Planners have given permission for 48 homes to be created on the site of an old brewery and factory in Portslade Old Village.
The scheme is made up of 11 houses and 37 flats and includes a conversion of the locally listed Le Carbone factory building, in South Street, Portslade.
The landmark building, with its distinctive chimney, was built as a brewery in the 19th century and the outside will be preserved.
Some of the newer buildings on the one-acre site will be demolished and 7,255 sq ft (674 sq m) of floor space will be created for employment.
This is expected to house the Phoenix arts organisation, providing cheap studio space, as well as community space and a café.
The developer PGMI Portslade expects the scheme to create 40 jobs. Seventy jobs went when Mersen – latterly the name for Le Carbone – ended production at the site, switching the work to the north east.
Councillor Leo Littman, a former Portslade schoolboy, raised concerns about the loss of employment space at a meeting at Hove Town Hall this afternoon (Wednesday 9 August).
And fellow Green councillor Phélim Mac Cafferty flagged up worries about drainage, given previous floods in the Old Village.
South Portslade ward councillor Les Hamilton told the Brighton and Hove City Council Planning Committee: “This is a good application in difficult circumstances.”
But he spoke about parking pressure in the area and the impact on access to neighbouring homes.
His concerns about parking were supported by Councillor Penny Gilbey who also spoke about flooding in the area.
Transport consultant Richard Fitter told the committee: “All parking can be provided on site.”
Councillor Joe Miller questioned the limited provision of affordable housing. The scheme proposes two options – either two of the two-bedroom houses and a payment of almost £20,000 or a payment of £126,000 to Brighton and Hove City Council.
Overall the developer will give the council about £200,000 in cash – known as “section 106” money – to support local transport, open space, indoor sport and local schemes.
About two dozen people objected to the plans, mainly with concerns about road safety and parking.
Councillor Carol Theobald said: “It will be wonderful to see the renovation of that historic building and chimney.”
Councillor Miller and Councillor Adrian Morris welcomed the housing despite the loss of employment floor space.
And Councillor Littman supported the plans for “a wonderful building”. He said: “It’s a good use of the space and it’s a sympathetic design.”
He pointed out that the Phoenix – named after a brewery “rising from the ashes” of a previous brewery in Brighton – was now to have a base in another old brewery building.
The plans were approved by ten votes to one, with only Councillor Gilbey against.
Sounds ok, but what of the concerns of the two dozen people about the road safety and PARKING .
Looks good on paper as long as flood mitigation is considered, but what about the Section 106 money?
Now is the time for locals of the village to push for something for their community that they really want and need, and not for councils to impose on them how the money will be spent.
It may be that this has already been considered, but something like a community facility for all ages of inhabitants to use in the area would be a good option.
So there is concerns with parking. I am local and there is nowhere to park down there.The 7 sapces that are down there are for the residence that are already living there. Where will all the new people park?? But don’t worry, the council have a plan to combat that, the council will be paid and/or be given 2 houses. Ok, So how does that solve the parking issue? Im either missing something or the council are being paid as compensation for all the complaints they will get to do with parking. But that still dose not alive the issue that there is nowhere to park. Plus we already have a cafe in the old village. We don’t need 2.
Well it was destined to be,dispite all ,the opposition ,the alternative was what ,leave the building to decay and fall down,, parking will be an issue ,but by 2040 and probably before ellectric cars will be comon and more exceptable they tell us .
Any money from the developer could pay for more stormwater diversion to stop the constant flooding threat to the village ,,
“the outside will be preserved.” Will that be like the Co-op department store in London Road – the external brickwork shaved from within so thinly it would make Gillette envious, and a completely separate construction built inside it?
Can we please have a Sainsbury’s local as part of the development as there isn’t a decent shop within walking distance.
We’re gonna need a bloody big car park !!..This is an absolute joke!!..no where to park as it is..the village will be ruined!!
I agree 100%
Outrageous that concent has been granted for 45 or however many properties without resolving the current and ongoing flooding snd parking problems in the old village. I have owned my house on South Street for 18 years and struggle every day with parking issues because THERE ISN’T enough parking for current residents who already live here and aren’t fortunate enough to have s garage or driveway. The village floods every few months as it is and the council and southern water can’t work out why and won’t invest any money towards fixing the damn problem!!! We have a cafe and two hair dressers so don’t need any more of those. Where will all the news residents and their visitors park?? In the car park on South Street no doubt which is already misused …. I’m one of the residents who objexted but what a waste of time they’ve was eh!!! How about they spend some cash on speed bumps in the 20nph zone down here to protect people as safety is an issue with speeding motorists using the village for a cut through at 35 miles per hour.