Plans for a nine-storey block of 42 flats have been refused on appeal.
Brighton and Hove City Council refused Fortitudo (154) Limited’s application to demolish two sets of semi-detached houses and build flats at 145-151 Kingsway last August.
The application did not go before the councillors who make up the council’s Planning Committee, with the decision made instead by officials in private.
There were 74 objections raising concerns about the height and design of the proposed building in the Pembroke and Princes Conservation Area.
Hove Civic Society, the Regency Society, Brighton Society and the Conservation Advisory Group all objected to the application.
There were 10 letters in support of the application saying that the block would rejuvenate the area.
Planning officials turned down the application because the “excessive height, bulk, scale, footprint and density would be an incongruous form of development in a prominent and sensitive location, representative of a cramped form of development and an overdevelopment of the site”.
The Poole-based applicant said in its appeal that the existing semi-detached houses were an “anomaly” in an area characterised by tall buildings.
The applicant also said that Brighton and Hove was not meeting its five-year housing supply demands and had more than 7,000 people on its housing list with 1,800 living in temporary accommodation.
The appeal statement said: “The new Labour government’s stated intention is to significantly boost the supply of housing. Part of this is increasing the majority of local planning authorities’ housing requirements.
“In Brighton and Hove this represents a modest increase from 2,319 dwellings a year to 2,435 dwellings.
“However, this represents a significant increase over the local plan requirement of 660 dwellings a year – Brighton and Hove will need to plan for a 368 per cent increase compared to the current local plan.
“Within this context, the presumption in favour of sustainable development is very clearly engaged and any harm needs to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.”
The nearby Aurum block at 189 Kingsway and Argentum at 239 Kingsway were given as examples of modern flats with “hard landscaping”.
A planning inspector raised concerns about the loss of light behind neighbouring Viceroy Lodge and Bluebird Court.
The inspector said: “I consider the proposal would have a major adverse effect on the living conditions of occupiers of some of the affected properties and users of the affected gardens.
“Windows at the (Princes Marine) Hotel would also lose light. While harmful, occupiers of hotel rooms are less sensitive to light loss than occupiers of dwellings.”
The inspector also raised the lack of demand, with flats in new blocks in the area still empty, without stating which ones.
The inspector added: “Nevertheless, the council has identified a demand for two-bedroom dwellings and raise no objections to the size of the proposed apartments.
“Moreover, it is likely that the location would be a desirable one.”
The inspector concluded that the proposal would be an over-development of the site and would have a harmful effect on neighbours.
The scheme would also fail to provide any affordable housing.
Go to appeal, B&H councils (decide in private) system is suspicious to say the least.
There’s no social housing provision although the developer maintains “any harm needs to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.” Is that suspicious too?
Didn’t read the article did you?
Council refused the application and the applicant appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.
NIMBYs gonna NIMBY
Developers gonna gaslight.
“The applicant also said that Brighton and Hove was not meeting its five-year housing supply demands and had more than 7,000 people on its housing list with 1,800 living in temporary accommodation.”
Unless Fortitudo are building social housing, which I suspect that they are not, then this is completely irrelevant to their application.
They haven’t sold all the ones down the road at argentum for the exorbitant purchase price of 700k for a 2 bed flat. You can see the facade of this new build already streaking rust from the bolts around the balconies. Who wants more of this poor quality high cost housing.
Good. Ugly, shoddy-looking and it won’t help anyone in local housing need. All new developments are also reliant on illegal labour nowadays, mostly untrained, so this new slave labour market also needs investigating before we allow any further new developments.
If you have actual evidence of illegal working then report it.
https://www.imsallegations.homeoffice.gov.uk/start
It’s not the role of the planning system to investigate who a developer employs.
Looks far better than the flats either side of it.
What is wrong with the semi-detached houses, other than them being an “anomaly in an area characterised by tall buildings” (presumably they were there before any tall buildings?).