Councillors have rejected plans to build nine homes on a backstreet site in Brighton occupied by garages and workshops.
Nine of the ten members of the council’s Planning Committee voted against the scheme after hearing about the potential adverse effects on its immediate neighbours in Lincoln Cottages and Lincoln Street.
The developer, Burlington Property Group, has already submitted an appeal because the council took too long to make a decision about the proposed homes in Hanover.
The committee would have turned down the project if it were still in a position to make the decision.
Meanwhile, Burlington has submitted a second planning application – for two-storey homes and a pocket park – which it said addressed concerns raised in an “urban design report” for the site.
Brighton and Hove City Council received 91 objections to the original scheme, with concerns including loss of light, loss of amenity and loss of privacy.
Lincoln Street resident Liz Cook spoke for 62 neighbours who commissioned a planning consultant’s report objecting to the scheme for eight three-storey houses, each with three bedrooms, and a bungalow.
She said: “Hanover is characterised by back-to-back gardens, but this development creates a new street frontage immediately outside our bedroom windows.
“Noise and light pollution from 24-hour human traffic and street lighting which will seriously harm our sleep, wellbeing and mental health.”
All the neighbours were concerned about where up to 18 bins for rubbish and recycling would go, against a house wall, she said, with the entrance to the site already a fly-tipping hot spot.
Labour councillor Tim Rowkins, who represents Hanover and Elm Grove, said that it was a rare site, providing affordable workshops for small businesses, craftspeople and artists.
Councillor Rowkins said that neighbours were pragmatic and understood that the site would become housing.
He said: “What they (neighbours) seek is a collaborative approach to arrive at a design that works for everybody and addresses their legitimate concerns.
“A reduced footprint, more tree planting on the perimeter to support wildlife and reduce the extent to which the properties, including the proposed new units, are overlooked, and greater consideration for refuse and recycling collection, all reasonable requests.”
Burlington’s agent, Oliver Milne, of Savills, said that the site was allocated for up to 18 homes in the council’s City Plan policy document – and the proposal for nine homes was a “sensitive design”.
He said: “We are confident we have struck the right balance between securing the optimal viable use for this unutilised brownfield site in delivering much-needed new homes while respecting the surrounding properties and ensuring that levels of light are acceptable for an urban environment such as this.
“The scheme shows no signs of overdevelopment, with the new homes meeting all required standards.”
Labour councillor Paul Nann said that he struggled with the scheme’s effects on people living in Lincoln Cottages.
He said: “It turns Lincoln Cottages into a dropping off and picking up zone. I was worried to hear it would become the place where residents’ bins are stored.
“The whole character of that small piece of the world would change completely. It would be a massive knock on the amenity of the people living in that area.”
Conservative councillor Carol Theobald was not so concerned about parking as there is less car-ownership in Hanover and the centre of Brighton than there is in outlying areas such as Portslade or Patcham.
She said: “It might be a lot better with two-storey properties instead of three because it does block out the people living behind. The overlooking is a problem.”
Green councillor Sue Shanks said that she would have liked to have seen affordable housing on the site.
Brighton and Hove Independent councillor Bridget Fishleigh proposed grounds for being minded to refuse the application.
They included overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of light, the layout and density of building, design and appearance, loss of amenity and traffic and road issues.
The council’s Planning Committee then gave its final verdict on the scheme during it. meeting this afternoon (Wednesday 2 August) at Hove Town Hall
Shame it’s being built at all. There are plenty of derelict sites and buildings that should be developed first before we start demolishing buildings that are in use.
Totally agree Lex Angel. It’s all about the current government policy to build new homes. It’s making an awful impact on the country. I wouldn’t mind if it was all genuinely affordable housing that people in need of decent housing could access. I wonder who can afford to live in all of the brand new houses being built on every last scrap of land we have left.
It doesn’t matter whether new housing is affordable or not – the people buying them will not be bidding on houses elsewhere, reducing demand overall. If enough houses are built, prices will even start to come down. The problem is not enough houses are being built in the places where people want to live i.e. the south east. And that is because the insane planning system prevents towns from expanding, and means that the only option left is to develop tiny scraps of infill like this.
Really? Can’t you see any drawbacks to ever expanding towns and hyper development? Also what if all these local proposed homes went to people buying second homes? Does that make no difference?
I wonder if you are aware that there are enough bedrooms in the UK already for the whole population. Council housing that stays council housing is one thing. Ever more properties for the wealthy are another.
Principle Residency Clauses are a good option to explore for new builds.
“Last scrap of land” isn’t even remotely accurate. Not even a stretch.