Agenda item - BH2025/03062 - Homewood College, Queensdown Road, Brighton - Full Planning

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

Answers to Committee Member Questions

2.    Councillor Parrott was informed that there were no reports of accidents at the access pinch point to the site.

3.    Councillor Theobald was informed that the use was not for a specific charity and the use change was temporary. The councillor considered that less than 6 years would be acceptable and that a light system was used to control traffic in other tunnels in the city.

4.    Councillor Cattell was informed that the caretakers house was currently vacant and was included in the site.

5.    Councillor Sheard was informed that the reason for the application to be for 6 years, was not known. It was noted that the access pinch point was a tunnel and the use could be shorter than the 6-year applied for.

6.    Councillor Hill was informed that it was not known if there have been any noise complaints from the site and the caretakers house was included in the site and would be treated as the same. It was noted the caretakers house could have non planning restrictions such as a covenant requiring the house to be used in conjunction with the use of the rest of the site.

7.    Councillor Robinson was informed that there was a second pedestrian access to the site avoiding the road tunnel. It was noted by the councillor that if the site were to become available for housing, the council would look at it as part of the regeneration of the city.

8.    Councillor Pickett was informed that there were conditions covering any lighting changes and signage to encourage non car travel.

9.    Councillor Thomson noted the use proposed was a ‘meanwhile’ use.

Debate

10. Councillor Parrott noted the city was short on housing and charity space. The councillor considered the site would be useful with the proposed change of use.

11. Councillor Guilmant considered if the site were not a school, then a charity use would be good.

12. Councillor Sheard noted the ‘meanwhile’ use and considered the site should be used for housing, whilst recognising the needs of charities. The councillor supported the application.

13. Councillor Robinson considered the proposals to be a good use of the site, and it would not be left to rot away. It was considered the change of use would help the charity sector.

14. Councillor Hill considered the site would be good for a housing charity.

15. Councillor Theobald considered the site would be better for housing; however, they supported charities. The councillor supported the application.

16. Councillor Earthey supported the application.

Vote

17. A vote was held, and the committee agreed unanimously to grant planning permission.

18. 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.