The site of a former school could be sold for housing if Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet approves a report on Thursday (24 April).
The council is considering selling the old Homewood College site, in Queensdown School Road, Brighton, after the school closed last November.
The site is one of four mentioned in the report – headed Capital Assets Strategy – which spells out the principles for the council to observe when deciding whether to buy or sell property.
The council stopped sending children to the special school after it was rated “inadequate” by the official education watchdog Ofsted and placed in “special measures”.
By last September there were no pupils at the school which catered for children with social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) needs and those with an education, health and care plan (EHCP).
And in the last financial year before the school closed – 2023-24 – it had a deficit of £709,000.
Before the premises could be used for housing, the council would have to obtain permission from the Department for Education to allow a change of use.
The other properties listed in the council report are an old school caretaker’s house in Hangleton Way, Hove, an empty office in Shenfield Way, Hollingdean, and a vacant cottage, in Stanmer Village.
If the cabinet approves the report, the council housing department could buy the properties in Hangleton and Hollingdean.
Labour councillor Jacob Taylor, the deputy leader of the council, said that this sort of deal formed “a key part of our overall capital strategy”.
The cottage in Stanmer is understood to have become vacant when a tenant voluntarily moved out and looks likely to be sold on the open market.
Councillor Taylor said that it was crucial to optimise the use of council property and operational buildings and to free up land for social housing.
The Capital Assets Strategy report is in two parts. The second part is confidential and includes the financial details for each of the four properties listed – and identifies other properties, described as commercially sensitive.
The report said: “For those properties identified, it is anticipated that, following transfer, the properties would be subject to investment which would include elements to improve energy efficiency.
“Any redevelopment would be completed in compliance with current standards and requirements.
“The transfer or appropriation for housing purposes of the properties listed in part two (the confidential part) of this report will allow them to be refurbished or redeveloped and occupied as housing or commercial space supporting employment, therefore contributing in a small way to the wider factors influencing health and wellbeing.”
The cabinet is due to decide the matter at a meeting at Hove Town Hall at 2pm on Thursday (24 April). The meeting is scheduled to be webcast. To watch, click here.
Why sell off assets instead of developing them? Social housing is needed, so provide it. It’s called investment!
Social Housing is very expensive to build, so a grant fund needs to be obtained for every social development, and it may be that Homes England is unable to subsidise this particular site. The numbers need to work, Ann.
Agree the council should not just be selling off assets like this.
What also bothers me is that only 2 weeks ago the council mentioned Homewood as an option to new england house companies they are evicting in September. The fact it’s now being discussed as being up for sale just goes to prove it was never a serious offer they were making. It really is a low move to make a suggestion they knew would probably not be suitable to businesses they have already screwed over, and even if it was suitable for some businesses, it sounds like the council had other plans all along so it wouldn’t be available to them.
Schools are closing I understand, due to the low birth rate – and that’s either a national thing, or a local one, but pretty worrying.
Imagine Brighton in the long term, as a place only older people can afford to live, and where young students come to study, but they quickly leave – because of the spiralling accommodation costs of staying. The city’s long term regeneration process is being lost here?
The council, in the meantime, just think this is another plot to sell on, and for sure we need more unaffordable housing.
But, in time, if the birth rate goes up again, then we might also need more schools, so what happens then?
It’s a bit of a mess, really.
Yeah, one of the lowest in the country. The TFR in Brighton and Hove was 0.98 in 2023, significantly below the replacement level of 2.1 and lower than the national average of 1.44; it’s a trend that’s likely to stay low for a while yet, so I’m not too worried about a rebound at the moment.
You’re absolutely right, Brighton’s declining birth rate reflects a complex interplay of economic, social, and demographic factors. It requires policies aimed at making the area more affordable and family-friendly, such as subsidised childcare, affordable housing initiatives, and economic development programs to diversify and strengthen the local economy.
According to the latest ONS data between the last two censuses, the average (median) age of Brighton and Hove increased by three years, from 35 to 38 years of age.
This area had a lower average (median) age than the South East as a whole in 2021 (41 years) and a lower average (median) age than England (40 years) so Brighton is not yet a stronghold of Mark Fry’s hated ‘Boomers’ by any means.
In the Lewes Road, London Road areas much land that could have been devoted to building social housing has been turned over to the universities and many family homes have been converted into HMOs so the students are often caught in a vice of their own making.
I largely agree with you, although I’d gently push back on one point.
While it’s understandable to be critical of planning decisions and university expansion, placing the blame on students themselves isn’t quite fair. Students are not responsible for planning policy or the housing market; this is more properly a failure of local and national policy, particularly around things like the regulation of HMOs, an over-reliance on private developers, and a historical lack of investment in new social and affordable housing stock.
“has been turned over to the universities”
Turned over by who?
Landowners who have sold their property to those who develop student housing? Those developers aren’t part of the university anyway.
So why don’t the Council put the Empty Offices into Flats, so that can be put on Homemove for those waiting in the Housing List.
As the Bungalow in Hangleton, why does the Council put that up on the Homemove bidding scheme-that would suit a Family and the School is nearby
Or is the Council that skint they need to sell these Properties.
Cottage in Stamner Park sounds lovely.
Because it costs money to convert offices into homes. There are also omplications in doing such comnversions as there are different standards for utilities, space and fire that need to be taken into account. It’s not s simple as putting in some walls and sockets.
The council is converting an old office building into flats near the pavilion so it is an option that is considered.
For the bungalow & Cottage to be offered to a council tennant it has to be sold by the council to the Housing Revenue Account (as per the law) and the Housing Department may not feel the price is worth paying along with the costs of any improvements needed to the property.
This is a building that has been offered to New England House tenants as possible alternative studio/workshop space after the council let NEH fall into such bad condition. And now I see, with no communication at all from the council that it (no doubt alongside NEH) will be turned into flats. This is headline disgraceful disrespectful behaviour.