Planning plea for murder house

First published in News

DEVELOPERS want to turn a former squat that was the scene of a grisly murder into a bedsit.

Brighton-based AR Properties have applied to turn the house in Russell Square, Brighton, where father-of-three Craig Palmer was battered to death in 2011, into a property for six different occupants.

However the plans have already run into problems with the firm receiving a ticking off from the council for carrying out work without permission.

Residents and local conservationists have also questioned whether the grade II listed property can sustain the building work needed to makeover the property.

The property was the long-term home of Regency Square Area Society member Ken Kennar until his death in 2010.

After his death the property was occupied by squatters and in January 2011 father-of-three Craig Palmer was beaten to death there.

In June last year, a council planning enforcement officer told the owners of the property to stop all works being carried out without listed building consent.

Officers revisited the property after work resumed in November and the owner was subsequently cautioned.

AR Properties have now submitted a new planning application which was registered this week for a one-bedroom flat in the basement and five bedsits on the ground, first, second and third floors of the property. The property developer proposes to spend about £85,000 to “restore what was a dilapidated home”.

The developers also state in that application that they will make “every attempt” to restore the building to “its original shape”.

Duncan Cameron, a resident and Regency Square Area Society member, said that he feared the property was not structurally sound enough to support being converted into a house of multiple occupancy.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:28am Sun 13 Jan 13

matlock says...

Obtaining listed building consent is like pulling teeth at the best of times. It's essential to build a good working relationship with the conservation officer right from the outset.

Good luck with that one, AR Properties!
Obtaining listed building consent is like pulling teeth at the best of times. It's essential to build a good working relationship with the conservation officer right from the outset. Good luck with that one, AR Properties! matlock
  • Score: 0

10:48am Sun 13 Jan 13

Mayan Turkey says...

A spectacular failure by the planning enforcement team?

What sanctions did being 'cautioned' involve? If any cheapo bedsit conversion still goes ahead it should raise serious concerns about all of those involved.

In future, couldn't traffic enforcement officers instead be given an extra £2 to undertake toothless finger-wagging on behalf of the planning department? Same result but a lot cheaper.
A spectacular failure by the planning enforcement team? What sanctions did being 'cautioned' involve? If any cheapo bedsit conversion still goes ahead it should raise serious concerns about all of those involved. In future, couldn't traffic enforcement officers instead be given an extra £2 to undertake toothless finger-wagging on behalf of the planning department? Same result but a lot cheaper. Mayan Turkey
  • Score: 0

11:08am Sun 13 Jan 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage.
The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city.
The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage. The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 0

11:29am Sun 13 Jan 13

matlock says...

The council's action may not be as weak as it seems. Carrying out works on a listed building without consent is a criminal offence, so the caution would have been a formal one. The next step is most likely to be a criminal prosecution.

Had this not been a listed building, then yes, it would be down to the more gentle enforcement action.

The developers will have seriously upset the conservation officer, so their ongoing costs will now rocket whichever way this goes; either through much more demanding requirements from the conservation officer or reinstatement work following their failed application.
The council's action may not be as weak as it seems. Carrying out works on a listed building without consent is a criminal offence, so the caution would have been a formal one. The next step is most likely to be a criminal prosecution. Had this not been a listed building, then yes, it would be down to the more gentle enforcement action. The developers will have seriously upset the conservation officer, so their ongoing costs will now rocket whichever way this goes; either through much more demanding requirements from the conservation officer or reinstatement work following their failed application. matlock
  • Score: 0

11:37am Sun 13 Jan 13

Mayan Turkey says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage.
The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city.
Good point. Cycling sheep might do the job just as well, there are more of them, they're much cheaper to employ, and they know how to emphatically say 'no' - well, sort of.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage. The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city.[/p][/quote]Good point. Cycling sheep might do the job just as well, there are more of them, they're much cheaper to employ, and they know how to emphatically say 'no' - well, sort of. Mayan Turkey
  • Score: 0

12:16pm Sun 13 Jan 13

MuammarQaddafi says...

Mayan Turkey wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage.
The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city.
Good point. Cycling sheep might do the job just as well, there are more of them, they're much cheaper to employ, and they know how to emphatically say 'no' - well, sort of.
One bleat for "yes," two bleats for "no."
[quote][p][bold]Mayan Turkey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The team is small and has a huge workload considering the size of the city and its heritage. The council are more interested in cycle lanes and sheep than the fabric of the city.[/p][/quote]Good point. Cycling sheep might do the job just as well, there are more of them, they're much cheaper to employ, and they know how to emphatically say 'no' - well, sort of.[/p][/quote]One bleat for "yes," two bleats for "no." MuammarQaddafi
  • Score: 0

1:35pm Sun 13 Jan 13

NickBrt says...

Please can we demolish it and surrounding houses and create a much needed travellers site? Yours faithfully Carraline and Jaysen X X
Please can we demolish it and surrounding houses and create a much needed travellers site? Yours faithfully Carraline and Jaysen X X NickBrt
  • Score: 0

4:18pm Sun 13 Jan 13

getThisCoalitionOut says...

Property developers who started the work before getting permission - on a listed building - hopefully they'll get the decision they deserve - NO!

They are obviously out for a quick profit no matter what - let them sleep there first and see how they like it, I wouldn't.
Property developers who started the work before getting permission - on a listed building - hopefully they'll get the decision they deserve - NO! They are obviously out for a quick profit no matter what - let them sleep there first and see how they like it, I wouldn't. getThisCoalitionOut
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree