Agenda item - BH2021/03806 - 7 Deans Close, Brighton - Full Planning

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

Speakers

2.    Ward Councillor Simson addressed the committee and stated that they were speaking on behalf of residents and noted that the site was next to a wildlife haven and was a special home to wildlife. Residents were not against development on the site; however, this application was considered an over development of the site and a smaller development would have less impact. The existing surrounding houses have large gardens and amenity spaces. The development will look at the wildlife area from this natural site, as seen on the site visit. It was noted that many trees have already gone, and this has affected birds such as jays and woodpeckers. Policy protects the bio-diversity, so how can the council consider this application. The committee were requested to refuse the application on the grounds of harm to local wildlife and over development.

3.    George Gunton addressed the committee as the agent acting on behalf of the applicant and stated that the application site had a vast garden which is sloped and lead to the upside down design. The units are designed to preserve the neighbour’s amenity after working with the council. The maximum amount of parking is proposed with access for fire services and bins. Work has also been undertaken with the County Ecologist on the site, which is not protected, and the bio-diversity is a net gain. The committee were requested to approve the application given the council’s shortfall in providing homes in the city.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

4.    Councillor Childs was informed by the case officer that the Arboricultural Officer had agreed that 5 main trees and 4 groups can be removed, and new trees and planting will be agreed by condition. The development is less than the threshold for affordable housing. The plans show the locations of new and existing trees on the site and details will be supplied by condition.

5.    Councillor Hugh-Jones was informed by the County Ecologist that the neighbouring site included a badger set and a buffer area had been set aside at the development site.

6.    Councillor Gibson was informed by the case officer that the application commits to high efficiency standards in accordance with policy CP8 and conditions and informatives cover this matter. The agent stated that air source heat pumps would be included in the development along with green roofs, which means there would be no solar panels or gas on the site.

Debate

7.    Councillor Childs considered that on balance the bio-diversity gain was good and supported the application.

8.    Councillor Shanks considered the development would be an improvement to the area and even though the garden was lovely it was a large piece of land. The councillor supported the application.

9.    Councillor Hugh-Jones considered the development to be good and of a high standard of ecology and sustainability. The councillor supported the application.

10. Councillor Littman was upset that some trees had been removed and considered the proposals to nearly be an overdevelopment of the site, however there were other similar developments nearby. The bio-diversity net gain was good. The councillor supported the application.  

Vote

11. A vote was taken, and the committee agreed unanimously to grant planning permission.

12. 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.