Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Lammas and Peake.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 20 December 2023.

The record of the meeting held on 20 December 2023 was agreed and signed by the Chairperson as correct.

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

There were none.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

Councillor Etheridge stated that he attended meetings for Frindsbury and Cliffe Woods Parish Councils and explained that if any planning applications were discussed there which were due to be considered by the Medway Council Planning Committee meeting, he would not take part in the discussion at the Parish Council meetings.

Councillor Pearce referred to planning application MC/23/2402 – 42 Main Road, Hoo St Werburgh, Rochester, Medway and informed the Committee that as he wished to address the Committee as Ward Councillor and was a Parish Councillor and had submitted a representation on this planning application, he would take no part in the determination of the application. 

Gillingham South Ward

Change of use of the existing building including the construction of a 4th floor extension to the rear and a 5th floor roof extension to create fifty seven self-contained flats with private terraces/balconies and associated refuse/cycle storage areas, car parking, green roof and landscaping.

Discussion:

The DM Manager outlined the application in detail for the change of use of the existing building including the construction of a fourth floor extension to the rear and a fifth floor roof extension to create fifty seven self-contained flats with private terraces/balconies and associated refuse/cycle storage areas, car parking, green roof and landscaping.

The DM Manager brought Members’ attention to the section in the report that no S106 obligations or affordable housing were being pursued, other than bird mitigation.  He explained that this was due to the viability of the scheme and that the submitted viability assessment had been independently assessed by the Council’s viability consultant. 

The DM Manager also brought Member’s attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which showed the Council was able to demonstrate

3.3 years supply of housing, however, this was still below the required 5-year supply.

The Chairperson and Chief Planning Officer explained that this was the first planning application reported to Committee, since May 2023, that required a viability assessment.  As many Members of the Planning Committee were new to the committee, a viability training session was scheduled for 12 February 2024 and 48 Green Street, Gillingham would be used a case study.  

It was, therefore, recommended that this planning application be deferred until the training had taken place and would come back to the next Planning Committee meeting on 14 February 2024.  The recommendation of a deferral was agreed. 

Decision:      

DEFERRED due to the undertaking of a viability training session on 12 February 2024.  

Fort Horsted Ward

Construction of a detached dwelling with associated parking, bin and cycle store - demolition of existing side projection.

Discussion:

The Planner outlined the application in detail for the construction of a detached dwelling with associated parking, bin and cycle store and the demolition of the existing side projection.

The Planner brought Member’s attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which amended the wording of the officer’s recommendation for refusal due to the National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) being updated in December 2023.

The Chief Planning Officer explained that although Medway Council’s housing land supply was well below the required 5 year supply, this development would only add one additional dwelling and it was considered that the harm to the character and appearance of the area would outweigh the benefit of the housing land supply.

Decision:      

REFUSED for the amended reason, which should read:

1.                The proposal, by virtue of its narrow width and lower ridge height than the existing dwelling, would result in a cramped, contrived and alien form of development, that would not relate well to the existing street scene of large width dwellings or the existing spatial pattern of development within the locality and would therefore be harmful to the character and appearance of the area.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies BNE1 and H4 of the Local Plan and paragraphs 72, 131 and 135 of the NPPF.

Hoo St Werburgh and High Halstow Ward

Construction of 2 bedroom detached bungalow with attached garage accessed off Coombe Road.

Discussion:

Councillor Pearce withdrew from the meeting to speak as Ward Councillor.

The Senior Planner outlined the application in detail for the construction of a two-bedroom detached bungalow with attached garage accessed off Coombe Road.

The Senior Planner drew Members’ attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which proposed changes to conditions 5 and 11.  A further letter of representation from the Independent Group had been submitted.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Pearce addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and outlined the following points:

• It was important that that the previous two planning applications, for a chalet bungalow, were refused.  A two-storey chalet bungalow would have detrimentally impacted on 42 Main Road, a locally important and attractive historic building. 
• A proposal that the brickwork should be painted white to match 42 Main Road, as this would be in keeping with the nearby properties. 
• Pleased to see the amended condition 5 which was now seeking the submission of all external materials including roof tiles and brickwork and the amended condition 11 to remove Permitted Development Rights for extensions, alterations and outbuildings.
• As the details for the planning application were reverting to a bungalow, the Ward Councillors for Hoo and High Halstow Ward now supported this application.

The Committee discussed the application in detail and were satisfied with the amended conditions 5 and 11.

Decision:      

Approved with conditions 1 to 11 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report including an amendment to condition 5 which seeks the submission of all external materials.  This would include the roof tiles and brickwork to ensure it would be appropriate for the area.   Condition 11 to remove Permitted Development Rights for extensions, alterations and outbuildings.

Councillor Pearce returned to the meeting.

Rainham South East Ward

Retrospective - Construction of a single storey outbuilding.

Discussion:

The Principal Planner outlined the retrospective application in detail of the construction of a single storey outbuilding.

The Principal Planner explained the history of the previous planning applications and specifically the permissions that had been granted for a day room as well as the previous refusals for large outbuildings which were considered over sized for a day room.

The Chief Planning Officer, following a question from Members, explained that if Members followed the officer’s recommendation and voted for a refusal, as this was for a retrospective planning application, they were effectively authorising formal enforcement action to be taken.

Decision:      

REFUSED for the reason set out in the report.

Strood West Ward

Construction of a two-storey side extension and creation of an internal link stairwell to existing flats/maisonettes to facilitate creation of a 3-bedroom dwelling together with associated cycle parking and waste storage - demolition of detached garage (resubmission of MC/23/1013).

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined the application in detail for the construction of a two-storey side extension and creation of an internal link stairwell to existing flats/maisonettes to facilitate creation of a 3-bedroom dwelling together with associated cycle parking and waste storage - demolition of detached garage (resubmission of MC/23/1013).

The Senior Planner explained that on a previous planning application for four flats which went to appeal, the Inspector did not agree that parking, activity  levels and traffic generation were of concern, although the appeal was dismissed on other grounds.

Decision:      

Approved with conditions 1 to 12 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.