Business tenants look likely to have to leave New England House by the end of September as the council works out what to do with the building.
It could cost up to £26 million to address serious fire safety risks, according to early estimates last November, or the landmark building may have to be demolished.
The initial options are due to be presented to Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet next week and a report setting out those options is due to published today (Wednesday 12 March).
The tenants were given a summary of the proposals yesterday when they were in effect warned that they would need to move out in the coming months.
If the cabinet agree next Thursday (20 March), notice will be given to tenants to vacate New England House so that the site can be refurbished or redeveloped in a way that addresses the fire risks.
The decision would give some of the most high-tech firms in Brighton and Hove just over six months – until Tuesday 30 September – to find new premises.
The council said: “Tenants will be contacted individually in accordance with the terms of their tenancy.
“The council will also work with businesses to support them in finding a solution that works for them.”
The problems affecting New England House were brought to the attention of the council’s new chief executive Jess Gibbons last November.
The council said: “In November 2024, serious fire risks were identified and the council put mitigations in place immediately to ensure tenants’ safety. This included the introduction of fire wardens on site, as well as the removal of LP gas.
“The expected scale of the work to bring the building up to required safety standards means it cannot be undertaken with existing tenants remaining on site. Emptying the building is the safest and most practical option.
“It’s not just about safety – there would be significant disruption in terms of noise, vibration and access.
“Tenants would have to relocate within the building while work was carried out, including moving all their property and fittings. And work would be expected to take several years longer if the building remained occupied.”
The deputy leader of the council Jacob Taylor said: “New England House is a hub for creative, cultural and digital sectors that is incredibly important to the city’s economy, and we don’t underestimate the impact of asking businesses to relocate.
“However, it’s vital that we ensure the long-term future of New England House and the affordable business space it provides.”
The Labour councillor, who also serves as the council’s cabinet member for finance and city regeneration, said: “We must carefully consider options for the refurbishment or redevelopment of the site. We can’t do that with tenants in place.
“We have been honest and in regular contact with the community at New England House and they know the building will need to close at some point so the necessary refurbishment or redevelopment can take place.
“Safety continues to be our priority and the building cannot stay open while key risks remain. The short-term fire mitigations in place must be followed by major works to repair the building.”
Councillor Taylor added: “When cabinet meets next week, we should be able to give tenants more clarity so they can make the decisions that are right for their businesses.
“We recognise it will be difficult for some tenants to find the type of accommodation they need in the city as there is a chronic lack of space that the creative sector specifically needs.
“I want to reassure tenants that we will support them to find alternative accommodation and they will be offered first refusal to return to a refurbished or redeveloped building.”
The cabinet is due to decide whether to vacate New England House after a report on the options for future use has been presented next Thursday at Hove Town Hall.
The meeting papers are due to be published today (Wednesday 12 March) on the council’s website.
A further decision on the future use of the building is expected to be made by the council’s cabinet in the summer.
I see more student housing on the horizon
That’d require a different classification of usage.
Not if you demolish it first, without the means to rebuild or justify the income on a business rental basis.
You’d still need a different classification of usage, regardless if a building is already there or not.
This could get quite messy if the Landlord (B and H CC) are responsible for the compliance with fire regulations. The costs may include compensation for the commercial tenants as well as the works, or change of future use of the site.
Compensation is limited by the lease they signed.
The council has known that the building needed serious work for more than 10 years, they have even received money from national Government to help meet the costs – yet they have not used this yet and allowed things to deteriorate to such a dramatic point that the building is unsafe – which all feels avoidable and will now leave businesses based there experiencing real difficulty because of the upheaval. Dreadful handling of it all.
If true, then I would not be too surprised. West Pier/Arches/Hippodrome the list goes on..
It is true, people have done several FOIs to get historic surveys and reports shared publicly and there’s information in some bits that have been accessed showing issues in the building for more than a decade.
Student accommodation suggested by Chris sounds about right,
probably go through on the nod!
About time that ghastly block riddled with sick building syndrome was replaced, surely?
The council should provide a compensation package if they require everyone to move. I wonder what they did with the grant to sort it out.
Why would they provide compensation?
If the building does have to come down it could open up space to build some social housing but, unfortunately, Chris and Old Nick are probably nearer the mark as far as Brighton Council are concerned.
I dunno, I think a significant change of usage would not be on balance a good idea. I’m a big fan of social housing, but we also need commercial spaces as well. There’s perhaps a argument to be made that a community space, alongside a regenerated building could be compelling, moving forward.
This is a prime location that could have multiple uses due to the size of the site. Next door is a new 18-story tower, so maybe a high-rise development of two different developments in offices and residential, 20-25 stories next to the station and city center.