Agenda item - BH2020/01018 - Former Peter Pan's Playground Site, Madeira Drive, Brighton BN2 1EN - Removal or Variation of Condition

1.    The Planning Manager introduced the presentation for the item.

Questions for officers

2.    Councillor Fishleigh was informed that the visuals provided on the applicant’s website are from a previous application. The depth of the proposed pool has not been confirmed as the details of the construction will be provided later once the lease for the site has been arranged. The pool water will be fresh water as it will be heated. The boundary fence will be 1.8m high, the details of which will be provided under condition relating to crime prevention. The sustainability aspects of the development have not been considered at this stage as they will not have changed from the previously approved application. It was noted that solar panels will require an additional planning application in the future and the drainage details will be required by condition. The councillor was also informed that access ramps were proposed for the pool reception area and the pool.

3.    Councillor Theobald was informed that the additional first floor spaces, some 351sqm being introduced when ground level space was given over to storage, have been approved. The colour scheme as approved is a more muted range than the original scheme, and the cladding will be broadly as before. It was noted that the traffic changes made to Madeira Drive would not affect the development. The councillor was also informed that condition 4 of the original approval guaranteed the buildings will be constructed before the pool and the pool constructed within 12 months of the buildings.

4.    Councillor Yates was informed that although the length proposed has changed to 50m from 25m, the width remains the same at 12m.

5.    The Conservation Action Group (CAG) representative was informed that the buildings will be permitted on a temporary basis for 10 years and this was covered by condition 3. It was noted that details relating to lighting will be submitted in response to condition 13.

6.    Councillor Shanks was informed that the details of the development covering temperature and sustainability will come back to officers by condition.

7.    Councillor Miller was informed that the suggested materials will come to the Planning committee chair’s briefing for approval under condition 7. The plan for the maintenance of the materials is also covered by condition 21. It was noted that condition 2 states that works should not commence before 2022 and the buildings will be constructed before the pool.

8.    Councillor Ebel was informed that the desire is to open the pool all year round and the pool will be covered by a thermal fleece cover to stop heat loss.

Debate

9.    Councillor Theobald considered the commercial units would be under used during the winter months, however the pool would be an attribute to the city. The councillor supported the application.

10.Councillor Henry considered the application was needed and they supported the application and were looking forward to the pool heating details.

11.The Conservation Action Group (CAG) representative reiterated that a grade II star asset overlooks the site, Madeira terrace, and the development could cause harm to the East Cliff conservation area. The representative expressed concern at the lack of details submitted, in particular for solar panels and lighting. The committee were asked to consider the application carefully.

12.Councillor Shanks considered a 50m pool would be good for the city, would be too cold for competitions, leisure swimming and children, however they supported the application.

13.Councillor Ebel considered the original application and this application to be good and will regenerate the area. The councillor considered the pool would be good for physical and mental wellbeing and considered the heritage concerns were outweighed by the benefits and supported the application.

14.Councillor Miller welcomed the 50m pool, however they expressed concerns regarding the impact on the listed terraces. The councillor wanted to see the site activated and considered the pool would draw people along the seafront. The councillor considered the 10 year temporary permission to be better than a permanent permission and on balance, supported the application.

15.Councillor Yates noted the CAG concerns and the increased footprint. However, the principle of development has been established as has the use of the site with an outdoor pool. The councillor considered that cycle parking information will be needed as this will help people engage with the seafront. The councillor proposed alterations to condition 15. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Henry.

16.Councillor Fishleigh expressed concerns at the appearance of the development and hoped for more information relating to carbon footprint and sustainability. The councillor requested a deferment and was informed that sufficient information had been submitted for the committee to make a decision by the senior solicitor.

17.Councillor Janio considered the pool to be a bonus for the city. The councillor supported the application.

18.Councillor Littman was reluctant to grant permission for any development on the shingle and considered the pool was against policy. The councillor was on balance opposed to the application.

19.The committee voted on the amendment to condition 15 proposed by Councillor Yates and seconded by Councillor Henry. The amendment was agreed by 8 to 1. (Councillor Childs was not present for the discussion or vote).

20.Condition 15 will now read as follows: The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of secure cycle parking facilities for the occupants of, and visitors to the development, INCLUDING THOSE WITH MOBILITY ISSUES AND OTHER CYCLE TYPES are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be fully implemented and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained for use at all times.

21.Following a short discussion on sustainable energy the committee voted on the suggested condition proposed by Councillor Shanks and seconded by Councillor Ebel that a further condition be added requiring an energy statement from the applicant. The additional condition was agreed by 8 to 1 (Councillor Childs was not present for the discussion or vote). The final wording will be agreed by Planning officers.

22.The committee voted and by 7 to 2 the amended application approved.

23.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.