Agenda item - BH2021/01360 - 1-13 Shelldale Road Portslade - Full Planning

1.       The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee.

Speakers

2.       Robert Rosenthal addressed the committee as an objecting neighbour and stated that they were speaking on behalf of other neighbours to the site, and they did not object to the proposals as such. Concerns related to the impact on the fabric of the adjoining property. It was considered that the developer had taken a cavalier attitude to the neighbours who sought assurance that the developer will reach an agreement with the council’s building control team. Other concerns related to the amount of excavation that the development will require, some 8,000 cubic metres approximately. The construction works will create noise and disturbance. The council were asked to send a clear message to the developers that agreements must be reached with neighbours during demolition and construction.

3.       The Senior Solicitor noted that Building Control matters were separate to planning matters and not for this committee to consider, as with the matters under the Party Wall Act which were civil issues. The committee could not make assurances requested by the objecting neighbour.

4.       Jon Puplett addressed the committee as the agent for the applicant and stated that the application related to a redundant brownfield site and the previous use for car repairs disturbed the neighbours. The design of the development extends the terrace and pays respect to the existing buildings. Soft landscaping is to be added and the new dwellings would be of a sustainable design including modern office space. The location is accessible, and the scheme will enhance the street scene. The developer has paid full regard to the neighbours and respects the Party Wall Act and the development plan.

Questions

5.       Councillor Yates was informed that the agent has spoken with the neighbour and answered questions and is happy to answer more in future. The applicant is a responsible developer and notes the conditions attached to the report. The Party Wall Act is a civil matter in which the developer will engage. The neighbour’s concerns are noted, and the developer wants to be a good neighbour.

Debate

6.       Councillor Ebel considered the proposals to be a great improvement on the existing buildings and noted the much needed four new large family homes to be constructed. The councillor supported the application.

7.       Councillor Shanks considered the development to be a good use of the site and encouraged the developer to have discussions with the neighbour.

8.       Councillor McNair considered the four new family homes with garages to be good, however, the grey appearance was not considered to mimic other existing houses in the area. It was considered that the narrow window design made the new dwellings look narrow, however, in general the design was good.

9.       Councillor Yates considered the application to be a good mixed use scheme with four new dwellings and office space. The councillor supported the application.

Vote

13.      A vote was taken, and the committee voted unanimously that planning permission be granted. (Councillor Moonan did not take part in the discussions or decision-making process).

10.      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 as set out in the report.