Item no. on agenda
Brighton & Hove City Council
For general release
Meeting: Environment Committee
Date: 1st July 2004
Report of: Director of Environment
Subject: Establishment of Design Panel
Ward(s) affected: 'All'
1. Purpose of the report
This report recommends the setting up of a new Design Panel to give the Council independent external advice on the design merits of new developments. This report follows from that presented to the committee in June 2003.
Recommendations
That the Environment committee resolve to recommend to Policy and Resources Committee:
That a new Design Panel to advise the Council on the design merits of new developments across the whole city be established and that the terms of reference and proposed membership be as set out in Appendix 2 of the report.
That a new code of conduct (set out in appendix 3) for all panels reporting to the Environment committee be approved.
That the Architects panel is brought to a close approximately one month preceding the first meeting of the new Panel.
That the Conservation Areas Advisory Group be renamed the Conservation Advisory Group with a focus on gathering the views from the amenity groups and assisting in the delivery of the conservation strategy (adopted by committee in September 2003) and that the terms of reference and proposed membership of the new Conservation Advisory Group be as set out in appendix 5.
That members of the Environment Committee record their thanks to those members of groups, past and present, who have devoted their time freely to the improvement of the City's built environment.
Further Consultation
Following the committee decision to defer a report in June 2003 (proposing combining the Architect's panel and CAAG into a single advisory design panel) pending further consultation with amenity groups officers have met members of the amenity groups on a number of occasions and with CAAG acting collectively on behalf of the groups to hear their concerns.
Representatives of the amenity societies explained that they viewed CAAG as the main way in which amenity societies (who jointly represent a large number of residents) could hold a dialogue with the Council and influence planning decisions.
The formal views of amenity societies on the current proposal are set out in a joint paper prepared by them and attached as Appendix 4. This comment was based upon an earlier draft of this report and should be read in the light of earlier proposals which proposed disbanding CAAG completely and incorporating some members into the proposed design panel. Whilst the CAAG now broadly welcome retention of the CAG they stop short of welcoming the proposed Design Panel and seek a larger representation on it. Their comments and responses to them are set out in Appendix 4
The Sustainability commission (at their meeting of 4th June 2003) registered concern about the shift from CAAG to a Design Panel and requesting that membership of the Panel reflect the conservation and sustainability expertise in the City and proposing that the membership criteria for any Design Panel should be open and transparent'. The current proposals differ considerably from those considered by the commission.
The RIBA greatly assisted with establishing the original architect's panel and has been most helpful in discussing and developing ideas around the new panel. The RIBA region and local branch chair have been consulted on this report.
Review following consultation
The original report proposed finding savings from the joining of the functions of the architect's panel and the Conservation Areas Advisory Group. Following consultation it is now clear that this cannot be achieved with the support of local amenity societies. As a consequence the proposals in this report merely refine existing arrangement in the light of current advice and best practice.
5 Interaction between advisory panels
Under present arrangements there is no forum for constructive discussion between CAAG and the architect's panel. CAAG representation on the proposed design panel therefore is desirable to debate the architectural and conservation merits of a scheme in a conservation area.
The RIBA regionally are talking to the Kent architecture centre about links between local design panels or architects panels and the regional panel so that major applications can be forwarded from one panel to another. Links between local design panels to establish some best practices are also being investigated. The RIBA's initiative to encourage dialogue between the regional design panel and local panels and their encouragement of joint working between local panels is welcomed and Council officers propose that the proposed Design Panel actively engage in both these exchanges.
6 The design panel
This review is part of the Council's response to the national agenda for urban renaissance to encourage excellence in design particularly in building and the public realm. The design panel will draw its membership from a broad range of design expertise to advise the Council in meeting it's aspiration as the lead city for architectural and urban design in the South East. The new panel also brings the Council in line with other advisory panels supported by CABE and English Heritage.
Terms of reference: .The primary focus of the group will be major development proposals affecting the city. Issues of wider design interest such as street design matters (and Public Art) should also be referred to the new panel.
Membership: It is proposed to create a panel made up from design expertise taken from a broad base (set out in para 3.2 of appendix 2 ) to tackle a wide range of design issues. Whilst it is proposed that architects make up the majority of the Design Panel, other design skills should be represented. A Panel established on these lines would be best placed to take a proactive part in promoting good design across the city whether in building, placement of works of art or street design. It is recommended that the design panel be drawn from a wider `pool' of members who will not be asked to attend every meeting. It is suggested that representation from local amenity groups be included when proposals fall into conservation areas. Amenity groups will wish to select members who have design skills to attend the design panel.
To keep the design panel to a manageable size it is recommended that a single meeting of the Design panel should not include more than 5-6 members. From the pool of skills a panel will be selected to meet the requirements of particular schemes under consideration. Consistency will need to be maintained by ensuring some continuity in panel membership.
Frequency of meetings: Major or significant applications will be taken to the Design panel. A priority will be to run the panel in a way that contributes to speed and efficiency in negotiating improvements to (primarily major) applications. This will require frequent meetings and it is considered that attendance could become quite onerous on professional people employed in design. (Hence the wider pool of members suggested in 6.2 above).
Education and promotion: It is suggested that an annual review meeting be an integral part of the working practice of the new panel so that lessons learned from previous schemes can be shared within the department. The Design panel will be encouraged to work closely with the Department to pro-actively promote and publicise the requirement for the highest quality design submissions and to encourage architectural competitions.
The Conservation Advisory Group
The Conservation Areas Advisory Group was seen as being part of a wider process of consulting with and engaging the local community in the planning process. The new group will remain focused around representing the views of local amenity groups.
Terms of Reference: It is proposed that the main focus of the Group be the monitoring and implementation of the Conservation strategy. It is proposed that the Group also comment upon:
applications having a significant impact upon conservation areas or listed buildings
Conservation Studies
Policy documents and advice notes
The Conservation Advisory Group will be a conduit to involve community groups in promotion of conservation schemes and seeking community comment upon council promoted schemes of improvement.
Membership: The membership will be drawn from representatives of amenity groups for a particular historic area of Brighton or Hove. The Conservation Advisory Group will not usually meet the designers or applicant's agent and consequently there is no need to unduly restrict the size of the forum.
Frequency of meetings: This will be kept under review but no change from the current frequency is currently proposed.
Servicing arrangements
It is hoped that the arrangements currently in place to service CAAG will be continued for the proposed Design Panel.
Meeting/Date |
Environment Committee December 2003 |
|
Report of |
Director Environment |
|
Subject |
Establishment of Design Panel |
|
Wards affected |
All |
|
|
|
|
Financial implications The June 2003 report proposed reducing commitment of officer resources to servicing consultative groups, releasing resources for policy development. This redistribution of resources cannot be achieved with the current proposal. Savings associated with the reduction of officer resources had not been included within the base budget so there will be no budget shortfall if the recommendations are accepted. Finance Officer consulted: Alasdair Ridley. Date 22/06/04 |
||
Legal implications It is not considered that this report gives rise to any Human Rights implications Legal officer consulted: Alison Gatherer 18.06.04 |
||
|
|
|
Corporate/Citywide implications The City Council is committed to consulting with its citizens. This report is consistent with that aim. The city is also committed to the very highest design quality in major developments and these panels are aimed at ensuring this is achieved. |
Risk assessment There a re no identified risks relating to the content of this report. |
|
Sustainability implications The current architect's panel actively promotes sustainable building. Every effort will be made to ensure that membership of the proposed design panel will incorporate expertise in and be supportive of sustainable development. |
Equalities implications There are no identified equalities implication directly implied by this report. Efforts will be made to encourage representation from ethic minorities on the panel and ensure that the proposed design panel actively promotes excellence in access for all. |
|
Implications for the prevention of crime and disorder Good design can be a positive measure in reducing crime. Panel members will be encouraged to pay attention to reduction of crime through good design and minimising opportunities for crime, in considering proposals. |
||
|
||
Background papers Report to Environment Committee June 2003 Comments of CAAG dated 28th May 2004 |
||
Contact Officer Rob Fraser, Head of Planning Strategy, Hove Town Hall, room 414 Tel 292380 |
||
Appendix 2
Design Panel
OBJECTIVES
1.1 Generally to act as a reference group to advise the Council on the design merits of major planning applications or Council proposals affecting the city and on the development of policies or measures to improve design standards in the city.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
2.1 To promote the objective of improving the standard of design within the city.
2,2 To encourage improved standards of submission that clearly illustrate the proposal under consideration.
2.3 To submit to the Council suggestions for action that will enhance standards of design or the improvement of the city.
2.4 To act as a source of advice on major planning applications and other proposals, that could affect the appearance of the city, its public spaces, roads, parks and gardens.
2.5 To assist in the development and formulation of policies to enhance the appearance of the city.
3 MEMBERSHIP
Membership of the panel shall include a broad based pool of people who have professional design skills. The core membership of the panel will be architects selected on behalf of the council by the RIBA and local amenity groups. Other members may include landscape architects, industrial designers, artists, highway engineers or others who have a proven background of developing design solutions.
Membership shall be open to design professionals engineers and artists (including -but not exclusively) members of recognised Institutes such as the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), the Institute of Historic Building Conservation (IHBC) the Royal Institute of Structural Engineers and the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) etc.
Due to the proposal to run meetings at frequent intervals (see below) the design panel be drawn from a wide `pool' of members who will be asked to attend every second or third meeting. Rather than try and recruit a definitive pool of advisers from commencement of the new panel people will be added to the pool as they become known to the Council. The RIBA will be asked to recruit a pool of architects from which members can be selected or rotated. The RIBA may, on occasion, be asked to invite specialist architects where a scheme before the council requires specialist knowledge. From the pool of skills officers will select a panel to meet the requirements of particular schemes under consideration.
A single meeting of the Design panel should not include more than 5-6 members, in order to keep the design panel to a manageable size to enable it to engage in constructive debate with the designers of schemes.
Consistency should be maintained either by ensuring some consistency in panel membership between the stages of development of a proposal or by ensuring a chair or vice chairs is present who can set the scene for the preceding discussion.
4 CONSTITUTION
The following parameters are suggested:
The panel shall be entirely advisory and shall not have executive powers.
The secretariat of the Group shall be officers of Brighton & Hove Council.
Officers of the Council shall produce agendas in consultation with the Chair.
The Chair and two vice chairs shall be elected from the membership annually.
There shall be an Annual Meeting of the forum in May of each year to which all members shall be invited at which the Chair and Vice Chair shall be elected.
Following the Annual Meeting of the forum, members will be invited to review schemes considered during that year and to draw lessons from schemes that the panel have considered with officers of the planning division.
The panel may establish sub-groups, or nominate members to represent their views at council meetings, sit on consultative or review panels (such as pubic art panels) as required.
Any nominee (or substitute) representing the group at such Council meetings or review panels shall be elected by a vote at a full meeting of the group
5 REPORTING
The Group shall principally report to the Policy and Resources (Planning Applications) Sub-Committee. However, the interests of the panel are relevant to a range of Council activities and other Committees may wish to consult the Group.
Record of comment: The minutes of the meeting shall record an agreed form of words that shall be reported as the comment of the group. So far as is practical the chair to approve the minutes within 5 working days of the meeting or production of a minute.
6 Frequency of meetings
The frequency of meetings shall be determined according to need by the Assistant director (City Planner) Environment. The primary current measure of performance in development control now is the time taken to determine planning applications. To meet government targets it is desirable to reduce any potential for delay in considering applications. Normally only major applications will be taken to the Design panel. A priority will be to run the panel in a way that contributes to speed and efficiency in negotiating improvements to (primarily major) applications. Members of the panel should be aware that this may require frequent meetings (see 3.3 above).
Education
The Design panel will be encouraged to work closely with the Department to pro-actively promote and publicise the requirement for the highest quality design submissions and to encourage architectural competitions to this end.
An annual review meeting shall be an integral part of the working practice of the panel. Members of the panel and officers will be able to review how successfully suggested improvements to schemes have been negotiated and to learn lessons from schemes that the panel have considered and have been determined or built.
Joint working: The panel will be encouraged to exchange best practice with adjoining design or architectural panels and to engage with the Regional design panel
Appendix 3
Code of conduct for all advisory panels reporting to Environment Committee
The chair of any group or panel shall be charged with ensuring the code of conduct is upheld.
The code of conduct shall apply to members of such groups, officers and invitees or those presenting to or attending the group.
The intention of the code is to ensure that meetings are conducted in a proper manner with due consideration for proberty.
The chair shall encourage a spirit of participation and the open and inclusive exchange of views.
Members of the panel, officers or applicants should not feel intimidated by the behaviour of others within the group or panel or those attending the meeting.
any breach of the Council's code of conduct shall be a breach of the Advisory groups code of conduct
All members shall respect the authority of the chair to conduct the meeting in an orderly and timely manner
Members of groups or panels covered by this code shall declare any financial, personal or business interest in any scheme or applications under consideration at the beginning of the meeting and shall withdraw from the room and take no part in the discussion of that item nor comment upon it subsequently. Likewise members should not take into consideration any previous personal, business or similar relationship in considering applications presented by persons they may know and should consider whether they should withdraw from the discussion under the above code. At the chairs discretion members may be asked to withdraw from discussion and leave the room if this is in doubt
[Rudeness, aggressive behaviour or any breach of common courtesy shown to another member of the group or panel, or to members of the council applicants or officers shall be a breach of the code.]*
[Any breach of common law, slanderous, malicious or otherwise actionable comment shall be a breach of the code (for the avoidance of doubt any racist, sexist, homophobic or similarly discriminatory comments shall be a breach of the code)]*
The advisory group or panels are primarily intended to give specialist advice or comment and members are therefore asked to refrain from expressing any overtly political viewpoint except where these are relevant in representing community opinion.
Any complaint regarding a breach of the code or unacceptable behaviour shall be considered immediately by the chair who may suspend the meeting or request that a member/officer/ invitee leave the meeting or refer the matter for legal opinion. At the discretion of the chair complaints may be the subject of an investigation or report to the next available meeting of the group or referral to the parent Council committee. At the discretion of the Director Environment complaints may be independently reported to the next available meeting of the parent Council committee.
* N.B. It has been advised by the legal section that the paragraphs in Square brackets be deleted, with the agreement of that section these have been left in place pending further consultation.
Appendix 4
FUTURE OF THE CAAG: comment of CAAG
N.B. It should be noted that the proposal in this report is considerably amended from that proposed in June 2003 and amendments to the proposal reflect comments received. Comments in appendix 4 reflect the proposals as framed in a recent draft of this report. The views of the individual amenity societies are attached as appendix 4a.
Comment of CAAG :- the group "welcomes the recommendation to retain a conservation advisory group.
further comments that:
i) the previous report to the Environment Cttee should be withdrawn,
ii) the title 'Conservation Consultative Forum' is not acceptable to the group, but that it should be named the 'Conservation Advisory Group'.
iii) the group will wish to continue to advise on conservation policy and street design matters, and on planning applications, including new buildings, that impact on the historic built environment,
iv) recommendations from the CAG should be reported in full to the planning applications sub committee, and any counter recommendation should be
justified,
v) the group would like to have had two members of CAG on the Design Panel (one with a design background, and if possible one from the conservation
area affected), but accept that as the Design Panel is such a small group, the CAG agree that it would be more practical to have one member with a design background, who would be expected to liaise with the member representing the area in which the application is sited.
vi) the group would like two representatives (one with a Design background and one to represent the area in which the work is to be sited) on the Community Art Panel, to advise on the acceptability of selected sites for a piece of public art at an early stage and before briefs are prepared,
vii) the group would like representatives from English Heritage and the RIBA (architects) to attend CAG more frequently,
viii) the group is concerned that the rights of the CAG member societies and their individual members to speak at planning applications sub
committee meetings is at the discretion of the committee chair. The group requests a report to a future meeting of CAAG on this subject..
Response to comments of CAAG:
ii) CAAG should become the Conservation Advisory Group, - this suggestion has already been incorporated as a recommendation in this report
iii) the group will wish to continue to advise on conservation policy and street design matters, and on planning applications, including new buildings, that impact on the historic built environment - The Terms of reference for the revised conservation Advisory Group accommodate these requests.
iv) ) recommendations from the CAG should be reported in full to the planning applications sub committee, and any counter recommendation should be
justified,. - This is covered by para 5.2 of the terms of reference that proposes the group agree a form of words that will be recorded as the CAG comment. It is proposed that this be normally reported verbatim. The case officers report should normally cover any reasons why the recommendation differs from consultations with CAG or advice from officers.
v) The CAAG would like to have two members of CAG on the Design Panel, etc. - It is hoped to keep meetings of the Design panel to a maximum of 5 members. The purpose of nominating one member of CAG was to ensure that the design panel had a means of communicating with CAG. The earlier proposal to have two amenity group members on the design panel was to reflect the proposal to bring CAAG to a close.
vi) ) the group would like two representatives (one with a Design background and one to represent the area in which the work is to be sited) on the Community Art Panel, to advise on the acceptability of selected sites for a piece of public art at an early stage and before briefs are prepared,. - this is outside the scope of this report. The suggestion will be forwarded to the art contribution steering group.
vii) the group would like representatives from English Heritage and the RIBA (architects) to attend CAG more frequently,. - this is outside the control of the Council but officers will encourage attendance.
viii) the group is concerned that the rights of the CAG member societies and their individual members to speak at planning applications sub
committee meetings is at the discretion of the committee chair. The group requests a report to a future meeting of CAAG on this subject... - this is outside the scope of this report as it concerns procedures of the sub committee but officers can explain current procedures.
Number of members in each society: ( for information)
The Brighton Society 72 households and amenity groups
Brunswick & Adelaide Residents Group 318
Hove Civic Society 387
Kingscliffe Society 394
Montpelier & Clifton Hill Association 346
North Laine Community Association 1,500 households
Preston & Old Patcham Society 109 households
Regency Society 400
Regency Square Area Society 200 households
Rottingdean Preservation Society 425 households, 630 members
Stanmer Preservation Society 20 households in the village and 120 members
West Hill Community Association 1,000 households.
Appendix 5
Conservation Advisory Group: Terms of Reference.
DRAFT November 2003
1. OBJECTIVES
1.1 Generally to act as a reference group to advise the Council on the implementation of the Conservation Strategy, on major planning applications or Council proposals affecting Conservation areas, Listed Buildings and on the development of policies for the protection of the historic built environment.
2. TERMS OF REFERENCE
2.1 To promote the objectives of conservation and to facilitate communication between the public and the Council on matters of conservation, historic buildings and archaeology.
2,2 To encourage the conservation and improvement of conservation areas, buildings of architectural or historic interest, other areas of historical interest and areas of archaeological interest within the city.
2.3 To submit to the Council suggestions for action which will preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas within Brighton and Hove and to encourage societies and individuals voluntarily to enhance their local environment.
2.4 To act as a source of advice on major planning applications and other proposals, including traffic calming or pedestrianisation proposals, that could affect the character of conservation areas , buildings of architectural or historic interest or historic parks and gardens.
2.5 To assist in the development and formulation of policies to enhance and protect conservation areas and buildings of architectural or historic interest in Brighton & Hove.
2.6 To report unauthorised work and conditions of planning permissions that have not been complied with.
3 MEMBERSHIP
3.1 A broad, locally based membership is desirable, to ensure that the council is able to effectively disseminate and collect local conservation information.
3.1.1 Local Groups and Societies: Membership should be drawn from representative organisations only, which are open to all residents or traders in an area without any selection criteria. Each organisation should hold regular meetings and an annual meeting at which officers of the organisation are democratically elected. Member groups should submit an annual report and the minutes of their AGM. The groups or societies should have as one of their stated or implied aims the conservation of the historic fabric or archaeological interest of their area.
3.1.2 That as far as possible the society or group should represent the whole (or a large proportion) of one of the designated conservation areas of Brighton and Hove.
3.1.3 That English Heritage be represented should they choose to attend.
3.1.4 That membership be open to representatives of Sussex Enterprise or other business or commercial organisations in Brighton and Hove (particularly those that have a significant presence in historic areas).
3.1.5 That membership be open to nominees from the national amenity societies (such as the National Trust , Victorian Society or Society for the Preservation of Ancient Buildings (SPAB))
3.1.6 That membership be open to nominees of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), the Institute of Historic Building Conservation (IHBC) the Royal Institute of Structural Engineers and the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI)
4 CONSTITUTION
The Group shall be entirely advisory and shall not have executive powers.
The secretariat of the Group shall be Brighton & Hove Council.
Agendas will be produced by officers of the Council in consultation with the Chair.
The Chair shall be elected from the membership annually.
There shall be an Annual Meeting of the Group in May of each year at which the Chair and Vice Chair shall be elected.
The Group may establish sub-groups as required.
The Group shall advise the Council on nominations for new members of the Group.
Any sub-groups, nominee (or substitute) representing the group at Council meetings shall be elected by a vote at a full meeting of the group
5 REPORTING
The Group shall principally report to the Policy and Resources (Planning Applications) Sub-Committee. However, the interests of the Group are relevant to a range of Council activities and other Committees may wish to request reports from the Group, when there is a need for input from a conservation perspective.
Record of comment: The minutes of the meeting shall record an agreed form of words that shall be reported as the comment of the group. So far as is practical the chair to approve the minutes within 5 working days of the meeting or the production of the minutes.
COMMITTEE REPORT APPENDIX
