Agenda item - BH2020/03091 - Adastral House, 7-8 Westbourne Villas, Hove

1.    The Planning Manager introduced the application.

Speakers

2.    Planning consultant Gareth Giles spoke to the committee as a representative of objectors and noted the poor management plan submitted as part of the application. The plan should layout better care for the homeless, with only six staff, no accommodation or break rooms have been allocated to staff. The neighbours object to the application as do Sussex Police. A better management plan needs to be secured. The site is outside the core hotel zone and should be refused.

Questions for speaker

3.    Councillor Fishleigh was informed that Sussex Police had concerns relating to the operation of the current site.

Speaker

4.    Ward Councillor Appich addressed the committee and stated they had been contacted by a number of residents with concerns and recommended refusal as there was a home of multiple occupancy (HMO) next door to the hotel and further homeless accommodation at 19-20 Westbourne Villas. The hotel showed no sign of investment and was an unauthorised hostel. The management plan was not good. The loss of the hotel would be forever and Hove needs hotels. The councillor also noted that there were a number of vulnerable people in the street.

Questions for speaker

5.    Councillor Miller was informed that the Police have been called numerous times and anti-social behaviour has taken place. The residents did not want to be ‘nimbys’ and it was noted that the management plan may or may not reflect accurately what was going on inside the building.

Speaker

6.    Angelique Glata spoke to the committee as the applicant and informed the councillors that the current management plan was from 2018 and the hotel was run in partnership with the council. The population of the hotel was not transient, and the dwelling was a long term home for the residents with six being there since 2018. The hotel had 200hrs of supported service and 40hrs of management service with security staff on site at all times. The speaker had visited neighbours and built relationships with them. The hotel has a strict policy on anti-social behaviour.

Questions for speaker

7.    Councillor Miller was informed that the hotel has a nightly licence with staff commissioned by the council. The residents give a contribution of £10 per week.

8.    The Planning Manager noted the hotel was outside the core hotel zone and that whilst the policies in City Plan Part Two have some weight, applications should not be assessed solely against them, in this case emerging policy on HMOs.

Questions for officers

9.    Councillor Miller was informed by the case officer that large HMOs were sui generis.

10. Councillor Theobald was informed by the case officer that homeless people will continue to be housed at the site and each room has a bathroom. There are also separate toilets on the ground floor.

Debate

11. Councillor Shanks considered the residents were not homeless as they have accommodation at the site and the accommodation already exists so why should that not continue. The councillor supported the application.

12. Councillor Ebel was glad that some neighbours had a positive view of the hotel. The councillor supported the application.

13. Councillor Miller considered that the residents had a right to a home. The councillor understood the concerns over tenancies and the management plan, the impact on neighbours and occupiers and on balance the harm was considered to outweigh any good. The councillor did not support the application.

14. A vote was taken and out of the 9 Members present, the committee agreed by 7 to 2 to grant planning permission. (Councillor Henry did not take part in the decision making process).

15. 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 Informatives in the report.