Plans to build an extra storey on top of a modern block of flats in Hove were approved by councillors this afternoon (Wednesday 8 January).
They voted unanimously in favour of a new three-bedroom penthouse for the block in The Upper Drive at a meeting at Hove Town Hall.
Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee was told that the third floor would be extended and a fourth storey added to block C at 9 The Upper Drive.
As a result, the third floor would included a new two-bedroom flat although an existing flat would reduce from three to two bedrooms as part of the scheme.
Labour councillor Jackie O’Quinn, who represents Goldsmid ward, spoke on behalf of 14 objectors to the proposals at the Planning Committee meeting.
She said that she walked along the road regularly and was disappointed to see “yet another” application to increase the height of one the blocks that make up 9 The Upper Drive.
Councillor O’Quinn said: “I watched the four blocks being built and then saw the two other blocks of flats built on this section of The Upper Drive.
“(It) has created a very disjointed appearance as there are two private detached houses between number 9 and the two new blocks of flats.
“The new blocks appear to have encouraged applications for the extra storeys at number 9 as this area became one of flatted developments – a chicken and egg situation.”
The applicant Edward Addison urged the committee to read the design and access statement prepared by his agent, Dowsett Mayhew, showing how the application complied with council planning policies.
Mr Addison added that a report by Reeves Transport Planning showed that the pressure on parking would not worsen as a result of the two extra flats.
The Reeves report relied on a survey that was carried out during the early hours of Monday 10 June and Wednesday 12 June.
It said that there were 92 vehicles parked and 52 spaces in the area which included The Upper Drive between Old Shoreham Road and The Drive, and Wilbury Villas between Old Shoreham Road and Wilbury Avenue.
Labour councillor Jacob Allen said: “You can either build outwards or you can build upwards.
“Given we’re surrounded by a glorious national park, which I’m privileged to represent a portion of, I’m a big fan of increasing density within the urban environment of the city.”
Brighton and Hove Independent councillor Mark Earthey said: “It is inevitable that block B is going to be raised to the same level so we’re going to have all three at the same height.”
So why wasn’t this built in the first place, when it would have been easier to do so?
Ask the developer!
Money, time, resources, changes to the area, interest, opportunity, etc.
Makes better use of space, means 1 less plot built on.
Penthouse? Lol. Talk about putting lipstick on a pig.
Councillor O’Quinn really doesn’t like progress does she!!!! She seems to moan about virtually every proposed development in her ward. Who cares if they want to chuck an extra flat on the roof.
To be fair, if that’s what her constituents are saying, she’s representing their views faithfully.
To be fair to Jackie O’Quinn, she presented 14 objections from residents. The same residents she was elected to represent. What do you expect her to do, ignore them? I wish there were more representatives with a backbone who can see little benefit to the wider community from this garish overdevelopment.
Meanwhile the thousands of other residents who made no objection couldn’t care less. If decisions were made on the basis of a handful of objections nothing would ever get built anywhere, ever. And why does a one storey extension have to somehow benefit to the wider community? This isn’t a large development, it’s a single storey. As long as the extension complies with planning guidelines (which it does) we all have the right to extend our property as we see fit.
I agree that the councillor should represent those who voiced an opinion either way, as is her elected role, however I do also agree that whilst comments should be taken into consideration, if they don’t present a strong argument, then developments should go ahead.