Agenda item - BH2020/01899 - 4 Tandridge Road, Hove - Full Planning
navigation and tools
You are here - Home : Council and Democracy : Councillors and Committees : Agenda item
BH2020/01899 - 4 Tandridge Road, Hove - Full Planning
RECOMMENDATION – GRANT
Ward Affected: Wish
1. It was noted that an in-depth presentation had been provided by officers in advance of the meeting and was included on the council website detailing the scheme by reference to site plans, elevational drawings and photographs which showed the proposed scheme in the context of neighbouring development.
2. The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the principle of the development, the design and appearance of the proposed dwellings and the impact of the proposal on neighbouring amenity. The standard of accommodation to be provided, transport implications and sustainability and are also material considerations.
3. Matthew Binns spoke to the committee as an objector. The speaker considered that their family would be adversely affected by the application. There did not appear to be any engagement by the applicant with the neighbours or a site visit to assess the impact of the proposals. The development will be incongruous. The property is two dwellings already and had been refused before. The speaker considered that they would lose light, and there appeared to be no assessment of this, loss of privacy as the rear of the new building will align with rear boundary of the neighbouring property. There have been other applications along Tandridge Road and this application will in result in? overcrowding with too many properties together. The speaker asked the committee to refuse the application.
Questions to speaker
4. Councillor Fishleigh was informed that the garage to the rear of the application site may have been turned into an office. The councillor was also informed that the application was considered to affect the light and privacy of the neighbouring properties. It was also noted a previous application for a replacement dwelling was granted planning permission. The councillor was informed that there were two dwellings on the application site.
5. Councillor Miller was informed that the new builds in the road were of a different design and had received little objection.
Questions for officers
6. Councillor Fishleigh was informed that a site visit had not taken place and as far as officers knew, the property was known as one dwelling.
7. Councillor Miller confirmed that a site visit would be appreciated to understand the site better.
8. The Senior Solicitor asked the committee whether they were happy for the case officer to carry out the site visit or would the Members wish to attend.
9. Councillor Littman addressed the committee and all the Members agreed that the case officer should carry out the site visit.
10. The Planning Manager stated that an extant planning permission existed for the site allowing two dwellings to be built.
11. A vote was taken and on a unanimous vote, all 8 committee Members agreed to defer the application pending a site visit to ascertain whether the application property was in use as one or two dwellings. (Councillor Yates was not present during the discussions and took no part in the decision making process).
12. RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration the report and agrees to defer the application pending a site visit.
- Header, 4 Tandridge Road, item 48F PDF 22 KB
- Plan BH2020 01899 - 4 Tandridge Road, item 48F PDF 311 KB
- Report BH2020 01899 - 4 Tandridge Road, item 48F PDF 86 KB
- BH2020 01899 - 4 Tandridge Road (003), item 48F PDF 1 MB