Agenda item - BH2023/01254 - 17 Old Shoreham Road, Hove - Full Planning

1.    The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee. The Planning Team Leader informed the committee that one further representation had been received regarding transport issues; the officer confirmed that the transport assessment had been completed correctly. Some conditions had been revised.

Speakers

2.    Tina Marron-Partridge addressed the committee as an objecting resident and stated that they represented 3 objecting neighbours. They noted that the Ward councillor had objected as had many residents. They considered that the applicant had directly circumnavigated planning policy. The access road is private and unsuitable for construction traffic. The house is landlocked. The development will create traffic and pollution. The reduction of the garden at 17 destroys the garden with trees and planting. It was noted that the neighbours at 15 considered the previous development to be too bright and no planting had taken place.

3.    Ward Councillor Bagaeen addressed the committee and stated that they objected to the proposals. They considered the loss of trees and outside space to be very important and they had meet with the architect, applicant and the neighbours. The councillor considered that children in the care home required space. The replacement of trees would be good as landscaping was critical. They noted that no evidence of boundary treatments had been seen so far and the boundary wall treatment would be critical.

4.    David Kemp addressed the committee as the agent acting on behalf of the applicant and stated that the care home was for adults not children. The applicant sent their apologies for not attending the meeting. Access to the site was agreed in 2020 via the adjacent site but negotiations with number 17 have collapsed so a new access was required. The extension to the side elevation will allow access to the garden, will allow a new outside room, and a new summer house, allowing outdoor social events. The residents are looking forward to enjoying the areas. The case officer requested changes, and these have been implemented in good faith. The committee were requested to approve the application.

5.    The case officer noted that the previous application came to committee in 2020, however, it was not called for discussion and the case officers’ recommendation was therefore agreed.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

6.    Councillor Theobald was informed by the agent that the one tree had been removed as it was considered diseased and replacement trees were on the plans, with details in the documents supplied. The Planning team leader noted that 5 trees were removed as part of the previous application. Two trees were removed with no objections from the Arboricultural Officer. It was also noted that the garden boundary had been moved by 1.5m to give the care home more garden and the house less.

Debate

7.    Councillor Theobald considered the driveway had been altered and more landscaping with trees was required. They noted that the planning permission had already been granted on the previous scheme and they were glad the driveway was better.

Vote

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

9.    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.