New home at 165 Hollingdean Terrace, Brighton

The proposed development

The application was for a modest new home, with the agent saying its scale had been reduced during discussions with officers.

“The Planning manager introduced the application to the committee.”

“Liam Russell addressed the committee as the agent representing the applicant and stated that they had been developing in Brighton and Hove for the last 25 years and were aware that each site needed an honest assessment. Any development should improve the area. This proposal is for a modest new home, designed with positive attitude to architecture. The agent has been working with planning officers and has reduced the scale of the development.”

Minutes

The site and surroundings

The garden would be 63 square metres, with access from Harrington Place and a gated access from Quarry Bank.

“Councillor Theobald was informed that the main access to the proposal would be from Harrington Place and the tree in the rear garden is not in a conversation area or covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The garden at 165 Hollingdean Terrace will be 63sqm. The side elevation windows will be fixed shut and obscure glazed. It was noted there would be some overshadowing given the topography of the site and orientation; however, this was not considered harmful enough to refuse the application.”

“Councillor Shanks was informed that the tree may only be removed outside of the nesting season. The access from Quarry Bank will be gated.”

Minutes

Concerns about the proposal

Objections concerned overdevelopment, garden loss, the tree and wildlife, neighbouring light and privacy, access, the substation and parking problems.

“Ward Councillor Fowler sent a speech to be read out by the Democratic Services officer as follows: I wish to object on the grounds of overdevelopment, the harmful impact on neighbouring residents and the surrounding environment. Having visited, I believe the proposal would result in overcrowding and the loss of a significant proportion of the garden space belonging to No. 165.”

“There is also the nearby substation to consider, and overall, the proposal appears to be trying to squeeze a development in with minimal garden provision and insufficient regard for the impact on neighbouring residents. I would request that an ecological survey be carried out to confirm whether foxes or other wildlife inhabit the vacant land.”

Minutes

Who spoke

A ward councillor’s objection was read out, and the agent spoke in support of the applicant’s proposal.

What members discussed

Members generally supported the design and housing use, while noting the small site, some overshadowing and the loss of the tree.

“Councillor Cattell considered that as there were very few brownfield sites left, this was a good development. Objectors have considered the proposals to be out of place; however, the design is modern in style and others have extended in the same style. There are a number of dormers in area of a similar design. The councillor supported the application.”

“Councillor Theobald considered the space to be good, however, there would be some overshadowing, and it was a shame to lose the tree. The negotiated reductions are good. The councillor supported the application.”

Minutes

The committee’s vote

The committee voted unanimously to grant planning permission.

“A vote was held and the committee voted unanimously to grant planning permission.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the report.

“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.”

Minutes