Brighton business bosses urge planners to back Sackville tower on Hove seafront

Posted On 28 Feb 2016 at 10:05 pm

Business bosses have written to Brighton and Hove City Council in support of plans by the Hyde housing association to build a block of 98 flats on Hove seafront.

The letter to planners from the Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership emphasises the need for new homes, the jobs that will be created by the project during construction and afterwards and the wider benefits to the local economy.

The letter, sent by the Economic Partnership chairman Dean Orgill on behalf of his colleagues, said: “On behalf of Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership, I write to support the planning application for the 98 new residential units proposed at 189 Kingsway, Hove, by the Hyde Group.

“Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership works closely with a range of stakeholders, including Hyde, to ensure that the city is able to meet its growing housing needs, in line with the emerging City Plan.

“The Partnership is also mindful of the need to continue enhancing our seafront estate for the benefit of future generations.

“The Partnership is very conscious of the need for new homes, and especially affordable homes, as set out in the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One, which identifies a minimum housing target of 13,120 new homes by 2030 (656 per annum).

“We are equally conscious that the objectively assessed housing need published by GL Hearn in June 2015 identified the need for Brighton and Hove to be equivalent to 30,120 homes over the 2010 to 2030 period (1,506 homes per year).

“The Economic Partnership has reviewed the independent Socio-Economic Impact report submitted as part of the application and believe the proposals will provide the following benefits to the area and sub-regional economy

  • The estimated £25 million construction investment which will create a minimum of 45 local construction FTE (full-time equivalent) jobs and 68 FTE jobs in the wider economy based on a National Housing Federation published 1.51 multiplier
  • The estimated £1.4 million annual economic impact to the local economy which will create an additional 18 FTE jobs in the local economy
  • The estimated £726,000 of new local resident spending in local shops and businesses, directly benefiting the vitality of Hove seafront and
  • The estimated figure of £196,000 per annum of new council tax receipts and New Homes Bonus to help deliver local council services

“We are also supportive of Hyde’s commitment to local skills and training. As such, we welcome their proposals for an on-site skills centre supporting apprenticeships, providing training and skills opportunities for people wanting to work in construction.

“The Economic Partnership understands that the Hyde Group plans to exceed the local employment scheme target of 20 per cent local labour and has set itself a target to achieve a minimum of 50 per cent local labour on the project. This is both encouraged and supported by the Partnership.

“The Economic Partnership welcomes the proposal for an affordable housing commuted sum, provided that the new affordable homes are delivered offsite quickly and in particular within the timeframe of the completion of the 189 Kingsway development.

“In addition, within the wider affordable housing proposal, the Economic Partnership would be keen to see the maximum range of affordable housing allowed within Section CP20 of the City Plan Part One, subject of course to financial viability.

“In accordance with the council’s Seafront Strategy and Seafront Investment Programme, it is important to attract inward investment into our seafront, which assists in enhancing the city’s capacity and propensity to attract and house more economic activity.

“To conclude, this proposed development attracts the Economic Partnership’s support due to the proposed economic benefits, the prospect of gaining a significant contribution to the provision of new homes and subject to the abovementioned points, the maximum supply affordable housing, offered by this application.”

  1. saveHOVE Reply

    “Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership works closely with a range of stakeholders, including Hyde…”

    So, what is this? Hyde calling in its marker? What?

    This nonsense from the Economic Partnership makes no sense in any way shape or form, especially not in planning policy terms.

    What off-site affordable? It’s not in the application.

  2. Jon Stanley Reply

    This article should be entitled – Local solicitors and consultants eager to get hold of Hyde’s money bend the ear of Warren Morgan, Tom Bewick and Robert Nemeth (who all sit on this ‘bosses’ committee) and issue spike articles to Franc and Jo.

  3. Jon Stanley Reply

    “The Partnership is also mindful of the need to continue enhancing our seafront estate for the benefit of future generations.”

    This is the absolute worst bit of the letter by the way. Dean Orgill should carefully read the objections from The Brighton Society and The Regency Society if he really wants to understand what an ugly eyesore this proposed tower would be.

    On the seafront yesterday hundreds of local people turned out in support of No to Sackville Tower. They should be listened too!!!

    Councillors Morgan, Bewick and Nemeth – Did you know that this letter was being issued by the partnership committee that you sit on?

  4. rideforever Reply

    We should build.
    But this tower is simply stupid and ugly.
    Destroying the seafront which is the reason why people come to the coast, will damage the city for generations.
    Many seaside towns are empty and full of poverty : why ? Stupid architecture destroyed their seafronts.
    People just go elsewhere.
    Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen here.

  5. Freelander Reply

    The rules of urban sprawl dictate that this tower will be built. The MPs who seem to sit on the same panel as the construction company will ensure their nests are well feathered. There will be a tower on that site even though the rhetoric is clearly patronising and wrong.
    The rules of a democracy dictate that MPs can be voted out by an electorate, but they won’t be.
    So the thousands of employees that will form the construction crew will all be found in Hove? What a farce!

  6. Jon Stanley Reply

    Apologies to Cllr Tom Bewick. It’s Cllr Tom Druitt who’s the representative on the Brighton and Hove economic partnership.

  7. Spooky Reply

    Can we get over the ‘Ruin the look of the seafront’ please? This was done very successfully in the 60’s & 70’s when the big rectangle high rise monstrosities such as Flag Court and Sussex Heights etc. were built with seemingly no regard for the existing architecture and look of Brighton and Hove (Flag court is probably where the majority of NIMBY’s are from as well).
    Hove is in dire need of modernization and having a new modern looking building complex will help detract the eye from the unsightly bare brick/concrete tower blocks already lining the seafront.
    Yes, we should do all we can to protect the Victorian/Georgian architecture in this town but do you want to stay stuck with the current 60’s theme? Or can we evolve and move forward and modernize like the rest of the country/world. I have lived in Hove all my life nearly 50 years and I am fed up with the few fuddy-duddies who seemingly don’t want to allow any changes to the area at all while they are still alive, while the rest of us suffer looking at the ugly buildings that the NIMBY’s are inhabiting.

  8. Graham Reply

    I guarantee had the economic partnership come out against the scheme the same people slating them in comments here would have roundly supported their view and held it out as further evidence the scheme should be knocked back.

    I think this proposal is an exciting building with an interesting palette of materials and represents a bold departure from the boring dull and bland architecture that is normally served up.

    Look at the building on the corner of Vallance Gardens and Kingsway if you need an example of how not to improve Hove seafront through poor quality pastiche design.

  9. Local taxpayer Reply

    YUCK = NO…locals don’t want towers blighting the horizon and our views. Yes build up or down, but further away from the number 1 asset we have…the sea.

  10. Also A Local Taxpayer Reply

    I love the design it is bold and innovative; some imaginative architecture for once.

    Hove seafront to the west of the King Alfred is in a sorry state and this would help to change that.

    As a city we are lagging behind others on the world stage, why does the Council consistently kowtow to civic interest groups and NIMBYs and knock back plans which would help to change this?

    By the way I’m also a local tax payer and personally I think we need these plans and more!

    I suspect Local Taxpayer above may be a classic NIMBY, basically saying we need to build but away from my doorstep.

  11. Barry Reply

    The ‘Partnership’ only care about one thing. Making money.

Leave a Reply


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.