A developer has submitted plans for a six-storey block of flats on a site where there is already permission for a five-storey block.
Orchard Holdings (Hove) Ltd has applied to Brighton and Hove City Council to build 42 flats over six floors at 65 Orchard Gardens, Hove. The site is currently occupied by Portslade Panelworks.
In April, the company – owned by Alfred Haagman, 63, Jonathan Bennett, 37, and 63-year-old David Lincoln Willis – was granted planning permission for a £14 million scheme consisting of 36 flats.
Both schemes include space for two commercial units and 25 parking spaces.
Orchard Holdings said that the council’s “housing delivery action plan” outlined the need for homes at market prices and at affordable prices.
The proposed scheme would provide 21 one-bed flats, 17 two-bedroom flats and four with three bedrooms – a mix that reflected the general demand for homes in the area.
But none of the homes would be “affordable”. A viability study by Nicholas Bignall, of Turner Morum Chartered Surveyors, said if 10 per cent of the flats were affordable, the scheme would make a loss of more than £1 million.
The scheme would have a “residual land value loss” of more than £900,000 even without affordable homes.
Mr Bignall said that Orchard Holdings had offered a “commuted sum” of just over £300,000 towards affordable housing elsewhere in Brighton and Hove.
About 70 people have lodged objections to the plans on the council’s website. One anonymous objector said: “This development of this block is not appropriate on this site immediately adjacent to 1930s homes.”
The objector, whose details were redacted by the council, said: “This will dramatically increase traffic on an already busy major junction on the Old Shoreham Road (and) Nevill Road, increasing noise and pollution.”
Another objector, whose details were also redacted, said: “The site is not within a tall building area and proximity to the Moda development off Sackville Road does not mean that the council should regard that as an adequate reason to allow a disproportionately high building to be erected.
“If this were to be common practice, it would not be long before any area of the city could be deemed to be sufficiently close to a tall building area to allow high-rise development to take place.”
To see the plans or comment, search for BH2023/02756 on the council’s website.
More than 50 residents met last week with Cllr Emma Hogan, Cllr Samer Bagaeen & myself. The proposed development is concerning to residents as over development where there are no buildings more than two storeys high and significant high rise development close by, without the additional infrastructure needed for all these dwellings.
The height aside, how does the council or indeed the developer expect the already heavily used Sackville, Neville, and Old Shoreham Roads to cope with the extra traffic from Moda before putting yet another block in the area?
From memory, Moda is projected to house approx 3000 people isn’t it? They are going to leave those flats at some point, probably at the usual school/work commute times. Given BHCCs total inability to wrap its head round alternative transport infrastructure, especially cycling, and lack of money to maintain existing roads and footpaths, it is reasonable to expect an increase in congestion in this part of town.
Feel free to object here by 1/12/23
https://planningapps.brighton-hove.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=S2GSEHDMLSZ00&activeTab=summary
The objections should be about the lack of affordable housing as part of the development. They’re using a loophole for their own profit. Shame on them.
Feel free to object here https://planningapps.brighton-hove.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=S2GSEHDMLSZ00&activeTab=summary
Thanks sarah. Sending in letters of support
Developers are, of course, out for profit. I’m pretty happy with the increase of rejections so far on the grounds of lack of affordability. Council have in my opinion, have been right in these refusals.
I hope they keep refusing unless affordable housing is absolutely guaranteed. Not just fining them after it’s built but removing the % of affordable flats promised from their ownership.
Greed…. Alfie, you should know better.
Always with Alfie !
50 HMO’s yet?
36 flats , two commercial units but only 25 parking spaces. Should be at least one per flat and three for each commercial unit.
42 flats…!
Unfortunately, we need two spots in my household. It’s something we cannot do without vocationally. It has been a deal-breaker for me looking at some properties.
I need 2 cars worth of public space to store my stuff on. Entitled
What a shame Statutory Consultees never seen to have ANY infrastructure objections to newbuilds aimed at incomers; but residents cannot access GP, dentist, school places, etc etc and the RSCH is a failing hospital.
42 flats…!
https://planningapps.brighton-hove.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=S2GSEHDMLSZ00&activeTab=summary
Local infrastructure is a very important consideration. There’s a deeper conversation about community based healthcare services and the expansion of pharmacists to be independent prescribers to help better support this, but it’s not quite there yet!
Get it built
The area is already congested so when all the flats in Sackville Road and Goldstone are occupied then these built too the traffic is going to be grid locked .so many flats crammed in round Goldstone, Sackville and now these ? Can’t wait for hundreds of electric car battery chargers to be installed too .