Developers are hoping to turn a former homeless hostel in Hove into dozens of new flats in a scheme worth more than £13 million.
But none of the flats would be classed as “affordable” at St Catherine’s Lodge which was most recently used by St Mungo’s homelessness prevention service.
The hostel was the subject of serious complaints from several neighbours and the charity relocated after serious building safety concerns came to light.
Now, St Catherine’s Hove, a company run by Timothy Clapham, Alfred Haagman and David Willis, has lodged a planning application for the site, saying that the disused property was in need of significant repair.
The men propose turning the building, at 9-12 St Catherine’s Terrace, Kingsway, into a residential block with a footway to Kingsway and Hove Place. But none of the homes would be designated as affordable.
Tim Clapham said: “Our plans for St Catherine’s have been guided by an independent financial viability assessment, in line with planning policy.
“Bringing an old building back to life is more costly than building from scratch.
“Its former use as a homeless hostel sadly didn’t work out because it needed a significant amount of money to make it fit for use.
“We also know from speaking with local residents that they were concerned about the anti-social behaviour it attracted.
“The scheme we’ve put forward makes best use of what’s there and our focus is to provide 36 high-quality new homes that befit the area.
“We are local developers, well aware of the acute shortage of housing in Brighton and Hove and will be working closely with the council to address any issues they may raise as part of the planning process.”
The proposal consists of 22 one-bedroom flats and 14 two-bedroom flats.
A financial viability assessment of the scheme forecast a 6 per cent profit which would be below the market standard. The assessment took into account the site’s value and the cost of developing it.
A planning statement detailed the result of consultations with a local community action group, with residents saying that anti-social behaviour had made the hostel extremely unpopular and that putting the building back into use would be beneficial.
The five existing car parking spaces would become cycle storage for residents and a transport assessment said that the flats would create a “reduction in the traffic impact generated by the site”.
The proposed external works to the building were described as “sympathetic to the local character and history”, with the height, width and length of the building to remain the same.
To view the application or to comment on it, go to Brighton and Hove City Council’s planning portal and search for reference BH2023/03293.
A decision on whether to approve the scheme is due to be made by Thursday 18 April.
Contracts put out by BHCC in 2023 totalling almost a third of the city’s budget.
You would have thought refurbishing a large hostel would be a doddle for them.
£40m Temporary and emergency accommodation https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/77c15308-63cc-4c1b-8d01-f0fab357239f?origin=SearchResults&p=3
And a separate £240m on a dynamic purchasing system for supported living? What software costs £240m?
https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/c2d578bf-3617-4e69-bd14-eddc117f1069?origin=SearchResults&p=1
The first contract is a three year contract for the provision of services.
Also the council don’t own this particular building and even if they did there would still be the same issue that St Mungos had with operating the building as temporary homeless accommodation.
The second contract you list is to provide actual support to those people that need them. It’s not a contract for computer software.
It’s also a five year contract hence the large contract value.
“Lot 1: Community Support:
The Community Support Service is where support is delivered to adults with learning disabilities …”
And similar language with the second Lot.
Good idea. Can they do the same with the hostel in Brunswick Place so people stop killing each other there.
Knock it down its past repair and build affordable housing. Most of these new build lie empty just a way for people to get money into the UK. The new build on Grand avenue lies mainly empty more than a year after completion. Apparent because its shared ownership with Southern housing. The latest CON where you never own your home.
So another proposal to develop flats with no provision for parking? How is this allowed? Ignoring the problem of parking doesn’t make it go away. The St James place (more shared ownership) in Portslade isn’t selling either for the same reason. I was told on enquiry that parking would be fine as there was no permit system nearby. There isn’t but one will definitely be brought in when the existing occupants can no longer park.