Agenda item - BH2023/02158 - 2 - 4 West Street, Rottingdean, Brighton - Full Planning

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

Answers to Committee Member Questions

2.         Councillor Earthey was informed that the Use Class of the building would be E, which meant the use could be for a pharmacy and it was noted that the applicant had advised that the Health Group would be offered the lease for the new unit, however, it was not reasonable to condition for pharmacy only. The Use Class E has been limited to A and E only. The loss of commercial floor space is acceptable under policies CP3 and DM12. There have been no objections from Highways as there are local car parks and sustainable transport is readily accessible from the site. The discharge of conditions will be considered by the case officer. The shop front design has been assessed as part of the application; however, advertisement consent would be required for fascia illumination if required.

3.         Councillor Cattell was informed that there would be a flat roof to the rear of the building and a pitched roof to the front. The rear elevation windows would be obscured glazed and permanently closed above 1.m from floor level. It was noted that the windows on the rear ground floor would not be obscure glazed, only those over 1.7m above ground level. The second-floor windows on the front elevation will be openable to enable cross ventilation.

4.         Councillor Allen was informed that there would be step free access by condition.

5.         Councillor Theobald was informed that the application site was not in the Conservation Area and the Heritage officer found the design acceptable. It was noted that the proposed design matched the adjacent buildings including the Tesco store. The materials are to be approved by the case officer and the Heritage officer by condition.

6.         Councillor Robinson was informed that the design had been assessed and found acceptable by the Heritage officer.

Debate

7.         Councillor Shanks noted that the Health and Wellbeing Board look at the number of pharmacies in an area. The Councillor supported the application.

8.         Councillor Allen considered the ramp outside the existing pharmacy needed to be removed, was in poor repair and noted that there were good bus connections nearby. The councillor supported the application.

9.         Councillor Cattell thanked the officer for the report and considered the proposed design to be good with nods to the existing buildings in the area, which improves the streetscene. The councillor supported the application.

10.      Councillor Robinson considered the proposals to be a vast improvement on the existing building. The councillor supported the application.

11.      Councillor Theobald expressed concern over the loss of the pharmacy and did not consider the design to be good.

12.      Councillor Allen noted the existing use could be anything, not just a pharmacy.

Vote

13.      A vote was taken, and the committee agreed by 8 to 1 abstention the officer recommendations.

14.      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.