Agenda item - BH2026/00020 - Site of Amex House, Edward Street, Brighton - Full Planning

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

Speakers

2.    Ward Councillor Lademacher addressed the committee on behalf of local residents and stated that they considered this location a tranquil part of the city and the building was not constructed for a gym. Noise was an issue and the impact on the residents, including vibration borne noise through the building. The report only comments on air borne noise. The councillor requested the application be refused as no evidence has been provided to show the suitability of the site. There are two existing gyms nearby and no reason to permit the application.

3.    Steve Eccles addressed the committee as a director of Edward Street Quarter who has overseen the project and stated that the building was constructed as a mix use community. This is a high-quality development with vacant lower ground floors. Permission for a climbing wall has been granted and that will be coming soon. A gym company is interested in the office space. The applicant has worked with planning officers and supplied evidence. The gym company already have sites within the city.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

4.    Councillor Robinson was informed that the conditions would be different to the previous application for the climbing wall, as they will include prevention of vibration noise. The case officer confirmed that prior to occupation a noise management scheme will be required. The building is a new build and therefore has good sound proofing. The planning manager confirmed that E use classes are generally considered to be, compatible with residential units. Music would be conditioned to be low. It was noted that the noise management plan would cover how the operator would deal with different scenarios such as talking, door banging etc.

5.    Councillor Guilmant was informed that there were two applications for the site as they were two separate units. The gym will be traditional and not a climbing centre and is a currently a concrete box. Free weights will require spring floor or matting and this will be submitted to planning. The planning manager confirmed that the application was for leisure uses and would allow for other leisure uses in addition to a gym. Steve Eccles confirmed there were three flats above the lower ground floor. It was not known if other gyms were 24hr. It was noted that the unit was marketed from March 2023 to now and has been empty the entire time. There are no finishes to the unit and no flooring at this time.

6.    Councillor Cattell was informed that the interested company operated 24hr gyms. Steve Eccles stated that noise testing was ongoing throughout the building and other works included the removal of a concrete floor and the fitting out of offices. The case officer noted that the building conformed to building regulations including sound proofing.

7.    Councillor Pickett was informed that the applicant applied for the 24hr use and sound mitigation would be part of the noise mitigation plan. It was noted that a noise decibel of reduction of 5db above Building Regulations requirements was appropriate for party walls when permission was granted in 2018.

8.    Councillor Theobald was informed that 24hr opening would accommodate different working patterns.

9.    Councillor Thomson was informed that the three applications, two for this agenda and one for the previous agenda were submitted separately as they were for three separate units. It was noted a tenant was ready to move into the space and use as a 24hr gym. Steve Eccles stated they wanted to reassure residents that the conditions would be fulfilled. The case officer stated that the use was not for a specific end user. The tenant lined up required 24hr use.

10. Councillor Parrott was informed by Steve Eccles that they were not sure what the noise vibration already experienced by residents was. It was noted there was a tenant awaiting the granting of change-of-use. Steve Eccles considered that a reduction in hours from 24hr would mean the unit would be re-marketed.

Debate

11. Councillor Cattell noted that the mixed use was required by the planning permission and gyms are a good use under policy. The units are empty at the moment and are therefore ‘dead’ space. The councillor was happy with the conditions proposed and supported the application.

12. Councillor Parrott considered it was a shame the space was empty, and a gym was a desirable use. Edward Street is not a quiet part of the city and was a busy area. The councillor supported the application.

13. Councillor Theobald considered the application a good use of the site, however, the councillor was worried for the residents regarding the 24hr use and considered 7am to 11pm would be better.

14. Councillor Hill considered the 24hr use supportive of all residents, some of whom may have different working times. The councillor did not consider a precedent would be set and supported the application.

15. Councillor Sheard considered that residents wanted the 24hr use and they knew people who work odd hours. The councillor considered the area, near the police station, St James’ Street and the hospital, so the residents already live with noise. The councillor supported the application.

16. Councillor Guilmant supported the 24hr use as they considered mitigation was in place and the use of the space as a gym would be good for mental health.

17. Councillor Robinson considered that noise inside the gym was acceptable, however the 24hr use was a concern.

18. Councillor Thomson noted there were 24hr gyms in the city.

Vote

19. A vote was held and by 8 to 2 abstentions the committee agreed to grant planning permission.

20. 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.