A growing Brighton business faced a grilling over a proposal to include a basement in an office building that already has planning permission but has yet to be built.
Lighting specialist Nicolaudie UK came under fire for the standard practice of putting up a fence to secure the site in Davigdor Road, Hove, between Preece House and the new Gradino flats.
At a Brighton and Hove City Council Planning Committee meeting, the firm’s agent Will Clutton heard a barrage of complaints because the fence meant that people living in Palmer and Harvey House no longer had step-free access to Davigdor Road, they said.
The firm, behind the lighting of the Victoria Fountain, in Brighton, and Tower Bridge, in London, would keep 18 local people in jobs in Brighton and Hove as a result of the move from the current Queen’s Road base to Davigdor Road.
After hearing the concerns raised at the Planning Committee meeting, Nicolaudie UK managing director Simon Bennett said that the tech business would speak to the council’s building control team.
Mr Bennett said: “We’re open to finding a positive solution. We wouldn’t want to block a public right of way.”
Labour councillor Trevor Muten, who represents Goldsmid ward, spoke for neighbours when the committee met at Hove Town Hall, this afternoon (Wednesday 28 October).
Councillor Muten said: “The proposed basement excavation also raises legitimate concerns about construction noise, dust, vibration and potential structural effects on neighbouring buildings.”
The Planning Committee was told that Palmer and Harvey House used to be an office building but had been extended and turned into flats in recent years – and the Gradino flats were newly built.
Residents should have been warned that permission had been granted four years ago for a new office building yet to be built – although work on the scheme only officially started last year.
Labour councillor Julie Cattell, a former chair of the Planning Committee and a professional planner, said that she sympathised if residents had been badly advised but this wasn’t a legitimate consideration.
And Green councillor Kerry Pickett said: “It’s unfortunate if some residents didn’t realise that this was happening.”
One neighbour, Tony Binns, a retired professor of geography and planning, said: “This is the most ridiculous application that I have ever seen. It’s totally inappropriate for this site.”
He said that the original planning permission was granted before anyone had moved into P&H House or the Gradino flats, adding: “The whole situation has completely changed.”
But a report to councillors said that the footprint of the proposed building would not change as a result of the latest application.
The report said: “A number of representations received regarding the current application raise objections to the development as a whole, including the principle, scale and form of the proposed building.
“However, these matters were fully considered under the original application and the principle of a three-storey office building on the site has already been accepted through the grant of planning permission which remains extant.
“The current application … seeks permission for amendments to the approved scheme. As such, the assessment focuses on the acceptability of (only) the proposed changes.
“Concerns regarding noise and disturbance arising during the construction phase have been raised. However, construction activities are temporary in nature and do not form part of the permanent development proposed under this application.”
Councillors were told that they could add a condition requiring a “construction environmental management plan” and they voted to do so.
The report also said: “Representations have raised concerns regarding pedestrian and disabled access to Palmer House and other areas of the wider site.
“However, the current … application does not propose amendments to the wider access arrangements serving the site or adjoining land. The application relates to amendments to the approved office building … and does not alter the approved means of access.
“The issue of access to the other developments on the site falls outside the scope of the amendments currently under consideration.”
The latest proposal included the addition of solar panels on the roof.
Labour councillor Tobias Sheard said that the application was for relatively minor changes to a scheme that already had planning permission.
And other members of the committee said that they were voting for it reluctantly because of their concerns about wheelchair access to the neighbour flats.
Mr le Duc, I am curious how this will be handled next week, as the planning law changes come into force. Will existing considerations be continued, or will they be immediately moved to the new process?