Monday 20 October 2014

Fencing for Patcham Place

An application SDNP/14/03236/FUL to the South Downs National Park Authority to fence the immediate surroundings of Patcham Place has been approved. The green line in the map above indicates the line of the fencing which will be made of mild steel in a traditional estate style. Traditionally wrought iron would have been used but this is no longer commercially available.

There is no evidence that Patcham Place was ever provided with gates but the proposed design is borrowed from existing 18thC examples and is typical of that which would have been used by the provincial gentry. They will be hung from piers of Portland stone with inset panels of knapped flint.

The installation of fencing has been prompted by:- 
  • uncontrolled vehicle parking by third parties whether commuters or users of the adjacent public park and sports pitches.
  • the lack of any perimeter control at night and hence the ability of vehicles to gain free access to the immediate vicinity of the building. 
  • recurrent problems of lead thefts from the roof and the resultant costs and potential for serious damage to the fabric of the listed building. 
Previous post: Patcham Place proposals.


  1. I have lived in Patcham for 41 years and like many other residents have used this newly fenced area frequently during that time to access the woods behind the building and the footpath that leads through the woods to Brangwyn Drive/Avenue and Way when walking to Patcham village and returning home. Usage by numbers of people over many years surely renders this a public right of way, and if I had seen any advance notices I'd definitely have objected to the stolen access of the part of the park now fenced. Because that is exactly what it is - part of the park. But the fence appeared almost overnight and was completed in days with no consultation with local residents or users of the park - at least none that I was aware of. You tag this page 'urban plunder' - which is precisely what this high-handed requisition of local facilities and rights of way is.

    1. Penelope, I haven't seen the completed fencing yet but will try and get over there tomorrow. If it doesn't follow the green line in the map above we have grounds for objection I think.

  2. Thanks for the rapid reply. The completed fencing may well follow the green line indicated on the map, although I haven't checked. What is certain is that it restricts access to a part of the park that has been freely accessible for at least 50 years - possibly even since the house was built - to quote from above: "There is no evidence that Patcham Place was ever provided with gates".

    As for the reasons given for the granting of planning application for the fencing, it seems very odd that if lead were being stolen from the roof that Brighton Council did not take steps to secure the building when they were the property owners and using the building as a youth hostel. Yet pedestrians have always been allowed access to this part of the park - I used to be taken there to search for conkers as a child, and carried on the tradition with my own children and now with my grandchildren.

    As for the legal implications: i.e: whether the newly fenced area was included in the sale of the property, and the possibility that the park at Patcham Place (like Preston Park) was originally gifted to the citizens of Brighton for their use in perpetuity, I will need to do some research.

  3. The council wisely kept the building occupied with live in property guardians covering all areas of the building, this protected the roof. When KSD took over they quickly removed most of the guardians out and moved the remaining few guardians to an area of the mansion that they couldn't protect the roof from. When the thefts began the same management that removed the guardians out and placed them so poorly around the building used them as scapegoats to the directors.

    In 2017 KSD director was jailed for racist verbal assault on a young woman. During the trial it emerged he had a violent past including five convictions for actual bodily harm.


In event of difficulty in adding comment, email:-