Agenda item - BH2018/00700,Peter Pan's Adventure Golf, Madeira Drive, Brighton - Full Planning

Erection of 16 meters high rope climbing course above existing golf course.

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected: East Brighton

Erection of 16 metre high rope climbing course above existing golf course

            Officer Introduction

(1)          The Principal Planning Officer, Maria Seale, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, elevational drawings and photographs. She stated that the main considerations in determining the application related to (HW11); the principle of locating the use in the this location, the impact to tourism and the economy, the impact to the setting of the East Cliff Conservation Area and nearby listed buildings, the impact to amenity and sustainable transport. 22 letters of support, 5 letters in objection and 2 comments had been received. The Kingscliffe Society and the Conservation Advisory Group had also objected to the scheme.

Questions to Officers

(2)          The Representative from the Conservation Advisory Group stated that the Group had reviewed the application before condition 3 which stipulated that the structure would be removed by 1 October 2024 had been recommended. He was thus unable to advise the Committee as to what opinion the Group would take on a proposal for a temporary structure in situ for five years.

(3)          In response to Councillor Theobald, the Planning Officer stated that the application did not include any suggestion that additional refreshments would be provided but there was already a café attached to the golf course and playground. 

(4)          Councillor Littman was concerned that the recommendation to approve the scheme was inconsistent with previous decisions which had been to refuse similar schemes.

(5)          The Planning Officer responded that the objections which had been raised in the report by heritage officers were consistent with previous schemes. The application was distinct from previous schemes as it was time limited. The Planning Officer felt that the benefit of a temporary boost to the area outweighed the negative impact on heritage assets.

(6)          In response to Councillor Platts, the Planning Officer stated that the applicant may not have felt able to vary the application from previously unsuccessful ones as reducing the height enough to address the heritage impact would diminish its appeal to visitors so as to make the scheme no longer financially viable.

Debate and decision making process

(7)          Councillor Hyde stated that economic development for the area was very welcome and that while the proposal was not aesthetically pleasing the whole area was awaiting regeneration and was not particularly aesthetically pleasing either.

(8)          Councillor Theobald welcomed the application as it provided another attraction for the seafront and she felt it would improve the area.

(9)          Councillor Inkpin-Leissner stated that he was minded to support the officer recommendations and that compared to some of the other seafront attractions 16m was quite small.

(10)       Councillor Platts stated that the east end of the seafront did desperately need more attractions but she felt the proposal was low quality and she was grateful that it was time limited.

(11)       The Chair stated that she welcomed meanwhile uses along the seafront while the renovation of the arches was in progress.

(12)       Councillor Littman felt that the application added to the variety of the seafront and would drag footfall east away from the centre.

(13)       Councillor Morris stated that he agreed with the point raised in the debate and welcomed the meanwhile use.

(14)       The Representative from the Conservation Action Group stated that he felt that the application was very similar to other temporary attractions which had opened on the seafront as they were tied together by the theme of meanwhile use.

(17)     A vote was taken and on a vote of 9 For with no Against and 1 abstention it was agreed to grant planning approval.

18.4    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.

Note: Councillors Mac Cafferty and Morgan were not present for the consideration of the item.