Scores of people have objected to plans to gate off a neighbourhood cut-through which shaves minutes off the commute or school run.
The route between School Road and Payne Avenue was created in about 2020 when an extension to Rayford House, which had been converted form offices to residential, was built.
The council put a condition on the planning permission requiring public access was kept open – but this was amended by a planning inspector in 2023 who said while residents should retain a right of way, this did not need to extend to the general public.
Now, The Pinnacle Freehold Ltd is applying to block up one of the access points and put a gate on the others which has a lock which can only be opened with a code given to all the
They say that keeping access open over the past two years has enabled drug-dealing, bike theft and antisocial behaviour including delivery drivers on mopeds racing through and dogs soiling the area.
Ninety people have objected to the latest application, while 37 have commented in support.
The planning application says: “The residents and leaseholders in The Pinnacle have been alarmed at the amount of through traffic resulting from these access points, including many pedestrians, pets, bicycles at high speed, and even food delivery motor bikes using the gaps as a short-cut from Payne Avenue to School Road.
“There have also been instances of drug dealing/drug use in the car park, and what appeared to be transactions involving stolen goods.
“A number of residents have also had their bicycles stolen from the adjacent bike storage area, and the access points have provided an easy escape route at night, or when residents challenge this behaviour. ”
One objector said: “The path that runs through this place has been used by many. Children walking to school. People making their way to the station in the early light.
Neighbours moving through their own town. It is a simple thing. A gate. A way through. But its loss will be felt.
“To close it is to take something from the community and to give nothing back.
Another said: The proposal to install a controlled gate for exclusive use by Pinnacle residents risks fostering division and resentment within the local community.
“The perception of exclusivity and restricted access to previously shared space is already causing tension among residents, which could be exacerbated if the variation is approved.”
One supporter said: “The openings were put there for the residents of the Pinnacle to have closer access to Aldrington Station. They did not exist prior to the development being commenced.
“With the proposed gates, the residents will still have access via Payne Avenue, they will restrict the use of people who don’t live in the block, but trespass on our car park.
“People have sprayed graffiti on our walls and signs, damaged a mirror for safe parking round the back of the building, convened in the back of the building, people of all ages have zoomed through the opening on bikes and scooters at speed, endangering residents and their children in the car park and our cars.”
Another said: “As it stands today we have young lads on bikes using it as a cut through and numerous dog walkers (who seem to feel it is perfectly acceptable to allow their dogs to urinate on the bins and to use this as an excuse to peer through windows).
“As most of the comments seem to be about ease of access to the school and Portland Road, may I remind all that a short walk down Ruskin road and then down Tamworth and along Marmion road is perhaps some 20M longer. Not a huge problem!”
In his 2023 ruling, planning inspector Luke Simpson said: “it is neither the role nor responsibility of this development to facilitate or improve access for existing local residents (other than those occupying the approved flats) to services and facilities in the area (including the nearest train station).
“I have sympathy for interested parties (including local residents and at least one local councillor) many of whom were clearly under the impression that the original proposal lawfully provided for public access through the appeal site.
“Nonetheless, for the reasons outlined above, such a requirement is not directly related to the development.
“It is up to the appellant whether to prohibit access to anyone other than the occupiers of the four flats.
“However, it should be noted that this planning permission does not grant permission for the installation of gates or other physical means of obstruction which might require separate planning permission, given that there are no appropriate plans before me which would achieve such an aim.”
So, the people objecting own nothing there, contribute nothing towards maintenance and repairs and yet want to make decisions about property they don’t own nor live in, glaring problem with one blunt answer.
Antisocial behaviour in Hove?.My oh my what’s the world coming to?
Yet again people feel entitled to something they do should not be using in the first place. 20m extra walk will do you some good.
The signs on the wall say:
“Private Property – No Public Right of Way”
Unless objectors are happy with members of the public walking over their land/garden/drive then it’s a pretty straightforward situation.
There is an inaccuracy in the report. The council didn’t insist the opening be maintained as it hadn’t existed in the first place, before the application for use by the four flat extension.
People are protesting in order to maintain the ability to trespass on private property, a very selfish and entitled attitude.