Agenda item - BH2013/02152 - Brooke Mead, Albion Street, Brighton - Council Development

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a part 6no storey and part 5no storey building providing 45 Extra Care residential units, with associated communal spaces, landscaping works, cycle and scooter parking and community facilities.

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a part 6no storey and part 5no storey building providing 45 Extra Care residential units, with associated communal spaces, landscaping works, cycle and scooter parking and community facilities.

(1)                   The Case Officer, Adrian Smith, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to photographs, plans and elevational drawings; attention was also drawn to matters on the Late List. The application was a Council development for a part five and six storey building of extra care units which would be 100% affordable housing. The site was located in the Albion Hill Estate and set on rising land with the Valley Gardens Conservation Area located to the south. The site would include a community winter garden and photovoltaic panels on the roof. All trees on the site would be removed as part of the application, and there would be new landscaping to mitigate this loss through condition. The key issues related to the principle of the development; the design and the impact on the setting of the Valley Gardens Conservation Area. There was an established need for housing for vulnerable people in the city over the next few years, and the units would be let on an affordable basis – this use was considered to carry material weight in consideration of the application. The proposed building was considered a tall building due to its height, but was not considered harmful to a significant degree. The nearest buildings were located to the north of the site on Church way, and the daylight impact was discussed in the report and it was not considered excessive or unduly harmful, and subject to conditions the overlooking was considered acceptable. There would be no onsite parking included in the scheme, and there would be contributions towards sustainable transport – as well open spaces for the wider Albion Hill Estate. The application was recommended to be minded to grant for the reasons set out in the report and subject to completion of a S106 agreement.

Questions for Officers

(2)                   The Committee discussed the issue of parking for carers working with residents on the site, and it was noted that the site had been assessed as being highly sustainable location and there was parking in the surrounding area. It was also noted that this had been discussed with the applicant prior to submission, and there would be a loading bay as had been identified, and provision for blue badges users. Following on from this Members expressed their views that it was important to have some parking for carers on or nearby the site especially given that some of the residents could be disabled. Following this the Head of Development Control highlighted that the City Council was the applicant, and the owner of the land on the wider Albion Hill Estate; with this in mind it would be possible to attached a condition to secure a parking space in the vicinity; which could be for dedicated use for staff working with residents at the development; the Committee agreed with this approach.

(3)                   In response to Councillor Simson’s queries in relation to the number of single units it was noted that the scheme had come forward in close consultation with Officers in Adult Social Care, and the development was a reflection of need and the number of beds. In was also confirmed that the units were fully compliant with lifetime homes standards.

(4)                   In response to Councillor Carol Theobald it was noted that the applicant had undertaken preliminary consultation.

Debate and Decision Making Process

(5)                   Councillor Wells said he was pleased to see the site come forward for development as it had been vacant for so many years.

(6)                   A vote was taken and the Officer recommendation that the application be minded to grant was agreed on a vote of 9 in favour with 1 abstention.

(7)                   Note: Councillors Duncan and Randall were not present during the consideration and vote on this application.

117.10  RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration the recommendation and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in section 11 and resolved to be MINDED TO GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and a s106 agreement.

Note: Councillors Duncan and Randall were not present during the consideration and vote on this application.