Issue - meetings

Background:

This report sought approval to adopt the Rochester Riverside Development Brief and Masterplan (September 2014) as a Supplementary Planning Document to the 2003 Local Plan. Copies of these documents had been included within Supplementary Agenda No.1.

The revised Development Brief and Masterplan established a vision for a high quality residential living environment with a complementary mix of uses. It promoted the development of a new neighbourhood that complemented historic Rochester, ensuring Rochester’s existing and future residents and visitors benefit from the area’s regeneration. The Masterplan included new residential units, a range of small office spaces, a hotel, shops and restaurants, and a new ‘Station Quarter’ focused around the new Rochester Station. The scheme included a new primary school as well as other community facilities.

The report gave details of the six week public consultation exercise undertaken, outlining the comments received and the Council’s response to the comments and issues raised. The report outlined the changes made to the revised Development Brief and Masterplan in light of the comments received. It was noted that the Council’s Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered the draft documents as part of the consultation process and the Committee’s view were set out within Appendix 2 to the report.

Alternative options to adopting the revised Development Brief and Masterplan, such as a market led review, were considered within the report.

During the discussion of this item, it was noted that the report and Brief acknowledged a small reduction to the Parking Standards for Rochester Riverside (1.6 spaces per unit as opposed to the Council's Interim Parking Standards average of 1.85 spaces per unit). Members were advised that the Council's Interim Parking Standards policy did allow for deviations where it could be demonstrated that the site sits within an urban context and has sustainable transport links and amenities close by. The Cabinet considered that Rochester was a unique development site and, as reported, the parking standards were considered appropriate in the light of the site’s urban context, transport links and the necessity to deliver a viable, high quality development. The Cabinet also noted that the Development Brief referred specifically to further flexibility in providing additional spaces at evenings and weekends via a resident permit system for the Medway Council owned long stay car park, as well as the future potential to create a multi-storey car park at the site if additional spaces are required now, or in the future.

It was noted that a number of minor typographical errors in the Development Brief and Masterplan, which would need to be addressed ahead of final publication.