reduce natural light to neighbouring gardens and create overlooking issues, resulting in a loss of amenity. The plans indicate a proposed entrance into the alleyway used by residents of Quarry Bank. Clarification should be provided. There is also the nearby substation to consider, and overall, the proposal appears to be trying to squeeze a development in with minimal garden provision and insufficient regard for the impact on neighbouring residents. I would request that an ecological survey be carried out to confirm whether foxes or other wildlife inhabit the vacant land. Finally, Quarry Bank already experiences significant parking and access problems, with cars and vans frequently causing obstructions for refuse and recycling collection vehicles as well as emergency services. For all of these reasons, I ask that this application be refused. Ward Cllr Asaduzzaman also supports the residents’ objections.

3.    Liam Russell addressed the committee as the agent representing the applicant and stated that they had been developing in Brighton and Hove for the last 25 years and were aware that each site needed an honest assessment. Any development should improve the area. This proposal is for a modest new home, designed with positive attitude to architecture. The agent has been working with planning officers and has reduced the scale of the development. The recommendation has been agreed with officers. The home will add to the housing supply. The site has been in family ownership for 60 years and will be a retirement home for the applicant. The committee were requested to support the application.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

4.    Councillor Theobald was informed that the main access to the proposal would be from Harrington Place and the tree in the rear garden is not in a conversation area or covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The garden at 165 Hollingdean Terrace will be 63sqm. The side elevation windows will be fixed shut and obscure glazed. It was noted there would be some overshadowing given the topography of the site and orientation; however, this was not considered harmful enough to refuse the application.

5.    Councillor Shanks was informed that the tree may only be removed outside of the nesting season. The access from Quarry Bank will be gated.

6.    Councillor Pickett was informed that a new condition regarding vibration from a substation would need to be agreed prior to occupation.

7.    Councillor Robinson was informed that the neighbours to the rear would see the proposed green roof to the sitting area. It was noted that the downstairs rear room of the development would be lower than the boundary wall.

8.    Councillor Thomson was informed that the development needs to comply with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 regarding any loss of habitat.

Debate

9.    Councillor Robinson considered the development was good. The councillor supported the application.

10. Councillor Shanks considered the development to be a good use of the small space. The councillor supported the application.

11. Councillor Cattell considered that as there were very few brownfield sites left, this was a good development. Objectors have considered the proposals to be out of place; however, the design is modern in style and others have extended in the same style. There are a number of dormers in area of a similar design. The councillor supported the application.

12. Councillor Parrott supported the application.

13. Councillor Pickett considered the design to be good, in this tiny space, that fits a lot in. The vegetation will be increased by the green roof and planters. The councillor considered the development to be really good.

14. Councillor Earthey considered the development to be a good use of the space around the substation. The councillor supported the application.

15. Councillor Theobald considered the space to be good, however, there would be some overshadowing, and it was a shame to lose the tree. The negotiated reductions are good. The councillor supported the application.

16. Councillor Sheard considered the development to be imaginative and a good solution to the space. New housing should be encouraged. The councillor supported the application.

17. Councillor Thomson considered that more housing was better, and this was a good use of the space, and it was good that there had been talks between the agent, applicant and the planning officers.

Vote

18. A vote was held and the committee voted unanimously to grant planning permission.

19. RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informatives in the report.