Cabinet members have approved plans to sell Patcham Court Farm on a 250-year lease to Royal Mail for a planned new delivery depot.
Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet was unanimous in backing the proposals at its meeting yesterday (Thursday 14 November) which is expected to generate about £3 million for council coffers.
Councillors came under fire from Save Patcham from Royal Mail campaigner Rebecca Mintrim, who called out “peppercorn rent” from the gallery as the proposals went through.
Mrs Mintrim led a deputation on behalf of the community at the start of the meeting.
She offered £1 a year from each person in Patcham for the term of the tenancy which would work out as more money than being asked from Royal Mail.
She said: “If the cabinet approves this bad deal, it should be a cautionary tale to our new Chancellor as it will be Brighton’s version of Gordon Brown’s sale of the gold reserves.
“But if you go ahead, we ask you to ensure that Royal Mail’s current properties do not become luxury developments.
“Developers should not be allowed to sidestep social housing obligations by paying penalty fees.
“We also remind the council of its duty to protect Patcham residents from increased pollution, flooding and safety risks if this project proceeds.”
She suggested the site could be used as a solar farm, a tech hub, a tourist centre or low-density housing.
The Labour deputy leader of the council Jacob Taylor, who is also the cabinet member for finance and city regeneration, said that it was right to raise the concern.
Councillor Taylor said that moving the Royal Mail’s distribution centre to the outskirts of the city would remove heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) from the city centre.
It would, he said, free up the Denmark Villas sorting office in Hove, and the Brighton office in North Road, for housing.
He explained that preparing the farm site for housing would cost £3.6 million, making a low-density project unviable, and high-density housing would have been opposed by the neighbouring South Downs National Park.
The farm buildings were cut off from the agricultural land when the A27 was built more than 30 years ago and is earmarked for employment use in the city plan.
Leasing the site to the Royal Mail would also keep 380 jobs in the city, he said.
Councillor Taylor said: “The other option is to move to Shoreham – and Shoreham is not in the city so that would be a net loss of jobs.
“It’s not desperately far away but it’s not impossible to see that many posties who live in the east of the city may not want to go and work in Shoreham. So it is retaining jobs in the city and that’s an important consideration.”
The Royal Mail secured planning permission to build the depot at the site in Vale Avenue in September, with more than 1,000 Patcham residents objecting to the scheme.
The council has first refusal to buy the Denmark Villas sorting office site, with a view to developing about 100 new affordable homes as part of its joint venture with Hyde New Homes.
The proposals were discussed at a special meeting of the council’s Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee on Wednesday (13 November).
Conservative councillor Anne Meadows shared her concerns that the lease would be for 250 years. She said that there needed to be a condition to prevent sub-letting in the future.
She was assured during the meeting that the planning conditions restricted the site for use as a Royal Mail sorting office only.
On the deal, Councillor Taylor said that selling the leasehold would give the council some control of the site and similar long leases were sold for Circus Street and the Marina.
Labour cabinet member Tim Rowkins said that currently the Royal Mail was operating out of two old and poorly insulated buildings, served by diesel-powered lorries.
Councillor Rowkins said: “What, by contrast, is being proposed would see those two sites replaced by a brand new facility, powered by solar and heated with heat pumps.
“The fleet on site would be fully electric and HGVs will be able to access the site directly from the A27 thereby taking them, their particulates and nitrogen dioxide out of the city entirely.”
And fellow Labour cabinet member Trevor Muten said: “The development is not going to poison our city’s water supply.”
Council leader Bella Sankey said that the talks were well under way when she came to the project after taking over the council in May 2023.
She said that she went to the site with a colleague, Councillor Gill Williams, listened to campaigners’ concerns and ensured all options were looked into before making what she believed was the best decision for the whole city.
Councillor Sankey said: “One of the things I love about this city is how passionate our residents are about our place and how much ownership people feel of this beautiful amazing city we live in, how much regard people have for our history and how much people want to preserve and continue as custodians to pass on a city that works for everybody that people can feel really proud of.”
The cabinet unanimously agreed to grant the 250-year lease in principle, with senior officials expected to conclude the talks in consultation with Councillor Taylor.
Live reporting posts from the special Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee threadreaderapp.com/thread/1856744676553842918.html
Live reporting posts from the Patcham Court Farm agenda item at the Cabinet meeting threadreaderapp.com/thread/1857075060252586371.html
Very bold statements from councillor Muten, who seems oblivious to the fact that Southern Water regularly dump sewage in the city, and have frequently been prosecuted for breaking the law.
I know quite a few posties based in Shoreham and outside the city who work in Brighton, so if Councillor Jacob Taylor thinks a move to Shoreham means loads of posties jacking in their jobs because they can’t manage the commute to Shoreham, compared to the commute to Patcham, he’s living in cloud cuckoo land.
Yet again Bella Sankey tries to distance herself from a contentious decision by talking about things happening before her time. She’s perfectly happy to try and take credit when positive things do happen, and is often strangely absent it’s something that might bring criticism, leaving Councillor Taylor to front meetings.
The council were always determined to shoehorn this development into Patcham, irrespective of environmental risks, everything reeks of greed along with Labour’s desperation to try and meet housing targets, when we know the majority of what they build in the city is not the affordable housing we need, and it’s postage stamp flats with flimsy walls that are sold at inflated prices. Meanwhile the council spends millions of pounds each year paying millionaire landlords for grotty temporary accommodation for homeless households.
Good, fully the right decision for the entire city. Nonsense campaign by a bunch of NIMBY Boomers sensibly pushed into the waste bin of history.
Agree with you about Cllr Taylor. He’s always been one to stand and field the difficult questions, to his credit.
Bella hasn’t held one of her Leaders’ surgeries up in Patcham though has she in the whole 18 months she’s been leader so not sure she’s listening to residents in reality.
The ‘Reimagine Brighton’ event that was due to take place there was rescheduled at short notice earlier this year, and a council officer let slip in an email that it was because of the potential for protests. Doesn’t exactly sound like the ‘listening’ council we were promised!
It’s very easy to accuse the council of ‘not listening’ just because you don’t get what you want.
The council still have to come up with the best solution for the city and of course this is a major and long term change which those living nearby may not want. I suspect what ever political colour the local council was, they would have reached the same decision.
It remains to be seen whether the water supply arguments against the scheme materialise as Patcham residents claim. If I lived there, I too would be alarmed.
Then again, here on Hove seafront I’ve often been told my flat will be under water in 20 years time, and yet they just built us a new park across the road, parts of which are below sea level at high tide.
Absolutely, and if they do materialise, I will join everyone in pushing for remedial action.
My comment isn’t just solely about this decision, it’s about what looks like a deliberate attempt on the administration’s part to avoid the Patcham area and refusing to engage with the community on this issue. Bella Sankey talks about going to the site, but that was a very contained visit and there has been no wider community engagement that’s been visible. Like I said, she’s not held one of her Leaders’ surgeries there in 18 months and the Reimagine Brighton events she was championing didn’t happen there either – worse – the one that was scheduled there was relocated at short notice to another part of Brighton.
Aside from any actual decision, you cannot say the council has listened to residents on this issue. They refused residents’ additional speaking time at the planning meeting, they refused residents questions at the meeting, they refused a request for this application to be handled in its own meeting rather than it being squashed into the regular one, they refused residents additional time to scrutinse new documents submitted to the council in mid-August. It is not a ‘listening’ council administration.
Wonderful news
About time this site was developed after 33 years.
Perfect location next to the A27/A23 and will make negligible difference to most of Patcham as it is literally 50 M’s from the A27 slip road in to Vale Avenue.
I expect the nimby’s of Patcham will bleat about it from behind their wife’s skirts to each other.
Will take so much traffic and pollution from Brighton.
I wouldn’t trust anything Muten says !
He’s the idiot that said VG3 won’t cause congestion