Agenda item - BH2016/06478-The Coach House, 1-6 Lions Gardens, Withdean Avenue, Brighton -Full Planning

Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of part two part three storey building providing 26no residential apartments (C3) with associated landscaping, parking spaces, cycle and mobility scooter store.

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

Ward Affected: Withdean

              Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of part two part three storey building providing 26no residential apartments (C3) with associated landscaping, parking  spaces, cycle and mobility scooter store.

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

Officer Presentation

(2)             The Principal Planning Officer, Jonathan Puplett, gave a presentation by reference to site plans, photographs and elevational drawings delineating the proposed scheme. It was noted that the letters of objection received from Councillors A and K Norman had been circulated as addenda to the main agenda pack. This application had been submitted following withdrawal of the previous application and subsequent discussions between the applicant and officers. The main considerations in the determination of this application related to the principle of development, including density and affordable housing provision; design and appearance; standard of accommodation including housing mix and amenity space; amenity impacts; trees, landscaping and ecology; sustainable transport and sustainability.

(3)             It was considered that the proposed development would deliver a net increase in housing units of 19 units. The six bungalows and large house currently in situ would be replaced by 26 one-bedroom flats. In general a proposal comprising one-bedroom flats only would not be acceptable as this would not provide a mix of units which reflected the needs of the city, as in developments which included market housing there was a priority to secure two and three bedroom units. In this case however significant weight had been given to the fact that 100% affordable housing (affordable rent) was proposed, and also to the fact that the type of housing proposed, aimed at younger retirees, would meet an identified need in the city. Giving weight to these factors, the provision of one-bedroom units rather than a mix more reflective of the city’s needs was considered to be acceptable in this case and Minded to Grant approval was recommended.

(4)          It was noted that revised comments had been received from the Transport Team and that a further letter of objection had been received from Councillor Taylor and had been circulated with the Additional Representations List.

Public Speaker(s) and Questions

(5)          Miss Elliot spoke setting out her objections to the scheme and those of other neighbouring objectors. They contended that the proposals did not meet the requirements of Policy CP 10 and would also result in overshadowing and overlooking of neighbouring properties and did not respect the urban grain of the area.

(6)          Councillor Taylor spoke setting out his objections and those of his two fellow Ward Councillors in respect of the proposed scheme. They were of the view that given the configuration of the proposals that significant overlooking and detriment to neighbouring amenity would occur particularly to properties in Hazeldene Meads where it appeared that screening vegetation was to be removed but not replaced. It was considered that the additional number of dwelling units and vehicular movements which would be generated would result in unacceptable levels of overspill parking by visitors/carers. The nearest bus stop was situated some distance from the site and did not have the benefit of a shelter.

(7)          Mr Slater and Ms Huezo as representatives of the applicant spoke in support of the application. Mr Slater explained that the development being provided by the Lions Housing Trust (a not for profit charity), was being provided in direct response to an identified housing need. Based on their experience many of those moving into these units would not have a vehicle and would avail themselves of the weekly minibus provided in order to enable them to do their shopping. There would be a significant distance between the units and the nearest neighbouring dwellings and in addition windows would be provided at high level in order to allow in light without resulting in overlooking.

              Questions for Officers

(8)          Councillor Wealls sought clarification as to whether all of the units would be fully accessible.

(9)          Councillor Morris referred to arrangements for storage and collection of refuse seeking confirmation that they were considered adequate.

(10)       Councillor Cattell, the Chair, sought clarification whether this mirrored other Lions developments elsewhere in the city or whether it represented a new departure.

(11)       Councillor Moonan enquired whether the one bedroom units would have bedrooms which were large enough to accommodate a double bed and it was confirmed that they did. Noting the number of cycle parking spaces proposed she also sought confirmation that there would be provision for mobility scooters too.

(12)       Councillor Hyde stated that a number of references had been made to the distances between the development and neighbouring dwellings seeking confirmation of the shortest distances from the site to the boundaries with neighbouring properties.

              Debate and Decision Making Process

(13)       Councillor Inkpin-Leissner expressed support for the scheme but considered that it would be beneficial for the bus stop to be re-located and/or for a shelter to be provided.

(14)       Councillor C Theobald stated that she was aware of the high standard of provision by Lions, nonetheless she was concerned about loss of screening and overlooking, and additional traffic movements generated.

(15)       Councillor Miller stated that he welcomed the additional housing which would be provided particularly as it would cater to an identified need.

(16)       Councillors Morris and Moonan expressed their support for the scheme.

(17)       Councillor Hyde stated that for her it was difficult as she could see pluses and minuses arising from the scheme.

(18)       Councillor Wealls stated that he felt unable to support the scheme as put forward.

(19)       Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that he had listened carefully to all that had been put forward in support and objection to the scheme, on balance he was able to support the scheme as it would provide much needed housing for the younger retired population of the city.

(20)       Councillor Cattell, the Chair. Stated that whilst acknowledging the concerns of objectors and having considered all of points made very carefully she supported the scheme which provided good site coverage, would address an identified need and was in keeping with the area.

(21)       A vote was taken and of the 11 Members present when the vote was taken on a vote of 7 to 3 with 1 abstention Minded to Grant planning permission was given.

20.2       RESOLVED - That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves it is MINDED TO GRANT planning permission subject to the receipt of no representations being received raising additional material considerations within the re-consultation period, a s106 agreement and the Conditions and Informatives also set out in the report and to the additional conditions and informatives set out below:

AmendCondition 5 to read:

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, a scheme for landscaping shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the following:

a) Details of all hard surfacing;

b) Details of all boundary treatments including the vehicular and pedestrian gates to the front access of the site;

c) Details of all proposed planting to all communal areas and/or all areas fronting a street or public area, including numbers and species of plant, and details of size and planting method of any trees;

d) Details of subdivisions to form gardens for the ground floor flats.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and amenities for the occupiers of the development and to comply with policies QD27 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan and CP12 of the City Plan Part One.

AdditionalCondition 22:

i) No development shall take place until a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a Written Scheme of Archaeological Investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

ii) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the archaeological site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition [1] and that provision for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition has been secured, unless an alternative timescale for submission of the report is first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: This pre-commencement condition is imposed because it is necessary to ensure that the archaeological and historical interest of the site is safeguarded and recorded to comply with policy HE12 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan

AdditionalCondition 23:

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the redundant vehicle crossover associated with the existing vehicular access on to Withdean Avenue shall have been converted back to a footway by raising the existing kerb and footway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policies TR7 of the Brighton and Hove Local Plan and CP9 of the City Plan Part One.

Additional Informative 5:

The applicant is advised that additional scooter storage closer to the individual flats should be considered as part of the development.

              MINOR APPLICATIONS