Agenda item - BH2013/03624 - The Westbourne, 90 Portland Road, Hove - Full Planning

Alterations to layout of doors and windows, new canopies to front elevation, raised garden level and installation of fixed aluminium planters to west elevation of garden.

(1)             It was noted that this application had formed the basis of a site visit prior to the meeting.

(2)             The Area Planning Manager, Nicola Hurley, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to photographs, plans and elevational drawings. The site related to a pub on the western corner of Portland Road which formed the end of the terrace. The proposals sought to raise the level of the rear garden area to allow internal and external access without the use of steps. The main considerations related to the impact on the character of the building and the wider area and the impact on residential amenity. It was considered that raising the level of the garden would have a limited impact and bamboo screening and planters would be installed to safeguard amenity. The existing gate would be removed and blocked up with materials matching the retained wall. The hours that garden could be in use were not restricted in the application and would relate to the hours that the pub was in operation. It was noted that the most recent noise complaint had been in 2008, and it was considered the proposals would not create any additional noise above the current arrangements. It was also considered there would be no harmful impact on neighbour amenity. For the reasons outlined in the report the application was recommended for approval.

Public Speaker(s) and Questions

(3)             Ms Anne-Catherine Jack spoke in opposition to the application in her capacity as a local resident. She noted she was speaking on behalf of the neighbours on Westbourne Street whose properties were located at the rear of the proposal site. She emphasised that the neighbours were all customers of the pub and wished to be fair to the business, and their objections were based on two concerns in relation to additional noise caused from the installation of the new French doors and the raising of the garden. There was also concern in relation to the impact of the noise caused by patrons on young children who lived in close proximity to the premises. The residents considered that the bamboo screening would not provide a long term solution or address concerns. The residents were already of the view that noise travelled down into the gardens, and there was concern that this would be much worse during the summer when the garden was likely to be busier and open later.

(4)             Ms Jack confirmed the location of her property in response to Councillor Hyde.

(5)             In response to Councillor Cox it was confirmed by Ms Jack that she had not received a notification of the application from the Local Planning Authority, and she had to make her own enquiries to get further information on the application.

(6)             It was confirmed by Ms Jack in response to Councillor Davey that the garden was currently in use, but customers tended to use the area at the front more; however, neighbours often heard the noise of glass being recycled.

(7)             Councillor Jones asked about noise problems and Ms Jack stated that there generally had not been problems with noise from the pub.

(8)             Ms Emma Lundin spoke in support of the application in her capacity as the applicant. She stated that she owned and operated the pub with her partner; since taking over the premises they had worked to improve it and operate a welcome community and meeting space. The local residents’ association met each month at the premises and the pub had been involved in community projects. The application was part of the ongoing works that had been undertaken since they had taken over, and the rationale was to make the garden space accessible as well as installing the French doors to create a better visual link with the inside of the premises. The pub already had air conditioning units to ensure the new doors would not need to be kept open during the hotter weather. They had worked to ensure neighbours were not disturbed by noise, and noted they had a number of letters of support.

(9)             In response to questions from Councillor C. Theobald it was explained by Ms Lundin that the garden was not usually open in the winter as the floor was difficult to maintain; when it was open ?efforts were  made to close the area by 2200 to 2230 hours to prevent noise disturbance and the recycling usually took place between 1000 and 1200 hours, and was normally only two bins used to empty bottles.

(10)          Councillor Hyde asked Ms Lundin if they would accept a condition in relation to the closure and clearing of the garden area, and Ms Lundin explained that the garden had been used regularly since they had operated the premises; they were not proposing an increased capacity nor would be encouraging this.

(11)          Ms Lundin confirmed to Councillor Davey that the proposal would allow for disabled access through both the pub and the side door to the garden.

(12)          Councillor Jones asked Ms Lundin about alternative types of screening and in response she explained that initially they had proposed a timber fence; however, Officers had considered this to be incongruous and it had been suggested that the bamboo would be more appropriate.

(13)          In response to Councillor Gilbey it was explained by Ms Lundin that the current exit from the garden to the street would be blocked up in the proposals as there was an alternative access point that was easier to manage.

Question(s) for Officers

(14)          It was confirmed for Councillor Davey that there were no conditions in relation to the times of the operation of the garden as these would be restricted to the same ones as the pub.

Debate and Decision Making Process

(15)          Councillor Hyde noted that she was of the view the garden area would be used much more with the proposals, and she was pleased to see the provision of disabled access and the use of bamboo to screen. She expressed concern about the new doors being left open and stated that she would be satisfied to support the Officer recommendation with a condition that the garden be closed and cleared by 2230 hours as this would help to mitigate the potential for increased noise.

(16)          Councillor C. Theobald stated that the proposals would be an improvement and she welcomed the accessibility for disabled people. She stated that she would second the proposed condition put forward by Councillor Hyde.

(17)          Councillor Davey noted that he echoed the points made by colleagues in the debate in relation to the closure of the area at 2230 hours. He noted the improvements made at the premises in recent years.

(18)          Councillor Cox noted that the current owners had gone to great lengths to become part of the local community; however, he also noted the concerns of the local residents and supported the condition proposed by Councillor Hyde.

(19)          The Head of Development Control, Jeanette Walsh, suggested the wording of the condition, ‘the garden to be closed after 2230 hours every day and the rear French doors to be kept shut after that time’.

(20)          Councillor Davey suggested that the condition should be worded such that the French be closed throughout all the hours to pub was open, except for access and egress, to reduce noise disturbance. The Head of Development clarified that the application replaced the existing fire escape with French doors and there was the potential for more noise disturbance.

(21)          The Committee voted on the proposed condition with the addition that the French doors remain closed whilst the premises was open and this was agreed with 6 in favour and 5 against.

(22)          A vote was taken, with the additional agreed condition, and the Officer recommendation that Planning permission be granted was unanimously agreed by the 11 Members present.

189.1    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 GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and informatives, and the additional condition set out below:

‘The garden area shall not be in use between 2230 hours and the hour in which the premises opens for business the following day, and the rear French doors shall be kept shut at all times the premises is open except for access and egress.’

Reason:  To safeguard the amenities of nearby residents and in order to comply with policy QD27 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan

              Note: Councillor Duncan was not present at the meeting.