Agenda item - BH2017/04051,Land to the rear of 35 Brunswick Place Hove - Full Planning

Demolition of existing garden wall & erection of 1no. three bedroom dwelling (C3).

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT

Ward Affected: Brunswick and Adelaide

Demolition of existing garden wall & erection of 1no.three bedroom dwelling (C3).

Officer Introduction

(1)       The Principal Planning Officer, Jonathan Puplett, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, elevational drawings, photographs and floor plans.

(2)       The main considerations in determining the application related to the principle of the proposed development, the design of the dwelling, the impact of the development on the Brunswick Town Conservation area and adjacent listed buildings, the standard of accommodation the dwelling would provide, the impact on neighbouring amenity and sustainable transport considerations. The site was vacant and the property would adjoin a similar new-build dwelling (BH2014/03838). 10 letters of objections had been submitted to the planning department. It was the Planning Officer’s opinion that the proposed design was sympathetic to the character of the area and would provide a good standard of accommodation to future residents. The application was therefore recommended for approval.

            Questions to the Planning Officer

(3)       In response to Councillor Theobald, the Planning Officer stated that while the rooms were quite small the proposed dwelling did exceed the minimum size for a three bedroom dwelling as defined in Government guidelines which the Council could refer to but not enforce.

(4)       In response to Councillor Miller’s concern that the ancillary room on the ground floor could be used as a fourth bedroom, the Planning Officer stated that the room looked to be around 2m x 2m which would make it a very small bedroom and he felt the description on the floor plan was fair.

(5)       Councillor Mac Cafferty was concerned that there had been no sunlight/ daylight report for the application especially as neighbouring buildings had ground floor and lower ground floor flats for which there may be a significant loss of light.

(6)       The Planning Officer responded that for smaller applications daylight reports were not provided as a matter of course and officers decided if they could adequately judge impact without a full report on a case by case basis.

            Debate and decision making process

(8)       The Committee voted unanimously to grant planning permission.

133.2  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 and for the reasons set out in the report.