- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@brightonargus
All the latest news and view from the Argus
@theargusoffers
The latest offers and competitions from the Argus
@theargusguide
The best events in Brighton, Hove and Sussex
@ArgusMagazine
Features, interviews, TV, travel and lifestyle from the Argus
- Find us on Facebook
The Argus
The Argus - news, sport and leisure for Brighton, Hove and Sussex
The Argus Offers and Competitions
Keep up to date with all the offers, events and competitions from the Argus
Three steps to planning hell (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Three steps to planning hell for Rottingdean couple
10:10am Tuesday 27th November 2012 in News
A couple have discovered there are three steps to planning hell – literally.
Trevor Hopper and his wife Denise have become embroiled in a bitter planning row over the steps at their Rottingdean home.
The dispute centres around three steps leading to the grade II listed building in Tudor Close.
The couple had installed a new set of steps but were refused retrospective planning permission for them.
In the latest twist to the saga, their application for a new set of steps to replace those installed was refused on Wednesday, November 21 – despite being recommended for approval by Brighton and Hove City Council planning officers. The committee spent nearly an hour debating the steps.
But councillor Lynda Hyde, the opposition spokesperson on the planning committee, said the application was important.
She added: “It might seem like a lot of time and debating spent on some steps but if you visited the site you would see it was important.
“If you start tinkering with Grade II listed buildings it will mean the status of Grade II listed will be diminished.”
Tudorbethan
Neighbours had complained the three steps are uniform in depth, which is against the original design displayed at adjacent homes, which are all of Tudorbethan style and face into a courtyard.
One wrote to the council and said: “The first step should be only one brick height, as it has been for the first 82 years of its build.
“It is obviously clear from the photograph of the original listed steps that the first step is laid face-down on its 10mm mortar unlike the proposed plan where they have the first row of brick placed on their side and then a second brick placed flat on top with 30mm of mortar.
“This means the total height of the proposed steps is a least 6in higher than the original.”
However, officers said “the character of the listed complex as a whole is significant due to its irregularity and eclectic character; which is central to its vernacular, Tudorbethan style”, with different style steps contributing to this.
The couple have been told to reinstate the original design of the steps.
See the latest news headlines from The Argus:
- Union announces further strike action after negotiation talks crumble
- Looking back: Budgie not just a pretty boy then!
- Union’s anger at frontline care plans in West Sussex
- Huge shingle moving operation to improve coastal defence in Shoreham and Lancing
- Sussex anti-frackers in tea party protest
Add us to your circles on Google+
Comments(15)
Fight_Back
says...
10:19am Tue 27 Nov 12
Tom V
says...
10:33am Tue 27 Nov 12
I'm not surprised retrospective planning permission was refused but they would have saved time and trouble if they'd just applied and worked with the planning office before building anything.
mustaphaLeeko
says...
10:55am Tue 27 Nov 12
Fight_Back
says...
10:58am Tue 27 Nov 12
Ballroom Blitz
says...
11:03am Tue 27 Nov 12
Ballroom Blitz
says...
11:03am Tue 27 Nov 12
mark by the sea
says...
11:13am Tue 27 Nov 12
Fight_Back wrote:Your absolutely right, why has tesco been allowed to flout the law? Under some idea they have lawyers the council can't pin down. The argus should ask the planning dept why the windows have not been put back in.
I should add that it's strange that B&H Council aren't so keen to enforce planning rules on Tesco in Church Road but when it comes to private individuals they'll come down like a tonne of bricks ( no pun intended ! ).
leobrighton
says...
11:25am Tue 27 Nov 12
Hove Actually
says...
11:27am Tue 27 Nov 12
shining star
says...
12:31pm Tue 27 Nov 12
steamytrains
says...
5:54pm Tue 27 Nov 12
BenUk
says...
8:41pm Tue 27 Nov 12
Calendar Girl
says...
6:46pm Wed 28 Nov 12
The "harm" in this case only comes from what seems to be the querulous neighbours with nothing else but time on their hands.
paverman
says...
8:59pm Wed 28 Nov 12
Fight_Back says...
10:17am Tue 27 Nov 12