Agenda item - BH2016/02053-Land Adjacent to Martello Lofts, 315 Portland Road, Hove

Erection of 2no three storey buildings, first building comprising of 3no one bedroom flats and 1no two bedroom flat. Second building comprises of six office spaces with cycle stores and associated works.

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected: Wish

              Erection of 2no three storey buildings, first building comprising of 3no one bedroom flats and 1 no two bedroom flat. Second building comprising of six office spaces with cycle stores and associated works.

(1)             It was noted that Members had observed this site during the course of their site visits.

Officer Presentation

(2)          The Principal Planning Officer, Stewart Glasser, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, photographs and elevational drawings. The application related to a parcel of land site fronting Portland Road on the corner of the Portland Road Trading Estate and had been used formerly as the on site car parking for the offices within the adjacent building, Martello Lofts. The building had been converted recently into residential accommodation and had associated parking at the rear of the building. Consent was sought to erect 2no. three storey buildings. The first to comprise 3 no one bedroom flats and 1 no. two bedroom flat, the second to comprise six office spaces with cycle stores and associated works.

(3)          It was considered that the proposed buildings would not significantly harm the character and appearance of the existing site, street scene or the surrounding area. The residential block would be located alongside 305 Portland Road, a two storey residential property with a separation of 3.1m being retained between the proposed building and 305 Portland Road. The eaves heights of these two properties would be of a similar height. No windows had been positioned in the eastern elevation and the proposed rear dormer and balcony would mainly provide views to the rear, which were predominantly commercial buildings. Obscure views would be introduced across the rear part of the garden areas of the adjoining residential properties, however mutual overlooking of these areas already existed from first floor windows. It was therefore considered that the proposed building would not result in significant overlooking or loss of privacy between the buildings. The proposed building would be located approximately 17m from the Martello Lofts and whilst there were a number of side windows facing that block the level of separation between the two was considered to be such that no direct overlooking or loss of privacy would occur.

(4)          It was noted that since the Highway Authority’s original comments had been made, the applicant had submitted an additional trip generation and impact assessment. The parking bays on the proposed development had previously been associated with Martello House when it had been in office use. Considering the two adjacent sites as a whole in assessing the net impact of development was considered reasonable in this instance and approval was therefore recommended.

Debate and Decision Making Process

(5)          Councillor Morris stated that supported the application which he considered would effect significant improvements.

(6)          Councillor Hyde considered that the simple but contemporary design proposed was in keeping with the proposed location stating that she supported the officer recommendation.

(7)          A vote was taken and the 9 Members who were present when the vote was taken voted unanimously to grant planning permission in the terms set out below.

20.7       RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informative also set out in the report and as amended below:

              Delete – Conditions 10 and 14

              Additional Informative 2:

              The applicant is advised that a disabled person’s parking space should be provided for the occupants of, and visitors to, the office building.

              Note: Councillors Greenbaum and C Theobald were not present at the meeting during consideration of, or voting, in respect of the above application. Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of the above application Councillor C Theobald left the meeting during its consideration and took no part in the debate or decision making process