An ageing industrial site in Brighton could be transformed by a multimillion-pound project after Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet agreed in principle to grant a 200-year lease on the site.
An unnamed developer is expected to take the lease on 3 Moulsecoomb Way, Brighton, and to demolish the existing 1960s building.
In its place, there are as yet unpublished plans to build something new, with employment space on the ground floor and student flats above.
A report to the council’s cabinet said that the existing building was in a poor condition and did not meet modern standards.
At a cabinet meeting at Hove Town Hall on Thursday (17 October), the deputy leader of the council, Jacob Taylor, spoke about the proposal.
Councillor Taylor said that he wanted the scheme to include discounted student rooms for local young people and commercial space at below-market rates for the creative industries.
Councillor Taylor said: “Some residents in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean and Coldean and Stanmer might say, do we need more purpose-built student accommodation? Which is a tricky question but it’s worth taking it head on.
“There is a fair amount of data to suggest that the building of purpose-built blocks has relieved the pressure on the residential housing market.
“And the number of HMOs (houses in multiple occupation) within Moulsecoomb and Bevendean has decreased in recent years as that purpose-built accommodation has come online.
“It’s worth noting this is an industrial footprint type site so adding some student accommodation to the top does not hugely change its character and position.”
The council would still own the freehold of the site and the money generated would be used to buy back family homes in the area which were previously sold under the “right to buy”.
The Labour deputy leader added: “A portion of the capital receipt would be used for buy-backs, specifically in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean.
“We are purchasing roughly a house a day at the moment in terms of buy-back homes for families. By my reckoning, we could potentially buy five family homes in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean with these funds, which would be really important
“Moulsecoomb and Bevendean is a great place for families to live and we want families to keep moving there.”
Fellow Labour cabinet member Tim Rowkins said that affordable commercial property needed to be celebrated.
He said: “The creative industries in Brighton and Hove are absolutely core to its identity and many of the people that work in those industries in many cases can’t afford to live here and certainly can’t afford to live here and rent commercial space.
“It’s very important that we start to think strategically about that in order to preserve one of the things that makes Brighton special.”
The cabinet member for housing and new homes, Gill Williams, said that there was a great deal of negotiation.
Councillor Williams, who is also a deputy leader of the council, said: “This is an exemplary example of how councils and the commercial world can work together to benefit our communities.
“It’s quite possible and very probable that we can carry on doing this in the future.”
The Labour leader of the council Bella Sankey commended Councillors Taylor and Williams for working together on the project to use the money to buy back homes.
The cabinet agreed to the surrender of the existing leases and to the grant of a new lease for up to 200 years. They asked officials to finalise the terms.
Why more Student housing?
What about those waiting on the Housing list within the City.
Did you read the article? The money from the lease will find further purchases on the buyback scheme which are used to house families on the waiting list.
The article answers your question, Steve has the right of it. Another aspect is that student-specific housing alleviates the pressure on private rented housing to be used as student accommodation, a challenge that has been highlighted by the universities before, thus providing stock availability to a wider demographic.
…and where are people supposed to work when we are losing industrial areas?
You didn’t even get past the second paragraph it seems, because the answer to your question is right there…
“with employment space on the ground floor”. How about right there in the new development?
Purpose-built student housing relieves pressure on local (family) housing – in fact, it does state this in the article with recent HMOs in those areas doing in number (which is a great thing as HMOs are a horrid thing IMHO). And the council money allows local (family) houses to be bought back, this helping to relieve the local housing list (in theory, as where do any displaced families go? Or are these HMOs?)
As for reduced industrial areas – much of the UK’s industry has downsized or changed in form, with more office-based or remote work being the norm in a number of industries, although there are still MANY other industrial areas in Brighton that could be utilised. And how many local residents are actually employed on this site right now anyway? Plus, in this case, the commercial space at the bottom should allow for local companies to establish a presence.
Sounds like a win-win scenario to me…
Indeed, we have quite a bit of space in Brighton at the moment that has the same designation, but is not being fully utilised at the moment, further strengthening your point.
The article talks in plurals, hence I would say again The Government should repeal “The Right to Buy Act” before another property is sold.
I couldn’t agree more. What is the point of selling them cheap, buying them back very expensively and then selling them cheap again. It makes no economic sense. The answer is to stop the right to buy, as they have done in Scotland and Wales. Until then it is completely pointless exercise and a waste of money
I quite agree with a change to Right to Buy. Whilst it does create opportunity for people who would have never been able to afford their own homes to purchase property, it does so at the detriment of the availability of social housing, leasing many in poverty, based on the rent-to-income ratio definition.
For me, the middle ground would be Right-To-Buy is a means-tested service when several criteria are met, such as:
1) None waiting on the Housing Register under Grade A & B
2) Overall Number of Council Properties is Greater than X% of the population
3) Only Properties that have been providing social housing for 100 years are eligible for RTB
Not a perfect solution, but limitations to that allow RTB to exist whilst protecting social houses properties by creating effectively a minimal service level in both overall quantity and value for money. And you could go further and more detailed into this, but as a rough idea, the concept makes sense.
Hmm, “Repel the right to buy act”.
What an interesting comment to make.
Okay, straight to the point here, if the property is being rented, it is occupied, therefore unavailable.
If the property is sold and occupied, the property is still unavailable.
The problem really with RTB is the knock down price and the council unable to reinvest the funds into ‘New builds.’
If students are local then they don’t need housing, We all know that these will be used for people with zero links to B&H or even to the UK.
Evidence doesn’t back that subjective opinion, at all.
So you think only students from B&H shoudl go to the universities and have to stay at home?
Students who do come here from outside the city do contribute to the city and its economic life whilst they are here. And many actually make theoir long term homes here.
Students come from all corners of the world.
Why is the developer unknown… when will it become known…
Do we know what the commuted sum will be?
So am I also right these might not be offered to people on the council housing waiting list?
Because these will be student flats!
Read the article!
200-year lease – how much residential council tax will be lost? leaving the rest of us making up the shortfall.