A developer is making a second bid for permission to rent its student rooms to young professionals.
CKC Properties Ltd has struggled to let the two blocks of purpose built student accommodation (PBSA) at Holden Court, 35 Hollingdean Road, Brighton.
Last October, it applied to Brighton and Hove City Council to relax a condition on the original 2021 planning permission that the rooms could only be let to students, saying it was not viable – but this was refused.
Planning officials turned it down due to the impact on housing mix and a lack of evidence to show why student housing alone was not viable.
CKC has now appealed to the Planning Inspectorate to overturn the decision.
The appeal statement, written by planning consultancy Third Revolution Projects, says the scheme has been partly occupied during term time.
It says: “However, because of shifting market conditions in Brighton, it is no longer feasible to operate the scheme viably as PBSA [purpose built student accommodation], due to a lack in demand.
“The scheme has low occupancy rates and has remained largely vacant for the past two term periods.
“Occupancy has been 70 per cent for 2025/26, resulting in a significant financial loss.
“In effect, the scheme as it currently stands is not serving to benefit the city’s housing demand, and units which would otherwise serve to provide high-quality accommodation are being (left) vacant.
“In order to rectify this, the appellant seeks to utilise those vacant units to provide housing options for non-students, as well as for students.”
The statement adds: “The entire scheme would remain open and available to students and so if demand for PBSA increases in the future, the entire scheme could be occupied by students.
“As such, the LDC (Lawful Development Certificate) would not actually change the mix of housing provided in the city, it simply introduces flexibility that will enable currently vacant units to be let, to the benefit the non-student population.”
Holden Court has 135 studio bedrooms with communal facilities. It has been built on a site earmarked by the council for student housing before its original application was submitted.
Both CKC Properties and the original applicant SE Properties share a company director – Geoffrey Thomas, 66.
The appeal documents are available to view by searching for BH2025/02490 on the council website.
Sounds like the ideal council purchase for a new social housing project. It could be for working single people, but a step up from a hostel.
Agreed!
Odd that this developer can’t fill his PBSA yet the University of Sussex is planning to build three
more massive student tower blocks by Moulsecoomb Place…
It’s because they are not linked to any uni and are charging well over the odds. All they have to do is lower their prices and they will be full. Council needs to stand firm on this. If HMOs are being built in bevingdean from family homes this lot need to lower their rents.
Absolutely 💯
There is something very sinister about being able to rent or refuse to rent accommodation to someone based on what they do for a living. It does not matter if someone is a student or a young professional – they all need to live somewhere. . We need young professionals to live in this city and work in the local economy and services. It is a very expensive city to live in and this type of accommodation is affordable and within reach for many younger workers. Refusing to allow “non-students” to live in the flats is nothing more discrimination based on an unprotected characteristics. Demographic engineering and discrimination in allowing housing belongs in 1930s Germany, not 21st century Brighton. BHCC uses central government legislation to demographically engineer this city and deny young professionals access to homes. Not just bizarre… dark. Very dark and The MPs are fully aware but ignore it. They do not care.
Incorrect on every level. Student housing has a smaller room size requirement as most students don’t spend a lot of time in accommodation. Where as young professionals would be living there have belongings ect ect. The rules actually do make a lot of sense. Equally students like to party in the week, why would you want to put working people next door to young men and women who want to party…
This student block is NOT affordable. That is the real reason its empty. Do you know how much this company is charging and how small and horrible the rooms are?
You talk about ‘young’ professionals but don’t forget that age is also a protected characteristic…
What sort of professional of any age would want to live in an overpriced room that is below legal standards for size with no sunlight or garden?
I think the idea of turning it into sheltered accommodation for vulnerable people is great but unfortunately would never happen!
Seems very similar to the UNVIABLE KOSY LIVING urban village that they have tried to push through on Melbourne Street. Completely inappropriate expensive pigeon hole rooms that no one wants to live in!
Why can’t the Council purchase the property to help single homeless people languishing in temporary accommodation in the city. Yes we need young professionals but surely social housing is required for the most vulnerable and destitute who will never have the opportunity to rent at unaffordable local private sector rents??
Because the rooms are to small, they would actually be breaking planning laws.
I expect it will eventually be stuffed full of ‘asylum seekers’!
You are so far off the mark, your issues should be with parasites like these developers rather than a few thousand people escaping persecution. You are not poor, financially stretched or endangered by “asylum seekers!” Don’t believe the rhetoric and false narrative espoused by the grifters.
These vultures are trying to exploit young professionals now instead of students! BHCC are right to resist these plans. This substandard accommodation is not big enough to house your dog and they changed their arm, rolled the dice and lost. Now they are whining they are not making enough money. They are not interested in alleviating the housing problem. The reason the rooms are not let is down to the extortionate rents. I would be very happy if these people go to the wall as they contribute nil to Society but are self-serving and only want wish to take.
I agree with not again ,,Brighton is overflowing with migrants,and people whom let dogs sit on bus seats,I thought dogs,bless them were to sit on the floor,this one who’s owner encouraged it to get up on the seat,and it looked quite unkempt, getting back to student accommodation?? Planning was granted as per there application no more to be said ,though it out.
Why don’t the developer sell the flats to the Council or a Housing Association for social rent homes?
Because the accommodation is substandard and not fit for human habitation. Why waste public money on something of little worth or intrinsic value? Wait until the company goes bust and buy it for £1 from the administrator.
I’m sure they would have considered it. Most likely, the main barrier is that student accommodation doesn’t fit the mandatory standards for council homes, so there would be a very costly conversion cost – likely to the point where it would just be cheaper to build a new property from the ground up!