No: BH2015/00888 Ward: REGENCY App Type: Full Planning Address: Heights 14 St Margarets Place Proposal: Installation of insulated render to all elevations and replacement of metal window cills with UPVC cills and associated alterations. Officer: Robin Hodgetts, tel: 292366 Valid Date: 10/04/2015 Con Area: Regency Square Expiry Date: 05 June 2015 Listed Building Grade: N/A Agent: RLF, 26 Finsbury Square London EC2A 1DS Applicant: Sussex Heights (Brighton) Limited - SHBL, Sussex Heights St Margarets Place Brighton BN1 2FQ

1 RECOMMENDATION REFUSE planning permission, subject to the reason(s) set out in section 11.

2 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION This application relates to Sussex Heights, a 24 storey residential tower block built c1966-68. Sussex Heights is an extremely prominent modernist landmark building visible from various places in the surrounding area. The original design by Richard Seifert has been partly compromised by the enclosure of some of the balconies and many of the original steel windows have regrettably been replaced in uPVC. The building is located within the Regency Square Conservation Area and is situated adjacent listed buildings.

3 RELEVANT HISTORY None relevant to this application.

4 THE APPLICATION The application seeks consent for the application of an external wall, insulated render system to all of the existing external rendered surfaces of the building. The insulated render system would be applied directly to the existing external surface and would have a thickness of 65mm. The existing metal window cills and headers would also be removed and replaced with upvc along with metal capping to the tops of the balcony parapet walls.

5 PUBLICITY & CONSULTATIONS External: Neighbours: Eight (8) letters of representation have been received from 3b, 9d, 18e, 22e, 23b, 23b, 23c & 24c Sussex Heights objecting to the application for the following reasons:-

 The proposal is a wasted opportunity to create a modern and beautiful external façade;  The proposal would significantly alter the lines and visual integrity of Sussex Heights;  Cladding directly onto the solid building, which already has damp problems, would create future problems.

One (1) letter of representation supporting the application has been received from 8c Sussex Heights supporting the application as there is a need to ensure the building is water-tight. The proposed work will maintain the basic appearance while making Sussex House brighter and cleaner.

Internal: Heritage: The application is seeking planning permission for the installation of insulated render to all elevations of the building and replacement of the metal window cills with uPVC cills and associated alterations.

The prominent application building is situated within a conservation area and within the setting of listed buildings; therefore the proposed installation of render to the building should seek to preserve, enhance and/or better reveal the character and appearance of the conservation area and preserve the setting of the listed buildings.

It is set out at paragraph 128 of the Framework that an applicant should “describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting (and) …the level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.”

Unfortunately, and contrary to the Framework, the application does not include an appropriate level of supporting information which would allow one to have an informed understanding regarding the potential impact of the proposed render system on the aforementioned heritage assets.

For example, the section drawings appear to show the window detail to the enclosed balcony areas; these windows are set within reveals whereas the windows to the building elevations are set flush with the outer face of the wall.

Additional details have been submitted during the application process however, the sample panel of white painted render is too rough textured. Furthermore, the section showing the proposed window cill detail would be odd; the cill is noticeably slanted and the profile under the cill plate is rather deep and would be a poor detail.

There are also concerns regarding the long term performance of the proposed system. Due to the exposed nature of the building in the marine environment, the proposed finish will be vulnerable to heavy weathering and the application does not confirm that the product has been tested in such an environment. Thus, there are concerns with regards the performance of the product in the proposed location and the required long term maintenance.

In additional to above, the proposed use of uPVC cills to replace the existing metal cill detail is resisted. Metal cills and windows were part of the original building design and the appearance and finish of uPVC would conflict with the character and appearance of the building.

By virtue of the lack of detailed information regarding the proposed rendering system and the inappropriate render sample and additional detail submitted during the application process, it is considered that the current proposal would not serve to preserve, enhance or better reveal the character and appearance of the conservation area, or preserve the setting of the surrounding listed buildings. The proposal would thus be contrary to Sections 66(1) & 72(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Sections 7 & 12 of the NPPF and Local Plan Policies QD4; QD5; QD14; HE3 & HE6.

6 MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that “If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”

The development plan is:  Brighton & Hove Local Plan 2005 (saved policies post 2007);  East Sussex, and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Plan (Adopted February 2013);  East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Minerals Local Plan (November 1999); Saved policies 3,4,32 and 36 – all outside of Brighton & Hove;  East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Waste Local Plan (February 2006); Saved Policies WLP 7 and WLP8 only – site allocations at Sackville Coalyard and Hangleton Bottom and Hollingdean Depot.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 27 March 2012 and is a material consideration which applies with immediate effect.

Due weight should be given to relevant policies in the development plan according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF.

The Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One (submission document) is an emerging development plan. The NPPF advises that weight may be given to relevant policies in emerging plans according to their stage of preparation, the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies and the degree of consistency of the relevant policies to the policies in the NPPF.

All material considerations and any policy conflicts are identified in the “Considerations and Assessment” section of the report.

7 RELEVANT POLICIES & GUIDANCE The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Brighton & Hove Local Plan: QD1 Design - quality of development and design statements QD2 Design - key principles for neighbourhoods QD14 Extensions and alterations QD27 Protection of Amenity HE3 Development affecting the setting of a listed building HE6 Development within or affecting the setting of conservation areas

Supplementary Planning Document: SPD12 Design Guide for Extensions and Alterations

Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One (submission document) SS1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

8 CONSIDERATIONS & ASSESSMENT The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the impact that the proposed development would have on the character and appearance of the host building and wider Regency Square Conservation Area.

Character and appearance Sussex Heights is a 24 storey, residential block which is highly visible within the surrounding townscape and within the Regency Square Conservation Area. The surrounding area is a mix of modern commercial developments such as Churchill Square shopping centre to the east and historic squares such as Russell Square to the north.

The proposed external wall, insulated render system (StoTherm System) would be applied to all existing, external wall surfaces and thus would have a significant impact upon the character and appearance of the building. The render system includes layers of insulation which would create a considerable thickness of approximately 60-65mm. This, when applied to the exterior of the building, would have a significant impact upon the setting of existing window cills and headers along with the setting of balcony parapet walls, fundamentally changing the appearance of the building and the relationship between the fenestration and exterior walls.

A sample of the exterior render has been provided by the applicant, which would be white with a rough finish. This rough finish would result in a considerably different character, with the texture considered inappropriate for a building of this prominence in such a sensitive setting. The proposal would also include the removal of existing window cills and headers and their replacement with upvc. Due to the thickness of the proposed render system and the required gradient of the cills an alien profile would be created which would contrast with the existing lines and character of the building.

There is no objection in principle to the installation of an external cladding system to the building. However, it is considered, as a result of the lack of detailed information regarding the proposed rendering system and the inappropriate render sample and additional detail submitted during the application process, that the current proposal would not serve to preserve, enhance or better reveal the character and appearance of the conservation area, or preserve the setting of the surrounding listed buildings. The proposal is therefore contrary to Local Plan policies QD2, QD14, HE3 and HE6.

Notwithstanding the above, the proposed metal coping to the parapet walls of the balconies is considered acceptable and would not have any significantly harmful impact upon the character and appearance of the building.

Impact on Residential Amenity The nature of the proposed development would not result in a harmful loss of light, outlook or privacy for occupants of adjoining properties.

Sustainability The proposal would result in increased insulation to the external elevations and would reduce the energy needs of the building. It is in accordance with policy SU2 which states that proposals should demonstrate, “the use of materials and methods to minimise overall energy and / or raw material inputs” and this is welcomed

9 CONCLUSION The Local Planning Authority has a legal requirement to ensure that all developments within Conservation Areas and that affect the setting of a listed building preserve or enhance their character and do not harm their setting. The proposal is considered unacceptable due to the harmful impact that it would have on the character and appearance of the host building, wider Regency Square Conservation Area and the setting of nearby listed buildings, contrary to policies HE3 and HE6 of the Local Plan.

10 EQUALITIES None identified.

11 REASON FOR REFUSAL / INFORMATIVES Reasons for Refusal: 1. The proposed render, by reason of its texture and in the absence of large scale details demonstrating how the render would be installed, would adversely impact upon the appearance and character of the existing building, the surrounding Regency Square Conservation Area and the setting of nearby listed buildings. Furthermore, the proposed render system has significant potential to discolour and deteriorate over time. The proposal would therefore be contrary to policies QD1, QD2, HE3 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan.

2. The proposed window cills, by reason of their profile, depth and material, would represent an inappropriate detail which would conflict with the key character and appearance of the building. The proposal would therefore have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the existing building, the surrounding Regency Square Conservation Area and nearby listed buildings, contrary to policies QD1, QD2, HE3 and HE6 of the Brighton & Hove Local Plan.

Informatives: 1. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SS1 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One (submission document) the approach to making a decision on this planning application has been to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority seeks to approve planning applications which are for sustainable development where possible.

2. This decision is based on the drawings received listed below:

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Site Location Plan 13/03/15 Existing Floor Plan LN25491/03 13/03/15 Existing North Elevation 10/04/15 Existing East Elevation 10/04/15 Existing South Elevation 10/04/15 Existing West Elevation 10/04/15 Proposed North Elevation 10/04/15 Proposed West Elevation 10/04/15 Proposed East Elevation 10/04/15 Proposed South Elevation 10/04/15 Sill Detail STCK_501 19/05/15 Balcony and Parapet Detail 001 13/03/15 Window Cill Detail 002 13/03/15

I have considered and agree with the reasoning in this report and authorise the refusal of planning permission for the Reason(s) set out in Section 11 above.

Signed: Rob Fraser Acting Head of City Planning and Development For Executive Director Environment, Development & Housing

Signature of Reviewing Officer: ……………………………………….

Dated: ………………………………………...