Agenda item - City Plan Update

16.1    Max Woodford, Director for Place, and Steve Tremlett, Planning Policy and Heritage Manager, presented the slides on the City Plan update. Key points included the timeline for the new City Plan 2041 leading up to submission in early 2028, a review of the recent consultation and key outcomes of the survey that included concerns over affordability of homes, a strong demand for industrial floorspace and concerns over the cleanliness of the city and condition of the seafront and city centre. The survey had performed well on Facebook, X and LinkedIn, receiving over 96,000 post impressions and the completion rate had doubled since the equivalent stage during the preparation of City Plan Part Two. There was also a separate survey for young people that gained 200 responses.

16.2    Councillor Parrott asked about engagement with disability groups. Steve Tremlett said that they had reached out to groups such as Amaze, Badge Brighton, Speak Out, and Possibility People, and asked them to circulate the survey and let their members know about the engagement events. They met with some of the groups in person including the Older Peoples’ Council. Councillor Parrott quoted the recent Health Count Survey that 37% of respondents said their disability or ill health affected their ability to get around the city. She suggested meeting with these groups in person would be more effective than asking them to complete a survey and to find different ways to connect. The feedback from group discussions should be allowed to form part of the consultation response and not just individuals completing the survey.

16.3    Councillor Sykes raised concerns about potential abortive work given upcoming legislative changes introduced in February 2025 and the ongoing devolution process, both of which has a large impact on planning. Steve Tremlett said that some work is paused until there is more clarity from the government and the team will continue to work on things that they know won’t be changing.

16.4    Councillor Goddard asked why the City Plan is important and what is scrutiny’s role at this stage. Max Woodford explained that the City Plan is one of the most important things that the council does as it shapes development for the city for the next 15 years, it is a very long process and touches on many council priorities. This is when the framework is set and that often conflict comes up at the planning permission stage later in the process when the plan is already in place. They want scrutiny members to understand the City Plan fully and to make suggestions to take forward. The plan can be used to fix issues such as the lack of affordable homes by potentially giving up industrial space but this only moves problems around. This is why the plan is important and that people feed in at this early stage.

16.5    Mary Davies from the Older People’s Council asked a question about the equality impact assessments including potential impacts on health and wellbeing and that this may dilute the focus on equalities. She also felt that she should have been able to make an organisational response to the survey rather than expecting individuals to complete it. Steve Tremlett said that the process of conducting equality impact assessments is set out in plan making guidance but that he would take her points on board for future consultations.

16.6    Councillors Loughran, Winder, Lyons, Cattell, Fishleigh, Evans and Mark Strong (CVS) asked questions about the consultation and increasing engagement. Suggestions and comments included: having an explanatory preamble to go along with the survey, using illustrative material and digital tools, not presuming prior knowledge, having a shorter survey with accessible language, giving people the option to comment on specific sections of interest to them, the importance of engaging with young people who are currently unable to afford to live in the city, holding group meetings for key stakeholders to provide feedback, explaining the relevance and importance of City Plan, being really provocative in the questions to get people talking about it, using different media to engage young people such as TikTok, sending out printed copies with council tax letters and using different venues other than libraries such as places of worship, museums, and reaching out to the universities. Councillor Winder said that the public have a different understanding of what they’re contributing to and we need to know if they want innovation or just for the city to be better, cleaner and a more pleasant place to live; it is unclear whether the plan is looking to benefit residents or visitors and that the consultation could ask more questions about making the city more equal.

16.7    Councillor Fishleigh asked how likely it would be for the government to reduce the housing target and how local neighbourhood plans interact with the City Plan and whether it takes priority. Councillor Fishleigh also asked whether they could end up building on the South Downs National Park. Steve Tremlett explained that the government’s standard method for calculating housing need is the starting point that the Plan must seek to meet. A lower housing target for the City Plan might be agreed by a planning inspector when the Plan is examined, but only if robust efforts have been made to explore all means of increasing housing supply to meet the government figure. The City Plan would be unlikely to allocate for housing any sites recently agreed for protection in a neighbourhood plan. The National Park is its own planning authority so the council can only look at sites outside of the park. 

16.8    Councillor Evans said she was disappointed not to see the short-term lets recommendations from the Task & Finish Group mentioned in the City Plan presentation. Max Woodford explained that they will be looking into the short-term lets recommendations following the approval from Cabinet. Councillor Sykes asked whether permitted development rights, which gives the freedom to change how properties are used, might undermine the city’s plans for designated use classes and development areas. Steve Tremlett explained that there is an extensive Article 4 Direction over large parts of the city that restricts permitted development from business and service uses to residential.

16.9    Place Overview & Scrutiny Committee RESOLVED to note the report.