Agenda item - Request for Deed of Variation, City College, 87 Preston Road, Brighton

Report of the Head of Planning (copy attached)

68.1      The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment and Culture requesting to vary the Heads of Terms of a Section 106 Agreement signed in connection with planning application BH2017/01083, in order to amend the affordable housing requirements.

68.2      It was noted that an in-depth presentation had been provided by officers in advance of the meeting and was included on the council website detailing the scheme and proposed amendment .The developer had requested this in response to a lack of interest in the affordable units from the Council’s list of preferred Registered Social Landlord’s due to the small number of units; the current climate caused by Covid 19 and a lack of confidence in the market. The only interested Registered Provider had subsequently confirmed that they would not be proceeding with the sale for the reasons set out in the report. It was considered that implementation of the development would deliver planning and economic benefits, including much needed private housing in a sustainable location and that the developer had provided sufficient justification and evidence that affordable housing units could not be provided on site.

68.3      The Housing Team had indicated that it was willing to accept the payment of an in lieu commuted sum to the Council that would ensure a set contribution would be used to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the city.

68.4      Councillor Theobald asked whether refurbishment works to the site had been completed and the date from which the current permission had been extant.

68.5      Councillor Fishleigh stated that marketing for units at the site indicated that they were on the market for in excess of £550,000 each. The sum being requested was far too low. It was explained that the commuted sum being sought was in accordance with applied in accordance with an agreed formula.

68.6      Councillor Yates stated that this approach seemed very short term in and enquired what that would provide in terms of the council’s own supply.

68.7      Councillor Bagaeen enquired whether this indicated a lack of confidence in the market and concern by the developer that units would remain unsold. It was noted that the developer had provided sufficient justification and evidence that affordable housing units could not be provided on site. The Housing Officer present, Emma Kumar explained in answer to further points raised the ability to provide units did not mean that they would be viable. Where a small number of units was to be provided that might not be economically viable for a registered provider.

68.8      Councillor Shanks stated that she was concerned that determination of this request should be deferred as in her view insufficient evidence had been provided that all options had been pursued. Councillor Fishleigh concurred in that view and other members echoed those concerns. Councillor Shanks proposed that the application be deferred in order to enable the Housing Strategy Team to revisit this application and to ensure that all options had been considered in concert with registered providers. Councillor Fishleigh seconded the proposal and it was put to the vote.

68.9      A vote was taken and the 9 Members present when the vote was taken voted by 7 with 2 abstentions that consideration of the application be deferred in order to allow the Housing Strategy Team to reconsider the options on avoiding the move to a commuted sum and to explore the number of Registered Housing Providers being considered.

68.10    RESOLVED – That consideration of this Deed of Variation application be deferred for the reasons set out in paragraph 68.9 above.