Developer told to knock down new house

A developer who built a bigger house than he had planning permission for has been told to knock it down.

Steve Banks was granted permission on appeal for a two-bedroom house replacing a garage to the rear of 43 Rushlake Road in Coldean in 2020.

Work began to build a house on a plot now known as 22 Rushlake Close – but the finished result was not the same as the approved plans.

Mr Banks has subsequently twice attempted to get permission for what has actually been built, or close to it.

But Brighton and Hove City Council has refused both applications – and the second attempt has now also been dismissed by planning inspector L Francis.

As well as being taller and larger, the built house includes a cinema room not on the original plans – which the council says is effectively a third bedroom.

In appealing the council’s refusal, Mr Banks said: “At appeal for the previous application, the inspectorate found … the appeal should succeed.

“While varying slightly from the approved scheme, the development proposed here inherently
follows the same principles which were not deemed to be of significant harm previously.”

He said this application included lowering the boundary wall to address some of the highways safety issues.

He added: “The applicant has written to the council regarding the small strip of land to the front of his property for which he believes he has adverse-possession rights.”

Two neighbours commented on the appeal. One said: “The applicant has demonstrated, repeatedly, that they have no respect for planning and that they intend to manipulate the situation until they get what they want.

“The relabelling of a room is a veiled attempt to disguise this clearly inappropriate space becoming a bedroom.

“This room is not fit for purpose as a bedroom, the only way to ensure this property is not used in an unsafe way is to reject this appeal.”

Another said: “Rushlake Close is a narrow, hilly residential street used daily by families, children walking to school, pedestrians, including the elderly and vehicles.

“The current arrangement already creates a safety hazard; the appeal does nothing meaningful to fix it.”

Francis – whose first name the planning inspectorate refused to provide, or to clarify whether they are a man or woman – was happy with the cinema room, but said the second bedroom’s new location in the basement gives it inadequate lighting and ventilation.

This room has been squeezed in by reducing the size of the courtyard garden to the point it becomes unusable, according to Francis.

They also said the boundary wall’s height reduces sightlines on the public highway, causing a danger when cars exit onto the road.

In their report, published last month, they say: “The harm I have identified to the character and appearance of the area, to the living conditions of future occupiers and to highway safety, would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal.”

Brighton and Hove City Council has now issued an enforcement notice requiring the house be demolished – with a deadline of 28 August to comply.

It requires Mr Banks to: “Entirely demolish the dwellinghouse, associated hardstanding and boundary walls.

“Remove from the land all debris and materials from the land resulting from compliance.

“Re-instate the grass verges as shown on the attached plan as previously existing.”