Brighton Developer Withdraws Affordable Housing Cash

Councillors shared their frustrations as a developer asked to end a requirement to pay £254,300 towards affordable homes.

Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee members were frustrated that viability assessments on a redevelopment of 126 Gloucester Road, found the scheme would not be viable if the developer had to pay out the money towards housing elsewhere.

The application for change of use from commercial to residential and raising of roof ridge height of the building to provide five homes and a smaller commercial unit, was approved in March 2023.

A presentation to councillors at the meeting on Wednesday 7 May, said a “late-stage” review would be part of the new head of terms, which would consider the actual costs of the build and whether an affordable housing contribution could be made in future.

Labour councillor Ty Galvin said:

“This is the old familiar story of people coming to get planning permission, saying there’ll be affordable housing and then saying they can’t afford it and we have to give in to them.

“They say the five units will contribute ot the housing problem in the city. I would like to hear how this is going to happen.

“Will they be available to rent, will they be available to the council?”

He was told the homes would be “standard dwellings” which is considered to contribute to the housing need across the city.

Councillor Joy Robinson said:

“It grates to give away money that would have been spent on affordable housing, but we need the five units.

“We’re caught between a rock and a hard place.”

Green councillor Sue Shanks asked if there would be a community infrastructure levy (CIL) payment, which was confirmed at £57,750.

She said:

“I’m not minded to vote for it, they’ve got planning permission so it’s entirely up to them if they carry on and pay us the money that we expected to get or whether they don’t

“I would have thought it’s not that much money compared to the overall cost of the five houses they’re going to sell.”

Conservative councillor Carol Theobald said:

“I’m actually fed up with applicants who are getting away with this all the time.

“It seems to me they obviously paid too much for the site and they should have known this before.”

Councillors Shanks and Theobald voted against the proposals which went through by seven votes for and two against.