Agenda item - BH2013/03816 - BHASVIC 205 Dyke Road, Hove - Full Planning

Construction of a new 3no storey teaching block located on the existing upper car park between College House and the main building on Dyke Road, provision of a new service area to provide access for deliveries and refuse vehicles located to the north of College House on Dyke Road, refurbishment of the existing refectory and staff room in the Link Building, installation of CCTV cameras and creation of a new landscaped area.

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

Construction of a new 3no storey teaching block located on the existing upper car park between College House and the main building on Dyke Road, provision of a new service area to provide access for deliveries and refuse vehicles located to the north of College House on Dyke Road, refurbishment of the existing refectory and staff room in the Link Building, installation of CCTV cameras and creation of a new landscaped area.

(1)                   The Senior Planning Officer, Clare Simpson, introduced the report and gave a presentation by reference to photographs, plans and elevational drawings. The college provided further education for approximately 2000 students, and the main building was locally listed; was on a prominent corner and had a strong street presence. Planning permission was sought for a three storey building on the site of one of the existing car parks, and 7 of the 29 spaces would be retained elsewhere on the site. There would also be a linked walkway between the existing building and the new building. The new scheme sought to address the previous reasons for refusal and the proposed building line now corresponded to the line of the main building. There would also be solar thermal and photovoltaic panels of the roof of the new building, and it would achieve BREEAM level excellent.

(2)                   The previous application had been refused by the Committee for reasons relating to design, prominence and the materials. The new scheme now had stronger lines and a horizontal emphasis as well as using red brick and bronze copper colourings. The plant equipment on the roof of the building had been reduced in its visibility through screening, and neither the Heritage Team nor the Conservation Advisory Group (CAG) had objected. The Committee were shown some comparisons between the new scheme and the previous and it was added that the site could accommodate the building without it being overbearing. The colour match on the red brick had been agreed with the Heritage Team and the type of copper cladding used would be weather treated. There would also be more planting at the back of the highway to soften the impact. Overall the scheme was considered acceptable and was recommended to be minded to grant subject to the S106 agreement and for the reasons set out in the report.

Speakers and Questions

(3)                   Councillor Brown spoke in support of the scheme in her capacity as the local Ward Councillor, and stated that the application would benefit existing and future students in the city. The college had been rated outstanding, but the current accommodation was very cramped, and a recent OFSTED inspection had highlighted that this remained an issue. The new accommodation would only allow for an additional 188 students, and its primary purpose was to make the site fit for the current number of students. If the scheme did not commence soon then the college could potentially lose the capital grant funding for the scheme. It was added that this application had sought to address the previous reasons for refusal, and the height was comparable with the other buildings on the site. The building would also perform well in terms of sustainability and energy performance. In summary Councillor Brown urged the Committee to support the application.

Questions for Officers

(4)                   In response to Councillor C. Theobald it was highlighted that 7 spaces would be retained of the 29 that be lost at the upper car park site. In relation to matters raised by East Sussex Fire & Rescue it was confirmed that these related to Building Control matters outside the remit of the Committee.

(5)                   In response to Councillor Wells it was explained that the S106 obligation was the mechanism to achieve the 20% level of local labour; Officers in Economic Development held databases of local labour sources and the Council would assist the developer in achieving this.

(6)                   In response to a further query from Councillor C. Theobald it was explained that there was a condition for a travel plan to be submitted that would help to mitigate the loss of the staff parking on the site.

Debates and Decision Making Process

(7)                   Councillor Carden noted that he welcomed the scheme; he felt his previous objections to the colour had been properly addressed.

(8)                   Councillor Hyde highlighted the inappropriate nature of the previous scheme, but noted that this scheme was much more appropriate in particular in the context of the locally listed building. She felt that this was an example of positive planning as the Committee had refused an inappropriate scheme, and in response a much more appropriate one had been put forward.

(9)                   Councillor C. Theobald stated that she agreed with the comments made by other Members, and, whilst she was still disappointed about the loss of parking, she felt this scheme was much more appropriate.

(10)               Councillor Jones noted that he agreed with the other comments in the debate; the scheme was much improved and the colour palette fitted in much better, and he was grateful to the applicant for the new scheme.

(11)               Councillor Littman stated that the decision to refuse the previous application had been the right one as the objections had been taken on board and he was happy to support the new scheme.

(12)               Mr Gowans added that the CAG had not objected, but felt the design was ‘bland.’

(13)               Councillor Hamilton noted that this was an excellent educational establishment, and he would support the application.

(14)               Councillor Mac Cafferty noted that he understood why this new application was better in the view of Committee Members, and welcomed the improvement of the facilities at the college.

(15)               A vote was taken and planning permission was unanimously granted by the 11 Members present.

141.1    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: Councillor Duncan was not present at the meeting.