There is no two ways about it, building 930 homes on the city’s 16 remaining natural sites on the urban fringe is a disaster for the environment. I can’t help but feel that many Green Councillors must be feeling uncomfortable not mounting a proper campaign against their destruction – though it is principally Labour members and supporters who have been in touch now in the hundreds – we hear you all loud and clear, and we’re backing you. That goes for tens of the city’s environmental groups too.
Stepping back for a second, I have seen little discussion about detailed figures within the plan. Most are aware of the assessed need of 30,000 homes. And most are aware of the agreed minimum target of 13,200 – achieving which is ultimately the point of this document.
I fully take on board arguments about the Planning Inspector wanting as much housing included as possible but nobody is mentioning that we have reached the minimum target as a headline achievement. And, from private discussions with Labour or Green Councillors, none of whom I have mentioned already, seemed aware of this when considering support or otherwise. This is concerning.
We are currently above the agreed minimum target by over 20%. This is not mentioned in the agenda before us and is calculated by taking the total housing supply figure of 14,875 from the Housing Provision Topic Paper from October 2019 and adjusting it to take into account increased predictions for the Hove Station Development Area following to give nearly 16,000 homes in total – or nearly 2,700 homes over. There are only 930 homes in the whole urban fringe proposal.
It’s simply not holding water with residents but it’s now being claimed, at the very last minute, that this is a parliamentary matter – or more to the point, the Tory Government. Obviously nobody believes this but, if it were true, why have our local Members of Parliament – Labour and Green who represent us on such matters – not been raising this in Parliament for us? If it is a Parliamentary matter, why have our local Parliamentarians been silent? The only noise that we have heard recently from Dr Lucas anyway was defence of similar green spaces – in Lancashire – along with a call for a crime of ecocide to deal with those wishing to develop such sites.
If it were the case that the true Labour/Green position is to put environment before housing-at-all-costs, where are the public statements from the two Groups that they are even against building the assessed need? It doesn’t make sense to campaign for extra housing in the city and then complain when the Inspector agrees.
And why has there been literally no campaigning on the matter of the environmental destruction from the two parties at local level? Disquiet should have at least led to some activity. This is a huge environmental issue, and rolling over so willingly for the Inspector is not the right approach.
I would add separately by the way that some of the sites included within the urban fringe assessment now fall within the realms of challengeability – in complete contravention of the stated Labour/Green position. Enough Labour and Green Councillors have now expressed publicly that they wouldn’t actually support Council-owned urban fringe sites being developed, in the context of the Council being landlord. This means that the sites shouldn’t even be in there as they no longer fit within the definition of ‘deliverable’ as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. If soundness is the concern, such statements are highly irresponsible.
Finally, our unsound amendments, especially those relating to the urban fringe, are very deliberately being kept on the public record as the foundation for any future challenge and our position on the Plan in its entirety will be kept under review, as the debate progresses, right until the last moment.
