A Brighton chippy is fighting to keep a tiled outside area and signage, which the council says is crude, but which it describes as jaunty.
Moussa Salama, who owns Fish and Chips in Preston Street, is appealing against Brighton and Hove City Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for the frontage, and an enforcement notice requiring him to remove an external ventilation flue.
As well as the chequerboard tiles, Mr Moussa put in a concrete ramp and seating area, handrails and glass balustrade in March 2020.
He only applied for permission in July 2021, and the enforcement notice was issued in 2022. He’s also been told to remove an external flue on the side of the building.
The appeal statement, written by Lewis & Co Planning, says: “One of the positive visual effects of the more brightly coloured and polished shop
front is to draw the eye away from the somewhat ramshackle rear facades behind the premises.
“So far from causing harm to the visual amenities of the host property, as opined by the council, the shop front alterations serve to enhance the immediate setting and the building, bringing the viewer’s attention away from the dilapidated backdrop to focus on the bright and eye-catching shop front.
“The seating area coupled with the glossy tiling to the front of the building present a jaunty seaside aesthetic appropriate to its location a stone’s throw from Brighton beach.
“With Preston Street being a popular, vibrant commercial thoroughfare, particularly busy during the evenings, the use of glossy finishes and an eyecatching design for the floor tiling is considered appropriate to the area’s established commercial character.”
When turning down the 2021 application, planning officer Emily Stanbridge said the outside seating area appears: “crude, poorly designed and at odds with the appearance of the front elevation and other seating areas on Preston Street which retain an open character.”
She also described the black and white tiles as “visually intrusive”.
Of the neighbours who have commented on the appeal, none seem to agree the frontage adds to the area.
One, whose details are redacted, said: “The ramp at the front entrance is not wheelchair compliant as there are further steps into the property and onto the terrace.
“The terrace is not in keeping with the temporary wooden ones at other restaurant premises in Preston Street and the glass and chrome materials at odds with the character of the area.”
Another described the frontage as “clearly awful”.
As with the ad hoc building outside restaurants on Church Road, there is an assumption by restaurants that Planning does not apply to them. As for Lewis’s assertion that the rear of Regency Square is manky, this applies to the rear of many grandly-fronted buildings and if that were reason for such gaudy building as this Preston Street one beside them , Brighton would be even more of a by-word for anarchy. How refreshing it is to look up at the first-floor designs and decorations on Western Road after being assaulted by the corporate facades at ground level.