Agenda item - BH2020/02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, Hove
navigation and tools
You are here - Home : Council and Democracy : Councillors and Committees : Agenda item
BH2020/02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, Hove
1. The Planning Manager introduced the application.
2. Frances Valdes spoke to the committee on behalf of neighbouring objectors and noted that the plans had already been refused and lost at appeal on the matter of plot size being too small. The speaker considered there were omissions and errors in the case officers report. The plot size is still the same and it was noted that an application had been dismissed in April 2020 by the case officer. The report omits the tree officer’s objection and the on-site tree will not be protected. The extension will be too close to the neighbouring property on this sloping site. The proposed ground floor will be below street level, with the proposed steps to the rear allowing views into the neighbouring balcony and bedroom. The street consists of bungalows and the development will look incongruous in the garden of an existing dwelling. 13 objections were sent in April 2020 and 7 objections were submitted for this application.
Questions for speaker
3. Councillor Childs was informed that the speaker considered the proposals to be out of keeping with the area by way of scale, size, character and the building line of bungalows will be broken.
4. Ward Councillor Vanessa Brown addressed the committee and stated they were disappointed that the application had been recommended for approval as the plot size is too small. The new development takes up too much of the plot with not enough outside amenity space. The proposals will overlook neighbouring properties. The development will have a detrimental impact on the existing cedar tree and the tree officer concerns are noted. The detrimental impact of the development outweighs the benefits of a new house.
5. Ian Coomber spoke to the committee as the applicant’s agent and noted the report was detailed and the position was not the same as before. The cedar tree will be protected. The pitched roof has been altered to reduce the impact of the proposals and the plot size has been increased following previous applications. It was noted that an arboricultural method statement will be required by condition. The design fits in the context of the site and the Hove Park area and is in keeping with other dwellings. The area should deliver homes, and this is a well-designed home by a local developer and builder.
6. The Planning Manager recommended an additional condition for land levels.
Questions for officers
7. Councillor Ebel was informed that the neighbour’s garage would prevent overlooking to neighbours from the proposal.
8. Councillor Theobald stated they had visited the site and noted the site was small and the Cedar tree would be very close to the proposed scheme. The councillor noted the previous applications had been refused by officers and lost at appeal. The development will affect neighbouring bungalows and the proposals would be out of keeping. The scheme would leave the donating house with a very small garden and the proposals with very little external space. The councillor did not support the application.
9. Councillor Childs visited the site and noted the scale of development was out of keeping with the area and was considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. The councillor did not support the application.
10. Councillor Miller considered the plot to be too small and the application to be the same as before.
11. Councillor Yates considered the site to be too tight, with constraints on space the development was too much for the site.
12. Councillor Littman considered that back garden development can be acceptable, however, this site was too small, too close to neighbours and the scheme would threaten the cedar tree.
13. A vote was taken, and the committee voted against the officer recommendation to approve by 8 with 2 abstentions.
14. Councillor Fishleigh proposed a motion to refuse the application on the grounds that the both donating plot and the proposed site would be too small with little amenity space. The property would be out of keeping with the surrounding bungalows and the works would be detrimental to the existing cedar tree. The motion was seconded by Councillor Miller. The councillors agreed that the final wording would be agreed by the Planning Manager in consultation with them.
15. A vote was taken, and the committee voted to refuse the application unanimously.
16. RESOLVED: That the application be REFUSED for the reasons set out by Councillor Fishleigh with authority delegated to the Planning Manager to agree the final wording of the reasons for refusal in consultation with the Proposer and Seconder.
- Header BH2020 02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, item 102K PDF 22 KB View as HTML (102K/1) 3 KB
- Plan BH2020 02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, item 102K PDF 320 KB
- Report BH2020 02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, item 102K PDF 102 KB View as HTML (102K/3) 93 KB
- Cllr Brown Rep BH2020 02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, item 102K PDF 209 KB View as HTML (102K/4) 5 KB
- MI BH2020 02285 - 7 Woodland Drive, item 102K PDF 2 MB