Agenda item - BH2016/01757 - 18-19 Ship Street, Brighton - Full Planning

Creation of additional floor to create 1no three bedroom flat with associated alterations.

RECOMMENDATION – REFUSE

Ward Affected: Regency

              Creation of additional floor to create one three bedroom flat with associated alterations.

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

(2)          The Planning Manager, Major Applications, Paul Vidler, gave a presentation detailing the scheme by reference to plans drawings and photographs. It was noted that the application related to a double fronted 1970’s building built over four floors (including basement) to the western side of Ship Street. The building comprised a hairdressers to ground floor with associated studio space at lower ground floor level. The first floor was in residential use with the second floor in office use. The rear section of the building, set out over two floors, was solely in residential use other than the roof terrace above the flat roof which was associated with the existing second floor office space.

(3)          The main considerations in the determination of this application were the principle of the development, the impact on the character and appearance of the building, the Old Town Conservation Area and adjoining listed buildings, the impacts on the amenities of adjacent occupiers, the standard of accommodation to be provided, and sustainability and traffic issues. It was considered the proposal would detract from the appearance of character and of the building. It would fail to preserve the conservation area and would result in harm to the setting of adjoining listed buildings. The proposal would result in harm to the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers and would fail to provide an acceptable standard of accommodation for future occupiers. Whilst acknowledging the need for additional housing in the city it is not considered that a modest gain of one residential unit outweighed the significant harm which would result; refusal was therefore recommended.

              Public Speakers

(3)          Mr Parsons spoke on behalf of the applicants in support of their application. He reiterated that although this represented a different form of development from that requested by the previous application, this scheme had also been sympathetically designed to enhance the existing building without detriment to its neighbours.

              Debate and Decision Making Process

(4)          Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that he did not support the view that would result in a bulky and overbearing structure, particularly when considered in the context of the height of the fly tower at neighbouring Hippodrome site were that building to be redeveloped in line with the extant permission. He considered the proposal would tidy up the existing development.

(5)          The Chair, Councillor Cattell, stated that she considered that the varying neighbouring roof heights contributed to the townscape of the area and that she supported the officer recommendation.

(6)          A vote was taken and the 10 Members present during consideration and voting on the above application voted by 6 to 2 with 2 abstentions that planning permission be refused.

44.9       RESOLVED – That the committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in section 11 of the report and the policies and guidance in section 7 and resolves to REFUSE planning permission for the reasons set out in section11.

              Note: Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the above application, Councillor Morris left the meeting and took no part in the consideration of the application, the debate and decision making process or the voting thereon. Councillor Moonan was also not present at the meeting during consideration or voting on the application.