Agenda item - BH2019/03590 - 9 - 12 Middle Street Brighton BN1 1AL - Full Planning

skip navigation and tools

Agenda item

BH2019/03590 - 9 - 12 Middle Street Brighton BN1 1AL - Full Planning

RECOMMENDATION – MINDED TO GRANT

Ward Affected : Regency

Minutes:

            Demolition of existing building and construction of a part three storey (to rear), part six storey, plus basement with associated roof top plant mixed use replacement building incorporating B1, A3 (Café) and A3/A4 (Restaurant/Bar) uses with associated hard and soft landscaping, ancillary cycle parking and other associated works.

 

(1)        It was noted that an in-depth presentation had been provided by officers in advance of the meeting and was included on the council website detailing the scheme by reference to site plans, floor plans, elevational drawings and photographs which also showed the scheme in the context of neighbouring development. Reference was made to an additional visual which had been circulated the previous day and to further discussions which had taken place with the highways authority. It had been agreed that the appropriate traffic management arrangements could be secured by condition rather than by Heads of Terms.

 

(2)        It was noted that the main considerations in determining the application related to the principle of developing the site for a B1 office led proposal, the impact on the character and appearance of the locality, conservation area and nearby listed buildings, the impact on neighbouring amenity, impact in terms of sustainable transport, sustainability and biodiversity. Whilst the scheme would result in the loss of the existing building, which was regrettable it had been demonstrated that the building was in a poor state and would require substantial works to rectify, which would compromise its appearance and the proposed replacement building was considered to be of high quality and appropriate within its context. Although the new building would have a slight negative impact on neighbouring amenity it would be in keeping with the pattern of development in the area and the harm was not such to warrant refusal of planning permission.

 

(3)        Overall, the scheme would deliver substantial benefits, including high quality office space which would meet modern requirements, would provide an active frontage which could help to kickstart regeneration of the street and provide a well-designed modern building which would complement nearby heritage assets; therefore planning permission was recommended.

 

            Questions of Officers

 

(4)        Councillor Theobald asked to view additional visuals showing the frontage and rear of the building and enquired whether/what remedial works could have been undertaken. It was explained that the building was in a poor condition including its façade and that a structural survey indicating the current level of deterioration had accompanied the application.

 

(5)        Councillor Fishleigh asked whether it would be possible to require the existing frontage to be retained/rebuilt as part of the new building and it was explained that the building was not listable, this was not considered to be an economically viable option, it was beyond economic repair and that such treatment would be likely to result in a patchy appearance and was unlikely to effect lasting improvement to the structure.

 

(6)        In answer to further questions it was explained that the building had been vacant for a period of time and that the fabric of the building had deteriorated in consequence.

 

(7)        In answer to further questions by Councillor Theobald it was explained that as the building was not listed works being undertaken on site would not have been monitored and the extent of any works being undertaken would not have been apparent until the scaffolding had been removed. The Legal Adviser to the Committee, Hilary Woodward, reminded Members that they were required to determine the application before them.

 

(8)        Councillor Miller referred to the position of the access gates enquiring whether they were to be re-positioned and whether their location would prevent access to the rear yard area other than through the building itself.

 

(9)        Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that he was very familiar with the area in which the site was located, citing recent development which had not weathered well as it was not sufficiently robust for the marine environment in which it had been used. He asked whether a condition could be applied to any permission granted in order to ensure that this was taken account of. It was confirmed that an informative could be added to ensure that the applicants were aware of Members concerns. Members of the Committee indicated that they were in agreement that such an informative be added.

 

            Debate and Decision Making Process

 

(10)      Councillor Theobald stated that she considered that the existing building was unique and should be retained and would not therefore vote in support of the proposed scheme.

 

(11)      Councillor Miller stated that whilst the proposed scheme would impact slightly on neighbouring buildings, he did not consider that to be significant. As the Committee were required to determine the application as put forward and in view of the fact that it would deliver modern office accommodation to a high specification he felt able to vote in support of the scheme.

 

(12)      A vote was taken and on a vote of 9 to 1 minded to grant planning permission was granted.

 

119.2    RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves that it is MINDED TO GRANT planning permission, subject to a s106 planning obligation and Conditions and Informatives also set out in the report, SAVE THAT should the s106 planning obligation not be completed on or before 12 August 2020 the Head of Planning is hereby authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in section 9 of the report. An informative to be added requiring the applicant to consider the materials to be used to seek to ensure that they were sufficiently robust for use in a marine environment.

Supporting documents:

 


Brighton & Hove City Council | Hove Town Hall | Hove | BN3 3BQ | Tel: (01273) 290000 | Mail: info@brighton-hove.gov.uk | how to find us | comments & complaints