Agenda item - BH2021/01013 - 4 Keymer Road, Brighton - Full Planning

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

Speakers

2.       Joanne Avison addressed the committee as an objector and stated that the key aspect of their objection to the application was the impact on the neighbouring properties. The proposals will block daylight, be overbearing and result in a loss of privacy, contrary to planning policy. The case officer did not view the property from the neighbour’s property; however, ward Councillor McNair did visit. The two storey development will result in a loss of daylight and privacy. The scheme is broadly the same as the previously refused application. The small garden means the development will be too near the neighbouring property. A bungalow would be more suitable as it would be smaller. The committee are asked to look at it again.

3.       Ward Councillor McNair addressed the committee and stated that they were not aware of the previous reasons for refusal, however, 18 letters of objection have been received. It is considered that the scheme will have an overbearing impact on the neighbour’s property contrary to planning policy. The balance between garden and dwelling will be different from the surrounding area. The councillor also stated they had visited the neighbours’ homes. There is no parking and cycles will not be suitable in this hilly location. Nearby projects have been granted with parking, so why not here. The development will result in a loss of amenities with loss of light and space, and no parking. The neighbours will be in the shadow of the development and the scheme will set a precedent.

4.       Nick Jones addressed the committee as the agent for the application and stated that the application was for a two storey dwelling and the design has been worked from first principles not from the previously refused applications. The design is sensible and considerate and responds to the reasons for refusal of the previous applications. The proposals are significantly lower than the previous scheme and smaller. It was noted that there is a significant level change between the objecting neighbour and the application site, and the parking accords with parking standards. No parking was given for the previously refused schemes.

5.       The case officer informed the committee that the separation distances between the proposed dwelling and the neighbour were approximately 12 to 14 metres. The neighbour and the proposed dwelling will be set at an oblique angle so the view from the windows will not be direct.

Vote

6.       A vote was taken, and the committee agreed by 5 to 1 that planning permission be granted.

7.       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.