Agenda and draft minutes

The Group Head of Planning informed the Committee of the sad news of the passing of Charlie Hardy a member of the Council’s Planning Policy Team.  He informed members that the Planning department’s condolences had been passed to Charlie’s family and that he was sure that the Committee would wish to do so as well.

All present then stood and observed one minute’s silence in her memory.

There were no apologies.

Members and Officers are invited to make any declaration of pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this agenda, and are reminded that they should re-declare their interest before consideration of the items or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

Members and Officers should make their declaration by stating:

a)             the item they have the interest in

b)             whether it is a pecuniary/personal interest and/or prejudicial interest

c)             the nature of the interest

Councillor Elkins declared a Personal Interest in respect of Agenda Items 8 and 10 as a member of West Sussex County Council.

The Chair confirmed that there were no urgent items to consider at this meeting.

To receive questions from the public (for a period of up to 15 minutes).

          The Chair invited questions from a member of the public who had submitted their questions in advance of the meeting in accordance with the rules of the Council’s Constitution.

The Chair confirmed that seven questions had been submitted from Ms Thompson and these were read out by the questioner and responded to by the Chair. 

(A schedule of full questions asked, and the responses provided can be found on the meetings webpage here).

The purpose of this report is to inform Members of the budget process for 2025/26 as required by Part 6, Section 2 of the Council’s Constitution.

The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer was invited by the Chair to present the report that set out the budget process for 2025/26.  The report outlined the key service committee dates and explained the process was driven by the medium-term financial report to the Policy and Finance Committee on 24 October 2024.  Briefings would be held with members throughout the budget process with dates to be confirmed. 

The Chair then invited questions and comments from members.  In response to a question concerning the increasing demands on service delivery referred to at paragraph 4.2 of the report, the Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer explained that the greatest challenge to the Council was the cost of providing homelessness provision.  This provision would be a cost pressure for this year and next year due to the increasing demand, and measures were being taken to control these costs.  A further pressure was uncertainty surrounding the Council’s income levels being reduced following the Local Government Finance settlement for 2024/25, which had announced the discontinuation of the New Homes Bonus (NHB) and implied removal of the Minimum Funding Guarantee Grant (MFGG).  He provided details of a Joint Finance officers briefing where local government finance experts had advised there had not been any national discussions on the Government’s plans on the removal of the NHB and MFGG, which would not be known until the Local Government Finance settlement for 2025/26 was announced at the end of the year.  If they were removed they were likely to be removed gradually.

A member welcomed member briefings during the process and asked that officers give members ample notice of them.  

The Committee noted the Budget process for 2024/25 as outlined in the report.

The purpose of this report is to appraise the Planning Policy Committee of its forecast out-turn against the 2024/25 budgets, which were approved by Full Council at its meeting of the 21 February 2024.

The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer was invited by the Chair to present the report.  He referred to the Quarter 1 2024/25 forecast at Table 1, paragraph 4.2, which set out a small underspend of £50k.  Salary costs were forecast to underspend by £200k but would be largely offset by the recruitment of external professionals filling staff vacancies.  Referring to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) income, the Council was able to recover some of its costs from CIL receipts with the forecast predicting an overachievement of £70k.  Following the deletion of a number of staff posts in the 2024/25 budget the Council was on target to meet those savings.

The Chair then invited questions and comments from members.  A question was asked whether the reduced number of applications being received would lead to less income being received by the Council.  The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer responded that the variation related to the cost recovery for CIL receipts.  He referred to the substantial planning fee increases announced by the Government in December 2023 and advised that  the Council had exercised caution in factoring any increase in income in the budget, as the effect on the number of planning applications received as a result were not known.  The effect on the current budget will be monitored throughout the year and any increase or reduction in the number of planning applications received will be factored in to the 2025/26 budget process. 

The Interim Head of Planning Policy provided details of the comments received from Financial Services to the National Planning Policy Framework consultation, that noted that if the householder planning application fee was increased to £528 it could potentially generate a fee income of up to £150k additional income.  It was too early to know what the implications would be as the new fees had not been ratified.  The Group Head of Planning explained that staffing levels were managed according to the amount of planning income received.

The Committee noted the report.

The purpose of this report is to appraise the Planning Policy Committee of its draft final out-turn against the 2023/24 budgets which were approved by Full Council at its meeting of 9 March 2023, subject to external audit. 2022/23 figures are also shown for information.

The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer was invited by the Chair to present the report.  He advised that the figures contained in the draft 2023/24 draft final outturn report were subject to external audit.  He referred to an overspend of £251k, which was an improvement on the level predicted at Quarter 3, the details of which were set out in paragraph 1.  Although Planning services income had underachieved by £377k the position had improved during Quarter 4 due to an overachievement following an increase in Community Infrastructure Levy receipts. 

The Committee noted the report.

This report seeks the Committee’s agreement of the full update to the council’s three-year Infrastructure Investment Plan (IIP 2025/27), following an eight-week stakeholder consultation (1 February to 1 April 2024). The IIP 2025/27 allocates Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funds to key infrastructure projects, assessed and prioritised using submitted evidence, for delivery within the three-year period. Following the Committee’s agreement, the IIP 2025/27 will need to be referred to Full Council for approval.

[Councillor Elkins re-declared his Personal Interest as a member of West Sussex County Council during discussion of this item]

The Interim Head of Planning Policy was invited by the Chair to present the report that provided an update to the Council’s three-year Infrastructure Investment Plan 2025/27 (IIP).  He drew attention to the Priority Shortlist that set out the recommended projects to be taken forward for funding allocations in the three-year period and the updated Baseline Longlist.   A total of five projects had been identified to receive Community Infrastructure Levy payments from the strategic pot. 

Details of the five projects for consideration were provided:

·     Existing Littlehampton Waste Recycling Facility capped to actual receipts in Year 3 within the WSCC 70% pot;

·     Existing project at Littlehampton Fire Station - Relocation or redevelopment (allocation Year 1 £50k; Year 2 £50k; Year 3 £0k and capped to actual receipts in Year 3 within WSCC 70% pot);

·     Existing project for Route 8 Arundel to Ford Active Travel - allocation reduced to Year 1 £100k within ADC 20% pot – future funding subject to National Highways Designated Funds Review 2025; It was noted that officers will be giving further consideration to this allocation and whether it should continue to come out of the Arun District Council funding pot or if it was more appropriate to come out of the West Sussex County Council funding pot.

·     Add existing project at Lion’s Den Littlehampton – Play area improvements - £30k within ADC 20% pot;

·     Add new project at Ferring Village Play Area – Play area improvements - £30k within ADC 20% pot.

It was noted that projects came forward ad hoc throughout the year and advised that officers will consider providing a more structured timetable of bidding rounds for each year.

The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Partridge and seconded by Councillor Lury.

The Chair invited the Committee to make comment and ask questions. 

·       The Interim Head of Planning Policy responding to member questions clarified the position concerning the project for Route 8 Arundel to Ford Active Travel, confirming that it was not the intention to ask West Sussex County Council for an additional contribution.  The project had initially included the green link that had included links to Arun District Council’s proposals for a leisure route in the same location.  The Council had sought external funding for the route but as it had not been successful the project had been paused.  The £100k of funding sought was for a further feasibility study for non-motorized users with consideration being given to whether it would be more appropriate for the funding to be ring fenced from the County Council 70% strategic pot or if the smaller Arun District pot would be more appropriate.  National Highways had advised that funding for the travel route from Ford to Littlehampton was not available in its current Road Investment Strategy (RIS2).  He referred to the number of road improvement schemes that had been cancelled and that it was hoped that the unspent funding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 243.

To update Planning Policy Committee on the publication of the council’s annual Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS) setting out S.106 planning obligation contributions (i.e. financial contributions from developments secured under Section 106 of The Town and Country Act 1990, as amended) and CIL income and spend on the council’s infrastructure list from the previous financial year. This is in accordance with the requirements of ‘The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended).

The Interim Head of Planning Policy was invited by the Chair to present the report which updated the Committee on the Council’s annual Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS).  He explained that West Sussex County Council and neighbourhood bodies will carry out their own Infrastructure Statement in terms of their Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Section 105 receipts.  The number of CIL demand notices issued, of £4.5m, was significantly higher than the previous year.  The increase in CIL receipts when compared with the previous year (£2.1m compared with £800k) and S106 receipts (£12.m compared with £2.5m) and what the money has been spent on were highlighted.  The number of new affordable dwellings provided under S106 has increased from 395 to 607 this year.

The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Partridge and seconded by Councillor Tandy.

The Committee

                     RESOLVED that

The Arun Infrastructure Funding Statement 2023/24 be noted and published on the Arun District Council website, in accordance with Regulation 121A of the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 (as amended).

This report updates the committee on the Arun Secondary School progress with landowner engagement.  It identifies the work streams and costs required to progress the potential site options available for allocation and acquisition, of a sustainable and deliverable site for the accommodation of a 10 Form Entry (with room for 4 form expansion and 6^th form provision) Secondary School to serve the strategic developments within Arun.

[Councillor Elkins re-declared his Personal Interest as a member of West Sussex County Council during discussion of this item]

The Interim Head of Planning Policy was invited by the Chair to present the report. The report provided an update on the progress officers have made with landowner engagement concerning the potential site options for an Arun Secondary School.  He referred to paragraph 4.5 that provided details of each landowner’s response, which was either that the landowner did not want their site to be considered or no response was received.  It did not necessarily mean that the necessary work on potential sites could not progress, as they all met the necessary criteria for a new secondary school.  It was noted that the Council had Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers should it wish to allocate a site or if a planning application was received for a site.  Paragraph 4.9 set out the further detailed investigative work to be commissioned to identify a suitable site.  He referred to the decision made by the Committee at its meeting held on 30 January 2024 not to support Site Option F as a preferred site.  However, officers suggested that members may wish to re-consider and agree to include this site alongside the five sites to be progressed under the further Site Constraints Study.  The results of the feasibility work will be reported to the Committee. If further sites did come forward they would also be considered.  Following the further detailed work to be undertaken by the Council in consultation with West Sussex County Council a final preferred site will be brought to the Committee for consideration.    

The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Bower and seconded by Councillor Partridge.

The Chair invited the Committee to make comment and ask questions: 

·      The Interim Head of Planning Policy clarified that the location of Site Option F was in Ford.  He reminded members that West Sussex County Council had been in discussions with the landowner of this site but no land deal had been agreed as yet.  

·      A member asked if Academy Trusts had been approached concerning the sponsorship of a new school in Arun.  The Group Head of Planning replied that West Sussex County Council would expect the site identification process to have taken place in the first instance, which was an important stage of the process, before they will discuss proposals with the school providers.

·      Responding to a question regarding the use of a CPO, the Group Head of Planning explained that this process would only be used by the Council to acquire land for a suitable site only if all other avenues had failed.  Before starting the process in the first instance some certainty would be required in the form of a school site allocation or a planning permission coming forward. 

·      A comment was made that it was disappointing to see West Sussex County Council, who were landowners and had the responsibility for delivering secondary schools, were not putting any site proposals forward in Arun.  Given  ...  view the full minutes text for item 245.

This report is noting the summary of the responses received from the public consultation on the Regulation18 Issues and Options - Direction of Travel document, in order to inform the next stage of the Local Plan Update 2023 to 2041.

The Interim Head of Planning Policy was invited by the Chair to present the report.  He provided details of the public consultation on the Direction of Travel (DoT) document that had taken place following approval by the Committee.  The consultation set out a vision and objectives, and asked respondents if they considered that the Council was considering the correct issues in the DoT.  A good response had been received with 73 respondents, of which there were 299 specific comments.  The comments received mainly related to three key areas: providing homes in the right places, climate change and the need to deliver infrastructure to support growth.  The results of the consultation will be used to develop the next stage of the Local Plan for which evidence and preparatory work has already commenced.  During the process, there will be extensive engagement with members via direct consultation and through the committee process.  The detailed responses to the consultation were available on the Council’s website for viewing.

The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Lury and seconded by Councillor Partridge.

The Chair invited the Committee to make comment and ask questions. 

Councillor Lury referred to the Special Planning Policy Committee held on 18 September 2024 and the Committee’s agreement to send a letter to the regarding the proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).  He advised that the letter, signed by the Group Leaders, had been sent and advised that the letter had been copied to the four Arun MPs and to the press.  He thanked the Group Head of Planning for his assistance and the Group Leaders for supporting the letter.

In response to a comment made that due to the proposed changes to the NPPF the DoT document should be reviewed due to the unknowns that the new planning system will bring and whether or not the Council should continue to prepare a new  Local Plan.  The Group Head of Planning advised that both this Committee and the Council was committed to continue preparing a new Local Plan under the current planning system, as the changes to the new system were not yet known and was progressing its evidence-based work in the meantime.

The Committee

                     RESOLVED

i. That the summary of the consultation responses is noted and that the consultation responses do not cause any issues which prevents officers from progressing onto the next stages of the Local Plan Update, and

ii. That the contents of the consultation comments will be used, where relevant, to inform the next stage of Local Plan evidence base work.

This report is intended to introduce members of the Planning Policy Committee to the ‘Three Harbours Strategy’ document (hereafter referred to as ‘the Strategy’). It also seeks agreement from the Committee for Arun District Council to become a formal signatory to this new Strategy, in partnership with a number of other local authorities, institutions and environmental and conservation groups across the region such that the council can influence the future of this important resource.

The Interim Head of Planning Policy was invited by the Chair to present the report.  He explained that the Council had recently become aware of the Three Harbours Partnership and its draft Strategy for 2024-2028 at a late stage.  Notwithstanding this, officers have assessed the Strategy in terms of water quality, diversity and carbon capture that were broadly in line with the Council’s climate change emergency and its ambitions in terms of carbon reduction and improvements to the environment.  Officers had assessed the Council’s involvement and were of the opinion that the best way forward would be for the District Council to become a signatory to the Partnership to include member involvement.  He drew attention to paragraph 4.6 that set out the 10 key inputs envisaged by 2028 in the high-level plan.      

The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Huntley and seconded by Councillor McAuliffe.

The Chair invited questions and comments from members. Comment was made that although the opportunity to become a member of the Partnership was belated it was welcomed due to the significant importance of the three harbours. 

A member expressed the view that a member representative should be appointed to represent the Council on the Chichester Harbour Conservancy if there was not already a member appointed to this outside body. 

The Director of Growth clarified that the Three Harbours Partnership and Sussex Bay Project were two distinct projects although there was synergy between them. Officers were working with the Sussex Bay Project and at the same time, albeit belatedly, the Council was getting involved with the work of the Three Harbours partnership.  The Interim Head of Planning Policy added that the Partnership’s proposed integrated recovery plan would map all its projects.  The engagement strategy proposed working groups and a standing citizens’ assembly providing greater involvement and collaboration.  Officers undertook to provide Councillor Goodheart with further information surrounding citizens’ assemblies.     

Members welcomed the opportunity to join the Three Harbours partnership and become a formal signatory to the Strategy.

The Committee

          RESOLVED that the Committee

i.   Consider the Final Draft of the Three Harbours Strategy document (2024-2028); and

ii.  Agree that Arun District Council should join the Three Harbours partnership and become a formal signatory to the Strategy.

The Committee’s Work Programme for 2024-25 is attached for the Committee’s information.

          The Interim Head of Planning Policy advised that since the publication of the agenda a number of updates had been made to the work programme.  He undertook to circulate the latest version to the Committee following the meeting.

The Committee noted the work programme for 2024/25.