Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Etheridge, Myton and Peake.

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 3.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

Gillingham North Ward

Outline application with some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for demolition and redevelopment of site to provide new waterside business and enterprise campus including access.

Discussion:

The Assistant Head of Legal Services (Place) reminded Members that the only factors that could be considered in determining the application were planning matters. The ownership of the land, who the applicant was, the end user of the land and any issues related to existing leases of land were not material planning considerations.  In the determination of this application, Members should consider the policy framework, as outlined in the officer’s report, along with the officer’s presentation.  

The Principal Planner outlined the application, in detail, with some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for demolition and redevelopment of site to provide new waterside business and enterprise campus including access.

The Principal Planner brought Members’ attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet, which stated that the correct ward for the site, was St Mary’s Island Ward, however, the access was within the Gillingham North Ward.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Tejan addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and raised the following concerns:

• If approved, the decision would affect the lives and livelihoods of local families and could result in a significant loss of Medway jobs.  These families were the backbone of our national economy and the social economic vacuum caused could last decades or centuries.
• The loss of the last working dock in the South East of England. The closure of Chatham Docks could significantly increase Co2 emissions, which would impact the health and wellbeing of the residents.
• The retention of manufacturing was critical, and the economic development should not come at the cost of the future community welfare. 
• There were nearly 200 objections to this planning application and a petition with over 2,000 signatures to Save Chatham Docks showed how important it was to save the docks.
• The timing of the determination of this planning application was of concern, it seemed rushed and not appropriate in the run up to a General Election, especially as the Secretary of State would consider this application, which was one of national importance.  

The Committee discussed the planning application in detail noting the officer’s presentation and the points raised by the Ward Councillor. 

The Chief Planning Officer clarified that the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Department (DLUHC) issued an Article 31 Holding Direction which stated that Medway Council could not issue any decision notice to approve the application, prior to confirmation on whether the Secretary of State considered it appropriate to call in the application for their consideration.  However, DLUHC officers had encouraged Medway Council to take this planning application to Committee, for Members to consider, to assist the Secretary of State in his/her assessment of the material planning matters.

Members asked for clarification as to why they could approve recommendation A and B if the Secretary of State would make the final decision.  The Chief Planning Officer explained that Members could resolve to approve the application and the Secretary of State would then be notified.  The decision notice could not be issued until the Secretary of State had either formally  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

This report informs Members on the amount of Section 106 funding received between October 2023 and March 2024 and sets out what the contributions must be spent on according to the Section 106 agreements. This report is submitted for information to assist the Committee in monitoring the contributions which developers have agreed to as part of new development schemes.

Discussion:

The Chief Planning Officer gave a summary of the amount of S106 funding received from October 2023 to March 2024 and referred to Appendix 1 to 3 in the report. 

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.

This report summarises the content of agenda item 7, which, in the opinion of the proper officer, contains exempt information within one of the categories in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. It is a matter for the Committee to determine whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of documents.

Decision:

The Committee agreed to exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of agenda item 7  (Planning Enforcement Report)  because consideration of these matters in public would disclose information falling within paragraph 6 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as specified in agenda item 6 (Exclusion of Press and Public) and, in all the circumstances of the case, the Committee considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

This is the report to Committee informing Members of enforcement proceedings during the period 1 October 2023 – 31 March 2024.  

 Discussion:

The Chief Planning Officer gave a summary of the planning enforcements proceedings referred to in Appendix A of the report.

The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that he was happy to take any questions and respond directly outside of the meeting. 

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.