Agenda item - BH2014/00596 - Anston House, 137-139 Preston Road, Brighton - Full Planning

External alterations including new aluminium windows, enlarged window openings, creation of balconies and cladding to all elevations following prior approval application BH2013/02779 for change of use from offices (B1) to residential (C3) to form 44no residential units.

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

External alterations including new aluminium windows, enlarged window openings, creation of balconies and cladding to all elevations following prior approval application BH2013/02779 for change of use from offices (B1) to residential (C3) to form 44no residential units.

(1)             The Area Planning Manager introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to photographs, plans and elevational drawings. The application site related to the existing Anston House which was nine-storeys in height, and had been vacant for approximately 25 years. Permission was sought for the external works following the recent prior approval to convert the commercial premises into residential units. The scheme proposed the enlargement of windows and the creation of new balconies. During the life of the application different external materials had been proposed: initially this had been a black cladding and the final proposition had been a terracotta cladding that better read the surrounding context. The main considerations related to the impact of the works on the conservation area and neighbouring amenity. The principle of the change of use had already been approved and the cladding tile was considered an acceptable approach. The tone of the tile was similar to the palette of the conservation area and would provide visual interest and soften the appearance of the building. In terms of amenity at the rear the proposed balconies would have screening and obscured windows to reduce overlooking. For the reasons set out in the report the application was recommended for approval subject to conditions; informatives and an amended Condition 3.

Questions for Officers

(2)             It was confirmed for Councillor Gilbey that transport matters could not be considered as part of this application.

(3)             It was confirmed for Councillor Davey that the Committee could only consider matters in relation to external changes.

Debate and Decision Making Process

(4)             Mrs Montford stated that the primary concern of the Conservation Advisory Group (CAG) related to the proposed colour of the cladding. The proposed terracotta would not be appropriate, and it was felt that something lighter was needed to contrast the dark heavy appearance of the neighbouring Telecom House. The CAG would be satisfied if the final agreement of this followed the decision of the Committee; this had also been discussed with the applicant and they were in agreement to reserve this matter.

(5)             At this point the Chair drew attention to the proposed condition to refer the final agreement of the materials to the Head of Development Control in consultation with the Chair, Deputy Chair and Opposition Spokesperson.

(6)             Councillor Littman stated that he had objected to the previous Anston House application that had been refused in 2013; he stated that whilst there had been letters of objection there was nowhere near the previous level of opposition. He had been waiting for an application to allow the site to come back into use, and this change of use was appropriate.

(7)             Councillor Jones noted that it was really important that the site was bought back into use, and this seemed an appropriate way to mitigate residents’ concerns.

(8)             Councillor C. Theobald stated that the building in its present state was an ‘eyesore’ and this an appropriate way forward for the site.

(9)             Councillor Wells welcomed the site being bought back into use as housing.

(10)          Councillor Hyde noted that this seemed like a compromise approach to the redevelop of the site.

(11)          Councillor Davey stated he would not support the application and he was of the view the previous proposals for the redevelopment of the entire site was a missed opportunity that could have retained employment space.

(12)          Mrs Montford reiterated that it was important a lighter finish be approved at the site to improve the situation for the residents on Dyke Road Drive.

(13)          Before the vote was taken the Head of Development Control explained that further consultation by the applicant had taken place during the lifetime of the application and this was not usually best practice.

(14)          Councillor Hyde noted that she also felt a lighter finish would be more appropriate.

(15)          A vote was taken and the Officer recommendation that planning be granted was approved on a vote of 9 in support and 1 against.

7.4         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 and the amended condition and additional informative set out below:

              Amended Condition 3

No development shall take place until samples of the materials (including colour of render, paintwork and colourwash) to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason:  To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and to comply with policies QD1 and QD14 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan.