Agenda item - BH2021/04096 - Land to the West of 149 Ladies Mile Road, Brighton BN1 8TB - Full Planning

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

Speakers

2.       Ward Councillor McNair addressed the committee and stated that there three reasons to object to the application. The developer states there would be no trees lost, this is not true. The eco systems have been lost. The proposed patios are not good enough nor is one parking space at each unit. Visitors will find it difficult to park. The neighbouring properties are low level bungalows or individual dwellings, and town houses don’t fit the streetscene. The proposed properties will overlook the existing neighbours. Local residents would prefer two bungalows with more off street parking. The properties should have more space and better biodiversity.

3.       Robert Miles addressed the committee as an objector and stated that trees have been lost through the destruction of the existing garden and habitat. If the proposals are agreed there will be more cars parked on the road, which is already congested with traffic. Drains and other local services will be affected. Other new builds have been in keeping with the locality; however, the proposals are not. The committee were requested to refuse the application.

4.       Courtney Darby addressed the committee as the agent acting on behalf of the applicant and stated that trees had been removed when the applicant looked at the site, which was mostly covered with tarmac and other hard surfaces. The costs of returning to the previous eco system would be high. The biodiversity of the site will be enhanced by the wild flower roofs, planters and 8 to 10 new trees. The style of the area is mixed with the south side of the road being vary varied. The applicant has been working with officers and minor tweaks have been made.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

5.       Councillor Moonan was informed that the adjoining building ceased to be used as a school in 2020 and is now in use as a nursery and the existing external space was to be retained of approximately 950sqm, which will be accessible to public and nursery children. It was confirmed that the proposals met policy requirements and the open space is sufficient for the nursery school as required by Ofsted.

6.       Councillor Theobald was informed that the nursery space to be retained was 1,000sqm.

7.       Councillor Yates was informed that there were no Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) on the site and no breach had occurred when the trees were removed. The existing open space was considered poor quality and any development would require planning permission.

8.       Councillor Theobald was informed that if there was an education covenant on the land, this was not a planning consideration.

9.       Councillor Shanks was informed that no objections had been received from Highways with regards to parking and traffic.

Debate

10.      Councillor Theobald stated they attended the nursery and were previously a governor of the school. The councillor considered it was a shame to lose the trees and the nursery to be left with only a strip of land. The development is out of character with the area. It was a shame to reck the nursery. The development was too dense and out of keeping. The councillor was against the application.

11.      Councillor Yates considered it was the rational decision to approve more houses and they were content that there was no stress on parking. The change of front gardens into parking will harm the environment. There are a variety of buildings in the road. The councillor was pleased to see more homes in the city and supported the application.

12.      Councillor Childs supported the application and considered the design to be consistent with the road. The councillor noted that homes on this type of site was better than on the city fringe land.

13.      Councillor Moonan was against the application as they considered the homes were fine, it was the impact on the community space. The councillor was not satisfied that the nursery school had enough space, and they were therefore not able to support the application.

14.      Councillor Littman supported the application considering that 4 bed homes were needed. The removal of the trees was a concern however nothing could be done about that. The councillor considered the development an improvement.

Vote

15.      A vote was taken, and by 5 to 2 the committee agreed to grant planning permission.

16.      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.