A developer has won an appeal to build nine homes on a back-street site occupied by garages and workshops.
Burlington Property Group can now build eight three-storey houses and a bungalow on land behind 15-26 Lincoln Cottages, Brighton, after taking its case to the Planning Inspectorate.
Nine of the ten members of Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee voted to refuse planning permission when the application went before them last August.
By the time it reached the committee, Burlington had already submitted an appeal against non-determination, having submitted its application in December 2022.
The application prompted an outcry among Hanover residents, with 91 people submitting objections.
The council told the Planning Inspectorate: “Members considered that the cumulative impact on neighbours – in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of light and increased traffic and road issues – would be too significant to outweigh the benefits of the scheme and a smaller scheme would be more appropriate on the site.
“Additionally, members were not convinced that the additional scale and bulk of the proposed development so close to the boundaries would not be overdevelopment of the site or would be in-keeping with the character of the area.”
Burlington, represented by the agent Savills, said that the proposed development would take up 18 per cent less space than the existing buildings which cover 551 square metres. The proposed nine homes would cover 449 sqm.
The appeal response also argued that there was capacity for parking permits in the area and the council could limit applications through its transport team.
Burlington said: “The council has not provided any evidence to robustly demonstrate that the impacts of the scheme would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme.
“It is accepted that the site is heavily constrained and therefore the design-led approach adopted has given careful consideration to the relationship with surrounding properties in developing the layout and massing for the scheme.
“It is acknowledged that there will be a change in the outlook from existing properties. However, the high-quality design approach adopted will ensure that any adverse impacts are minimised.”
The planning inspector said that, during a site visit, there was plenty of on-street parking in the area.
And although the site included garages and workshops, it was earmarked for housing in the City Plan – the council’s planning blueprint.
The inspector said: “The construction and subsequent occupation of nine dwellings on the appeal site would undoubtedly generate types and levels of noise and activity above those currently generated within the site.
“However, reasonable levels of noise and activity also result from the use of surrounding land and buildings.”
Local opinion carries no weight despite all the rhetoric from the council and the government suggesting local people get involved 😒
Interestingly, most people don’t understand that just because they consult on something, there is no obligation to act on public comments.
We understand the issue of obligation, you miss the point.
it has been demonstrated time and time again that local opinion is of no consequence. Local opinion SHOULD genuinely carry some weight when decisions impact local communities The sad simple truth is, it doesn’t.
Is local opinion important when considering planning applications?
Yes it is.
But the law states that the planning committee can only decide an application based on planning grounds and an ‘I don’t like it’ or ‘my house price will go down’ aren’t valid planning grounds for rejection.
A single cogent objection will have more weight than a petition that contains hundreds of signatures that has no planning grounds in it.
But equally the law basicaly favours approval of an application unless there are proper planning grounds to object.
In this case the committee voted to reject the application but the inspector felt differently.
It’s not a difficult concept, simply give more weight to local opinion……it’s an easy concept to understand.
Get the law changed then to give greater emphasis to relevant comments from residents then. Because the planning committee has to act within the law..
BUT planning isn’t a popularity contest and nor should it be.
Of course local opinion should be considered but how representative are local consultations? The people who respond are self-selected. The people who are not represented are those who will eventually live in these much needed new homes.
The people who are not represented also include all the current nearby residents, who will be adversely affected by over development in an already seriously overcrowded area. This is not just ignoring local consultations either, it’s riding roughshod over council decisions. I see the developers are now demanding parking should be included as well, this was completely ruled out during the consultation, for very good reasons. It’s a bad idea all round and I hope it’s stopped.
I feel for your predicament. I’m sorry to say that hope and even pray will not help, their money speaks louder.
You hope it’s stopped?
The whole article is about the fact that the planning inspector approved the scheme!
Yes, I did read the article, thanks. We don’t have to accept every bad decision because it’s made by a ‘higher authority’, there are other routes of complaint. It ain’t over till it’s over.