Agenda item - BH2014/01858 - Former Methodist Church, Lyminster Avenue, Brighton - Full Planning

Erection of 3no three bed terraced houses.

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward: Patcham

Erection of 3no three bed terraced houses.

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

(2)             The Senior Planning Officer, Adrian Smith, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to photographs, plans and elevational drawings; it was noted that one additional representation had been received in relation to parking. The grass area was historically used by the Methodist Church and sat to the right of the site. The responses were outlined in the report; and the main considerations related to the principle of the development; the use and the broader amenity value. The retention of the land did not outweigh the proposed development of housing, and the properties would add to the character of the street scene. The application was recommended for approval for the reasons set out in the report.

Public Speaker(s) and Questions

(3)             Ms Jamie Bainbridge spoke in objection to the scheme in her capacity as a local resident; she stated that residents and the community had used the land and hall for over 60 years and the parking on site was good as it gave through access. The applicant had divided the site, and Ms Bainbridge was of the view that the restrictive covenant was still in place. She added that the parking arrangements would be dangerous at the nursery, and it would be difficult for parents to pick up and stop. Ms Bainbridge disputed the wording of the report and argued that the land had merit as it was the ideal size for use in association with the hall and there was no proof that the nursery would be viable without the grassland. Reference was made to the NPPF and that the removal of a community use did not constitute ‘creative’ planning. It was noted that local Ward Councillors and the LAT objected to the scheme.

(4)             In response to Councillor Hyde the objector explained that she was at the meeting representing the views of her local community that used the land for community events.

(5)             In response to Councillor C. Theobald the objector explained that there would only be a very small area for parking left if the scheme went ahead.

(6)             Ms Lynda Wyer spoke in support of the scheme in her capacity at the agent acting on the behalf of the applicant; she stated that the scheme was a revision of a refusal earlier in the year for reasons in relation to design and the loss of the community space. It was rare anywhere in the city to have nursery with designated pick up and drop off location, and it was noted the community use of the land had been on the good will of the Methodist Church. A great deal of work had been undertaken since the previous refusal, and the agent argued that there was sufficient other community areas nearby to the site.

(7)             In response to Councillor Davey the agent confirmed the history of the use of the former church, and clarified the situation in relation to the restrictive covenant – reiterating that the community use had been at the good will of church.

(8)             The agent confirmed to Councillor C. Theobald that there was a small piece of land retained for use by the nursery – as well as the other space in the immediate area.

(9)             The agent confirmed for Councillor Pissaridou that the nursery had entered into a 15 year lease.

Questions for Officers

(10)          The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the restrictive covenant was not material consideration.

(11)          It was confirmed for Councillor Cox that the previous refusal has been a delegated decision.

(12)          The proposed position of the new properties on the street was clarified for Councillor C. Theobald.

(13)          In response to Councillor Davey it was explained that the previous reasons for refusal in relation to the loss of the community site had been overcome by: clarification on how the grassland related to the nursery, and more information on how the site had been used historically.

(14)          The Senior Planning Officer explained that the Council’s Estates Team had released the restrictive covenant the previous year.

(15)          It was confirmed for Councillor Davey that the nursery had taken on the property on the understanding that the grassland did not form part of the lease.

Debate and Decision Making Process

(16)          Councillor C. Theobald noted that she supported the views of the residents and understood their wish to keep the open space.

(17)          A vote was taken of the 12 Members present and the Officer recommendation that planning permission be granted was carried on a vote of 9 in support; 2 against and 1 abstention.

67.4       RESOLVED -  That the Committee has taken into consideration the recommendation and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in section 11 and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and informatives.