Agenda and draft minutes

·        10 March 2010

The record of the meeting held on 10 March 2010 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Kenneth Bamber, Hunter and O’Brien.

The Chairman will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report. 

The Chairman accepted the following urgent items for consideration at this meeting:

Item 6 and 10 – Century Buildings Site, Rochester – On the basis that the Council had agreed pursuant to judicial review proceedings that a report on whether to make a modification order and a discontinuance order in respect of blocks at the Century Buildings site would be considered at this meeting of the Planning Committee.

Item 11 – Planning Application MC/09/1628 – National Grid Property Holdings Grain - On the basis that it was necessary for the Committee to consider amending the Section 106 agreement for planning application MC/09/1682 at this meeting so as to retain funding from external sources.

Item 12 – Planning Application MC/09/2626 – Land bounded by The Brook, Queen Street, Slicketts Hill and Cross Street, Chatham – On the basis that it was necessary for the Committee to give consideration to imposing an additional requirement in the Section 106 Agreement relating to planning application MC/09/2626 at this meeting prior to the issue of the planning permission. A report agreeing to impose the Section 106 terms required by this Committee was due to be considered by Council at its meeting on 15 April 2010.

(i)                 The Chairman reminded Members to ensure that their nameplates were turned towards the public gallery and to speak directly into the microphones.

(ii)               The Chairman reminded Members that if they leave the room for any part of the introduction or discussion on a planning application, they should not rejoin the Committee for the debate and decision-making for that particular application.

(iii)             The Chairman also announced that after consideration of the urgent items, there would be a short adjournment to enable the Head of Legal to leave the meeting to seal a document.

(a)       Personal interests under the Medway Code of Conduct

            A Councillor who declares a personal interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

(b)       Prejudicial interests under the Medway Code of Conduct

            A Councillor who declares a personal and prejudicial interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, must withdraw from the room and take no part in the debate or vote on the matter.

            Councillors who have declared a personal and prejudicial interest may make representations, answer questions and give evidence before leaving the room but only  if members of the public are allowed to attend for the same purpose.

            If an interest is not declared at the outset of the meeting, it should be disclosed as soon as the interest becomes apparent. 

Councillor Andrews declared a personal interest in planning application MC/09/2635 (Fenn House Farm, Fenn Street, St Mary Hoo, Rochester) on the basis that he had received a letter from the applicant. Councillor Andrews removed himself from the Committee for consideration and determination of this application.

Councillor Andrews declared a personal interest in agenda item 9 (Enforcement Proceedings) on the basis that he was a member of the Hoo Institute.

Councillor Baker declared a personal interest in planning application MC/09/2635 (Fenn House Farm, Fenn Street, St Mary Hoo, Rochester) on the basis that he had received a letter from the applicant. However, he confirmed that he had not expressed a view on the application and therefore would speak and vote on the application.

Councillor Hicks declared a personal interest in planning application MC/09/2635 (Fenn House Farm, Fenn Street, St Mary Hoo, Rochester) on the basis that he had received a letter from the applicant and had asked for this application to come to committee for determination. However, he confirmed that he had not expressed a view on the application and therefore would speak and vote on the application.

Councillor Hubbard referring to planning application MC/10/0381 (59-61 Bryant Road, Strood) advised that he would remove himself from the Committee and address the Committee as Ward Councillor on this application as he had had discussions with both the applicant and residents.

The Development Manager declared a personal interest in planning application MC/09/2219 (10 Hollywood Lane, Wainscott, Strood) on the basis that one of the objectors was known to him and he confirmed that he had not had any involvement in the processing of this application.

Discussion:

The Committee received an urgent report seeking approval to amending the Section 106 agreement approved by the Committee at its meeting on 10 March 2010 (Minute 650(A) refers).

This report had been accepted by the Chairman as an urgent item on the basis that it was necessary for the Committee to consider amending the Section 106 Agreement at this meeting so as to retain funding from external sources.

Decision:

The Section 106 Agreement approved at Minute 650(A) relating to planning application MC/09/1682 (National Grid Property Holdings, Grain) be concluded in a form that permits the development to proceed in the event that the Stoke Highway Works cannot be undertaken, on the basis of payment of the £5,375,000 from the developer to be used by the Council on such other highway improvement works between the Site and the Four Elms Roundabout (inclusive) as the Council decides.

Discussion:

The Committee received an urgent report requesting approval of an additional head of term for the Section 106 agreement relating to planning application MC/09/2626 (Land bounded by The Brook, Queen Street, Slicketts Hill and Cross Street, Chatham) approved on 10 March 2010 (Minute 650(B) refers)

This report had been accepted by the Chairman as urgent for consideration at this meeting on the basis that it was necessary to consider this matter prior to issue of the planning permission and on the basis that a report on the imposition of the Section 106 terms was due to be considered by Full Council on 15 April 2010.

Decision:

The following additional term of the required Section 106 agreement for planning application MC/09/2626 be approved and included in the report to Full Council on 15 April 2010:

(vi) A requirement that 25% of the housing units to be provided on the site be provided as affordable housing units in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Council’s Guide to Developer Contributions.

This report relates to the site known as Century Buildings, 22/26 Victoria Street, Rochester.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report circulated prior to the meeting setting out the current position with regard to the site known as Century Buildings and located at 22/26 Victoria Street, Rochester. A site plan was circulated at the meeting.

The Chairman had accepted this report as urgent for consideration at this meeting on the basis that the Council had agreed pursuant to the judicial review proceedings that a report on whether to make a modification order and a discontinuance order in respect of blocks at the Century Buildings site would be considered at this meeting. However, the Chairman stated that she recognised that the report was very complex and that Members had had limited time in which to read the report in great detail. She therefore suggested that it might be beneficial for consideration of the report to be deferred at this stage and, for the Committee to visit the site so as to have a greater understanding of the issues.

Decision:

Consideration of this report be deferred to enable the Committee to undertake a visit to the site to enable Members to have a greater understanding of the site layout and the various blocks referred to in the report.

The Development Manager and Principal Planner reported upon the applications contained within the schedule of planning applications as follows:

Strood Rural

Demolition of existing brick 2 storey garage building and change of use from garage to residential construction of 3 no. blocks containing 15 no. residential units. 

Discussion:

This application had been the subject of a site visit on 27 March 2010 at which the Senior Planner had set out the details of the application, plans, a summary of the representations and the planning issues to be considered as they related to principle and density, character and appearance of the street scene, amenities of neighbours of the site, impact on parking and highway conditions. The Transport Officer had been present at the site visit and had explained the Vehicle Parking Standards in response to residents concerns.

Local Residents had raised a number of issues at the site visit and these were summarised on the supplementary agenda advice sheet along with a summary of discussions at the site visit.

Since despatch of the agenda, a petition signed by 13 residents had been received in support of the application and the Environment Agency had also advised that it had no objection subject to conditions dealing with contamination issues. One further letter of objection had also been received along with a letter from the Frindsbury and Wainscott Community Association also objecting to the application. A summary of these additional objections was set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

During discussion on the application, Councillor Hubbard referred to the summary of the debate at the site visit and advised that the comments that had been attributed to him were incorrect and that these comments had been made by another person. He requested that this correction be noted.

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 22 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Hempstead and Wigmore

Application for new planning permission to replace an extant outline planning permission allowed on appeal (MC2007/0712, APP/A2280/A/07/2047623 for 4 detached four bedroom houses with associated access) in order to extend the time limit for implementation.

Discussion:

It was reported that since despatch of the agenda one further letter of objection had been received reiterating views already set out within the report.

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 6 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Hempstead and Wigmore

Construction of two storey rear extension (roof lights front and rear) 

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 3 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report. 

Strood Rural

Raising of roof height to provide first and second floor living space; part two storey part single storey side and rear extension and porch to front (demolition of existing garage). 

Discussion:

The Principal Planner referred to a revised plan received prior to the meeting.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Mason spoke on this application as Ward Councillor.

Decision:

Consideration of this application be deferred pending a site visit. 

Luton and Wayfield

Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission (MC2003/1285 – Re-development of existing site for residential purposes), in order to extend the time limit for implementation 

Decision:

Approved subject to:

(A)              the applicant entering into a deed of variation from the initial Section 106 agreement to provide the following:

(i)                 contribution of £6,850 per pupil place required for secondary school provision and £6,000 per pupil place required for expansion of existing primary school or £7,000 per pupil place required for new build;

(ii)               the provisions of affordable housing at 25% of the total number of residential units proposed;

(iii)             a £20,000 contribution towards traffic calming measures and pedestrian safety improvements in the immediate area;

(iv)             a £20,000 contribution towards the improvement of play equipment on Luton recreation ground;

(v)               to require applicants to enter into Section 278 agreement for improvements to site access; and

(B)              conditions 1 – 11 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Strood South

Construction of 2 three-bedroomed houses 

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 - 3 and 5 and 6 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report and an amended condition 4 as follows:

4.                  No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping (hard and soft) and boundary treatment. These details shall include existing and proposed site levels(including cross sections through the site) hard surfacing materials, planting plans (including replacement tree planting), written specifications; schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers where appropriate; implementation programme. Details shall also include specific measures to mitigate against impact on outlook along the western boundary of the site.  All hard and soft landscaping and boundary treatment shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

All planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be implemented during the first planting season following occupation of the buildings or completion of the development, whichever is the earlier.  Any trees or plants which within 5 years of planting are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless the Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason:  Pursuant to condition 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality, in accordance with Policy BNE1 and BNE6 of the Medway Local Plan 2003.

Rainham South

Conversion of existing garage to form annex and construction of a detached garage to rear. 

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 5 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report. 

Peninsula

Demolition of existing building and erection of a pair of semi-detached 3 bedroom houses with associated parking. 

Discussion:

This application had been the subject of a site visit on 27 March 2010 at which the Planner had set out the basis of the application, the plans, a summary of representations and set out the planning issues for members to consider as they related to matters of principle, residential amenity for neighbours, impact on the countryside and Special Landscape Area along with impacts on the highway.

A summary of points raised at the site visit by local residents along with a  summary of the debate was set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

Since despatch of the agenda, one further letter had been received in support of the application.

Decision:

Refused on the grounds set out in the report.

Strood North

Construction of a two storey extension at rear to accommodate an extension to shop and pharmacy at ground floor level with two self contained one bedroom flats over. 

Discussion:

Since despatch of the agenda, three letters had been passed to the Planning Office by Councillor Hubbard from local residents, two of which expressed support for the application in terms of the community benefits although one had expressed some concern over parking. The third letter from the immediate neighbour expressed reservations regarding the impact on themselves but felt that there may be a way forward in terms of attention to detailing which may allow the pharmacy to expand.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Hubbard spoke on the application as Ward Councillor.

Decision:

Consideration of this application be deferred pending a site visit.  

Exempt and confidential items are not available to the press and public but a brief summary of the contents may be found under each heading.

Any press or public that are present at the meeting may be asked to leave at this point, as the items to be discussed have sensitive information in them and the Local Government Act 1972 allows for this to happen because the information relates to an individual.

The Committee agreed to ask the press and public to leave the meeting because the following items contained sensitive information relating to current legal proceedings. The information was considered to be exempt under paragraph 6 of part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. 

This report sets out action taken by the Environmental Enforcement Team with regard to Section 215 issues. 

The Committee received and noted a report setting out action taken by the Environmental Enforcement Team with regard to Section 215 issues for the period October – December 2009.

The Committee expressed their appreciation to the Environmental Enforcement Manager and his team for the work undertaken during the last quarter on Section 215 enforcement.

This report sets out enforcement proceedings for the period October 2 – December 2009.

The Committee received and noted a report setting out Enforcement Proceedings for the period October – December 2009.

A supplementary report was circulated detailing more up to date information on various cases and setting out a number of new cases being investigated.

The Development Manager agreed to provide Councillor Bowler with an update on case number 119.

Officers were requested to investigate possible enforcement action in respect of a site identified in Thomas Street, Rochester.

Officers agreed to investigate the current situation in respect of the site referred to at Case 157 of the main report.