Agenda item - BH2020/01548 - 23 Trafalgar Street, Brighton - Full Planning

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected; St Peter’s & North Laine

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, elevational drawings and photographs which showed the proposed scheme in the context of neighbouring development.

2.    The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the principle of development, design and heritage, the impact on neighbouring amenity and on the highways network.

Speakers

3.    Ward Councillor Deane spoke to the committee. The councillor considered that Members were absolutely right to refuse the application when it first came to committee and noted that councillors from all parties considered it as a ‘pub by stealth’ and is therefore an inappropriate change of use within the Cumulative Impact Zone. The councillor noted that although licensing conditions stipulate no outside drinking beyond 6 pm there would be noise and disturbance to nearby residents from smokers who will be permitted outside until 10 pm. The councillor also found it concerning that there is a whiskey bar open to the public in close proximity to Brighton Met College. This second application has at best minor tweaks compared to the first application and few, if any, concerns raised have been allayed. The councillor considered that although there have been numerous letters of support for this application the members are requested to take note of the postcodes of those supporters as the councillor believes a significant number are not from Brighton and do not represent the wishes of local people. The councillor urged the committee to abide by policy and again refuse this application, as there is very little difference between this and first time around.

4.    Sebastian Woolf, the applicant, spoke to the committee. The applicant thanked the case officer and stated they were a business owner in the whiskey trade and well known in the North Laine area and understood the dynamics of the area. The applicant did not consider they were off loading cheap alcohol but would be open for the sampling and selling of whiskies. Support had been received from around the UK and distributers would be invited to Brighton to enjoy the applicant’s own whiskey brand. Brighton is a good place for small businesses, and this will not be a large chain pub like venue. The independent whiskey will be bottled in Brighton with labels designed by local artists.

Questions for the speaker

5.    Councillor Fishleigh was informed that the applicant did not speak to the committee on the previous application. The applicant confirmed they had not spoken to the North Laine trader’s association but had spoken in person to other business owners and believed there would be employment opportunities and that people were excited by the proposal.

Questions for officers

6.    Councillor Fishleigh was informed that although not relevant a premises licence had been granted.

7.    Councillor Hills was informed that petitions and support had been received from across the UK.

8.    The Planning Manager stated that the material considerations within the objections or representations in support were to be considered, and not the number of objections or representations in support.

Debate

9.    Councillor Simson supported the applicant that they considered to be unique.

10. Councillor Fishleigh supported the application.

11. Councillor Osborne supported the application and considered the conditions to be acceptable.

12. Councillor Childs supported the application and considered the conditions to be good, along with the building improvements, and the employment and tourist benefits.

13. Councillor Littman considered the application to be better than the previous one and that the proposals would be good for the city. The councillor supported the application.

14. A vote was taken and the 8 Members who were present when the vote was taken the committee voted unanimously that planning permission be granted. (Councillor Yates was not present during the discussions and took no part in the decision making process).

15. RESOVLED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to be GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informatives as set out in the report.