Subject:		Adoption of Hove Station Area Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document
Date of Meeting:		16 September 2021
Report of:		Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture
Contact Officer:	Name:	Alan Buck	Tel:	01273 293451
	Email:	alan.buck@brighton-hove.gov.uk
Ward(s) affected:		Goldsmid, Hove Park

FOR GENERAL RELEASE

1.         PURPOSE OF REPORT AND POLICY CONTEXT

1.1 This report provides feedback on the results of the Hove Station Area Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The draft document was the subject of an eight-week public consultation exercise between 14 December 2020 and 7 February 2021.  The results of the consultation have been considered and a range of changes to the document are recommended to take on board comments where appropriate.

1.2 The report seeks adoption of the final version of the Hove Station Area SPD, which supports the aims of the City Plan and will provide clear guidance on the positive regeneration of this development area.

2.         RECOMMENDATIONS:    

2.1 That the committee notes the comments made during pubic consultation and the proposed responses (see appendix 1).

2.2 That the committee agrees to adopt the Hove Station Area Supplementary Planning Document (attached as Appendix 3 to this report) and authorises the Head of Planning to make any necessary minor grammatical and non-material text and illustrative alterations in consultation with the Chair of TECC Committee prior to its publication.

3. CONTEXT/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION

3.1 At its meeting on 19 November 2020 the committee approved a draft version of the SPD for public consultation purposes. The draft SPD seeks to integrate and distil existing higher-level planning policies in the Brighton & Hove City Plan and the emerging Hove Station Area Neighbourhood Plan.  It provides an urban design-led approach to guide the future development of blocks, routes and spaces in the area - identifying opportunities for development to provide a coherent, connected, integrated and sustainable urban quarter within a high-quality townscape and public realm.

3.2 Responses were received from fifty-four bodies and individuals over the duration of the consultation period.  Respondents included twenty-two organisations – comprising various bodies, amenity and interest groups and landowners – and thirty-two respondents submitting representations via council’s consultation portal.  Due to data laws and the set-up of the portal, the thirty-two respondents submitting representations via the latter platforms are not identified or identifiable.

3.3 The responses received have been collated, summarised and responded to in a report that forms an appendix to this report.  Appendix 1 lists all comments received (along with a proposed response and -where appropriate – a recommended change to the document).  Appendix 2 highlights and summarises some of the comments received from key stakeholders in the area.  These comments are also included in Appendix 1. 

3.4 Feedback from the consultation was largely positive, with considerable support shown for the various proposals relating to the urban design and sustainability principles and site specific proposals set out in the draft document.  

3.5 There were a range of concerns expressed relating to the potential quantum of development that might come forward and its impact on the wider area including the potential heights of buildings.

3.6 Following careful consideration of the range of comments received, it is not proposed to make any fundamental resulting changes to the draft SPD. A range of changes are proposed, however, to take on board comments where considered appropriate and where these can helpfully clarify issues or amend errors in the draft document.  In many instances where strong concerns have been raised – for example in relation to the potential heights of new buildings in the Conway Street Industrial Area, the concerns relate to existing adopted council policy.  It should be noted that the purpose (and remit) of the document is to be consistent with and supplement existing planning policy as opposed to establishing new planning policy.

3.7 In its role as a document to guide future development in the Hove Station Area, and inform planning decisions over a lengthy period of time, the SPD sets out an approach that seeks to distil and add value to existing planning policy in City Plan Part 1 policy DA6 (and the emerging Neighbourhood Plan) and establish a range of urban design objectives that can help ‘unlock’ the potential of the area for future development.  One of the document’s key objectives is to set out a flexible scenario for future development that reconciles the land use and operational aspirations of the Brighton & Hove Bus Company (who are committed to stay in the area) in a way that will secure the new high quality sustainable neighbourhood envisaged for the area. 

3.8 The council is already in dialogue with key stakeholders in examining a strategy towards implementation.  This includes working collaboratively with LCR Property and Network Rail Infrastructure in exploring options towards achieving this. LCR Property is a government-owned company that has the remit to work collaboratively with Network Rail in unlocking development and regeneration opportunities across the UK’s network of railway stations and their surrounding land. LCR’s previous projects have included the redevelopment of St Pancras International and King’s Cross Stations and masterplanning of a new metropolitan centre at Stratford City in London.

3.9 The three parties have recently met with the bus company (the Go-Ahead Group/Brighton & Hove Bus Co) to get a full understanding of their shorter and longer-term requirements - and further explore the viability of a strategy for land assembly, providing for future operational needs and meeting the SPD’s development objectives.  Further meetings will need to follow with key landowners, local stakeholder groups, the local community in general and wider community bodies and interest groups.

4. ANALYSIS & CONSIDERATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

4.1 The rationale for whether or not changes are being recommended to the draft SPD is set out in the consultation report attached at Appendix 1.  None of the recommended changes affect the key aspects of the draft SPD. 

5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & CONSULTATION

5.1 Consultation with a range of key stakeholders was undertaken prior to and during the Issues & Options stage, with further meetings taking place following the appointment of the consultant team at the start of 2020.  Stakeholders consulted have included key landowners, developers, residents, ward councillors and core members of Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum.

5.2 The consultation on the draft SPD between last December and February was undertaken for an eight-week period (a two-week extension to the normal six weeks to factor-in the Christmas period).  The consultation comprised:

· An online exhibition including all relevant documents, a video summary of the draft SPD and an ‘easy read’ summary of the draft SPD

· Two online public meetings hosted by external facilitators and attended by members of the officer/consultant team – incorporating question and answer and feedback exercises

· An additional online public meeting hosted by Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum (funded by BHCC) also attended by members of the officer/consultant team.

5.3 The consultation was widely advertised via the following means:

· A mailout to all addresses within the draft SPD area

· Emails to all known stakeholders that have previously responded to consultation exercises on the plan.

· Emails to all bodies and individuals on the Planning Policy database that have made their details available for mailouts

· Press releases

· Laminated posters within and around the area covered by the draft SPD

6.         CONCLUSION

6.1 Various revisions and additions are proposed to the draft SPD as a result of the consultation.  These are discussed in the appended consultation report and are incorporated (or highlighted) in the revised draft version of the SPD (also appended).  If the committee is agreeable to these proposed changes, it is recommended that the document be adopted as supplementary planning document to the Brighton & Hove City Plan.

6.2 Discussions are being held with regard to a potential route to implementing key aspects of the masterplan. Engagement will follow as appropriate with wider stakeholders and community groups.

7.         FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS:

Financial Implications:

7.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. The council received a revenue grant of £70,000 through One Public Estate funding from the government which has been used to finance the work in preparing and developing the Hove Station Area masterplan. Officer time spent on the project will be met from existing revenue budgets.

            Finance Officer Consulted:     Rob Allen                                       Date: 23/0821

Legal Implications:

7.2      The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012

govern the content of, and the procedure for adopting, SPDs. The Regulations

provide that SPDs cannot contain planning policy but can contain statements

regarding environmental, social, design and economic objectives relevant to the

attainment of the development and use of land. The Regulations also provide that a draft SPD must be subject to public consultation for a period of at least four weeks. Once adopted the SPD will be a material planning consideration in the determination of those planning applications to which it is relevant.

Lawyer Consulted:                   Hilary Woodward                          Date: 23/8/21

Equalities Implications:

7.3 The draft SPD provides supplementary planning guidance in respect of the adopted City Plan Part 1, for which an Equalities Impact Assessment was undertaken.  Equalities issues are embedded in existing planning policy and these are further applied in the draft SPD. Such issues as providing and improving access for all are an important element of the SPD, which includes proposals to improve access over and beneath the railway line to benefit a wide range of user groups (including people with disabilities, pushing buggies etc).  As the council works with potential partners and stakeholders towards an implementation strategy, it will be important to engage with a wide range of  organisations and individuals – including those with a particular interest and/or remit in mobility and access issues. Recent communications between the council and two such local groups (BADGE and Possability People) have highlighted the useful input that they can provide in this respect.   It will be important to ensure a range of ongoing communications and consultation with such organisations to ensure the finer details around ensuring a fully accessible environment (as required under the SPD and wider planning policy) are fully addressed, worked-up and embedded within the future development of the area.

Sustainability Implications:

7.4 The City Plan Part 1 was the subject of sustainability appraisals over the course

of its preparation. Sustainability issues are embedded within its policies and

proposals and have informed and been carried forward in the master-planning work.  This includes ‘paving the way’ for a Heat Network Feasibility Study of the Hove Station Area, that is currently being commissioned.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Appendices:

1. Hove Station Area Masterplan SPD – Report on Public Consultation

2. Summary of main issues raised by key stakeholders.

3. Supplementary Planning Document: Hove Station Area Masterplan – proposed final version

Background Documents

1. Hove Station Masterplan – Consultation Event Report Feb 2021

2. SPD Meeting Questions 16 Fen 2021 (Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum)

3. Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One

4. Brighton & Hove City Plan Part 2 (Proposed Submission)

5. Hove Station Neighbourhood Plan (‘Regulation 14’ public consultation version, 2019)