A plan to demolish and replace eight council-owned tower blocks in Brighton has been approved in principle by senior councillors.
It will mean finding new homes for more than 1,000 people as part of project that will cost hundreds of millions of pounds over several years.
The eight tower blocks in Hollingdean, Kemp Town and Whitehawk contain 558 flats, most of them rented to tenants by Brighton and Hove City Council.
The council’s cabinet made the decision at a meeting on Thursday (17 July) to pull them down and build new homes in their place on the three sites.
The flats were all built using “large panel systems”, with precast concrete panels stacked on top of each other like a house of cards.
The risks of this method of construction became known after a gas explosion left four people dead and 17 injured at Ronan Point, in London, in 1968.
The Grenfell Tower fire, eight years ago, brought a greater focus on the safety of high-rise blocks.
A series of surveys and checks led the council to conclude that eight of its blocks of flats did not meet current safety standards.
The blocks are St James’ House, in Kemp Town, Dudeney Lodge and Nettleton Court, in Hollingdean, and the bird blocks in Whitehawk – Falcon, Heron, Kestrel, Kingfisher and Swallow Court.
The council said: “Structural surveys last year found that the buildings no longer meet current safety standards for withstanding a collapse in the case of an explosion or large fire.”
After the cabinet meeting at Hove Town Hall, Labour councillor Gill Williams, the council’s cabinet member for housing, said: “This is a big step.
“But after very careful consideration of the options, we have agreed in principle that regeneration is the preferred option.
“Since October last year, I have been working with officers and meeting with householders to explore the options about the future of these blocks.
“We recognise that these buildings have happy memories, in some cases for three generations of families.
“This is why it was important for us to explore all the options in detail, including strengthening and refurbishing the blocks. That would only buy us 20 more years, at great cost and disruption, without solving the core safety issues.
“By creating more family-sized homes in the city, it should reduce wait for a three-bedroom home down from the average of eight years.
“We will now begin working hand in hand with residents on every step of the next part of the journey.
“We’re holding the first ‘resident advisory panels’ for each area in the coming weeks. These have been set up to ensure any regeneration designs reflect the needs, the voices and the vision of residents.
“Our other key focus is to set up rehousing teams to start supporting residents to plan their moves. This is a big task and will be done in phases over a number of years. We’re reassuring residents that no one will have to move immediately.
“We will support every resident through the rehousing process and we will do everything we can to help them stay in their local community if that’s what they want.
“We are fully committed to supporting residents through every step of this process, to listening to them and to building a better future – together.”
This is outrageous if there is no guarantee that the residents will be rehoused within the same place. Think about it your kids go to the local schools you have a local doctor good god how distressing!
Certainly going to be an upheaval for many. They’ll have a few opportunities. There are likely people who will relish the chance to move to another area, or even outside of Brighton.
Either way, it is going to be a massive logistical challenge.
L is right Benjamin, it’s much more than an “upheaval” and I agree with them it’s outrageous. Residents have been left in these LPS blocks for far too long with lumps of concrete falling off them and without issues identified in fire safety reports followed up adequately until the post-Grenfell legislation kicked in.
The council still do not publish fire risk assessments for their high rise blocks automatically and it’s shocking that so much important information about the safety of the council’s housing stock is withheld and not available to residents.
6 years ago in 2019 the Argus reported that “a resident at Dudeney Lodge in Hollingdean, Brighton, who complained about a crack in his ceiling, said: “I wanted to know if our homes were safe and, after reading the reports, they obviously are not. Now that the risks have been exposed, I want the council to take action.” ”
Years ago then when someone did an FOI request the council gave out incorrect information, presumably because they did not know enough about their own housing stock to know their response was wrong. I think it was 2018, Brighton and Hove City Council were asked which LPS blocks have been demolished while under its control. They answered ” “we do not have any high-rise blocks constructed using the large panel system” and they later had to issue an apology for getting it wrong and giving out incorrect info.
What’s worse is that while the council is now looking at the LPS blocks, there is still so much of its housing stock where surveys have not been yet fully completed, or if they have, that info has not been communicated to residents.
Councillors should be up in arms and making the case to the government about the urgency of the situation and the need for greater support to manage decades of disrepair, yet they seem instead to trying to be managing the situation with a drip feed of information. The whole thing is shocking and outrageous imo.
There was a lot that the Green led council missed out on reporting and actioning, and now it’s having to be done now, so you raise some valid points there. Having an actual City Plan in place is a good step in the right direction in answer to that, with more to be done.
I’m in total agreement for further regeneration of our housing stock in this City. It’s a basic need that effects so many other aspects of people’s lives fundamentally.
And I agree, Government should be assisting councils to deliver ambitious housing projects.
Wait so they intend to replace high density tower blocks with low density family homes?
I swear they’re trying to make the city unaffordable…
No, they haven’t provided any plans as of yet. There is a mindedness to ensure a good measure of three-beds though, as it is one of the worst categories to be in on the waiting list.
Low rise developments can provide the same or more houses of high rises. Tower blocks have to be surrounded by open space, so a mixture of terraced housing and 3 or 4 story blocks can provide more housing
Why are they demolishing these structures first? Shouldn’t they be constructing more housing in other areas to accommodate the residents before proceeding with the demolitions? Why are they reducing the available housing? I understand that these buildings are unsafe due to fire hazards and potential explosions, but aren’t safety measures already in place? Brighton already has families on the housing list waiting for accommodations, so where will they house 1,000 families?
They aren’t. They’ll decant people first, before taking down one of the buildings, and not whilst people in there, lol.
You also have to think of these as already gone. You can’t put new people in there outside of temporary emergency, so an attrition-based approach makes sense.
And housing crisis hasn’t gone anywhere, 8,000 on the waiting list. These blocks are just one part of a much larger issue.
I think this is the wrong decision. These blocks are famous, p port of the landscape and have all sorts of memories associated with them, some good some bad.
They provide a considerable amount of housing on relatively small areas of land and prioritisation should have been given to repairing and upgrading the existing blocks rather than demolishing them and inevitably building fewer homes on the same land with all the problems that will come with the displacement and need for rehoming of all the residents.
They aren’t famous, Ron. It would be a poor investment to refurb them when they are already end of life, Ron. That’s how you make bad financial decisions, Ron.
Hi Ben, as a local resident in the Whitehawk area, Swanborough flats received interior and exterior refurbishments not long ago, also some much needed additional flats were built on the lower floor. These refurbishments and additional flats were reported as having a life span of 10-15 years.
I’m very suspicious that all of a sudden, these flats have been condemned just months after a proposed plan to build on the race hill adjacent to these flats was rejected.
Surely, BHCC would have carried out surveys on the buildings before spending millions on the refurbishments, this stinks to me.
I’m betting, the proposed ‘New’ build will be sanctioned anyway now, we will have to see…
They are not subjected to a Fire Safety Order though; that’s a critical difference. Plus, that would have been at a fraction of the cost needed for the bird blocks. The new development had been green lit for a while now, the additional community space interested me – North Whitehawk Association would definitely benefit from having a larger space.
Whitehawk Hill – the area that can be developed on mind, has been landlocked for years, that’s not a new battle, so I don’t know if the conspiracy holds up, here. Sounds like Whitehawk as a whole is going to be looked at, which makes a lot more sense than a narrow focus on just the buildings.
Famous for extra ventilation, past their life expectancy, lack of fire safety, and falling apart by themselves, grow up Ron,
No mention of where the money is coming from when the Council announces a predicted £40m shortfall in the next financial year in the previous article on the page.
Or what happens to the residents while they are awaiting their new blocks to be built. it seems extraordinary that all these blocks have to be destroyed rather than modified with additional fire proofing measures. Sustainability is clearly completely out the window as a consideration. You’d expect less crude solutions in the 21st Century than having to bulldoze hundreds of peoples’ homes, with all the stress, mental health issues and insecurity that will come with this decision. Why not simply fit sprinklers?
It was reported on where money was going to come from. And what happens to residents. And why regeneration is preferred over refurbished in this instance. And how that is more sustainable. And why “just fit sprinklers” wouldn’t work.
Honestly, everything you said here can be easily answered by actually reading in detail. It’s a fatal flaw that you constantly repeat. Do better than this performative outrage that’s detached from reality.
Because fire sprinklers are not a stand alone solution, they are fitted depending on the spec of the building, domestic, commercial, office block and they all have their own spec on things like doors, windows, corridors, stairs and lifts all vary depending on what the building is being used for, that’s also why office blocks are not always a cheap conversion to housing, differents specs.
Sounds like the right decision. Hopefully this will distract the council from more vanity projects and focus them on what really counts.
These high rises were already reaching end of life anyway so I’m kind of glad the issue has been forced; there’s an opportunity to look at Whitehawk more broadly whilst they are at it and do some regeneration of housing, retail and community space, to elevate the area out from the top 5 percentile of deprivation, in the entire country.
I reckon the Council will start re-building up by the Racehill, then up at the Green in Whitehawk-move some in there, then other parts of the City
Then Block by Block they will be demolishing them
Those that are squashed in or have a flat to big should be able to move to Flat that suit Households needs, not be put back into Flat that is to big or small for them
Can’t wait to see all the Plans the Council put together for Residents to view.
Racecourse is an interesting one, because it’s be landlocked for a decade or so. Friends of Whitehawk Hill soundly fended off the developer last time.
Oh right, didn’t realise that, but though that’s why they knocked the Second Block down so would built 2 new blocks of Flats so everyone has got the same up there.
Surely they build sooner than that.
As a resident of one of the condemned blocks for 14 years, I must say I am disappointed in this decision by the Council. I understand it but having to move from my forever home is hard to take. I have no idea how the Council intend to find alternative accommodation for us all, but speaking personally I expect a flat of a similar standard, i.e warm, dry, mould free and comparatively cheap to run.
I think it is essential that people are offered social housing that is tailored to their needs. This will be a significant logistical challenge. And I wouldn’t be surprised if several underoccupancy properties are identified during this process.
No need to panic, all the Residents will be informed etc
The Council will go through the right channels etc to get people into what Accomadation they will be offered in or out of the Area ( guessing out-there hardly any in this area to Rent Privately or Council tbh) so some may want to move back or stay in other parts of The City.
Do they have to go back once they are completed, or when the council give options to go Temporary or move to a new place permanently.
I live in Nettleton Court. The council’s main stated reasons for knocking down our block are that it wouldn’t withstand an explosion or a fire.
Nettleton Court is much sturdier than the new builds. What building would withstand an explosion ?
There is no gas in the block & we have 24/7 security to make sure no one takes in anything that could explode. Plus we have had a team of electricians working on upgrading & installing £1,000’s worth of fire safety equipment to each flat. They’ve been on site for 18 months !!!
This block was built 60 years ago &, as far as I know, there has only been one serious fire. Obviously that flat was ruined, the flat below suffered water damage from the fire brigade. That was it !!!
A few months ago the press repeatedly said that the government had put aside £20 million for the remaining 44 leaseholders. I’ve been offered £200k for my flat. Do the math.