Agenda item - BH2021/04397 - 8 West Way, Hove - Full Planning

1.    The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee.

Speakers

2.    Ward Councillor Lewry addressed the committee and stated the application was very unpopular and the impact of this large scale development would be great. It was noted there were seventeen objections, which is more than for the last application. The nursery will bear the brunt of the development, with sleep time interrupted and the loss of some of the front garden buggy parking. The parents of the nursery children have not been contacted and there is not parking for the development. The impact of the development will be felt across the area. The committee were requested to refuse the application.

3.    Kevin Tyler addressed the committee as an objector and stated that the nursery owner objected on loss of front garden and the landlord had not been spoken to. The nursery would lose business as the building site will put parents off. There is no parking in the location, and when the bus stops there is chaos in the area at the moment. 8 - 10 more cars will have an impact. The plans are bigger than before. The quiet time at the nursery will be affected. The extension will cause overshadowing of the neighbouring property and have a huge effect with overlooking of the garden and, as the neighbour we would have to move. Hundreds more would object on parking grounds. The flats opposite have parking restrictions, and the development would make parking worse.

4.    The Planning Manager noted that the front garden play space will not be used for parking, and the play space is not to be closed, there is no additional parking provided at the application site, which has no access for nursery users. A construction management plan will be submitted to the Council by condition. The planning department would not have access to the contact details of nursery users to notify them.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

5.    Councillor Ebel was informed that a soft play area to the front of the nursery is proposed with some open space, once the bins have been moved. There are other outdoor areas at the nursery.

6.    Councillor Theobald was informed that there are additional outdoor play areas, the dental parking is to remain, and Highways are happy with the application.

7.    Councillor Moonan was informed that there is no parking in the development. The Senior Solicitor noted that use of the front garden by the nursery could be protected by condition. The nursery were informed of the application, the dental practice parking is to remain the same and Highways have not objected.

8.    Councillor Shanks was informed that the previous application has expired, and the scale of the current proposal was the same as the previous application which was refused in 2010 and allowed at appeal.

Debate

9.    Councillor Littman noted that the previous application had been refused at committee and costs had been granted against the Council by the inspector. The councillor did not feel there was much choice but to approve the application.

10. Councillor Theobald understood the nursery were unhappy at parking issues, the development would be dark for the neighbour, the general layout was bad, and there was no extra parking.

11. Councillor Moonan considered the applicant could have proposed demolition, so building on top of the existing was better for the environment and considering the housing need. The councillor supported the application.

12. Councillor Moonan proposed a condition to retain the front garden play area at the nursery. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Littman.

Vote

13. A vote on the proposed additional condition was taken and agreed unanimously.

Vote

14. A vote was taken, and by 5 to 1, the committee agreed to grant planning permission. (Councillors Janio and Barnett took no part in the decision making process or the vote on this application).

15. RESOVLED: 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 and the condition proposed by Councillor Moonan.