Agenda item - BH2022/01584 - 25 Drove Road, Brighton - Full Planning

1.       The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee. The case officer updated the committee that the plan list is now the location plan only and condition 2 is now an informative.

Speakers

2.       Ward Councillor Simson addressed the committee and stated that the application was confusing, and the majority of the land was in the South Downs National Park, with driveway in Brighton and Hove City Council boundary. The neighbouring residents were concerned over the loss of trees and noise. There were mobile homes on site already, and the access was used by walkers and cyclists. The committee were requested to refuse the application.

3.       David Campion addressed the committee as the agent and stated that they agreed with the report and the owners had bought the freehold some years ago, and there was no scaffolding business at the site, only horses. There is a mobile home on site and no enforcement action had been taken against the owners. The council have been informed of the tree felling, which were not covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). It was noted there were no objections to equine use at the site. The committee were requested to grant planning permission.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

4.       Councillor Yates was informed that the committee were to consider the access part of the application only.

5.       Councillor Hugh-Jones was informed that the committee needed to make a decision and the applicant could appeal.

6.       Councillor Moonan was informed that the South Downs National Park decision has no bearing on the access in the city boundary. The applicant requires both authorities to grant permission. It was noted the South Downs National Park have refused permission to the rest of the site. The application before the committee was for access only.

7.       Councillor Theobald was informed that the committee would require a substantive reason to refuse the application. It was noted that usage would not be great.

Debate

8.       Councillor Yates supported the officer recommendation as there was no valid reason not to.

9.       Councillor Moonan noted that the committee were not deciding the site, which was in the national park. Residents can monitor any issues. The councillor supported the application.

10.      Councillor Hugh-Jones considered there was no valid reason to refuse the application.

11.      Councillor Theobald considered there were more business’ than horses on site and was against the granting of planning permission.

12.      Councillor Littman thanked the officers and considered the usage increase of 9% would be acceptable. The councillor supported the application.

Vote

13.      A vote was taken, and by 6 to 1, the committee agreed to grant planning permission.

14.      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.