Decisions

The Chairman invited Mrs Sharp to move her second motion. Mrs Sharp moved her second motion which was seconded by Mrs Hume.

 

Mrs Sharp then outlined her motion below:

 

We note that the Council has declared a Climate Emergency in the summer. One of the key actions that individuals, businesses and councils can take to reduce their carbon footprint is to source their electricity from renewable sources and change to a Green Tariff.

 

We therefore recommend to the Council:

 

1.    That enquiries be made to compare different renewable energy providers to demonstrate the council’s commitment to reducing its impact on the environment

2.    That an evaluation of the comparison of prices between an 100% Green tariff and a Brown tariff takes place including consideration of fixed and flexible pricing and the length of the contracts

3.    That the council’s energy supply contracts be reviewed

4.    That an energy procurement strategy that supports local community energy providers be created (example: the County Council’s Your Energy Sussex https://www.yourenergysussex.org.uk/)

 

The Chairman invited Mrs Plant to respond as the Cabinet member for Environment. Mrs Plant thanked Mrs Sharp for her motion. She explained that the current energy contracts including Electricity and Gas are awarded to Kent County Council, LASER Buying Group. The council procurement strategy for energy supply has in previous years focussed upon lowest price but also required price certainty.  To achieve these things the council has opted for a “Purchase In Advance” agreement, which provides a fixed tariff price year on year over the 4 year framework which includes a 2 year break clause. These four year framework contracts will expire on 30 September 2020 and new contracts will be required to be awarded in good time prior to this date.

The council will therefore need to agree on its preferred procurement route for future energy supplies in the lead up to September 2020.

 

Mrs Plant then proposed a counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mrs Lintill:

 

That this matter be referred to the Environment Panel to consider and make its recommendation to the Cabinet as to the council’s energy procurement strategy for 2020 and beyond.

 

Mrs Hume responded by explaining that although a lot of the work will need to be carried out by the Environment Panel there is value to discussing the issues at Full Council as the climate emergency effects everything the council does.

 

Mr Moss wished to endorse the comments made by Mrs Hume and acknowledged the importance of renewable energy sources.

Mr Elliott requested clarification of the nature of the current contract. Mrs Plant confirmed that it is a brown contract.

 

Mr Plowman added that the Chichester City Council energy source is a renewable energy supplier.

 

Mrs Lintill confirmed that it was something which could be considered further.

 

Mr Brown asked if the Environment Panel minutes had been published. Mrs Plant explained that they had and members had been notified of how to access the minutes online.

 

Mrs Plant then read her counter motion which had been seconded by Mrs Lintill as follows:

 

That this matter be referred to the Environment Panel to consider and make its recommendation to the Cabinet as to the council’s energy procurement strategy for 2020 and beyond.

 

In a show of hands the Council voted in favour.

 

RESOLVED

 

That this matter be referred to the Environment Panel to consider and make its recommendation to the Cabinet as to the council’s energy procurement strategy for 2020 and beyond.

The Chairman invited Mr Hughes to move his motion. Mr Hughes moved his motion which was seconded by Miss Lishman.

 

Mr Hughes then outlined his motion below:

 

It is recommended that the Council notes the following:

 

1.    Home-ownership has fallen to a thirty-year low; the average home now costs 13.5 times the average annual pay packet in Chichester and 1.7 million households nationally pay over a third of their income each month to a private landlord.

 

2.    Building more market-price homes can help lower prices only over the long term, so more supply alone cannot fix the problem or help thousands of families in Chichester District with the housing pressures they face now. The crisis requires action to build genuinely affordable homes at scale, and ensure a better balance in the new homes built.

 

3.    Affordable housing is one of the best investments councils can make: not only does it create a home for a family, and regular rental income for the council as landlord, it reduces housing benefit spending in the more expensive private rented sector too. A recent report by Capital Economics confirmed that a national programme of 100,000 genuinely affordable homes a year “will deliver a sustained structural improvement to public sector finances”.

 

4.    Investing in affordable housing creates jobs and boosts local economies. It’s estimated that every £1 spent on house building generates £2.84 in extra economic activity, and social landlords are also significant local buyers and employers: for every £1 million of housing output, 12 jobs are created.

 

5.    There is a pressing need for urgent additional council, social and affordable housing in the District of Chichester as local residents face spiralling rents and house prices, meaning there is a grave shortage of affordable housing for families in the District, which may increasingly force residents’ children and grandchildren to move away from the area. This is an unacceptable situation which this council has a moral duty to act upon. There are currently 1358 households on the Council’s housing register; there are also currently 42 households in council-owned temporary accommodation and a further 18 households are in non–council-owned temporary accommodation. 

 

6.    Many of the residents on the District’s housing register will be in private rented accommodation, which costs the taxpayer greater amounts in housing support benefits because private rents are extremely high, and temporary accommodation, which means that this council has to spend money that could otherwise be used for other vital council services.

 

7.    This council also notes that there is an additional cost to the Council in the difference between the housing benefit paid and what the council can claim back from government, based on Local Housing Allowance rates: in the last year this was estimated to be around £20K.

 

8.    It is unacceptable for this council to fail to act positively to meet the housing needs this District has, particularly as significant investment in new council housing will in the long term make savings which will relieve the costs to this council in its duties as a local housing authority. 

 

9.    However, the council recognises that reactivating the Housing Revenue Account would be a task needing a considerable amount of work. Therefore, as national law permits councils to build up to 199 council houses without an HRA, the council states the following:

 

It is recommended that the Council resolves to:

 

1.    Change the council’s definition of affordability to that of the formula used for Social rent and Intermediate housing, which is pegged to local incomes.

 

2.    Launch a review of our affordable housing target with a view to increasing the minimum in the Local Plan to 40 per cent.

 

3.    In the medium term, establish a scrutiny panel to examine the viability of setting up a Local Housing Company (LHC) as an independent, arms-length organisation wholly owned by the council and operated on a not-for-profit basis.

 

However, in the meantime, it is recommended that the council resolves to:

 

4.    Commit to building up to 199 Council Houses, available at affordable rent prices, and for rental income to be ring-fenced to reinvest in housing stock.

 

The Chairman invited Mrs Graves to respond as the Cabinet member for Housing. Mrs Graves thanked Mr Hughes for his motion. She acknowledged the difficulties faced by local people trying to secure a home in the district and emphasised that housing is a key priority for the council and the Corporate Plan includes the aim that the council will improve the provision of and access to suitable housing. Mrs Graves drew attention to two key pieces of work underway that address the issues raised, namely, the review of the Local Plan and the preparation of new Housing Strategy. She confirmed that these pieces of work will consider the points raised in the proposed motion. Mrs Graves explained that members also had the opportunity to attend a workshop on 5 September 2019 which considered the viability of the forthcoming Local Plan and also the Housing and Economic Needs Assessment. She confirmed that a pre-Council session is also planned on 26 November 2019 to present the draft new Housing Strategy to all members. The Housing Strategy will then go on to Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC), Cabinet and Full Council.

 

Mrs Graves explained that it would be premature for the Council to accept the recommendations as Council will have the opportunity to debate these issues at a future meeting once all the relevant evidence has been provided.

 

Mrs Graves then commented on each recommendation in turn as follows:

 

Recommendation 1: The definition of affordable housing is set down in the National Planning Policy Framework for planning purposes so the Council is unable to change this definition locally.

 

Recommendation 2: The Local Plan review will take into account the evidence received in the Housing and Economic Needs Assessment and Viability assessment when considering what percentage of affordable homes should be delivered on market sites. The new Housing Strategy will also consider what additional affordable homes the Council can enable by working with registered providers and community led housing groups. A new affordable housing delivery target will, therefore, form part of the Housing Strategy under consideration by members in the coming months.

 

Recommendation 3: It is not for the Council to establish scrutiny panels. This is a matter for the Chairman of OSC in consultation with the Committee and the Business Routing Panel. As said, however, the new Housing Strategy will be considered by OSC at its meeting in January 2019.

 

Recommendation 4: This suggestion has been considered in the past and the Housing strategy will consider our options to identify the best way for us to continue to deliver affordable housing. It is not a decision the Council can make today as the Constitution clearly sets down the requirements for expenditure of capital, which include a project initiation document, with an options appraisal, detailed capital estimates, revenue implications and approval by Cabinet.

 

Mrs Graves then proposed a counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mrs Lintill:

 

·         That recommendation 1 of the previous motion is not taken forward as the definition is set down in the NPPF

·         That recommendations 2 and 4 be considered as part of the work being undertaken for the Local Plan review and Housing Strategy update, both of which will come to Full Council in due course.

·         That recommendation 3 is referred to the OSC for their consideration.

 

Mr Moss then proposed a counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mr Brown:

 

 

That Council resolves to:

 

1.    Receive a report by officers at the next DPIP on the possibility of implications of changing the council’s definition of affordability to that of the formula used for social rent and intermediate housing, which is pegged by local incomes.

2.    Request that when the council’s consultants provide members with their final conclusions on their review of possible changes to the affordable housing target (of “at least 30%” and allowing Neighbourhood Plans to include their own Affordable Housing Strategy) members be presented with a range of options which enable us to see the trade offs between changing the target, raising the CIT for investment in vital infrastructure and improving energy efficiency plans i.e. members should be presented with a range of options not simply a single recommendation or even two diametrically opposed options.

3.    Establish a scrutiny panel to examine the medium to long term viability of setting up a Local Housing Company (LHC) as an independent, arms-length organisation wholly owned by the council and operated on a not-for-profit basis.

4.    Write to the Housing Minister to request that councils be given the power to suspend the right to buy at the very least for newly-built council houses.

5.    Receive a report by officers at DPIP on the risks to capital invested in council housing presented by the current right to buy, specifically referencing how other councils are managing this risk and building new council houses.

6.    Review land under council control and/or which has the potential for being brought under council control which could be used for the building of up to 199 council houses. If this option was pursued, these would be made available at affordable (definition as per point one) rent or for part ownership. Rental income to be ring fenced to reinvest in housing stock.

 

Mrs Shepherd addressed each point in turn:

 

·         Point one would be more appropriately directed to OSC.

·         Point two is premature as officers are working on the evidence base and members need to fully understand the consequences prior to making such as decision.

·         Point three would be more appropriately directed to OSC.

·         Point four can remain as is.

·         Point five would be more appropriately directed to the OSC to establish a task and finish group.

·         Point six would be more appropriately directed to an OSC task and finish group.

 

Mrs Rudziak added that affordability clauses could be considered in the Housing Strategy subject to viability.

 

Mr Hughes emphasised the importance of points two and three which could make the lives of residents better. He requested a commitment to agreeing point four.

 

Mr Briscoe drew attention to the resources that are already in place such as Community Land Trusts (CLT) which Mr Hughes acknowledged.

 

Mr Oakley commented that Mrs Graves proposal remained clear and evidence based. He warned of avoiding unintended consequences if the long term viability is not carefully considered.

 

Mr Plowman noted his agreement in principle with building 199 council houses as he acknowledged the lack of an affordable house in Chichester.

Mr Brown acknowledged the need for social housing but emphasised the importance of doing it properly with information required.

 

Mrs Hume supported the motion in principle but emphasised the need for the housing to be genuinely affordable. Mrs Sharp supported Mrs Hume’s comments. She explained that the idea of a CLT relies heavily on volunteers and asked if the council could provide officer time to put into such projects.

 

(Mrs Plant gave her apologies as she left).

 

Mr Hobbs explained that it is important that members have fully thought out the options before making a decision.

 

Mr Dignum proposed a motion to go to the vote which was seconded by Mr Elliott.

 

Mrs Lintill then read out a counter motion which had been seconded by Mrs Taylor as follows:

 

Recommendation 1 of the previous motion is not taken forward as the definition is set down in the NPPF, that recommendations 2 and 4 be considered as part of the work being undertaken for the Local Plan review and Housing Strategy update, both of which will come to Full Council in due course, and that recommendation 3 is referred to the OSC for their consideration and that Council invites OSC to establish a scrutiny panel to examine the medium/long term viability of setting up a local housing company as an independent arms length organisation wholly owned by the council and operated on a not for profit basis. That panel is to receive a report by officers on risks to capital invested in council housing presented by the current right to buy specifically referencing how other councils are managing this risk and building new council houses and that they also review the land under council control and/or which has the potential to be under council control which could be used for the building of up to 199 council houses. If this option is pursued the properties would be made available under affordable rent or part ownership. Rental income to be ring fenced to reinvest in housing stock. The council will also write to the Minister for Housing to request that council’s be given the power to suspend the right to buy at least for the newly built council houses.

 

Mr Moss then withdrew his counter motion.

 

In a show of hands the Council voted in favour.

 

RESOLVED

 

1.   That recommendation one of the previous motion is not taken forward as the definition is set down in the NPPF

2.    That recommendations two and four be considered as part of the work being undertaken for the Local Plan review and Housing Strategy update, both of which will come to Full Council in due course.

3.    That recommendation three is referred to the OSC for their consideration and that Council invites OSC to establish a scrutiny panel to examine the medium/long term viability of setting up a local housing company as an independent arms length organisation wholly owned by the council and operated on a not for profit basis. That panel is to receive a report by officers on risks to capital invested in council housing presented by the current right to buy specifically referencing how other councils are managing this risk and building new council houses and that they also review the land under council control and/or which has the potential to be under council control which could be used for the building of up to 199 council houses. If this option is pursued the properties would be made available under affordable rent or part ownership. Rental income to be ring fenced to reinvest in housing stock.

4.    The council will also write to the Minister for Housing to request that council’s be given the power to suspend the right to buy at least for the newly built council houses.

The Chairman invited Mrs Sharp to move her motion. Mrs Sharp moved her motion which was seconded by Miss Barrie.

 

Mrs Sharp then outlined her motion below:

 

1)    Trees

 

The Council is requested to note:

 

·               The importance of trees in slowing the pace of climate change by absorbing carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen into the air, as well as providing a habitat for wildlife

·               The contribution trees make to the environment in our towns including shading and cooling, pollution and noise mitigation, as well speeding up floodwater drainage and improving the quality of our street scene

·               The Government’s pledge in 2018 to plant 11 million new trees by 2050, including in towns and urban areas

 

In support of the national campaign to increase the number of trees being planted, the Council is requested to:

 

1.    Appoint a District Tree Champion

2.    Agree a review of current policies on and attitude towards the planting of trees in our rural and urban area with a view to introducing a more proactive policy to increase the number and regularity of trees planted

3.    Recommend West Sussex County Council consider a strategy to educate children in understanding the benefits of trees and tree planting

4.    Recommend an urgent Tree Summit with the City Council, Parish Councils, District Council and County Council, BID and the Tree Wardens and members of the public to work out how to plant more trees

5.    Recommend officers investigate funding streams to enable residents and community groups to fund the planting and future maintenance of trees

 

2)   Wildflowers to support pollinators

 

The District Council is responsible for various areas of land in the district (for example New Park and Priory Park). The way in which the council’s teams manage this land which is under our control as a District Council assets has an impact on wildlife and amenity. Being cut several times each year means grass is cut before many wildflower plants have had a chance to flower. Wildflowers need to be available for insects when in flower and to be left long enough to have seeded before being cut. Cutting regimes should be timed to allow wildflower areas to self-perpetuate and improve the wildlife value of the land.

 

The Council is therefore requested to:

 

1.    Review and reduce the timing and frequency of grass cutting across the district to increase biodiversity and manage some of our land as wildlife habitats

2.    Work with partners to produce a pollinator action plan to guide cutting contracts and communicate the resulting plan and reasons to residents

 

3)   Pesticide Free District

 

The Council is requested to:

 

1.    Formally congratulate the Property Manager of the City Council on limiting the use of dangerous chemicals which could endanger the health of the City Council employees and the wider public

2.    Recommend that the Property Manager coordinates a city wide reduction in the use of pesticides

3.    Recommend that the City Council consider joining the Pesticide Free Towns Network which envisions minimised use of pesticides by replacing them with sustainable alternatives

 

In line with the Pesticide Free Towns Network the Council is requested to:

 

·         Ban the use of herbicides and pesticides in public areas under council’s control

·         Help extend the ban of pesticides and herbicides to private areas with public access and agricultural areas next to where citizens live

·         Support the greening efforts towards local biodiversity enhancement already being championed by Transition Chichester

·         Develop and promote a campaign aimed at informing citizens about the transition to become pesticide-free, and the reasons for it; encourage citizens to actively support the transition by promoting the use of sustainable alternatives in private gardens and allotments

·         Communicate with and involve all stakeholders

·         Increase local biodiversity through municipal and citizen-driven activities

 

4)   Green bus stops

 

The Council is requested to work with Stagecoach, Parish and County Councils to consider initiating the use of Green roofs for bus stops. We recommend that sedum or other plants are used on the roofs of bus stops to attract more bees as pollinators, provide more plants to improve air quality and to be a visible sign that the District Council is actively reducing our collective carbon footprint.

 

5)   Greening Flower offer in the park displays

 

The Council is requested to encourage more sustainable forms of planting by:

 

·         Drought resistance planting

·         Using pollinator friendly planting to encourage bees

·         Using locally grown flowers instead of plants from abroad

·         Using native plants

·         Using perennials and wildflowers as much as possible to draw the public’s attention to the importance of supporting native species and encouraging bees

 

6)   Advice to Planning Applicants

 

The Council is requested to recommend to the Planning Department that it sends out a list of ideas that all new applicants for planning can use to “green” their applications by introducing environmental measures such as habitats for hedgehogs, wildflower planting, protecting and increasing bat corridors, installing green roofs or walls or using permeable paving, harvesting rainwater to water the garden, changing power providers to renewables, installing bat and bird boxes, planting trees to support bat corridors and provide shade, less rigorous grass cutting regimes. Councillors are invited to view the advice given to residents in the South Downs National Park.

 

The Chairman invited Mrs Plant to respond as the Cabinet member for Environment. Mrs Plant thanked Mrs Sharp for her motions. She explained that the environment is high on the council’s agenda and as such many of the suggestions are already in progress.

 

Mrs Plant added that some of the matters raised are not matters for Council to determine but are either operational Executive matters or matters which Full Council has already established within the terms of reference for the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel (DPIP).  As such, Mrs Plant recommended referring the suggestions to the relevant decision making body for debate. Mrs Plant then addressed each point in turn as follows:

 

1. The importance of trees. 

 

Mrs Plant explained that while the intentions are positive, the practicalities of operational delivery need to be explored further such as how this would be resourced, and ownership issues in relation to residents and community groups planting trees on land that may not be in their or our ownership would need to be explored.

 

 

 

 

2. Wild flowers.

 

Mrs Plant explained that she is supportive of the approach and confirmed that in recent years the council had established new wildlife areas as well as areas of parks that are subject to a reduced mowing regime. The council continues to look at sites where mowing can be further reduced.  With regards to the introduction of a pollinator action plan she explained that it is important to remain mindful as to how it would be resourced and delivered.

 

3. Pesticide free District.

 

Mrs Plant explained that the council could not determine whether Chichester City Council should join the Pesticide Free Towns Network. She added that CDC have reduced the use of pesticides and herbicides over recent years to a minimum and share an ambition to go pesticide free. With regard to fine turf maintenance (bowls and cricket) where a high standard of playing surface is required further discussion would be need as to go pesticide free could result in a lower standard of playing surface which may not be acceptable to the clubs that use the facilities.  She explained that officers continue to keep an eye on industry developments and hope a solution to can be found which could be adopted.

 

Mrs Plant confirmed that although she supported the remaining points under this heading in principle consideration would need to be given to resource and delivery as they will require a districtwide multi-agency approach.

 

4. Green Bus stops.

 

Mrs Plant confirmed her support of the intention but explained that the work would need to be given to the bus stop owners to consider how it could be resourced.

 

5. Greening Flower offer in the park displays.

 

Mrs Plant confirmed that the council no longer plant seasonal displays (as of six years ago). The council’s flower beds contain sustainable plants such as Echinacea, Lavender, Sedum and Heather. The council is also tolerant of weeds in bedding such as dandelions and allows them to remain during their pollinating period. Mrs Plant clarified that this should be referred to the Parks Strategy Task and Finish group for review.

 

6.    Advice to Planning Applicants

 

Mrs Taylor then responded to the final planning related point. She explained that the council already provides advice on how to implement beneficial ecological and environmental measures within the Environmental Protection section of the website.  The advice is available to applicants in drawing up their proposals, although it is not mandatory for such measures to be implemented.  Current Local Plan policy requires proposals that may have a negative impact on protected ecological interests to mitigate for this impact, but not to implement greater ecological improvements than that. Mrs Taylor warned that further advice that implies that the council has greater control within the CDC Plan Area than it does risks unrealistically raises expectations. The council is unable to insist on such provision within CDC Planning Applications without a current relevant planning policy in place.  Any such aspiration should be drawn out and tested through the Local Plan Review process.

 

The South Downs National Park Authority advice that is referenced in the motion relates to Ecosystems Services. The advice is technical information to support implementation of their new Policy in the recently adopted South Downs National Park Local Plan.  In dealing with applications on behalf of the South Downs National Park Authority CDC planning officers need to ensure that planning applications meet the requirements of the Ecosystems Services policy and have regard to this technical advice in doing so.

 

Mrs Plant then proposed a counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mrs Lintill:

 

That points 1-5 be referred to the Environment Panel and point 6 be referred to the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel.

 

Mr Brown then proposed a counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mr Moss:

 

That the motion presented in Section 19 to be treated as a report to Council.

 

That the report presented in Section 19 of the agenda be noted and the Council’s full support for the aims set out in it be confirmed.

 

That item 1 (Trees) be noted and agreed, subject to the following clarifications:

 

·         The District Tree Champion to be appointed by the Council.

·         Review to be channelled through the Environment Panel.

·         Remit of Tree Summit to be expanded to include hedgerows.

·         Investigation to be channelled through the Environment Panel.

 

That item 2 (Wildflowers) be noted and agreed, subject to the following clarifications:

 

·         Review to be channelled through the Environment Panel.

·         Pollinator Action Plan to be developed through the Environment Panel.

 

That item 3 (Pesticides) to be referred in its entirety to the Environment Panel.

 

That item 4 (Bus Stops) be noted and agreed for consideration, with the Environment Panel leading on behalf of the Council.

 

That item 5 (Sustainable Planting) be noted and agreed.

 

That item 6 (Advice to Planning Applicants) be noted and agreed, with the following additions:

 

·         That Environment Panel be tasked with overseeing the creation of a ‘greened development vision’ which can be communicated to all applicants providing context for the advice and recommendations being given.

·         The vision, accompanying information and advice to include links to sources of information providing more detailed explanations, sources of materials and (if appropriate) contractors and suppliers, to local community conservation groups which may be able to assist, etc.

 

Mr Plowman gave his support to the counter motion from Mr Brown explaining that Chichester City Council is taking a holistic approach. He asked members to consider areas which could be utilised as better locations for trees and drew attention to a BBC energy guide which is available online outlining ways to make changes.

 

Dr O’Kelly gave her support to the counter motion from Mr Brown and urged close working with WSCC.

 

Mrs Lintill explained that she supports the ethos of the motion but through the relevant channel such as the Environment Panel.

 

Mrs Taylor added that the council is very proactive in environmental issues.

 

Mr Brown withdrew his counter motion.

 

Mrs Plant read out her counter motion as follows which was seconded by Mrs Lintill:

 

That points 1-5 be referred to the Environment Panel and point 6 be referred to the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel.

 

In a show of hands the Council voted in favour.

 

RESOLVED

 

That points 1-5 be referred to the Environment Panel and point 6 be referred to the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel.