News RSS Feed


Conservation groups attack plans to demolish landmark Brighton building

3:18pm Monday 28th January 2008

comment Comments (34)   Have your say »

By Lawrence Marzouk »

Plans to demolish a landmark building and replace it with flats and a GP surgery have been attacked by leading conservation groups.

English Heritage and the Victorian Society have criticised the proposals for the former Royal Alexandra children's hospital in Dyke Road, Brighton.

The scheme will see the Victorian structure torn down and replaced by more than 150 flats - 40 per cent of which would be "affordable homes" - a GP surgery with a pharmacy and a community green for public use.

But English Heritage, which gives historic buildings listed status, and the Victorian Society, which campaigns for the preservation of Victorian and Edwardian structures, have objected to the planning application.

In a letter to Brighton and Hove City Council, English Heritage warned the scheme would have an 'adverse effect' on the area and said the buildings were 'rather monolithic'.

English Heritage turned down a bid to have the buildings listed because of its many changes but believes the former hospital remains an important landmark.

Graham Steaggles, historic areas advisor, wrote: "The Royal Alexandra Hospital for Sick Children retains its impressive Queen Anne revival 1881 main facade.

"There have, however, been later additions and changes that compromise its overall architectural interest."

The Victorian Society has called for the building not to be knocked down.

Heliose Brown, conservation adviser for the society, said: "The Royal Alexandra Hospital is an attractive and well built part of the history of this area.

"It is still in fair condition and lends itself well to adaptation and so offers the possibility of a potentially exciting conversion project.

"The proposed replacement residential blocks are not of sufficiently remarkable design to warrant the destruction and waste of this historic building.

"The society strongly recommends that permission is not granted for its demolition."

A spokeswoman for developers Taylor Wimpey said: "Taylor Wimpey is continuing discussions on the design with Brighton and Hove City Council as part of the planning application process."

The building company has continued to argue that converting the building is not viable.

The firm said that even a partial conversion would mean forgoing a doctors' surgery and energy efficiency.

Roger Amerena, chairman of the Montpelier and Clifton Hill Association, is calling for a meeting with the council and developers to look again at the plans.

He said: "Not all the buildings can be retained but some should be.

"We would like a meaningful discussion between the community and the developers."

The Montpelier Surgery in Victoria Road has been identified as the GP practice that would move to the new development, as it will have to leave its current site in the next few years.

John Oliver, practice manager, said more than 1,700 people had signed a petition in support of the surgery moving and has urged people to write to the planning committee.

The planning application is still open to consultation and is likely to be discussed in March.

Tell us what you think about the proposals for the former Royal Alex below.


Your Say YourArgus

Stroller, Hove says...
3:36pm Mon 28 Jan 08

The Tories have no interest in architecture. They have shown that since they got in. They are "working with" Wimpey to get a dreary design through. It will lose them Pavilion at the General Election.

Robert, Brighton says...
3:37pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Brighton is expanding at a rate that can't be sustained. We need to be encouraging people to move out of the city, not into it. It already can't cope with the volume of people living here. Burgess Hill / Haywards Heath / Crawley - all places better served by public transport and not overfull already.

GREYRUN, HOVE says...
3:38pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Should we describe Taylor Wimpey as part of the yob culture but in reverse, instead of destroying they desecrate the town with their ghastly buildings showing no sensitivity just a pursuit of maximum profit.

Big Cheese, Peacehaven says...
3:52pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Yes, the proposed building design is about as appetising as a wimpy.

David, Hove says...
3:54pm Mon 28 Jan 08

The council only see 140 new band D taxes so thats as much planning as they need
Now can everyone just roll over and shut up as they dont want to hear about character or views and if you dont we can always start by calling you NIMBYs not that anyone will have a bcak yard if these to55ers get there way

Albert, Falmer says...
4:04pm Mon 28 Jan 08

My initial reaction was "oh no! more heritage being destroyed" but seeing as what apparently "tens of thousands" of people have supported desecrating the landscape around Falmer I say GO FOR IT! BUILD BUILD BUILD! that horrible Preston Park could be a multistorey too.

Matt Spoors, hove says...
4:08pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Wimpey will get away with this as the planning office is run by a bunch of monkeys with no design sense or appreciation for good architecture - just look at all the bland design an build apartment blocks with blue balconies, that have gone up in the last few years.

Jacob, Brighton says...
4:36pm Mon 28 Jan 08

I work at the RSC hospital. The reason the children’s hospital was closed in the first place is the costs involved in renovating the building out weighed building a new one. I imagine the developers face the same issues. I would like to see it saved, but I guess it’s down to returns and as ever the greed of the developers out weighs saving our heritage.

norm, hove says...
4:39pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Why does 40% have to be 'affordable', it will drag the whole development down? The sales office will of course tell all prospective buyers that the 'affordable' units will be filled with nice law abiding 'key workers', the reality will be the usual mix of scoungers who will trash the place!

Labour Councillor, Town Hall says...
4:45pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Stroller wrote:
The Tories have no interest in architecture. They have shown that since they got in. They are "working with" Wimpey to get a dreary design through. It will lose them Pavilion at the General Election.
What a predictable line from this secret Labour councillor online. And yet another Labour fallacy. This is why Labour can't be trusted : they tell lies as easily as you or I breathe fresh air.

Everyone knows that people like er..."Stroller" are just angst ridden scum vengeful at other people who they think are better off and know nothing about culture or architecture. "Stroller" knows the outcome of the development is almost inevitable but uses the story for anti-Tory mileage all the same. Pathetic.

Labour scum go back your smoke-filled working mens clubs of the 1950s with your nylon shirts and greasy kipper ties. You fool nobody.

Barry, Walsingham Road says...
5:23pm Mon 28 Jan 08

The Tories are dreadful. They have given permission to knock down the Westbourne Hospital and put up another rotten building. So I am not surprised they want to do the same on Dyke Road. This will certainly lose them votes hand over fist.

sam, brighton says...
5:30pm Mon 28 Jan 08

How about building a nice SCHOOL there so kids from all over the area can get somewhere central and don't have to get 5 buses to get to Dorothy Stringer and Varndean?

Clive Graham, Seven Dials says...
7:26pm Mon 28 Jan 08

This has been on the cards for ages. Money grabbing developers always want to get as many small flats out of a space as possible. This could easily be turned into tasteful decent sized flats retaining the exterior, but no, of course they want to demolish it and bung up another bland building with the usual inferior social housing at the back probably.

Johny Dean, Montpelier Crescent says...
7:30pm Mon 28 Jan 08

140 flats - crazy over-development. How many cars too? Surely this close to the centre of the city there should be a limit on number of car spaces

markc, hove says...
7:56pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Oh dear! We can't have affordable homes affecting the relentless gentrification of central Brighton. So let's pretend an unremarkable brick building in an area of stucco architecture is somehow special. As usual the nimby faction are thinking about property values rather than aesthetics or the needs of the city they have moved to.

hem, says...
8:15pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Tory Leader Brian Oxley isn't up to the job.

He is making some classic mistakes.

Tories will lose seats at the next election because of decisions such a sthis.

Terry, Brighton central says...
8:24pm Mon 28 Jan 08

English Heritage, the Victorian Society and most others are right - Wimpeys proposals are shocking! They knew the financial profile when they bought it - it's their own commerical risk. Section 106 can still require adequate commnunity benefit and that could still be a doctors surgery. To convert the existing main building (and I would include the villa on Dyke Road)- now that would be an exciting project!/bold]

Flat Foot Soozie, Brunswick Square says...
9:58pm Mon 28 Jan 08

The Tories have no taste. They are beginning to make the LibDems look halfway decent - and that's sayng something.

Dee, Brighton says...
11:07pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Labour Councillor wrote:
Stroller wrote: The Tories have no interest in architecture. They have shown that since they got in. They are \"working with\" Wimpey to get a dreary design through. It will lose them Pavilion at the General Election.
What a predictable line from this secret Labour councillor online. And yet another Labour fallacy. This is why Labour can\'t be trusted : they tell lies as easily as you or I breathe fresh air. Everyone knows that people like er...\"Stroller\" are just angst ridden scum vengeful at other people who they think are better off and know nothing about culture or architecture. \"Stroller\" knows the outcome of the development is almost inevitable but uses the story for anti-Tory mileage all the same. Pathetic. Labour scum go back your smoke-filled working mens clubs of the 1950s with your nylon shirts and greasy kipper ties. You fool nobody.
What a pompous Tory tw*t! Have plenty of money and no worries do we? And as for Labour not to be trusted, how about Margaret Thatcher for the biggest bloody liar of the lot?! Our country has never recovered, and is never likely to, from the useless, pathetic "leadership" of that awful woman. She brought us to her knees and all the Tories still sing her praises! Who's the "fool" and the "scum" there then?!!!!

Scummer, Brighton says...
11:46pm Mon 28 Jan 08

Surely this cannot be allowed to happen. Has the Argus started a campaign yet? I'm willing to go on a march if is saves this historical building which could make way for some more wimpey prefabs.

Dennis, Brighton says...
2:59am Tue 29 Jan 08

Surely we don't need a concrete monstrosity
in Dyke Road. Modify the plans to keep the shell & develop the interior. Nice to see some stupid brainless
female called Dee missing the point entirely and having a rant at one of our better Prime Ministers who broke the power of the ghastly Labour cloth cap and brown ale unions.

P. Wilkinson, Brighton says...
8:51am Tue 29 Jan 08

The council must not allow Wimpey to demolish this attractive building. It may not be the most distinguished building in our beautiful town but it's far better than what will replace it. The Tories and Labour must realise the electoral consequences of letting this happen.

Sue Palmer, Wish says...
10:03am Tue 29 Jan 08

The Tories are really out of tune with the times if they think nobody will mind if another slab makes Dyke Road look like everywhere else. How did they get in charge of this?

Election, ahoy!

Roy Pennington, says...
10:03am Tue 29 Jan 08

The building company has continued to argue that converting the building is not viable.
The firm said that even a partial conversion would mean forgoing a doctors' surgery and energy efficiency.

On balance, the community needs a brand new surgery rather than a building kept in aspic.

littlemiss, sussex says...
10:06am Tue 29 Jan 08

i spent most of my childhood in the royal alex, may aswell have called it my second home! what memories, such a beutiful building & garden. Due to be replaced by some rubbish modern flatpack IKEA jobby! what a garstly sight! keep the building and renovate the interior!!
all 'developers' are greedy!!! money money money! Eventually all of Brighton will be replaced by garstly new builds.. if the developers get their way..

Louis, Brighton says...
10:13am Tue 29 Jan 08

Who'd be a Tory on the planning committee when this gets there?

It must be sleepless nigths between now and then for them. This is the big one. Everybody will be waiting for the result, and I would not be surprised if Tories bow to "developer" pressure and become the most reviled people in the city. They'll have to move to Burgess Hill.

Roy, says...
10:31am Tue 29 Jan 08

perhaps the planning officer will recommend "minded to refuse"

PS, hove says...
10:47am Tue 29 Jan 08

So. Taylor Wimpey say that partial conversion would be "unviable" and would result in the loss of the doctor's surgery. Who are they to call the shots here? It is for the Council to show some spine here and demand that TW proove it. Also - why should the doctor's surgery go? Emotional blackmail here, I think. I am sure that there are other pointless contributions such as % for art that can be forgone rather than vital contributions such as the doctors surgery or money towards building a new school. If the council had done its job properly since it was formed in 1997, and asked developers for contributions for doctors surgeries, schools etc, the city would not be in the mess it is today. Time to get tough Council!

Roger Tilbury, Worthing says...
11:08am Tue 29 Jan 08

As John Betjeman said we have to decide what is worth preserving rather than try to preserve everything just because it is a large Victorian building. This was the basis of his campaign to save St Pancras. Is this particular eyesore really worth saving?

Lou, Brighton says...
11:39am Tue 29 Jan 08

It's obviously all about money. Apart from council tax, how much will the council receive for agreeing to this plan????

Hell's Bells, Ventnor Villas, Hove says...
12:34pm Tue 29 Jan 08

As far as I can make it out, the Conservatives do not have any councillors who are interested in architecture and culture, and so they don't appreciate what all this means to people. It is depressing to think of walking up Dyke Road and looking at another of these non designs.

Paul, Conservation area says...
8:19pm Tue 29 Jan 08

Roy Pennington wrote:
The building company has continued to argue that converting the building is not viable. The firm said that even a partial conversion would mean forgoing a doctors' surgery and energy efficiency.
On balance, the community needs a brand new surgery rather than a building kept in aspic.

Oh come on Roy you should know much better than that!

No-one is interested in preserving the building 'in aspic'. Saving a conservation areas history is pretty important as well you know. What is wanted, judging by the significant outcry, is an exciting proposal that converts and revitalises the existing buildings. The request to house a doctors surgery can still be pursued and should be vigorously - there is room. Taylor Wimpey have really got their hooks in haven't they and look whose biting - shame.

Planning officers should recommend 'refusal' not 'minded to refuse'.

Wendy McAngus, Brighton says...
1:13pm Wed 30 Jan 08

People who want to stop the council letting developers ruin our city for future generations should go to the council's extremely un-user friendly planning section and object to BH2007/04453 and BH2007/04462 or call Sue Dubberley on 292097 and tell her what you think!

Hilary, Bucks says...
8:38pm Tue 5 Feb 08

I oppose the demolition of the former Royal Alexandra Children's Hospital in Dyke Road.
The building should be transformed into apartments I would be more than happy to purchase one and live there.

Your sayYourArgus

comment Add your comment

Register for a FREE The Argus account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.

Please register now or sign in below to continue.




Forgotten your password?

Sponsored Links


Local Services


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »