Agenda item - BH2018/01181 - Preston Barracks, Mithras House, Watts Building, Lewes Road, Brighton - Reserved Matters

Watts Site: Reserved matters application pursuant to outline permission BH2017/00492 for approval of layout, scale and appearance relating to the University’s proposed Business School and linked canopy, forming defined site parcels 1 and 2 respectively.

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

Reserved matters application pursuant to outline permission BH2017/00492, as amended by BH2018/00636 and BH2018/01002, for approval of layout, scale and appearance relating to the University's proposed Business School and Linked Canopy, forming defined site parcels 1 and 2 respectively.

Officer Introduction

(1)          The Principal Planning Officer, Sarah Collins, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, elevational drawings, photographs and floor plans. She stated that the main considerations in determining the application related to the layout, scale and appearance of the Business School (Academic Building), the removal of the canopy from parcel 2, the accessibility of the Academic Building and the potential impact of the development on the environment, the local highway network and the street scene. BH2018/01181 was a reserved matters application which related to BH2017/00492.

Questions to the Planning Officer

(2)          Councillor Wares stated that he was concerned that the titled façade may mean that artificial lighting would be necessary during the day in rooms which would otherwise be adequately lit by natural light through unobscured glazing.

(3)          The Planning Officer responded that the design of the titles allowed enough light to pass through so that most teaching spaces would comply with light requirements for a residential property. The main circulation area was served by a large lightwell.

Debate and decision making process

(4)          Councillor Miller stated that he was disappointed that the canopy which had originally been proposed as an architectural feature tying the campus together had been lost but that this was not enough to warrant refusal.

(5)          Councillor Inkpin-Leissner stated that he was in favour of the application and liked that the design disguised the bulk of the building.

(6)          The Committee unanimous voted to grant planning permission.

31.2    RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out below and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informatives detailed in the report.