|
Consultation Report |
Consultation on the In-Principle Recommendation to Demolish and Redevelop 8 Large Panel Systems (LPS) Buildings |
|
Date |
February 2026 |
1. Introduction
1.1 Under the Housing Act (1985) Section 105, all councils have a legal obligation to consult secure tenants on any proposed changes to the management, maintenance, improvement or demolition of the homes they manage, as well as changes to the provision of services or amenities. In addition, the Council has duty to consult leaseholders, TA and private tenants.
1.2 In July 2025 the Council approved, in principle, a recommendation to regenerate all eight LPS buildings, inclusive of demolition of the existing blocks and creation of new housing on the sites.
1.3 The 8 LPS buildings are situated across three sites within the city:
· St James’s House in Kemptown
· Nettleton Court & Dudeney Lodge in Hollingdean
· Falcon Court, Heron Court, Kestrel Court, Kingfisher Court and Swallow Court in Whitehawk, referred to hereafter as the Whitehawk ‘Bird Blocks’
1.4 After Cabinet approved the in-principle recommendation, the Council commenced the required consultation in October 2025, the process of which is detailed under section 2 of this report.
1.5 Given the significance of the decisions and in line with the principle of consultation, the Council also included existing Temporary Accommodation households, Seaside Homes households, leaseholders and private sector tenants of leaseholders, within the consultation.
1.6 This report provides an overview of the consultation process. Residents across all sites contributed detailed feedback on their homes and the surrounding area, including what they value, the challenges they face, and the indoor and outdoor facilities they would like to see incorporated into any future developments.
2 Consultation Programme Overview
2.1 The consultation ran from Monday 13th October 2025 to Monday 12th January 2026. Residents were invited to take part via an online YourVoice survey hosted on the Council’s website, with paper copies available on request, and uploaded manually by officers onto the YourVoice platform. Engagement activities were delivered through multiple channels and were personalised to reflect residents’ varied needs, circumstances and preferences.
2.2 Residents were informed of the consultation requirement through monthly resident newsletters, refreshed noticeboards, post boxes at all blocks for written queries, a dedicated email inbox for direct contact and interpreter-supported appointments.
2.3 Residents were also informed via the LPS Resident Advisory Groups that played an active role in shaping the consultation questions and advising on the most effective ways to engage residents, including the use of plain-language materials and alternative engagement routes. These sessions took place with residents on:
2.4 To support participation and gather feedback following the launch of the consultation on Monday 13th October 2025, the Council held a series of consultation and visioning workshops. These sessions took place on:
2.5 In addition, three drop-in engagement sessions were delivered as part of wider Residents’ Days that provided opportunities for residents to complete the survey and speak directly with officers from the wider programme team:
2.6 To ensure maximum engagement, two door-knocking campaigns were carried out across all eight blocks. These campaigns offered individual support to residents in completing the survey including interpreter-supported sessions provided on request to residents with language barriers, health needs or anxiety, and accessibility issues, and ensuring equal access to information. These were held on:
2.7 Feedback gathered through informal conversations at engagement events has also been an important complement to the survey responses. While all residents were encouraged and supported to complete the online survey, it is recognised that some may have chosen not to do so. To ensure all views were captured, key themes arising from these engagement sessions, and through informal conversations with residents were, and will continue to be, recorded and analysed.
2.8 The Council places strong importance on all forms of resident feedback and continues to document and retain this information to ensure that residents’ views and concerns are clearly understood. Where appropriate, this feedback will inform the ongoing development and refinement of the programme.
2.9 In total, the consultation received 312 responses out of 530 householders, representing an overall response rate of 58.8%. The breakdown by site is as follows:
- 88 secure council tenants, 10 temporary accommodation tenants including Seaside Homes and 2 leaseholders
- 117 secure council tenants, 19 temporary accommodation tenants including Seaside Homes, and 2 leaseholders
2.10 Detailed comments and site-specific feedback are provided in section 4 for St James’s House, section 5 for Nettleton Court & Dudeney Lodge, and Section 6 for the Whitehawk ‘Bird Blocks’.
3 Consultation & Responses
3.1 The following section provides an overview of the consultation responses by site, overall response levels, an analysis of completed questionnaires, and a summary of feedback alongside the Council’s comments.
3.2 The questionnaire consisted of seven questions. The first six questions applied to all buildings, while the seventh question was tailored to each specific site. The questions were:
1) What do you like about your current home and the area?
2) What don't you like about your current home and the area?
3) Is it clear why refurbishment of the buildings is not the preferred option?
4) Is it clear why the preferred option is to knock down the current buildings and replace with new homes?
5) What outdoor spaces and facilities would you want in a new development?
6) What indoor facilities (shared spaces) would be important to you?
7) Site-specific questions:
· St James’s House: If living in the town centre is important to you, what matters most?
· Nettleton Court & Dudeney Lodge: If you want to stay in the area, what matters most?
· Whitehawk: What’s important for your area’s future?
3.3 All responses were thoroughly reviewed and analysed by the Council. A detailed breakdown of responses by site, including key feedback, is provided in the following sections.
3.4 Given the volume of survey responses and accompanying comments, this report focuses on the top three recommendations for each question on each site. This approach ensures clarity and keeps the report concise, while still reflecting the breadth of feedback received. All responses to the questionnaire have been reviewed by the Council and will continue to inform the programme as it develops.
3.5 It’s important to note that some free-text comments may align with options that were available as structured responses in the questionnaire. Where this occurs, these comments have not been reclassified to preserve the integrity of the original feedback. Reviewers should keep this in mind when interpreting figures and percentages presented in this report.
4 St James’s House
4.1 What do you like about your current home and the area?
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
Size and Layout of Rooms |
60 |
81.1% |
Transport Links & Buses |
63 |
85.1% |
|
Balcony or Own Outdoor Space |
54 |
73% |
Close to Shops & Services |
61 |
82.4% |
|
View from Windows |
47 |
63.5% |
Connection to Seafront/Town Centre |
58 |
78.4% |
|
Heating, Hot Water & Warmth |
45 |
60.8% |
Neighbours & Community |
50 |
67.6% |
|
Storage Space Available |
41 |
55.4% |
Green Spaces Nearby |
47 |
63.5% |
|
Open Plan or Separate Kitchen |
40 |
54.1% |
Safety & Security |
42 |
56.8% |
|
Sound Proofing between Homes |
25 |
33.8% |
Parking Available |
29 |
39.2% |
|
Accessibility features |
23 |
31.1% |
No Answer |
9 |
12.2% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
7 |
9.5% |
Other (Please tell us) |
8 |
10.8% |
|
No Answer |
0 |
0% |
|
|
|
4.1.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· Struggling with the amount of light I have in my flat |
|
· Central boiler system |
|
· Fall risk, so I need level flooring and doors |
|
· Location |
|
· Location is close to work and shops which are essential for my condition. Dedicated parking space required due to mobility issues |
|
· Cheap to run heating and low electricity use. Average cost of running the flat as I will be retiring soon and my income will drop dramatically |
|
· Community, good neighbour relationships, security knowing those around you brings.
|
4.1.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· I love living in this area because I love to walk to Saint Queens Park and Preston Park. Also, I have grandchildren and I love to take them to the Brighton theatre. |
|
· Pub across the road is very noisy |
|
· Parking is a big issue |
|
· Don’t like the area it’s depressing, run down, and smells of dog mess |
|
· Resident unable to answer as they are struggling with health |
|
· I currently have a garage for storage of my car and extra storage. |
|
· Prior to the scaffolding erected around the building, it was always reassuring that both entrances were open and light to come and go. Unfortunately, this has long gone with the scaffolding staying in place, where it is noticed some residents and many non-residents converge, openly dealing, as well as rough sleepers using as sleep/toileting areas.
|
4.1.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.1.4 Residents highlighted several aspects they value about their current homes, particularly the size and layout of the rooms, which were positively rated by 81% of respondents. Many also appreciated having a balcony or private outdoor space (73%) and the views from their windows (63.5%).
4.1.5 The Council recognises residents’ strong appreciation for well-designed internal space, including room sizes, layouts, and access to private outdoor space. These priorities will be taken into account as design work progresses, and opportunities to optimise internal layouts, balconies and outlooks will be explored as part of the emerging proposals, where ‑feasible, taking into consideration the feedback of residents.
4.1.6 Residents also highlighted the significant value of the area’s transport links (85.1%), proximity to shops and services (82.4%), and easy access to the seafront and town centre (78.4%). These locational advantages form an important part of the existing neighbourhood and are expected to remain key strengths of the area throughout any future regeneration activity.
4.2 What don't you like about your current home and the area?
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
Poor Water Pressure |
22 |
29.7% |
Street based antisocial behaviour, such as drugs, rough sleeping |
51 |
68.9% |
|
Not Enough Storage |
15 |
20.3% |
Area feels unsafe |
26 |
35.1% |
|
Number of Lifts |
15 |
20.3% |
Bins Storage/Rubbish |
23 |
31.1% |
|
Size too Small |
15 |
20.3% |
Parking problems |
16 |
21.6% |
|
No Answer |
15 |
20.3% |
No Answer |
13 |
17.6% |
|
Damp Issues |
14 |
18.9% |
Poor Road cleaning |
10 |
13.5% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
14 |
18.9% |
Problems with Neighbours |
9 |
12.2% |
|
No outdoor space |
13 |
17.6% |
No Green Spaces |
7 |
9.5% |
|
Heating Problems |
8 |
10.8% |
Other (Please tell us) |
7 |
9.5% |
|
No View or poor view |
4 |
5.4% |
Poor Transport Links |
3 |
4.1% |
|
Hard to get in and out |
3 |
4% |
Too Far from Shops/Services |
2 |
2.7% |
|
Size too big |
1 |
1.4% |
|
|
|
4.2.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· If there are no adaptations, then it could be difficult |
|
· Windows could be better |
|
· Don’t like the area |
|
· Block needs more care and looking after |
|
· Living with anxiety, and issues with ASB and others being intimidating |
|
· Ants is a big issue |
|
· Condition the building is now in, and the general look from outside. Antisocial behaviour in the area |
|
· Having to move again |
|
· E scooter issues |
|
· Everything is alright |
|
· No issues |
|
· The state the communal and outside areas are in. Dirty and not cared for. |
|
· Very noisy neighbours above us, nothing gets done when complaints are made, we've been flooded multiple times, and nothing is done. A lot of undesirable people have moved in, and the building now feels unsafe. |
|
· The lifts are small and cannot really accommodate when people are moving in or out of the building. As there are only two lifts that serve all flats, it becomes difficult when one is out of service (happens often) or when someone is trying to load and unload household items and keeps a lift on one floor so inaccessible for others to use. There is no service lift that can be used specifically for this purpose and is bigger to allow easier transportation of large items i.e. couches, tables and beds.
|
4.2.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· I do not particularly like unlike anything in my area at times. We do have some issues with drug dealing that is evident, but overall, I love my place. |
|
· Some neighbours could be a problem |
|
· There is a lot of parking problems, and the bins are exposed |
|
· Need more bins |
|
· Parking is not good at all |
|
· Road cleaning is amazing. Whosoever cleans at chapel street is brilliant. |
|
· Not a child friendly and safe area. |
4.2.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.2.4 Residents identified several issues with their current homes, most notably poor water pressure, which was raised by nearly 30% of respondents. Concerns were also expressed about insufficient storage space and the number of lifts, each highlighted by around one in five residents.
4.2.5 Water pressure testing will be part of the development process and is acknowledged as a resident concern. The Council will also investigate the amount of storage required with the project team, and two lifts will be required as a minimum to any future buildings.
4.2.6 In relation to the wider area, the most significant concern was street based antisocial behaviour, including drug activity and rough sleeping, reported by almost 69% of respondents. Over a third of residents also felt that the area is unsafe, and around 31% raised issues relating to bins, waste storage and rubbish.
4.2.7 The Council intends to apply Secured by Design (SBD) principles to any future redevelopment, recognising residents’ concerns about crime and antisocial behaviour, and feeling unsafe in the area. This approach will inform considerations around site layout, natural surveillance, lighting and the creation of safe and defensible spaces. Proposals for bin storage will also form part of the design process, and feedback on the limitations of the current arrangements will be considered when developing options for new facilities.
4.3 Is it clear why refurbishment of the buildings is not the preferred option?
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
65 (87.8%) |
6 (8.1%) |
1 (1.3%) |
2 (2.7%) |
|
Comments
· I would just like to say that this council should have maintained this building for the last 30 years and they have not. They have neglected it. |
|
· Well, it is clear at this point, but had necessary works that have been completed since the LPS block issues were highlighted, (as well as ongoing works continuing), been done when they should have been addressed, perhaps the structure would have fared better over the decades of lack of input. |
4.3.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.3.2 The majority of residents indicated that they understood why refurbishment is not the preferred option. The Council will continue to provide clear, accessible information as the programme progresses to ensure residents remain fully informed about decisions relating to the buildings.
4.4 Is it clear why the preferred option is to knock down the current buildings and replace with new homes?
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
68 (91.8%) |
3 (4%) |
1 (1.3%) |
2 (2.7%) |
Comments
|
· The council have not got enough properties anyway to fill in people that are going to have to move. They should’ve spent it on the building over the last 30 years that we know of and all the money they’ve spent around this scaffolding that’s been for six years. Why? Why is it up anyway. I’m not an architect I don’t know what the situation could be but devastation of the surrounding houses and flats in the streets. |
|
· It is too far gone to disagree, but will note that there seems to have been an endless stream of workmen within the building righting works/wiring/fitting of new up to date tech alarm systems, renovation of void flats to re accommodate as temporary use in between the start of decant of original Tenants through until BHCC are ready to proceed with demolition. Many people are puzzled and confused as to why so much money has and continues to be ploughed (literally) into this building.
4.4.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.4.2 The majority of residents reported that they understood why demolition and rebuilding is the preferred option. As with the previous question, the Council will continue to provide clear and timely communication throughout the programme, including updates on the ongoing maintenance required for the existing building while regeneration plans are developed. |
4.5 What outdoor spaces and facilities would you want in a new development?
|
Balconies |
56 |
75.7% |
|
Local Shops |
44 |
59.5% |
|
Parking |
44 |
59.5% |
|
Good lighting for Safety |
43 |
58.1% |
|
Clear Sightlines (no hidden corners) |
32 |
43.2% |
|
Seating areas for residents |
32 |
43.2% |
|
Community Garden Areas |
30 |
40.5% |
|
Trees and Green Spaces |
29 |
39.2% |
|
Children’s Play Areas |
24 |
32.4% |
|
Allotments & Growing Spaces |
19 |
25.7% |
|
Dog Exercise Area |
19 |
25.7% |
|
Storage for Mobility Scooters/Equipment |
19 |
25.7% |
|
Fencing |
16 |
21.6% |
|
Raised Planting Beds |
15 |
20.3% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
6 |
8.1% |
|
No Answer |
3 |
4.1% |
Comments
|
· I want a laundry room. |
|
· Specific allotments for parking |
|
· Scaffolding attracts rough sleepers |
|
· Need to be careful where seating is placed as this could attract drug users and rough sleepers |
|
· No fencing as it’s easier for junkies to use it for anti-social activities behind the car park areas. The working dogs should be allowed but not the big ones. I don’t think there should be balconies above the sixth floor, and I don’t think young kids should be above the sixth floor as well because of windows not locking properly they could lean against it and they’re out the window. 1st /2nd floor has flexed adapted for disabilities so you haven’t got the problem if there’s anything happens getting people from wheelchairs and all that floors above whereas they can be carried from two floors. |
|
· We love dogs, but any new development needs to consider who keeps animals, especially those that bring in dogs and be accountable for keeping all communal areas clear and clean from mess. Hence not thinking a dog exercise area a good idea. |
4.5.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.5.2 The Council recognises the strong value residents place on balconies at St James’s House. As design work progresses, opportunities to incorporate balconies and enhance outlooks will be explored where feasible as well as including private amenity space on ground floors. The site benefits from attractive long range‑ views across the surrounding area, and this feedback will help inform how future design proposals consider building orientation, height, and layout to maximise natural light and outlook where possible.
4.5.3 Residents also highlighted the importance of the local amenities available within the Kemptown area, noting the convenience of shops and services within easy walking distance of the site. The Council acknowledges the significance of this accessibility for many households. Consideration of parking provision will form part of any future design process, and resident feedback on current parking challenges will be taken into account. The Council will also explore potential approaches to supporting sustainable travel and ensuring appropriate provision for future development.
4.6 What indoor facilities (shared spaces) would be important to you?
|
Community Room for Meetings/Activities |
39 |
52.7% |
|
Access to the internet |
34 |
45.9% |
|
Sound Proofing |
33 |
44.6% |
|
Easy Access in and out for residents |
28 |
37.8% |
|
Internal walkways between blocks |
24 |
32.4% |
|
More than One Lift |
23 |
31.1% |
|
Toilets |
21 |
28.4% |
|
Temperature Control |
18 |
24.3% |
|
Small spaces for informal get-togethers |
11 |
14.9% |
|
No Answer |
6 |
8.1% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
6 |
8.1% |
Comments
|
· Service lifts to move goods and big items. Also, not only easy access but safe access |
|
· Laundry room in the blocks |
|
· A set of lifts |
|
· Cable the community room up with fibre optic |
|
· Retaining the laundry room as it brings people together |
4.6.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.6.2 The Council acknowledges residents’ interest in having shared spaces that support community interaction. As part of the design development process, options for a community room or alternative forms of communal space will be explored to understand what could be appropriate for the site and responsive to residents’ needs, noting also the importance residents place on internet access.
4.6.3 In addition, sound insulation within any new buildings would be required to meet current building regulation standards, helping to reduce noise transfer and improve overall living conditions.
4.7 If living in the town centre is important to you, what matters most?
|
Good Transport Links |
61 |
82.4% |
|
Close to Shops & Services |
58 |
78.4% |
|
Close to Seafront & Town |
56 |
75.7% |
|
Central Location |
54 |
73% |
|
Accessibility of Site |
27 |
36.5% |
|
Being Part of Local Community |
24 |
32.4% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
5 |
6.8% |
|
No Answer |
1 |
1.4% |
Comments
|
· Need to be close to friends |
|
· Close to family and friends |
|
· Work and family are both close |
|
· We’ve lived here for 30 years and are in our 70s. The area is our home, and we’d like to stay. We need somewhere where we can walk to shops that aren’t a long way away from anything. I like to be somewhere I can walk and relax, go do my shopping, and be close to my grandkids so I can have them near me - if I’m elsewhere I don’t drive, so I need to be somewhere where I can get to the places quickly. |
|
· Close to work essential due to chronic fatigue and dislocations |
4.7.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
4.7.2 Residents highlighted the strong benefits of the surrounding area, particularly its excellent transport connectivity, central location and ease of access to shops, services and the seafront. Kemptown also provides a varied range of independent shops, cafés and amenities, which many residents value as part of their daily lives.
4.7.3 The Council recognises the importance of these features in supporting residents’ wellbeing and independence. As the regeneration proposals develop, consideration will be given to how new buildings and public spaces can complement and integrate with the character of the wider neighbourhood, helping to maintain the strengths of the existing area and support the continued vibrancy of the local community.
4.8 Conclusion:
4.8.1 While many of the concerns raised relate to long‑standing building and environmental issues, residents demonstrated a strong grasp of why refurbishment is not being pursued and why redevelopment is considered the most viable route forward.
4.8.2 Taken together, the feedback provides a clear picture of what matters most to residents at St James’s House: a well-connected location, homes that are comfortable and practical, and a neighbourhood where people feel safe.
4.8.3 This insight will play an important role in shaping the next stage of design work and future engagement, ensuring that any proposals respond directly to the priorities residents have identified and support a safer, more resilient living environment over the long term.
5 Nettleton Court & Dudeney Lodge
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
Size and Layout of Rooms |
85 |
85% |
Transport Links & Buses |
80 |
80% |
|
View from Windows |
72 |
72% |
Close to Shops & Services |
68 |
68% |
|
Balcony or Own Outdoor Space |
68 |
68% |
Connection to Seafront/Town Centre |
60 |
60% |
|
Heating, Hot Water & Warmth |
59 |
59% |
Safety & Security |
56 |
56% |
|
Open Plan or Separate Kitchen |
46 |
46% |
Green Spaces Nearby |
46 |
46% |
|
Storage Space Available |
29 |
29% |
Neighbours & Community |
45 |
45% |
|
Accessibility features |
21 |
21% |
Parking Available |
24 |
24% |
|
Sound Proofing between Homes |
19 |
19% |
No Answer |
12 |
12% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
8 |
8% |
Other (Please tell us) |
8 |
8% |
|
No Answer |
3 |
3% |
|
|
|
5.1 What do you like about your current home and the area?
5.1.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· I love where I live |
|
· Electric door provided and shower |
|
· Quiet |
|
· No storage space not a lot of electric sockets |
|
· It's what I’ve known for the last 15 years, and I’m confident and comfortable with everything this place offers & gives me. |
|
· I’ve lived in Brighton since 1990. My neighbours are nice, and my flat is spacious. I love the views, and I love having a balcony for my plants. |
|
· I’m quite happy here. Some dubious characters but I keep myself to myself. |
|
· I'm on a well-served local bus route. |
5.1.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· Garden, Trees & Grounds |
|
· Mobility scooter storage |
|
· Visitor parking |
|
· Safety is an issue - I never locked the door when I moved in 20 years ago, but now I have drug dealers living on my floor |
|
· Drug users in the block |
|
· Member of the gym in town, so I must be in reasonable distance |
|
· Gardens and community |
|
· The community and people I meet on the school run |
5.1.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.1.4 Residents identified a number of positive features within their current homes, with the size and layout of the rooms standing out as the most appreciated (85% of respondents). Many also appreciated the views from their windows (72% of respondents), and having access to a balcony or private outdoor space (68% of respondents).
5.1.5 The Council recognises the importance residents place on well-designed internal spaces, including generous room sizes, thoughtful layouts and access to private outdoor areas. These priorities will inform the development of future design options, and opportunities to enhance internal configuration, outdoor space provision and overall outlook will be explored where feasible, taking into account the feedback received through this consultation.
5.1.6 Residents also emphasised the strengths of the local area, particularly its strong transport connections (80%), the convenience of nearby shops and services (68%), and its close relationship with the seafront and wider city centre (60%). These established locational advantages are regarded as key attributes of the neighbourhood and are expected to remain important features throughout any future regeneration activity.
5.2 What don't you like about your current home and the area?
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
No Answer |
40 |
40% |
No Answer |
37 |
37% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
22 |
22% |
Street based antisocial behaviour, such as drugs, rough sleeping |
34 |
34% |
|
Not Enough Storage |
21 |
21% |
Other (Please tell us) |
17 |
17% |
|
Damp Issues |
7 |
7% |
Bins Storage/Rubbish |
16 |
16% |
|
Number of Lifts |
6 |
6% |
Area feels unsafe |
13 |
13% |
|
Size too Small |
6 |
6% |
Problems with Neighbours |
10 |
10% |
|
Heating Problems |
5 |
5% |
Parking problems |
7 |
7% |
|
Hard to get in and out |
4 |
4% |
No Green Spaces |
4 |
4% |
|
No outdoor space |
4 |
4% |
Poor Road cleaning |
3 |
3% |
|
No View or poor view |
4 |
4% |
Too Far from Shops/Services |
2 |
2% |
|
Poor Water Pressure |
3 |
3% |
Poor Transport Links |
1 |
1% |
|
Size too big |
1 |
1% |
|
|
|
5.2.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· Noise transmission from nearby flats & City Clean/Recycling |
|
· Sound proofing |
|
· Security |
|
· Noise |
|
· Plumbing |
|
· Would prefer the block to be 50 plus like it used to be. |
|
· Parcels are stolen from outside your door |
|
· Nothing, perfect for 20 years |
|
· Dogs, too many in the block |
|
· Barking dogs, smell and loud noise |
|
· Nothing |
|
· Would prefer to be lower |
|
· Nothing |
|
· Love my home |
|
· The bath |
|
· Dust from the rubbish dump |
|
· Noise |
|
· Nothing I don’t like |
|
· Being knocked down |
|
· lack of soundproofing, noisy |
|
· No longer feels safe |
|
· can be noisy sometimes especially when stormy |
5.2.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· Hill from centre a small pest |
|
· Noise from neighbours |
|
· Have more disability parking |
|
· Too many dogs in the block- dog poo everywhere |
|
· Having a fear of the lights going out |
|
· Don’t like the depot next door |
|
· Drug gangs |
|
· Not something I don’t like |
|
· Churchill’ square too busy |
|
· Sometimes you get odd noises |
|
· Dogs barking and pee in life, visitors misbehaving |
|
· Area works well for me |
|
· When moved in two years ago, my e bike was stolen in a minute. |
|
· No, I love living here |
|
· Noisy at times |
|
· Too many high builds |
|
· I don’t like big dogs being locked in these small homes. This is a crime. This should be considered when making new homes |
5.2.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.2.4 40% of residents reported no concerns about their current home. Among those who did highlight issues, 21% felt that storage space is insufficient. This is an important consideration for many households, and the Council will explore how storage provision could be improved as part of any future development work.
5.2.5 Approximately 22% of residents provided additional comments through the free text section, where noise emerged as one of the most frequently mentioned issues. As noted at section 4.6.3, any new buildings would be required to meet current building regulation standards for sound insulation, helping to reduce noise transfer and support improved living conditions.
5.2.6 37% of respondents reported no concerns about the area, though street based antisocial behaviour, such as drugs, rough sleeping was highlighted as a concern by 34%, and 17% of respondents provided comments that broadly relate to noise an antisocial behaviour.
5.2.7 The Council intends to address these resident concerns through Secure by Design (SBD) principles as part of any potential construction phases to provide a proactive approach to these issues by integrating security measures directly into the layout and physical fabric of buildings and their surroundings. Any new developments will also be required to adhere to building regulation standards for noise insulation.
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
91 (91%) |
5 (5%) |
1 (1%) |
3 (3%) |
5.3 Is it clear why refurbishment of the buildings is not the preferred option?
Comments
|
· I'm still not convinced that there are no viable options. As stated, the Labour government came into power with a clear agenda to increase social housing and has directed all local authorities accordingly. Given that Brighton has a Labour majority, this decision appears politically aligned. However, I believe the buildings in question still have at least 10 years of life. They are not falling apart, and there are no clear signs of dilapidation. A significant amount has already been spent on doors and alarms etc and all such measures intended to keep us safe while we live here. It's difficult to accept the notion that safety is a priority when so much money is spent on these features, yet essential services like the NHS continue to be underfunded. |
|
· Due to what happened years back to similar buildings it's good to redevelop and make it more modern. |
|
· Yes, thank you to your helpful team of Sam and Hemangi for explaining clearly in simple words. |
5.3.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.3.2 Most residents indicated that they were clear about why refurbishment is not the preferred option, which is a testament to the ongoing efforts to engage with all residents. The Council will maintain a commitment to clear and timely communication throughout the next stages of the programme so that residents remain fully informed about any decisions relating to the buildings.
5.4 Is it clear why the preferred option is to knock down the current buildings and replace with new homes?
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
88 (88%) |
5 (5%) |
2 (2%) |
5 (5%) |
Comments
|
· No, it is not entirely clear why demolition is the preferred option. The structures appear to be in usable condition, with no obvious signs of severe dilapidation. In fact, recent investments in safety features such as new doors and alarms suggest that the buildings were deemed safe for continued occupancy. Demolition should be a last resort, not the default, especially when the buildings still have years of viable use and residents feel their voices have not been adequately heard. |
|
· I think you should consider leaving them as they are for a little while longer. Obviously, they will continue to degrade, and they will have to be knocked down, but I don’t think that’s unsafe, so I’ve been trying to leave them for awhile |
|
· I would prefer it if the block was to stay |
|
· We believe the building is still in good condition, especially considering the large amount of money recently spent on alarm systems, safety improvements and replacing the doors. Moving all residents would be very difficult and would cause a lot of disruption for people. Instead of demolition, it would be better to explore other options to upgrade the safety and improve the existing building rather than tearing it down. |
|
· Would have helped if you also had put in a plan where you are putting us |
5.4.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.4.2 The majority of residents also indicated that they were clear as to why the preferred option is to knock down the current buildings and replace with new homes. The Council will maintain a commitment to clear and timely communication throughout the next stages of the programme so that residents remain fully informed about any decisions relating to the buildings. Reflecting on the free text comments, communication will include updates on existing building management to provide comfort and reassurance to existing residents.
5.5 What outdoor spaces and facilities would you want in a new development?
|
Balconies |
76 |
76% |
|
Good lighting for Safety |
66 |
66% |
|
Local Shops |
63 |
63% |
|
Trees and Green Spaces |
59 |
59% |
|
Seating areas for residents |
58 |
58% |
|
Clear Sightlines (no hidden corners) |
52 |
52% |
|
Community Garden Areas |
45 |
45% |
|
Parking |
43 |
43% |
|
Fencing |
34 |
34% |
|
Allotments & Growing Spaces |
31 |
31% |
|
Storage for Mobility Scooters/Equipment |
29 |
29% |
|
Raised Planting Beds |
28 |
28% |
|
Children’s Play Areas |
23 |
23% |
|
Dog Exercise Area |
21 |
21% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
15 |
15% |
|
No Answer |
6 |
6% |
Comments
|
· Clear dog areas |
|
· Quiet and high up |
|
· Disability parking |
|
· Laundry service, Swift bird boxes, compost bins |
|
· Closer to the sea |
|
· Would like to live in any floor above… I feel very claustrophobic so would want to live in top floors to have a good view and quality of life |
|
· More modern wiring system |
|
· Ground floor and near the marketplace |
|
· Low rise priorities that look on to a central courtyard |
|
· Compact place for living. if it’s smaller can manage it better |
|
· None as I’m not fussy |
|
· Fountain in a community area |
|
· Whatever we have now should all be included. If the flats could be of similar size, that would be amazing |
|
· Laundry room |
|
· Balcony if it’s high rise. Had hip replacement, so difficult for me to get in and out of bath. It will be good to have shower. I am always worried about falling and as I live all by myself, I dread tipping. |
5.5.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.5.2 Residents collectively valued balconies (76% of respondents), good lighting for safety (66% of respondents), and Local Shops as their top three priorities.
5.5.3 Balconies continue to be a strong priority for residents across all three sites. While previous Council-led developments have often incorporated balconies, any future inclusion will be explored through the design process, taking into account site constraints and the value residents place on the existing views from the buildings. In relation to lighting and safety, the Council intends to apply Secured by Design (SBD) principles to any future redevelopment. These principles will guide considerations around site layout, natural surveillance, lighting and the creation of safe and defensible spaces.
5.5.4 The Council will continue to explore all reasonable options for the site as plans progress, recognising the importance residents place on being close to local shops, as identified in the feedback. The site benefits from strong transport connections to the city centre and wider area, ensuring continued access to shops, services and other local amenities.
5.6 What indoor facilities (shared spaces) would be important to you?
|
Sound Proofing |
53 |
53% |
|
Community Room for Meetings/Activities |
49 |
49% |
|
More than One Lift |
48 |
48% |
|
Easy Access in and out for residents |
42 |
42% |
|
Access to the internet |
33 |
33% |
|
Temperature Control |
30 |
30% |
|
Small spaces for informal get-togethers |
25 |
25% |
|
Internal walkways between blocks |
22 |
22% |
|
Toilets |
22 |
22% |
|
No Answer |
17 |
17% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
9 |
9% |
Comments
|
· Laundry service is quite useful |
|
· Internal walkways between blocks do cause problems |
|
· Laundry service |
|
· No 5g towers on the top of the blocks |
|
· Laundrette |
|
· Secure access to buildings |
|
· Community room with kitchen is ideal, and have some social do to meet with people |
|
· Gym |
|
· Laundry room |
5.6.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.6.2 Residents identified several priorities for indoor facilities, with soundproofing (53%), a community room for meetings and activities (49%) and the provision of more than one lift (48%) emerging as the most valued features.
5.6.3 Any new buildings would be required to meet current building regulation standards for sound insulation, which aim to reduce noise transfer and improve living conditions. In addition, new developments of this scale must include a minimum of two lifts, which would be incorporated into future design proposals.
5.6.4 The Council acknowledges residents’ interest in having shared spaces that support community interaction. As part of the design development process, options for a community room or alternative forms of communal space will be explored to understand what could be appropriate for the site and responsive to residents’ needs.
5.7 If you want to stay in the area, what matters most?
|
Feeling Safe |
68 |
68% |
|
Access to Local Services |
59 |
59% |
|
Easy Accessibility to Transport |
58 |
58% |
|
Accessibility of Site |
51 |
51% |
|
Good Relationships with Neighbours |
41 |
41% |
|
Being Part of the Local Community |
38 |
38% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
7 |
7% |
|
No Answer |
3 |
3% |
Comments
|
· Access to my family. All my children live around. Happy to go to Moulsecoomb as my son lives there |
|
· Localised and not too much of uphill. |
|
· GP’s |
|
· My most important things are to be close to pharmacy, GP and a local shop, |
|
· School and children’s activities |
|
· Close to job |
|
· There are lot of services around and it’s easy to get to the town with the kind of transport available. Since I can’t walk up the hill, the present bus link is good for me. |
5.7.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
5.7.2 Residents prioritised wanting to feel safe (68%), having access to local services (59%) and accessibility to transport (58%). As previously mentioned, the Council intends to adopt Secured by Design (SBD) principles to any future redevelopment to ensure residents feel safe in their own homes. Fortunately, the site benefits from strong transport connections to the city centre and wider area, ensuring continued access to local amenities.
5.8 Conclusion:
5.8.1 While many residents reported satisfaction with their current homes and surroundings, the themes of storage, soundproofing, safety, and neighbourhood conditions were consistently raised. Importantly, most respondents recognised why refurbishment is not the preferred option and expressed an informed understanding of the case for demolition and redevelopment.
5.8.2 The feedback from residents of Nettleton Court & Dudeney Lodge reflect both a strong connection to their homes and a clear understanding of the wider issues influencing the Council’s position.
5.8.3 The Council acknowledges these insights and will continue to ensure that residents’ priorities — including safety, transport connectivity, access to services, and the quality of future homes — are embedded in the design development and ongoing engagement as the programme progresses.
6 Falcon Court, Heron Court, Kestrel Court, Kingfisher Court and Swallow Court in Whitehawk
6.1 What do you like about your current home and the area?
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
Size and Layout of Rooms |
113 |
81.8% |
Transport Links & Buses |
92 |
66.6% |
|
Heating, Hot Water & Warmth |
90 |
65.2% |
Close to Shops & Services |
68 |
49.2% |
|
Balcony or Own Outdoor Space |
88 |
63.7% |
Green Spaces Nearby |
68 |
49.2% |
|
View from Windows |
82 |
59.4% |
Connection to Seafront/Town Centre |
59 |
42.7% |
|
Open Plan or Separate Kitchen |
73 |
52.8% |
Safety & Security |
58 |
42% |
|
Storage Space Available |
58 |
42% |
Neighbours & Community |
56 |
40.5% |
|
Accessibility features |
38 |
27.5% |
Parking Available |
28 |
20.2% |
|
Sound Proofing between Homes |
36 |
26% |
No Answer |
25 |
18.1% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
11 |
7.9% |
Other (Please tell us) |
12 |
8.6% |
|
No Answer |
9 |
6.5% |
|
|
|
6.1.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· Nothing, I’m being forced to stay in a 2 bed with 18yr son sharing with 16yr sister and me sharing with my 11yr old |
|
· It’s not very easily accessible |
|
· Nothing |
|
· I love my flat |
|
· I like the light |
|
· Feel more secure |
|
· I hate it here |
|
· Allotment |
|
· I like the flat |
|
· Nothing |
|
· prefer separate kitchen. Hot water and water pressure not good. Communal heating is good. I hear a lot of noise between neighbours. Balcony feels unsafe, not something a child can be on- feels not strong enough/ how its built. Storage space bad/ limited by water tank. In bathroom - handrails installed - special locks installed
|
6.1.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· My family is in Whitehawk also my autistic daughter goes to the met and can't do multiple bus routes |
|
· Baby groups / toddler |
|
· Local school, church |
|
· More space |
|
· Want to stay on bus route 1 |
|
· Hate this area |
|
· Racecourse |
|
· Bins are always left messy |
|
· Allotment and racecourse |
|
· Being in a short distance from my disabled daughter and grandson who I support and am secondary carer for them both |
|
· Smell of weed not so nice - I don’t drive so doesn’t affect me |
|
· Lots of ASB late at night. Not safe for children. Door to building broken - randoms coming in drugs and things
6.1.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.1.4 Residents ranked size and layout of rooms (81.8%) as their favourite aspect of their current homes, followed by Heating, Hot Water and Warmth (65.2%), and Balcony or own Outdoor Space.
6.1.5 The Council recognises residents’ strong appreciation for well-designed‑ internal space, including room sizes, layouts, and access to private balconies or outdoor space. These priorities will be taken into account as design work progresses, and opportunities to optimise internal layouts, balconies and outlooks will be explored as part of the emerging proposals, where feasible, taking into consideration the feedback of residents.
6.1.6 Any new development would be required to comply with current Building Regulations relating to heating, hot water and Warmth. As part of this, there will be a strong focus on energy efficient design to help ensure comfortable living conditions for residents while supporting lower energy use over the long term.
6.1.7 Residents identified transport links (66.6%), proximity to shops and services (49.2%) and access to nearby green spaces (49.2%) as the most valued aspects of their current location. In taking forward any future development, the Council will seek to ensure that new proposals complement the existing green space and local character of the area, creating an environment that residents can continue to take pride in. |
6.2 What don't you like about your current home and the area?
|
About Your Home |
About Your Area |
||||
|
Other (Please tell us) |
43 |
31.1% |
Bins Storage/Rubbish |
48 |
34.7% |
|
Poor Water Pressure |
42 |
30.4% |
Street based antisocial behaviour, such as drugs, rough sleeping |
45 |
32.6% |
|
No Answer |
34 |
24.6% |
No Answer |
38 |
27.5% |
|
Not Enough Storage |
30 |
21.7% |
Parking problems |
30 |
21.7% |
|
Heating Problems |
27 |
19.5% |
Area feels unsafe |
24 |
17.3% |
|
Damp Issues |
27 |
19.5% |
Problems with Neighbours |
21 |
15.2% |
|
Size too Small |
22 |
15.9% |
Other (Please tell us) |
17 |
12.3% |
|
No outdoor space |
19 |
13.7% |
Poor Road cleaning |
15 |
10.8% |
|
Number of Lifts |
14 |
10.1% |
Too Far from Shops/Services |
5 |
3.6% |
|
Hard to get in and out |
12 |
8.6% |
Poor Transport Links |
3 |
2.1% |
|
No View or poor view |
4 |
2.8% |
No Green Spaces |
2 |
1.4% |
|
Size too big |
1 |
0.7% |
|
|
|
6.2.1 Other (About Your Home)
|
· Repairs have been bad |
|
· Safety |
|
· Waste pipes are not big enough |
|
· Water pressure is bad |
|
· Balcony not safe for Son |
|
· Rain comes in when it rains and how high up we are |
|
· Pigeons, cupboards falling off |
|
· Leaks |
|
· Poor care and disrepair |
|
· No outdoor space |
|
· Overcrowded |
|
· Leaks |
|
· Happy |
|
· Don’t like the neighbourhood and the people around |
|
· The dogs wee is bad in landings and lifts |
|
· Kitchen falling apart |
|
· No hot water in my kitchen |
|
· Noise from the people upstairs |
|
· Needs new kitchen |
|
· Nightmare noise from upstairs |
|
· Shower there is no bath |
|
· No issues at all |
|
· Likes it all |
|
· Far away from the town |
|
· Nothing |
|
· Nothing I don’t like. I get on with everyone have no problems |
|
· Feels unsafe being in a flat with small children |
|
· Leaks |
|
· The lifts are a mess |
|
· Nothing |
|
· Bedbugs |
|
· Poor electric system and water supply |
|
· No visitors parking bays as these be taken up by the bins and the area seems to have a lot of people smoking weed in the building comes through my vents in the toilet and bathroom so with young children it’s not very nice to walk into the flat front door to smell. Police most of the time round the blocks of flats. |
|
· Lifts, heating is always breaking, caretaker is not given proper things to do her job, lots of people smoke weed in the block so stinks |
|
· Bed bugs |
|
· Sometimes lift breaks down which is annoying |
|
· Not near enough to work |
|
· Water comes up through the bath from other people’s baths |
|
· Unsuitable and dangerous for wheelchair user |
|
· Childs bedroom is so small - if we could divide it up for privacy but not enough room. Some heating problems and have had to call people out. Here we don’t control the heat especially when its cold, and a few years back we had no hot water for a month. A few damp issues in bedrooms. we tend to keep windows open. have a lot of stuff in both rooms. Very small balcony. |
|
· Being up high with young children and an adult with mental health issues |
|
· Too High up with kids |
|
· Lifts and communal area not clean |
6.2.2 Other (About Your Area)
|
· Litter in the communal areas of the building and the recycling is done badly. It’s always on the floor or in the wrong bin. |
|
· Not enough dog waste bins |
|
· Nothing |
|
· Human faeces in the stairway |
|
· Area is fine |
|
· Not enough children family parks |
|
· The hills are hard to walk up |
|
· What goes on in the area |
|
· No issues at all |
|
· Nothing I don’t like |
|
· The smell of drugs every night |
|
· Kids running about |
|
· Bins |
|
· Gone downhill, no respect from residents and drinkers at entrance |
|
· It’s become very loud and too many big dogs |
|
· The smell in blocks with windows and wafting up - could do with more recycling bins |
|
· Noisey |
6.2.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.2.4 24.6% of residents reported no concerns about their current home. Among those who did highlight issues, 30.4% of residents reported poor water pressure. Water pressure testing will be part of the development process and is acknowledged as a resident concern at this stage.
6.2.5 31.1% of residents provided additional comments through the free text section, where existing building condition, noise and soundproofing, and safety, security and anti-social behaviour were raised as common issues.
6.2.6 Secure by Design principles will be adopted as part of any new developments to address anti-social behaviour issues, and as noted previously, any new buildings would be required to meet current building regulation standards for sound insulation, helping to reduce noise transfer and support improved living conditions. Concerns around the existing building conditions will be shared with the relevant teams to ensure that resident feedback is captured.
6.2.7 27.5% of respondents reported no concern about the area, though anti-social behaviour was mentioned again at 32.6%, the response of which has been included above. The bins/storage were highlighted as the greatest dislike among residents (34.7%). Proposals for bin storage will also form part of the design process, and feedback on the limitations of the current arrangements will be considered when developing options for new facilities.
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
120 (86.9%) |
6 (4.3%) |
5 (3.6%) |
6 (4.3%) |
6.3 Is it clear why refurbishment of the buildings is not the preferred option?
Comments
|
· It is clear not the preferred option |
|
· No lifts to top floors is stupid. Lack of bedrooms poor quality falling apart |
|
· I think it’s outrageous I got put into a block of flats on temporary accommodation when the month after I get a letter saying its being demolished. And then more people being moved in |
|
· These blocks are far too old, always having issues and problems constantly knocking them down is the best option |
|
· Blocks are past there sell by date and cannot be fixed |
|
· Needs to be done but want new council home |
6.3.3 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.3.4 Most residents indicated that they were clear about why refurbishment is not the preferred option, which is a testament to the ongoing efforts to engage with all residents. The Council will maintain a commitment to clear and timely communication throughout the next stages of the programme so that residents remain fully informed about any decisions relating to the buildings.
6.4 Is it clear why the preferred option is to knock down the current buildings and replace with new homes?
|
Yes |
No |
No Answer |
Comments |
|
125 (90.5%) |
7 (5%) |
3 (2.1%) |
2 (1.4%) |
Comments
|
· I think it would cost more to demolished render |
|
· I agree
6.4.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.4.2 The vast majority of residents indicated that they were clear about why the preferred option is to knock down the existing buildings and replace with new homes. The Council will maintain a commitment to clear and timely communication throughout the next stages of the programme so that residents remain fully informed about any decisions relating to the buildings. |
6.5 What outdoor spaces and facilities would you want in a new development?
|
Balconies |
108 |
78.2% |
|
Good lighting for Safety |
89 |
64.4% |
|
Local Shops |
89 |
64.4% |
|
Parking |
88 |
63.7% |
|
Community Garden Areas |
77 |
55.7% |
|
Seating areas for residents |
77 |
55.7% |
|
Trees and Green Spaces |
72 |
52.1% |
|
Children’s Play Areas |
63 |
45.6% |
|
Clear Sightlines (no hidden corners) |
55 |
39.8% |
|
Allotments & Growing Spaces |
46 |
33.3% |
|
Fencing |
44 |
31.8% |
|
Dog Exercise Area |
40 |
28.9% |
|
Raised Planting Beds |
32 |
23.1% |
|
Storage for Mobility Scooters/Equipment |
30 |
21.7% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
11 |
7.9% |
|
No Answer |
6 |
4.3% |
Comments
|
· Yes, for others dedicated bike storage and fencing I think is not necessarily for safety |
|
· Something for teenagers |
|
· Support sensory regulation |
|
· Adult social area |
|
· Bike shed |
|
· Don’t want to go to high rise blocks and getting bungalow would be ideal |
|
· Not bothered I don’t want to come back |
|
· I wouldn’t come back |
|
· My own private space/ good bus route into town |
|
· Better security |
|
· if balcony then a bigger one built better that isn’t glass panel to feel more solid |
6.5.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.5.2 Residents identified balconies (78.2%), good lighting for safety (64.4%) and proximity to local shops (64.4%) as the most important outdoor features. The Council will explore opportunities to include balconies and enhance outlooks as part of the emerging design proposals where feasible, noting that balconies have been incorporated into many recent Council-led developments. Lighting and wider safety considerations will be developed in line with Secured by Design (SBD) principles, ensuring that natural surveillance, safe movement through the site and well-lit shared areas are embedded into future designs.
6.5.3 In relation to access to local shops, there may be opportunities to enhance this as part of the wider master planning work for the Whitehawk area. This could include exploring options either on the existing site or within the surrounding neighbourhood to help strengthen the overall offer of local amenities.
6.6 What indoor facilities (shared spaces) would be important to you?
|
More than One Lift |
75 |
54.3% |
|
Community Room for Meetings/Activities |
63 |
45.6% |
|
Easy Access in and out for residents |
62 |
44.9% |
|
Sound Proofing |
61 |
44.2% |
|
Access to the internet |
38 |
27.5% |
|
Toilets |
31 |
22.4% |
|
Temperature Control |
29 |
21% |
|
Internal walkways between blocks |
26 |
18.8% |
|
Small spaces for informal get-togethers |
23 |
16.6% |
|
No Answer |
15 |
10.8% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
7 |
5% |
Comments
· A laundry which I don’t mind paying for
· Hall for rent
· Parking
· Not bothered but don’t want to come back
· Wouldn’t come back so not bothered
· Security or someone about (concierge)
· Laundry
6.6.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.6.2 More than half of residents (54.3%) expressed a preference for buildings with more than one lift. Any future redevelopment would meet current building safety and accessibility requirements, which include the need for multiple lifts in blocks of this scale. Residents also highlighted the value of having a community room for meetings and activities (45.6%), as well as the importance of easy access in and out of the buildings (44.9%).
6.6.3 Options for community space and improvements to the outdoor public realm will be explored as part of future development proposals and the wider Whitehawk masterplan which will involve significant input from residents. This work will also consider residents’ feedback regarding the need for improved access arrangements to and from the buildings.
6.7 What’s important for your area’s future?
|
Local Shops |
79 |
57.2% |
|
Protecting Existing Green Spaces |
73 |
52.8% |
|
Facilities for Young People |
72 |
52.1% |
|
Protecting Community Spaces |
61 |
44.2% |
|
Local Jobs and Training Opportunities |
59 |
42.7% |
|
Being Part of the Local Community |
52 |
37.6% |
|
Accessibility of Site |
48 |
34.7% |
|
Better Connections Between Blocks |
36 |
26% |
|
No Answer |
9 |
6.5% |
|
Other (Please tell us) |
9 |
6.5% |
Comments
|
· Close to work and hospital |
|
· Chains of shops cheaper shops |
|
· Community hub down at the library better pathways for ways for disabled people |
|
· Close to hospital |
|
· Not coming back, so it doesn’t really matter |
|
· A better future away from here |
|
· Making sure there’s an onsite shop, and GP on the estate |
|
· Transport links |
|
· Being kid friendly. It was so different when I was born 61 yrs ago. |
6.7.1 Brighton and Hove City Councils feedback:
6.7.2 Residents placed particular importance on the availability of local shops (57.2%), the protection of existing green spaces (52.8%), and the provision of facilities for young people (52.1%). These priorities reflect a strong interest in maintaining and enhancing the community infrastructure within the area.
6.7.3 The Council will consider opportunities to strengthen local retail provision as part of the wider master planning work for Whitehawk. In parallel, the Council intends to safeguard existing green spaces and explore ways to improve their accessibility and usability for residents. As part of this process, options to enhance facilities for young people will also be assessed to ensure future proposals support a balanced and inclusive neighbourhood.
6.8 Conclusion:
6.8.1 The consultation showed a broad understanding of the structural issues affecting the Whitehawk blocks, with most residents recognising why refurbishment is not the preferred option and why demolition and redevelopment offer a more sustainable long‑term solution.
6.8.2 Overall, the feedback from the Whitehawk ‘Bird Blocks’ demonstrates that residents value many aspects of their existing homes and neighbourhoods, while also highlighting clear areas where improvements are needed.
6.8.3 The Council acknowledges the key themes raised through the engagement and will continue to ensure that these insights directly shape the design development, rehousing approach, and ongoing communication with residents as the programme progresses.
6.8.4 The Council also acknowledges the ongoing development of the wider Whitehawk masterplan, which continues to progress, with the necessary procurement processes scheduled to commence shortly. Feedback gathered through the engagement and consultation activity will be incorporated into the further development of the Whitehawk masterplan.
7 Equalities Information
7.1 The Council is bound by the Equality Act (2010) to have due regard to the need to:
· Eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation and any other conduct prohibited under the Equality Act 2010.
· Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a relevant protected characteristic and people who do not.
· Foster good relations between people who share a relevant protected characteristic and people who do not.
7.2 The eight LPS blocks have a diverse demographic profile, including a wide range of ages, household types, languages spoken, levels of digital access, varying health and mobility needs, and different ways of engaging with information. Recognising this, the engagement programme was designed to ensure that all groups directly affected by the proposed regeneration were reached.
7.3 This included a series of equality-focused activities aimed at removing barriers to participation:
· Targeted Engagement: Specific efforts were made to include underrepresented and vulnerable residents. Tailored support was provided for those facing language, disability, or digital exclusion barriers. Activities included focus groups, one-to-one conversations, door-knocking campaigns, and accessible feedback mechanisms such as post boxes in communal areas.
· Inclusive Consultation Methods: A range of engagement opportunities were offered to accommodate different preferences and needs. These included online surveys, site-specific workshops, monthly drop-in sessions, and Resident Advisory Group meetings at each site, ensuring all voices could be heard.
· Broad Stakeholder Involvement: The programme engaged secure tenants, temporary accommodation households, Seaside Homes residents, and leaseholders (both resident and non-resident). This comprehensive approach ensured that the consultation reflected the diversity of the affected population.
8 Conclusion & Next Steps
8.1 The Council has now completed its legal obligation to consult secure tenants with regards to the first phase of this process, as well as its duty to consult leaseholders, TA and private tenants. Response rates to the consultation were strong across all three sites, with an overall combined return rate of 58.8% supported by a comprehensive and sustained programme of engagement. The feedback received has been carefully reviewed and will continue to inform the development of design principles and future proposals as the programme progresses.
8.2 While some of the feedback from the residents indicates a wish for there not to be demolition, there appears to be a general recognition and understanding that demolition is the most realistic option. Following the results of the consultations set out in this report and the options analyses provided to cabinet in July 2025, this report recommends that the preferred option of demolition and redevelopment should be taken forward for each site, including the approval of ‘Initial Demolition Notices’ which will suspend the Right to Buy during this period.
8.3 The Council has the power to issue ‘Initial Demolition Notices’ for each secure tenant on each of the sites under the Housing Act 1985. The notice formally signals the Council’s intention to redevelop and remains in force for up to seven years from the date it is served. The Council currently anticipates demolishing the LPS blocks once they are fully vacated, expected within the next five to seven years. Whilst seven years is the maximum period allowed for by statute, the expectation is that works of demolition will be completed promptly. The Corporate Director of Housing and Adult Social Care will need to give consideration as to the timing of the service of the interim demolition notices.
8.4 Further consultation will continue as plans evolve, ensuring residents and stakeholders remain closely involved in shaping the next stages of the programme. This will include targeted engagement with local neighbours—such as adjoining property owners, nearby residents, local community groups and relevant businesses—particularly at key design and development milestones. These conversations will take place before any significant proposals are finalised, allowing local feedback to inform the emerging plans.
8.5 Any future decision to proceed with demolition would be subject to a separate approval process and the issuing of a ‘Final Demolition Notice’, which would end any existing Right to Buy claim and prevents new applications. Additional statutory consultation requirements would also apply at that stage, providing further opportunities for those directly affected to comment.
8.6 In line with the July Cabinet report, officers are progressing plans for the redevelopment of each site. Individual schemes will be brought back to Cabinet for approval at the appropriate stages.
8.7 At each stage requiring approval, development proposals will be supported by a detailed business case demonstrating affordability and long-term financial viability. This will include full capital and revenue implications, funding assumptions, comprehensive risk assessments, and evidence of deliverability. Proposals will also demonstrate alignment with corporate priorities, housing need, and value for money principles.