Plans for Hove's Sackville Hotel site approved on appeal (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Plans for Hove's Sackville Hotel site approved on appeal
12:55pm Tuesday 16th October 2012 in News By Tim Ridgway, Local government reporter
Developers have been given permission to build the first family homes in a seafront area for more than 50 years after national planners snubbed councillors.
Brighton and Hove City Council’s planning committee rejected proposals for the former Sackville Hotel site in Kingsway, Hove, in June.
They claimed that the scheme failed to respect the surrounding conservation area.
However, after Brighton businessmen Robert Webb and Michael Deol appealed to the Planning Inspectorate, they have now been given the go-ahead.
Work is expected to start on the development, which includes a modern seafront terrace of five six-storey town houses, in the coming months.
Mr Deol said: “We’re delighted that the appeal has been upheld and look forward to creating this landmark for Hove. We want to work with the council to put this building up.”
The pair, who own a number of restaurants and nightclub Revenge, bought the site near the junction of Sackville Gardens for £1.5 million in 2006.
Original plans to restore the 45-bedroom hotel to its Fifties heyday with the creation of a new five-star complex and flats were halted when the roof of the building collapsed in 2006.
A revised plan, which also includes a separate block facing Sackville Gardens with two flats and two maisonettes, was rejected by the council’s planning committee in March.
The same scheme was rejected again in June despite the Government’s new national planning guidelines being introduced.
The local authority said it had fears about the impact the work would have on the neighbourhood and how it would fit with planned development at neighbouring 191 Kingsway.
Following the hearing, inspector Mary O’Rourke said: “The appeal proposal has been carefully designed to make good use of the site and would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area.
“It would achieve the social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development by providing new homes, creating a high quality built environment, enhancing our built and historic environment and would contribute towards building a strong, responsive and competitive economy.”
Costs were not awarded.
A council spokeswoman said: “We are disappointed that the inspector thought these schemes were acceptable designs.”
Comments(13)
ShorehamBeachcomber
says...
1:17pm Tue 16 Oct 12
saveHOVE
says...
1:44pm Tue 16 Oct 12
mustaphaLeeko wrote:Why do I not think you actually know anything about this?
Hahaha!
Excellent news for them, I always thought it was a great design for the site and about time something modern was built.
And yah boo sucks to the stick in the mud planners at the council!
Fact is, windows on the western side of the end of the proposed terrace will now prevent adjacent development being put on the space beside it. And a huge seafront area will have to be left vacant on overlooking, overshadowing grounds.
A better design would have kept that wall windowless to allow for adjacent development. Keep up!
saveHOVE
says...
1:46pm Tue 16 Oct 12
ShorehamBeachcomber wrote:Five storey house. Stairs all the way. Who wants to buy that?
Good 5 x £1.5m houses to bring in the rich who spend more money buying goods, pay more stamp duty & rates, employ more cleaners etc... Roll on more unaffordable housing then the poorer can simply move into the places vacated by the wealthier...
rolivan
says...
2:02pm Tue 16 Oct 12
saveHOVE wrote:By the time they get upstairs to bed it will be time to come back down again.I hope they have plenty of emergency exits in place on the 4th 5th and 6th Floors.Can the plans be viewed online?
ShorehamBeachcomber wrote:Five storey house. Stairs all the way. Who wants to buy that?
Good 5 x £1.5m houses to bring in the rich who spend more money buying goods, pay more stamp duty & rates, employ more cleaners etc... Roll on more unaffordable housing then the poorer can simply move into the places vacated by the wealthier...
saveHOVE
says...
2:31pm Tue 16 Oct 12
rolivan wrote:Planning register - 189 Kingsway Hove
saveHOVE wrote:By the time they get upstairs to bed it will be time to come back down again.I hope they have plenty of emergency exits in place on the 4th 5th and 6th Floors.Can the plans be viewed online?
ShorehamBeachcomber wrote:Five storey house. Stairs all the way. Who wants to buy that?
Good 5 x £1.5m houses to bring in the rich who spend more money buying goods, pay more stamp duty & rates, employ more cleaners etc... Roll on more unaffordable housing then the poorer can simply move into the places vacated by the wealthier...
bug eye
says...
4:16pm Tue 16 Oct 12
SaveHove says the windows on the western flank will stop development next door. Well next door at 191 Kingsway also had their plans approved on appeal on the same day by the same inspector and she saw no problem, therefore there are plans to re develop 191 Kingsway too, with another contemporary development.
Now can we get some decent planning officers who know what they are doing, and can they deal with the mess at 155 Kingsway currently being created.
Hove Actually
says...
6:52pm Tue 16 Oct 12
saveHOVE wrote:Apart from the FACT planning was also allowed on this site on the same day
mustaphaLeeko wrote:Why do I not think you actually know anything about this?
Hahaha!
Excellent news for them, I always thought it was a great design for the site and about time something modern was built.
And yah boo sucks to the stick in the mud planners at the council!
Fact is, windows on the western side of the end of the proposed terrace will now prevent adjacent development being put on the space beside it. And a huge seafront area will have to be left vacant on overlooking, overshadowing grounds.
A better design would have kept that wall windowless to allow for adjacent development. Keep up!
Sad to say you cannot Troll on this anymore.
saveHOVE
says...
9:06pm Tue 16 Oct 12
Hove Actually wrote:Solomonic problem then.
saveHOVE wrote:Apart from the FACT planning was also allowed on this site on the same day
mustaphaLeeko wrote:Why do I not think you actually know anything about this?
Hahaha!
Excellent news for them, I always thought it was a great design for the site and about time something modern was built.
And yah boo sucks to the stick in the mud planners at the council!
Fact is, windows on the western side of the end of the proposed terrace will now prevent adjacent development being put on the space beside it. And a huge seafront area will have to be left vacant on overlooking, overshadowing grounds.
A better design would have kept that wall windowless to allow for adjacent development. Keep up!
Sad to say you cannot Troll on this anymore.
And it might well be that the Sackville developers will wish to rethink their end of terrace design to get round the problem they now have.
Putting a window on a wall that stands to have a blank wall for an outlook won't make it dez rez.
therat
says...
10:36pm Tue 16 Oct 12
bug eye
says...
11:18pm Tue 16 Oct 12
saveHOVE
says...
10:48am Wed 17 Oct 12
bug eye wrote:I agree with you totally.
SaveHove, The planning app states that the west flank wall of the development will have windows that do not open and are obscured glass because they are not living spaces, just bathrooms and studies, and only affects that one particular property of the terrace, and will therefore not overlook the neighbours. the sackville hotel site is an empty eyesore, whilst nextdoor is already developed and is proposing being redeveloped so the right to light on a redevelopment that does not exist or may never exist cannot be considered. its a shame they did not work together to create one long terrace that would have looked magnificent, as I think the 191 development is inferior and far more out of keeping with this stretch of conservation area.
I have, similarly, tried to suggest to the Conway Street developer and Sackville Trading Estate developer and one other property owner in Newtown Road that they all work together to create a truly useful, integrated and coordinated development from Ellen Street up to Old Shoreham Road.
All flatly decline. And the quality of development suffers and the needs of the city suffer too.
saveHOVE
says...
10:50am Wed 17 Oct 12
bug eye wrote:Windows might be obscured but they exist for a reason: daylight. And be assured they will invoke right to it when and where they can make it stick.
SaveHove, The planning app states that the west flank wall of the development will have windows that do not open and are obscured glass because they are not living spaces, just bathrooms and studies, and only affects that one particular property of the terrace, and will therefore not overlook the neighbours. the sackville hotel site is an empty eyesore, whilst nextdoor is already developed and is proposing being redeveloped so the right to light on a redevelopment that does not exist or may never exist cannot be considered. its a shame they did not work together to create one long terrace that would have looked magnificent, as I think the 191 development is inferior and far more out of keeping with this stretch of conservation area.
mustaphaLeeko says...
1:01pm Tue 16 Oct 12
Excellent news for them, I always thought it was a great design for the site and about time something modern was built.
And yah boo sucks to the stick in the mud planners at the council!