Agenda for Economic Development & Culture Committee on Thursday, 18th September, 2014, 4.00pm

skip navigation and tools

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall

Contact: Penny Jennings  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

17.

Procedural Business

    (a)   Declaration of Substitutes: Where Councillors are unable to attend a meeting, a substitute Member from the same Political Group may attend, speak and vote in their place for that meeting.

     

    (b)  Declarations of Interest:

     

    (a)         Disclosable pecuniary interests not registered on the register of interests;

    (b)         Any other interests required to be registered under the local code;

    (c)         Any other general interest as a result of which a decision on the matter might reasonably be regarded as affecting you or a partner more than a majority of other people or businesses in the ward/s affected by the decision.

     

    In each case, you need to declare

    (i)           the item on the agenda the interest relates to;

    (ii)         the nature of the interest; and

    (iii)       whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest or some other interest.

     

    If unsure, Members should seek advice from the committee lawyer or administrator preferably before the meeting.

     

    (c)   Exclusion of Press and Public: To consider whether, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, or the nature of the proceedings, the press and public should be excluded from the meeting when any of the following items are under consideration.

     

    NOTE:  Any item appearing in Part Two of the Agenda states in its heading the category under which the information disclosed in the report is exempt from disclosure and therefore not available to the public.

     

    A list and description of the exempt categories is available for public inspection at Brighton and Hove Town Halls.

    Minutes:

    17a     Declaration of Substitutes

     

    17.1    Councillor K Norman was in attendance in substitution for Councillor Brown. Councillor A Norman was in attendance in substitution for Councillor Wealls.

     

    17b     Declarations of Interest

     

    17.2    There were none.

     

    17c     Exclusion of the Press and Public

     

    17.3    In accordance with Section 100A of the Local Government Act (“The Act”), the Economic Development and Culture Committee considered whether the public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any item of business on the grounds that it is likely in view of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during it, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information as defined in Section 100A(3) of the Act.

     

    17.4    RESOLVED – That the press and public not be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any item on the agenda.

18.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 161 KB

19.

Chair's Communications

    Minutes:

    19.1    The Chair explained that although he would be referring to a few highlights as part of his communications a full text in respect of recent and upcoming events would be recorded in the substantive minutes of the meeting.

     

    Brighton Digital Festival

     

    19.2    The Chair explained that the Brighton Digital Festival was now in full flow and would be running throughout September with a programme at the interface of digital and arts and culture and incorporating business conferences alongside arts events and networking. The city council had co-funded the Grassroots programme with Arts Council England providing small pockets of investment to facilitate a wide range of projects including 300 Seconds – a networking event for women in tech and digital sectors; Six Stories – a digital project sharing stories of older people in the city and Block Builders which would enable young people to use Minecraft to reimagine and rebuild London Road. For more information on these and other projects www.brightondigitalfestival.co.uk

     

    Other Arts News

     

    19.3    The Phoenix Art Gallery had received an award of £150,000 from Arts Council England towards their capital development plans. Creative England were organising a production familiarisation trip to Brighton in early October as part of the Film City initiative. This would bring a group of film production companies to the city for a tour of sites and locations. From April 2013 to April 2014, a total of 217 production enquiries had been made with an estimated inward investment of £297,000 into the local economy. This had included the Channel Four production of ‘The Fear’ which had been filmed on location in the city for two weeks.

     

    Events

     

    Brighton Speed Trials

     

    19.4    The National Speed Trials had been held on Madeira Drive on Saturday 6th September, the first following the fatality at the event in 2012. The Chair commended the hard work undertaken by all of the officers concerned to ensure that all of the necessary arrangements had been put in place and had been signed off by the organisers to the satisfaction of all parties in advance of the event. He was pleased to be able to report that the event had taken without any serious incident. The event was organised by Brighton & Hove Motor Club who have responsibility for the Speed Trials. Over the previous months considerable advice was given by the city’s Safety Advisory Group to the Motor Club to improve the safety arrangements for the event. As with any event it was important that the organisers reviewed arrangements and looked to improve the arrangements for any event, particularly for one involving motor sports with an inherent risk.

     

    Friends Life Tour of Britain

     

    19.5    The Chair stated that he was pleased to note that the previous Saturday an estimated crowd of 100,000 people had watched the end of Stage 7 of the Tour of Britain cycle race in the city. Particularly large crowds had gathered on the Category 1 climb up Bear Road and along the length of the sprint finish in Madeira Drive. The Sussex stage had been won by Julian Vermote of the Omega Pharma Quick-Step team who had taken a lead in the run up to Ditchling Beacon which he had been able to hold all the way to the finish. The city had received extensive positive media coverage including live television broadcasts on ITV and Eurosport with the helicopter pictures showing the city at it’s best. The organisers Sweet Spot had been delighted with the arrangements and support for the Tour in the city and would like to return in the near future. A report on the estimated economic impact of the Sussex Stage would be provided by Sweet Spot hopefully by the end of October.

     

    Tourism and Venues

     

    VB Partnership

     

    19.6    The city now had 420 partners so far with more in the pipeline

     

    On-line

     

    19.7    The www.visitbrighton.com website was on route to exceed 2 million unique users again in 2014. Work was taking place to re-design www.visitbrighton.com so it was more ‘responsive’ in nature (adjusted to fit mobile devices) and integrated 2 key channel managers into the site (Ratetiger) being able to offer accommodation partners a more streamlined way to aid availability. It was anticipated that this would generate further income in accommodation sales.

     

    19.8    The main Autumn web campaign ‘Beyond the City: Downs, Towns & Coast’ micro site would launch in September and would capitalise on the South Downs/Biosphere and countryside offering moments from the city (book a break and use city as a base from which to explore surrounding areas of natural beauty with opps for walking/cycling/outdoor activities etc) See http://www.visitbrighton.com/countryside/home (work in progress at moment, but would be live by the time of the partner event). The project linked in nicely with city’s recent Biosphere UNESCO status.

     

    Conference Sales – Recent Wins

     

    19.9    British HIV Association (BHIVA) - 22 – 24 April 2015 – 600 delegates

    NUS National Conferences - years 2016 and 2017 - 850 delegates European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases (ESPID) – 10 – 14 May 2016 – 2500 delegates Society for Experimental Biology Annual Conference - July 2016 – 800 delegates44th IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP)  - 12-17 May 2019 – 3000 delegates

     

    VIC

     

    19.20  City Champions had welcomed and helped more than 6000 visitors since they launched at Easter and Greeters had done 144 greets this year, with more than 100 visitors. The VIP network had handled around 10000 enquiries since April.

     

    Marketing Highlights

     

    19.21  Press – So far this year the city had hosted over 100 press trips, beating our target for the year. Highlights had included – The Guardian, The Telegraph, Sunday Times Travel, The Express and the Independent. Internationally the city had hosted press from Germany, Japan, Ireland, Finland, France, USA, Belgium, New Zealand and India. In terms of campaigns, the city was part of Visit England’s Cycling campaign which had included coverage within the Guardian and, among other things, highlighted the Tour of Britain coming to the city. We would also be taking part in the second phase of Visit England’s and their Rugby World Cup campaign (Spring 2015)

     

    Royal Pavilion and Museums

     

    Arts Council England (ACE) Funding

     

    19.22  ACE had confirmed in July that the Royal Pavilion & Museums would continue as one of its Major Partner Museums for 2015-18. ACE’s support was not just financial, it also provided a very public endorsement of the service’s current excellence and future ambitions, and highlighted RPM’s leadership role within the museum sector nationally. ACE’s assessment of RPM’s bid praised in particular its stewardship of collections, digital initiatives, outstanding work to achieve resilience and sustainability, leadership within the south east, and exceptional programme with young people.

     

    Centenary of the Start of the First World War

     

    19.23  With support provided part by the EU though the Interreg Great War project, RPM’s summer launch of a wide programme of centenary activity had already attracted considerable positive visitor response. For example the seafront display, ‘Dr Brighton’s War: Hospitals and Healing in Brighton during WW1‘ had been seen by an estimated 54,000 people across six weeks in July and August. The major new exhibition at Brighton Museum & Art Gallery ‘War Stories: Voices from the First World War’ (12 July – 1 March 2015) had provided the centrepiece of an Open Day on Saturday 13 September which had attracted over 1,000 visitors.

     

    The Royal Pavilion Ice Rink would return this year. It would open on Saturday 8 November and would remain open until Sunday 18 January 2015.

     

    Libraries

     

    19.24  The new Academy and Mile Oak Community Library was due to open on October 1. The library was located in the newly built Academy complex, this fantastic shared facility would offer more space, light, books and computers to the whole community.

     

    Pop Up Shops

     

    19.25  The Pop Up Shop scheme had now delivered its tenth Pop Up in the city as part of the wider “Recreate” project and had met its target for delivery well in advance of the end of March 2015. This week had seen the launch of a new Pop Up initiative entitled “Shop Share” where existing retailers could rent out shelf(s) space, wall space or vacant floor space within their existing premises to support the creative sector. Retailers and prospective tenants were already showing interest in the scheme which represented a new and innovative way for existing retailers to maximise the use of space in their existing premises.

     

    19.26  Councillor K Norman echoed the Chair’s words in respect of the Brighton Speed Trials Event expressing his gratitude to all who had been involved in ensuring that arrangements were put into place to secure a safe and enjoyable event for participants and spectators alike.

     

    19.27  RESOLVED – That the content of the Chair’s Communications be received and noted.

20.

Call Over

    (a)          Items (23 - 28) will be read out at the meeting and Members invited to reserve the items for consideration.

     

    (b)          Those items not reserved will be taken as having been received and the reports’ recommendations agreed.

    Minutes:

    20.1    All items on the agenda were called for discussion.

21.

Public Involvement pdf icon PDF 56 KB

    To consider the following matters raised by members of the public:

     

    (a)      Petitions: to receive any petitions presented to the full council or at the meeting itself;

     

    Report of the Head of Law (copy attached).

     

    (b)      Written Questions: to receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 11 September 2014;

    (c)      Deputations: to receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 11 September 2014.

    Minutes:

    21a     Petitions

     

    21.1    One petition had been received as set out below:

     

          Homes in Multiple Occupancy, 69 and 75 Ewhurst Road BN2 4AL

     

           Referred from the meeting of Council held on 17 July 2014.

     

              “We have grave concerns regarding the ever increasing multiply occupied homes on this street.

     

    Some residents have been in contact on a regular basis with Brighton and Hove employees over the past 12 months plus, to try and limit the number of HMO’s in this street. We believe we have 40/50% of the total properties multiply occupied, which is destroying the community. Indeed, you were sent a Planning Enforcement Complaint Form re 69 in the spring of last year and a Planning Contravention Notice was served last autumn, but no action appears to have been taken.

     

    We had been hopeful that the article 4 direction would protect us, but that seems not to be the case. Whilst we are pleased that the licensing requirements should improve properties for tenants, we are surprised that the licensing does not limit the number of such properties when they are above the recommended percentage. It seems illogical to grant a licence to a new HMO when no planning permission has been granted or possibly even applied for.

     

    69 was a two bed home previously occupied by one man and his dog. That property was extensively renovated and converted to a six bed property. One or two students moved in with some of their possessions in August but no one lived at 69 until September 2013. That property was not habitable in April/May 2013 and was advertised as being available to rent in July (but was still not finished then). It appears the property has been granted a licence but should not be given planning permission.

     

    75 was a dilapidated, basic 3 bed property rented and occupied by an older man. Following his death, the landlord/letting agent refurbished the property and it was initially let in September 2012 to two brothers for 6 months. It was then let to a family from May 2013 for 6 months and is now occupied by 3 students who took up residence in January 2014. We believe that this property has neither a licence or planning permission and should not be granted either

     

    We feel very let down by the Council and it appears that, either

    a)    The new article 4 direction is useless, or

    b)    the local authority is not applying it and

    c)    the local authority is not taking action against those landlords who are flouting the direction.

     

    Excessive noise and rubbish on street are now commonplace. Recycle boxes are the worst offenders. They are left on the pavement continuously and the boxes, or sometimes just the re-cycling, are blown down the street. Residents have noted that the open re-cycle boxes are often used for general rubbish by passers by, which means City Clean will not empty them. Residents have, with a representative from City Clean knocked on doors to advise tenants that boxes should not be left on pavements but improvements have been short lived. If we didn’t have the huge number of HMO’s this would be less of a problem. Wheely bins are frequently over full with additional black bags left along side. This is heaven for seagulls and foxes.

     

    There are still a number of young families and older residents living here. We all want our street to be part of a community, which would include a limited number of students. We do not want to feel dominated and overwhelmed by the number of students in the street. Therefore we ask the local authority to implement the article 4 direction in our street and return some properties to family use.”

     

    21.2    It was noted that this petition had been referred to this Committee because the petitioner had specifically referred to Planning enforcement issues and Article 4 directions, which fell within the remit of the Economic Development and Culture Committee rather than the Housing Committee.

     

    21.3    The Chair, Councillor Bowden responded that as the points raised were very detailed and would require officer investigation, he was asking officers to provide a full and detailed response to the petitioners and for that to be copied to members of the committee.

     

    21.4    Councillor C Theobald stated that she considered that enforcement action should be undertaken without delay and it was explained that officers were actively pursuing this matter in order to determine the most appropriate course of action.

     

    21.5    RESOLVED – That the contents of the petition be received and noted.

     

    21b     Written Questions

     

    21.6    There were none.

     

    21c(i)  Deputation - Designation of Neighbourhood Areas and Neighbourhood Forums – Hove Station and Hove Park Neighbourhoods

     

    21.10  The following Deputation was received: We firmly believe that the section of Hove Park Ward that has not been included in the recommended area for the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum should be re-instated. This missing section is the northern part of DA6 which includes the vital Goldstone Retail Park and the Sackville Trading Estate.

     

    This area should be included in the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum area because residents of Hove Park Ward live opposite these locations and would be the most affected by any development proposals for these sites and should therefore have the greatest influence. Residents in the Hove Station Forum, who primarily live south of the railway line, would be less directly affected. We do not believe that it is necessary to have the whole of DA6 incorporated into one forum.

     

    Jeremy Mustoe

    Colin Hancox

    Roger Crouch

    Arthur Green

    Maggie Sladen

    Cathy Smith

     

    21.11  The Lead petitioner Mr Mustoe spoke for 5 minutes in support of the Deputation in accordance with the Committee protocols set out in the Council’s Constitution.

     

    21.12  The Chair confirmed that as the Deputation formed the subject of a report elsewhere on the agenda (Item 23) that it would be appropriate for discussion and debate to take place when that report was under consideration.

     

    21.13  RESOLVED – That the contents of the Deputation be received and noted.

     

    21(c)(ii)Deputation - Designation of Neighbourhood Areas and Neighbourhood Forums – Hove Station and Hove Park Neighbourhoods - Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum

     

    21.14  The Chair stated that at his discretion he had agreed to permit Professor Gibson to speak on behalf of those representing the proposed Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum. Professor Gibson stated that his group held an opposite view from that expressed by the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum. He stated that the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum considered that they would also be affected by proposals in the area referred to by the Hove Park group and did not agree that a split along Ward boundaries was necessarily appropriate as this was in any event an artificial construct. He explained that the Hove Station group had repeatedly sought to discuss common issues with the Hove Park Group but that these invitations had not been taken up. He also considered it unfortunate that in his view the representation and views expressed by the Hove Station Group had been misrepresented in some quarters, which was regrettable. Whilst his forum preferred a single area approach, the were happy to compromise with a shared boundary along the Old Shoreham Road.

     

    21.15  The Chair re-iterated the points that he had made to the previous speaker, referring to the fact that the views expressed by all parties were noted and would be considered by the Committee when they considered the report set out at Item 23 on that afternoon’s agenda.

     

    21.16  RESOLVED - That the contents of the petition be received and noted.

22.

Member Involvement pdf icon PDF 57 KB

    To consider the following matters raised by councillors:

     

    (a)      Petitions: to receive any petitions submitted to the full Council or at the meeting itself;

    (b)      Written Questions: to consider any written questions;

    (c)      Letters: to consider any letters;

     

    Letter from Councillor A. Norman: Talking Statues in Brighton & Hove

     

    (d)      Notices of Motion: to consider any Notices of Motion referred from Council or submitted directly to the Committee.

    Minutes:

    22a     Petitions

     

    Designation of Neighbourhood Areas and Neighbourhood Forums – Hove Station and Hove Park Neighbourhoods

     

    22.1    The following petition collected by Councillors Bennett and Brown was presented by Councillor Bennett on behalf of residents

     

    “We urge the Economic Development and Culture Committee to include the part of DA6 cut off by the railway line and currently in Hove Park Ward, including the Sackville Trading Estate and the Goldstone Retail Park, in the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum Area. Residents living directly opposite and closest to these sites would be most affected by any development.”

     

    22.2    The Chair indicated that points set out in the petition were noted and would be considered in concert with the report appearing at Item 23 on the agenda for that meeting. He requested that the content of the petition be noted and received.

     

    22.3    RESOLVED – That the content of the petition be noted and received.

     

    22b     Written Questions

     

    Designation of Neighbourhood Areas and Neighbourhood Forums – Hove Station and Hove Park Neighbourhoods

     

    22.4    Prior notification of the following question had been received from Councillor Bennett and had been circulated to Members separately in advance of the meeting.

     

                Councillor Bennett was invited to put her question:

     

    In the Hove Park Area where a close knit recognised community exists residents are aware and understand the implications of a Neighbourhood Forum and that is why they are so engaged with the process. Evidenced by two different petitions and the flood of individual responses to the consultation.

     

                A Planning Policy Officer stated that it would be easier if DA6 was in one forum area but agreed that it didn’t have to be. Is  this proposed as the easiest option for officers and are Members aware that residents in the Hove Station Neighbourhood  Area are largely ignorant of the Hove Station Neighbourhood Form, their representatives, their plans and the powers it will be given.”

     

    22.5    Councillor Bennett referred to the fact that a number of representations had been made by employees of the Custom Pharmaceutical Company and as to the weight which these had been given.

     

    22.6    The Chair, Councillor Bowden stated that as this matter formed the subject of a separate report at Item 23 on the agenda. The report reflected the officer view regarding DA6 and Officers would address the level of consultation undertaken by the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum in their introduction.

     

    22.7    RESOLVED – That the questions put by Councillor Bennett be received and noted.

     

    22c     Letters

     

                Talking Statues in Brighton & Hove

     

    22.7    A letter had been received from Councillor A Norman as set out on the agenda.

     

                Councillor Norman was invited to speak in support of her letter.

     

    22.8    The Chair, Councillor Bowden explained that he understood that the Arts and Cultural Projects Manager had already provided Councillor Norman with some background information in respect of this matter. Good ideas for supporting the city’s tourism offer were welcomed and he understand that this project were being trialled both in London and Manchester and we would be in touch with the organisers for feedback through our own staff at the Royal Pavilion and Museums.

     

    22.9    The Chair went on to explain that the city was actually developing a similar project to the Talking Statues at Royal Pavilion and Museums called Story Drop – it would be an app which would enable individuals to uncover the heritage of the city on various trails and tours and  this would include statues in the city. Members could access this by following the following the link set out below. There were are also a number of projects and developments in the Digital Festival that would be watched with interest and support could be offered in marketing terms through Visit Brighton. There were insufficient resources to set off a completely new separate project on the statues in the city, but it was hoped that Story Drop would continue to grow and develop in popularity, note would be taken of the results of the project that Cllr Norman had highlighted and the city would continue to work with digital partners to make innovative things happen in the city

     

    http://www.brighton-hove-rpml.org.uk/HistoryAndCollections/Pages/Story-Drop.aspx

     

    22.10  RESOLVED – That the contents of the letter be received from Councillor A Norman be received and noted.

23.

Designation of a Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum - Hove Station Neighbourhoods pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    Report of the Executive Director for Environment, Development and Housing (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – (1) That the committee refuse the application from Hove Station Neighbourhoods Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 1 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 13 and approve the designation of the Hove Station Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 11 to this report.

    (2) That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

    a) being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b) seeking agreement as to how the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum will engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan.

    (3) That the committee refuse the application from Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 2 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 14 and approve the designation of the Hove Park Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 12 to this report.

    (4) That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

    a)    being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b)    seeking agreement as to how the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum will engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan.

     



     

    * with the authority to designate the neighbourhood forum passed to the equivalent resultant Head of Service following service redesign

    * with the authority to designate the neighbourhood forum passed to the equivalent resultant Head of Service following service redesign

     

    Minutes:

    23.1    Before proceeding to formal consideration of the report Councillor Brown spoke in her capacity as one of the Ward Councillors for Hove Park Ward setting out her concerns regarding the recommendations set out in the report. Councillor Brown explained that both Ward Councillors and a number of residents (a petition had been prepared containing 797 signatures) were of the view that the Hove Park Forum Area should encompass the whole of the Hove Park Ward and should include as requested the Sackville Trading Estate and Goldstone Retail Park.

     

    23.2    Officers were recommending that these areas should be included in the Hove Station Forum Area. Hove Park Ward councillors and residents were however of the view that any development on these sites would affect residents of their ward, especially those living close by, more than residents in the Hove Station Forum area which was mainly south of the railway line.

     

    23.3    The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development and Housing the purpose of which was to determine four neighbouring planning applications, two of which related to the designation of neighbourhood areas Hove Station Neighbourhood Area and Hove Park Neighbourhood Area. The other two applications were linked to the area applications and related to the designation of the neighbourhood forums for Hove Station and Hove Park. These designations were part of the neighbourhood planning provisions introduced by the Localism Act 2011. Once designated they would enable the forums to prepare a neighbourhood development plan for their respective areas.

     

    23.4    The Head of Planning Strategy explained that four valid applications had been received. The areas proposed were each valid in their own right except in so far as they overlapped. Officers had tried to encourage the two area groups to reach a compromise which was acceptable to both, however, agreement had not been reached and officers had therefore put forward their recommendations, the rationale for which was set out in the report. Officers views in respect of DA      6 were set out based on their assessment which had been made on planning grounds and met all of the technical requirements of the legislation. In response to the issues raised by representatives of both groups officers had sought to detail the significant amount of correspondence received in a neutral manner without attaching undue weight to it.

     

    23.5    The Chair, Councillor Bowden commended the work undertaken by officers in bringing the report forward stating that he hoped that agreement could be reached.

     

    23.6    Councillor Robins sought confirmation as to whether it would be possible to set up areas which did not include the areas of contention and it was explained that this was not a practical option; it was not intended that there should be gaps between areas. Councillor Robins also sought clarification regarding the powers which the neighbourhood forums would have and it was explained that they would have the power to draw up neighbourhood plans which would guide development within a given area, although the City Plan itself would retain primacy in guiding strategic development. Councillor Robins stated that as he felt uncomfortable in being placed in the position of potentially voting to choose between the requests of one area and another, he sought clarification of the procedure by which any decision would be made.

     

    23.7    The Legal Adviser to the Committee explained that the proposed Conservative Group amendments which had been notified in advance of the meeting needed to be put and voted on. If they were agreed they would then become the substantive recommendations. If the amendments were lost the recommendations set out in the officer report would then be voted on.

     

    23.8    Councillor K Norman then put the Conservative Group amendments which are set out below. He explained that he considered that they represented a reasoned way forward for the reasons indicated by the two Ward Councillors. Councillor C Theobald concurred with all that had been said by Councillor Norman and the Ward Councillors and was happy to support the amendments: These were as follows:

     

    Proposed Conservative Group Amendment:

     

    2. RECOMMENDATIONS:

    2.1 That the committee refuse the application from Hove Station Neighbourhoods Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 1 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 13 and approve the designation of the Hove Station Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 11 to this report, with the exception of the areas which fall within the Hove Park Ward boundary including Sackville Trading Estate and the Goldstone Retail Park.

     

    2.2 That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

    a) being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b) seeking agreement as to how the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum will

    engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan.

     

    2.3 That the committee refuse approve the application from Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 2 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 14 and approve the designation of the Hove Park Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 12 to this report.

     

    2.4 That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

    a) being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b) seeking agreement as to how the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum will engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan

     

    Proposed by: Cllr. Ken Norman

    Seconded by: Cllr. Carol Theobald

     

    23.9    Councillor Robins re-iterated that he did not feel able to vote in respect of the proposed amendments for the reasons he had already stated and would therefore be abstaining. Councillor Morgan concurred stating that he considered it regrettable that the Government had framed the legislation in such manner that it could give rise to dissention between neighbourhoods in this way, each clearly had what they perceived to be the best interests of their local communities at heart.

     

    23.10  Councillor Randall referred to Councillor Morgan’s own Ward where local neighbourhood communities had been working together well and were not constrained within a single ward boundary.

     

    23.11  A vote was taken and on a vote of 4 to 4 with 2 abstentions, the proposed amendment was lost on the Chair’s casting vote.

     

    23.12  In answer to questions as to whether a designated neighbourhood area could be amended at a later date, it was explained that whilst the legislation did not explicitly allow for this, it might in theory be possible at the discretion of the council. The Chair stated that the degree of dissention which appeared to have been generated in respect of these proposed neighbourhood areas was regrettable and he feared might deter other areas of the city from engaging with the process. If the recommendations contained in the report were agreed he hoped all parties would co-operate in moving the proposals forward.

     

    23.13  The amendment having been lost the Committee then went on to consider and vote on the recommendations set out in the officers’ report. A vote was taken and Members agreed the resolutions set out below on a vote of 6 for with four abstentions.

     

    23.14  RESOLVED – (1) That the committee refuse the application from Hove Station Neighbourhoods Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 1 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 13 and approve the designation of the Hove Station Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 11 to this report.

                (2) That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

     

    a) being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b) seeking agreement as to how the Hove Station Neighbourhood Forum will engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan.

                (3) That the committee refuse the application from Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum for the Neighbourhood Area set out in Appendix 2 for the reasons set out in this report and précised in the draft decision notice set out in Appendix 14 and approve the designation of the Hove Park Neighbourhood Area as a neighbourhood area within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the extent of which Area is delineated on the map forming appendix 12 to this report.

     

    (4) That the committee authorises the Head of Planning & Public Protection* to designate the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum as a neighbourhood forum within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 subject to the Head of Planning & Public Protection*:

     

    a)    being satisfied that the neighbourhood forum meets the statutory criteria set out in paragraph 3.5 hereof; and

    b)    seeking agreement as to how the Hove Park Neighbourhood Forum will engage with people, groups and forums in adjacent areas and take their views into account in the drafting of any neighbourhood development plan.

     

                Note 1: When voting on the proposed Conservative Group Amendment Councillors Morgan and Robins abstained. Therefore On a vote of 4 to 4 with 2 abstentions the amendment was lost on the Chair’s casting vote.

     

                Note 2: When voting on the recommendations contained in the circulated report Councillors K Norman, Smith, C Theobald and Wealls abstained. Therefore the recommendations set out in the report were approved on a vote 6 for with 4 abstentions.



     

    * with the authority to designate the neighbourhood forum passed to the equivalent resultant Head of Service following service redesign

    * with the authority to designate the neighbourhood forum passed to the equivalent resultant Head of Service following service redesign

     

24.

Library Plan 2014/15 - Update pdf icon PDF 97 KB

    Report of the Assistant Chief Executive (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – (1) That the Committee endorses the Libraries Plan for 2014-15; and

     

    (2) RESOLVED TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL – That the Plan be approved.

     

    Minutes:

    24.1    The Committee considered a report of the Assistant Chief Executive seeking agreement to the final version of the Libraries Plan 2014-15 following public and stakeholder consultation.

     

    24.2    It was noted that the Plan had received provisional approval at the meeting of the Committee held on 19 June and had been updated and amended subsequently to ensure that it included any revisions required following further community engagement and consultation. The results of this consultation process were set out in Section 5.3 of the report.

     

    24.3    The Plan set out the Council’s vision for the service, building on recent successes and outlining priorities and objectives for the next 18 months in the context of the service’s overall plans and objectives for delivery across the city as a whole. It was considered that the Plan demonstrated how Libraries could help deliver broader corporate objectives and support the development of sustainable communities. In view of its status as a key strategic document the Library Plan required approval of full council.

     

    24.4    Councillor Smith commended the report and the work carried out by this service, although he considered it was regrettable that the mobile service had been lost, enquiring regarding the take up on the alternative arrangements which had been put into place. He emphasised the need to extend the level of collaboration with other partners and agencies. Councillor K Norman enquired specifically regarding the level of take up of the Home Delivery Service. The Head of Libraries and Information Services explained that these arrangements had been well received, this service was more cost effective and could reach more vulnerable people than had been the case with the mobile library service and gave better access to the range of services available to borrowers. This service was building up slowly as there were limitations dependant on the number of volunteers and where they were located within the city.

     

    24.5    Councillor Morgan echoed the points made by Councillor Smith considering that it was important to publicise and encourage use of the wider range of services available. Libraries had an important role as community hubs and in providing access to services other than borrowing books. The Head of Libraries and Information Services confirmed that this was one of the stated priorities in the Plan.

     

    24.6    Councillor Bowden, the Chair commended the wide range of services available stating that library provision was linked to other services whenever the opportunity arose, for example, in Woodingdean where it was linked to the health centre, in Portslade and at the new development in Circus Street, Brighton for which planning approval had been given the previous evening. The Circus Street development would include a Brighton University library to which the public would have access.

     

    24.7    Councillor Wealls thanked officers for forwarding copies of the most recent CIPFA profiles to him. Whilst acknowledging the quality of professional service provided and high levels of customer/user satisfaction, he remained of the view that the costs of service provision appeared high even when set in the context of comparable authorities. He also considered it was important to encourage users to borrow books as this one of the core functions of a library.

     

    24.8    Councillor Hawtree stated that notwithstanding technological advances it was clear that people still loved books and continued to use them in addition to Kindles, computers and other means of accessing available information.

     

    24.9    Councillor Robins welcomed the fact that services were available to those who were housebound. There were tremendous health and wellbeing benefits as a result of human contact and access to services which prevented individuals from feeling isolated or cut off. These were important and valuable benefits which helped to reduce tension and the need to access other services.

     

    24.10  Councillor Randall stated that it was a sign of the times that the nature of library use and direct book borrowing might change, notwithstanding the increased use of digital and other medias, library use remained popular across the city. It was important that Libraries remained at the heart of their communities.

     

    24.11  Councillor Morgan concurred and considered it was important to spread available assets, for instance Whitehawk Library in common with other branches was shut on certain days each week. He was also concerned that in a continuing harsh financial climate that financial necessity did not compromise the services provided. The Chair, Councillor Bowden responded that the valuable contribution made by the Library service was recognised and that cross-party discussion on how this valuable resource could best be protected would take place.

     

    24.12  Councillor C Theobald referred to Patcham Library, located in her Ward, it was a popular and well used library which would benefit from longer opening hours, and hoped that consideration could be given to how this might be achieved.

     

    24.13  The Head of Libraries and Information Services stated that a reduction in the number of books borrowed was part of a national trend across the country, but that this had been lower across the city than elsewhere. The Libraries Plan had a strong emphasis on reading, and a revised Reading Strategy for the city was in development, working with Children’s Services. Libraries were also working with Adult Social Care and Health colleagues to support the prevention agenda. As part of a PFI scheme the apparent costs of service delivery as set out in the CIPFA figures appeared high as the PFI revenue payments also covered capital costs, whereas the comparisons with other authorities were much better if this was taken into account. Discussions were taking place with CIPFA to see how this could be meaningfully reflected in future reports.

     

    24.14  RESOLVED – (1) That the Committee endorses the Libraries Plan for 2014-15; and

     

    (2) RESOLVED TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL – That the Plan be

    approved.

25.

Sports Facilities Leisure Card Update pdf icon PDF 80 KB

    Report of the Assistant Chief Executive (copy attached).

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – (1) That the Committee notes the positive benefits following the successful introduction of the citywide Leisure Card in April 2013.

    Minutes:

    25.1    The Committee considered a report of the Assistant Chief Executive which provided an update in relation to the council’s Leisure Card scheme following its introduction across six council sports facilities operated on behalf of the council by Freedom Leisure as part of the Sports Facilities Contract in April 2013.

     

    25.2    The report set out details on take-up of the scheme and also provided an assessment of its impact upon the levels of physical activity by Leisure Card holders. The scheme had been set up based on the principle of providing a discounted price to those likely to be able to afford to pay standard prices and to encourage greater participation in sport and physical activity by traditionally low user groups for whom price had been identified as a barrier to taking part. The Leisure Card scheme had also been designed to bring a clear and consistent approach to concessionary pricing and could be applied for free of charge by any residents in receipt of certain benefits.

     

    25.3    The Head of Sport and Leisure explained that the results of the survey undertaken to measure the success of the scheme had clearly demonstrated that the Leisure Card scheme had helped to provide better opportunities for residents on low incomes to access council sports facilities.

     

    25.4    Councillor Wealls stated that the scheme appeared to have been revenue positive in addition to achieving greater take up of healthy activity by under-represented groups. He considered that there would be merit in seeking to identify and engage with other groups where there were “gaps” which could be addressed.

     

    25.5    Councillors Smith and K Norman commented the health benefits that accrued from encouraging people to keep fit and active stating that they were aware that the Health and Wellbeing Board was looking at linking with the NHS and other partners and stressing the importance of a joined up approach in publicising such initiatives.

     

    25.6    Councillor Robins supported what had been said stressing that when the ability to use the card at venues across the city was important, if facilities were easily accessible, it was more likely that concessions would be taken up.

     

    25.7    Councillor Randall agreed with all that had been said and highlighted the importance of publicising what was available. For instance the “Ping” initiative which had provided the opportunity to take up table tennis at various locations across the city had been widely advertised before-hand and had been hugely popular.

     

    25.8    RESOLVED – (1) That the Committee notes the positive benefits following the successful introduction of the citywide Leisure Card in April 2013.

26.

Update on Apprenticeships pdf icon PDF 117 KB

    Report of the Executive Director for Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – That the Committee note the progress made in creating apprenticeships in the council and supporting the take-up of apprenticeships amongst businesses in the city.

    Minutes:

    26.1    The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development and Housing which provided an overview of progress made in creating apprenticeships for young people in the council and in supporting the take-up of apprenticeships amongst businesses in the city.

     

    26.2    In answer to questions by Councillor Smith, the Recruitment, Strategy and Delivery Manager explained that payment was in line with the minimum wage and that the activities undertaken by the council to support apprenticeships was on-going.

     

    26.4    In answer to questions by Councillors Hawtree and Randall it was confirmed that a successful bid had been made to support disadvantaged individuals by providing work placements with the aim of helping them to secure employment. The focus remained on young people who were disadvantaged, not in education, employment or training NEET’s and or were affected by the benefit changes. The council would continue to work with training providers and internal council services including Looked After Children, the Youth Employability Service and Benefit Teams.

     

    26.5    Councillor Robins referred to the need to seek to ensure that opportunities were provided for local young people citing that there were a number of building and other schemes under way locally which were undertaken by firms from outside the city.

     

    26.6    Councillor Randall stressed the role to be played by City College and others in providing vocations skills courses which provided opportunities to “grow” local skills.

     

    26.7    RESOLVED – That the Committee note the progress made in creating apprenticeships in the council and supporting the take-up of apprenticeships amongst businesses in the city.

27.

Coast to Capital Growth Deal - Implications for Greater Brighton pdf icon PDF 83 KB

    Report of the Executive Director for Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – That the Committee note the success in securing Local Growth Funding for projects that fall within the Greater Brighton city region.

    Minutes:

    27.1    The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, of Environment, Development and Housing providing an update on the outcomes of the Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Growth Deal which had been announced on 7 July and identified the projects that fell within the Greater Brighton City Region and which were funded by the Local Growth Fund (LGF).

     

    27.2    It was noted that The LEP’s Growth Deal announcement marked the culmination of the first phase of the Greater Brighton initiative which had focused upon the Greater Brighton City Deal bid and supporting the LEP with the development of their strategic economic plan and growth deal bid. This had seen a total of £83.4m funding allocated to the city region. This included:

     

    ·         £31.4m funding allocated to Greater Brighton through the City Deal process

    ·         £52.4m funding allocated through the first round of the Coast to Capital Growth Deal process

     

    27.3    Councillor Morgan referred to the West Street Junction Shelter, this scheme could be potentially generate revenue and he enquired whether/when transitional funding would be available for this project. The Head of City Regeneration explained that if a business case could be made to support any scheme it could be considered. Currently, the transport packages to be put forward were being agreed through the LEP, the process of putting these forward would commence over the coming months. Projects would require 20% match-funding but the level of funding provided would differ between projects.

     

    27.4    Councillor Deane explained that when she had attended a LEP meeting in Hailsham earlier in the year, it had been apparent that the region was competing for funding with other areas of the country. A number of the projects for the area were cutting edge or were embryonic long term projects for the future.

     

    27.5    Councillor Hawtree commended the Proposed flood defences for Newhaven and Shoreham respectively which represented an excellent application which would provide improvements over a wide area.

     

    27.6    RESOLVED – That the Committee note the success in securing Local Growth Funding for projects that fall within the Greater Brighton city region.

28.

The Greater Brighton City Deal: The Brighton Digital Exchange, New England House pdf icon PDF 89 KB

    Report of the Executive Director for Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

    Decision:

    RESOLVED – (1) That members note the progress that has been made in developing the business case for the Brighton Digital Exchange that forms part of the economic growth  initiatives agreed through the Greater Brighton City Deal;

     

    (2) That members agree to release £620,000 of funding from the Super Connected Cities Programme to deliver the Brighton Digital Exchange; and

     

    (3) Grant delegated authority to the Executive Director Finance and Resources and Executive Director of Environment, Development and Housing  to procure and award a contract  undertaking the wiring of New England House with the remainder of the funding to facilitate the Brighton Digital Exchange.

    Minutes:

    28.1    The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development and Housing outlining the progress that had been made in developing the business case for the Brighton Digital Exchange which would be located in New England House and would be funded via the Super Connected Cities Programme as part of the Greater Brighton City Deal.

     

    28.2    The Planning Projects Manager explained that consent was being sought to divert existing Super Connected Cities Programme (SCCP) funding in order to deliver the project, both via a grant programme to private sector partners and through the upgrading of existing wiring in New England House.

     

    28.3    RESOLVED – (1) That members note the progress that has been made in developing the business case for the Brighton Digital Exchange that forms part of the economic growth initiatives agreed through the Greater Brighton City Deal;

     

    (2) That members agree to release £620,000 of funding from the Super Connected Cities Programme to deliver the Brighton Digital Exchange; and

     

    (3) Grant delegated authority to the Executive Director Finance and Resources and Executive Director of Environment, Development and Housing  to procure and award a contract  undertaking the wiring of New England House with the remainder of the funding to facilitate the Brighton Digital Exchange.

29.

Major Projects Update pdf icon PDF 225 KB

    This standing item will provide an opportunity for relevant issues to be updated on.

    Minutes:

    29.1    The Committee considered the circulated schedule which provided an update on the current progress of major projects across the city.

     

    29.2    In answer to questions by Councillor Smith it was explained that redevelopment of the Black Rock site (if a suitable development was put forward), would not be delayed until completion of the building works currently under way. The existing lease arrangements were subject to a break clause.

     

    29.3    In answer to questions as to whether, the existing Brighton Centre would remain in until completion of any replacement facility it was confirmed that feasibility discussions remained on-going, and a formal project timetable had yet to be agreed.

     

    29.4    RESOLVED – That the contents of the schedule be noted and received.

30.

Items Referred For Council

    To consider items to be submitted to the 23 October 2014 Council meeting for information.

     

    In accordance with Procedure Rule 24.3a, the Committee may determine that any item is to be included in its report to Council. In addition, any Group may specify one further item to be included by notifying the Chief Executive no later than 10am on the eighth working day before the Council meeting at which the report is to be made, or if the Committee meeting take place after this deadline, immediately at the conclusion of the Committee meeting.

     

    Minutes:

    30.1    RESOLVED – That Item 23 – “The Library Plan2014/15” be referred to Council for approval as required under the Constitution.

 


Bookmark this page using:

Find out more about social bookmarking

These sites allow you to store, tag and share links across the internet. You can share these links both with friends and people with similar interests. You can also access your links from any computer you happen to be using.

If you come across a page on our site that you find interesting and want to save for future reference or share it with other people, simply click on one of these links to add to your list.

All of these sites are free to use but do require you to register. Once you have registered you can begin bookmarking.

Brighton & Hove City Council | Hove Town Hall | Hove | BN3 3BQ | Tel: (01273) 290000 | Mail: info@brighton-hove.gov.uk | how to find us | comments & complaints