Worthing’s original masterplan cost £150,000 – which was mainly from SEEDA money. Masterplans today don’t have that money.

The masterplan looks at the town centre, with lots of support for small independent businesses.

The other area is the seafront which should be the focus; it’s underused, under visited and doesn’t link to the town centre.

The original masterplan included wide consultation – with schools, local residents, businesses and representative organisations.

It gives a 15-20 year vision for Worthing. It’s a blueprint to guide development into the future. It was adopted by the council and one of the effects it has had is to guide the Local Development Framework’s Core Strategy. Worthing is one of the few towns to have adopted the LDF and Core Strategy.

Unfortunately, while the masterplan did attract investor interest, it dates to just before the recession; the interest disappeared overnight.

Insider knowledge suggests, however, that the developers are now looking at Worthing – because the Core Strategy allows developers to look at short timescales for development in Worthing.

The current masterplan should be a basis for the Made In Worthing masterplan; it gives a good evidence base for future work. We need to work on a masterplan that has teeth and links into key partners. The ‘localism’ agenda means that we could create a Neighbourhood Plan for Worthing – councils have to do this as it’s enshrined in government white paper.

Also within the revised government planning bill is the community right-to-buy which should be considered.

The reason we shouldn’t start from scratch is that the council did it – they won’t accept a new plan without knowledge of the existing plan. The current masterplan is broad-brush and will take 10-15 years. We can prepare somethign today which is 1-5 years and slots into the bigger framework.

Questions:

@masakepic interesting that current masterplan shows whole of current seafront as ‘inactive and having poor frontages’

Paul Eustice: inward investment could lead to gentrification, low price small units should be maintained

Dale Thomson: large scale investment can lead to loss of identity; Stratford is essentially rebranded as Westfield, for example

Paul Eustice: easy as resident to miss the amount of activity in the sea; you could arrive in Worthing and never find out about active seafront use

@twobelowzero: people visiting can miss Worthing’s gems. Town centre legibility is poor.

@itskickingoff: I felt at home staying in USA recently – because downtown Los Angeles is Worthing. It has lots of lovely old Art Deco nick-nacks. Worthing is special because lots of bits haven’t been knocked down, like in Brighton. Need to rearrange the furniture to draw attention to best bits

@itskickingoff We need more investment in long-term grassroots development – eg Red Herring in Brighton started with derelict building.

@itskickingoff what are Worthing’s gems – like Sea Lane Cafe? Do we celebrate or just leave them alone?

@dougald signage and waymarking is an old fashioned approach to content production; it’s pre-internet. How about using a wiki model for signage – editable, crowdsourced?

@portobelly created signage for Greenbelt; trouble is people add their own signs which destroy clarity

@masakepic there are several types of signs currently in use in Worthing; we need more clarity

@itskickingoff the question of who gets to decide what is called creates the urban narrative; we now have conflict between people in council and people. Signage is way into the discussion – the real discussion is who decides?

Paul Eustice we have to find ways to keep the old but use it well

@twobelowzero we need to identify and find best use for existing assets to create local distinctiveness. Regeneration is seen as a forward path, progress.