Agenda item - BH2020/02305 -Dental Surgery, 4 New Barn Road, Rottingdean, Brighton - Full Planning

RECOMMENDATION – REFUSE

Ward Affected: Rottingdean Coastal

Erection of first floor extension.

(1)        It was noted that an in-depth presentation had been provided by officers in advance of the meeting and was included on the council website detailing the scheme by reference to site plans, elevational drawings and photographs which showed the proposed scheme in the context of neighbouring development.

(2)        The main considerations in determining this application related to the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the building and the wider streetscape and the amenities of neighbouring properties including the amenities of no.4 New Barn Road. The previous planning history of the site was set out in the report and overall it was considered that the proposal would have a substantial detrimental impact to outlook and to be overbearing to the occupants of No. 4 New Barn Road by reason of its projection and increased bulk beyond the rear elevation of the host property. This would result in an unneighbourly development contrary to policy QD27 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan and therefore refusal was recommended.

            Public Speakers

(3)       

(4)       

            Debate and Decision Making Process

(5)        Councillor Mears spoke in her capacity as a Local Ward Councillor, in support of the application. There had been a significant loss to the infrastructure of the area and this was the only dentist in the area which residents were able to access easily and safely. This application would allow to increase their floorspace and to provide an improved offer to their customers. Neighbouring residents had not objected to the proposed scheme and as there were a variety of building styles in the vicinity this was not considered out of keeping.

(6)        Mr Burgess spoke on behalf of the applicants in support of their application. The proposed scheme responded to an identified need in the area, which was supported by the local community and had been significantly modified in order not to have a detrimental impact and was set 2.4m back from the neighbouring property who had not objected.

            Questions of Officers

(7)        Councillor Bagaeen sought clarification regarding reduction to the massing and set back of the proposed extension, also the roof and render treatments proposed. It was explained that whilst it was acknowledged that amendments had been made to the scheme and it did provide benefits it was considered that these were not sufficient to outweigh the harm that would result from its design, bulk and form.

            Debate and Decision Making Process

(8)        Councillor Shanks sought clarification regarding use of the current garden building and whether the neighbouring building was in occupation by one of the dentists; stating that in this instance she considered the proposed use to be acceptable.

(9)        Councillor Bagaeen stated that he noted that there were a number of other red brick buildings in the vicinity and a number of varied styles. The proposed form of the building had been scaled back and he considered that was such it would have a modest impact and would deliver a much needed local service.

(10)      Councillor Yates was in agreement stating that he did not consider that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact which was sufficient to warrant refusal. He considered that the scheme was acceptable.

(11)      The Chair, Councillor Littman stated that on balance he considered the proposal was acceptable

(12)      A vote was taken and the 8 Members present voted unanimously that planning permission be granted contrary to the officer recommendation. Councillor Theobald proposed that the proposed extension was not by virtue of its design, form bulk and footprint was not visually intrusive, nor unsympathetic to the design of the existing dwelling. It would not be of detriment to the character of the New Barn Road and Falmer Road streetscene and wider area and was not considered contrary to policy QD14 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan and CP12 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One. It was not considered that by reason of its projection beyond the rear elevation of the host property that it would result in unneighbourly development with a detrimental outlook and overbearing effects on 4 Barn Road, nor would it be contrary to policy QD27 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan. This was seconded by Councillor Yates. A recorded vote was then taken. Councillors Littman (Chair), Osborne, Bagaeen, Fishleigh, Henry Shanks Theobald and Yates voted that planning permission be granted.

71.8      RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report but agrees to grant planning permission for the reasons set out above. The final reasons for approval to be agreed by the Planning Manager in agreement with the proposer and seconder.

            Note: Councillors Janio and Williams were not present during consideration of the above application.