The ArgusDemolition plan for British Engineerium revamp (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Demolition plan for British Engineerium revamp

The Argus: Part of the British Engineerium in Hove, could be knocked down if plans are approved by the council Part of the British Engineerium in Hove, could be knocked down if plans are approved by the council

Part of a historic Victorian pump house could be demolished after multimillion-pound plans to redevelop it hit a snag.

Plans for the extension and restoration of the British Engineerium in The Droveway, Hove, were approved by Brighton and Hove City Council’s planning committee in August.

But the proposal to include an underground exhibition area beneath a light well in the building’s machine room is causing problems due to water leaks and damp in the walls.

Revised plans to demolish a small section of the listed Victorian landmark have now been submitted to the local authority.

The application states: “The incorporation of the machine shop with the light well structure above is proving to be a problem.

“As the adjoining level of the proposed underground exhibition area is to be 1.1m below, the existing walls will need to be underpinned or rebuilt.”

A letter sent to the council by engineers from the Hove-based Hemsley Orrell Partnership added it is likely that the walls, some of which are hidden behind timber panelling, are in such a poor condition that the entire structure needs to be rebuilt.

Structural problem

It adds that demolishing and rebuilding it with high quality materials is the “best option available to retain the structure”.

The buildings were built between 1865 and 1876 and originally provided water to Brighton and Hove via giant steam pumps.

The collection closed in 1952 but reopened again in the 1970s when it was transformed into a museum and exhibition hall.

Property developer and businessman Mike Holland, who bought it in 2006, is behind the plans to bring the site back into use.

Developers claim the whole scheme is “sympathetic” and is designed to “improve the facilities of the museum to place it on a more financially viable footing to secure the long-term preservation of the site”.

Comments are currently being accepted on the plans.

The local authority expects to make a decision on the applications, one of which is for listed building consent for the work, by early February.

More news from The Argus

The Argus: Daily Echo on Facebook - facebook.com/southerndailyecho Like us on Facebook

The Argus: Google+ Add us to your circles on Google+

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:14pm Tue 3 Jan 12

george smith says...

Astoria
Astoria george smith
  • Score: 0

9:33pm Tue 3 Jan 12

rfairweather@tiscali.co.uk says...

Why is there no mention Jonathan Minns who rescued this important part of our engineering history in the 1970s. If it were not for his foresight the whole site would probably now be a housing estate.
We should preserve this engineering treasure for future generations.
Why is there no mention Jonathan Minns who rescued this important part of our engineering history in the 1970s. If it were not for his foresight the whole site would probably now be a housing estate. We should preserve this engineering treasure for future generations. rfairweather@tiscali.co.uk
  • Score: 0

10:49pm Tue 3 Jan 12

Shonky says...

Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'?
So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience.
All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application.
Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering?
Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'? So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience. All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application. Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering? Shonky
  • Score: 1

11:54pm Tue 3 Jan 12

Valerie Paynter says...

Shonky wrote:
Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'? So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience. All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application. Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering?
This comment comes across as either smirking bitter-boy gullible. Or perhaps you work for the developer?

Believe everything a developer spins do you?
[quote][p][bold]Shonky[/bold] wrote: Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'? So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience. All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application. Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering?[/p][/quote]This comment comes across as either smirking bitter-boy gullible. Or perhaps you work for the developer? Believe everything a developer spins do you? Valerie Paynter
  • Score: 0

12:11am Wed 4 Jan 12

Shonky says...

Valerie Paynter wrote:
Shonky wrote:
Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'? So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience. All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application. Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering?
This comment comes across as either smirking bitter-boy gullible. Or perhaps you work for the developer?

Believe everything a developer spins do you?
I'm simply quoting the only facts that are contained in the piece. Then I am pointing out that there is nothing here in this article to justify its sensationalist headline.
I am neither particularly gullible, nor am I working for the developer. I would just like to see something approaching proper journalistic standards maintained. If the Argus thinks there is something bad afoot, it should report those facts in order to justify its headline.
But perhaps, Valerie Paynter, you have special priveliged knowledge about this story. If so, would you like to share it, rather than simply insulting your fellow poster?
[quote][p][bold]Valerie Paynter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shonky[/bold] wrote: Why do I have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph before I get the real, ahem, 'story'? So... experts are applying to replace a dangerous wall with a stronger structure in order to complete their plans to improve the visitors' experience. All this nonsense in the headline and picture caption about 'demolition' is a sad attempt at sensationalising a rather humdrum tale about a local planning application. Can't the Argus pay some grown-up journalists to write interesting and accurate news stories about our locality, rather than insulting their readers' intelligence with such failed attempts at scandal-mongering?[/p][/quote]This comment comes across as either smirking bitter-boy gullible. Or perhaps you work for the developer? Believe everything a developer spins do you?[/p][/quote]I'm simply quoting the only facts that are contained in the piece. Then I am pointing out that there is nothing here in this article to justify its sensationalist headline. I am neither particularly gullible, nor am I working for the developer. I would just like to see something approaching proper journalistic standards maintained. If the Argus thinks there is something bad afoot, it should report those facts in order to justify its headline. But perhaps, Valerie Paynter, you have special priveliged knowledge about this story. If so, would you like to share it, rather than simply insulting your fellow poster? Shonky
  • Score: 0

10:14pm Mon 30 Jan 12

ghost bus driver says...

This is a shame. If it means that the building can be preserved then fine, it says demolition and rebuilding of a small portion. I did my work experience there 16 years ago and met Jonathan Minns through that.
This is a shame. If it means that the building can be preserved then fine, it says demolition and rebuilding of a small portion. I did my work experience there 16 years ago and met Jonathan Minns through that. ghost bus driver
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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