Agenda item - BH2022/03189 - 26 Abinger Road, Portslade - Outline Application

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

Answers to Committee Member Questions

2.         Councillor Shanks was informed by the case officer that Building Control had assessed the building and agreed to the demolition.

3.         Councillor Theobald was informed by the case officer that the damage to the building would require demolition even if a planning application had not been submitted. It was also confirmed that the application was for a corner plot and there were other industrial units in the street. The two-storey building had been negotiated over a three-storey unit. The full planning application will look at details such as the dormer windows in the roof. The design shown in the application was indicative only and concerns had been raised by planning officers, however some dormers may be possible on the front elevation. It was noted that possible staff numbers had been requested and received and the current company have an intention to relocate within the city.

4.         Councillor Robinson was informed that the committee were being requested to agree the block plan and mass. It was noted that there were extra conditions in the late list relating to bee bricks and swift boxes, securing Biodiversity Net Gain (off site) through the Section 106 agreement and the inclusion of the indicative elevation into the plans list.

5.         Councillor Allen was informed by the case officer that there would be level access for pedestrians and the existing access would be utilised. There was a condition requiring exact pedestrian and access arrangements to be agreed.

6.         Councillor Loughran was informed by the case officer that the Use Class was F1 and therefore policy DM9 was used to access the application.

7.         Councillor Cattell was informed by the Head of Transport Policy & Strategy that the street was in a ‘no control’ parking zone.

Debate

8.         Councillor Allen considered the existing building to be nice, however understood it had to be demolished. The application was a good use of a brownfield site. The councillor supported the application.

9.         Councillor Theobald considered it a shame to lose the existing historic building and they wanted to see the detailed application when it is submitted.

10.      Councillor Cattell considered the application was a good use of the brownfield site. The councillor was glad the design would be a reserved matter and they requested a better design than submitted as indicative in this application.

11.      Councillor Robinson requested that outside space be included in the design of the detailed application.

Vote

12.      A vote was taken, and the committee voted unanimously to agree the officer recommendation.

13.      RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to be MINDED TO GRANT planning permission subject to a s106 agreement and the Conditions and Informatives in the report.