Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Anang, Gulvin and Hamandishe.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 22 October 2025.

The record of the meeting held on 22 October 2025 was agreed by the Committee 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 often attended meetings of Frindsbury and Cliffe Woods Parish Councils and explained that if any planning applications were ever 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 Campbell referred to planning application MC/25/0753 Former St John Fisher School site, 79 Maidstone Road, Chatham Medway and informed the Committee that as she wished to address the Committee as Ward Councillor on this planning application, she would take no part in the determination of the application.

This technical guidance outlines the requirements and best practices for Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) in planning applications and condition discharge submissions within Medway, ensuring alignment with national policy and local flood risk strategies. It provides detailed expectations for SuDS design, implementation, verification, and maintenance across various development types, supporting improved surface water management and flood resilience.

Discussion:

The Senior Flood, Drainage and Specialist Projects Officer gave Members a summary of this technical guidance which outlined the requirements and best practices for Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) in planning applications and condition discharge submissions within Medway, ensuring alignment with national policy and local flood risk strategies.  The report provided detailed expectations for SuDS design, implementation, verification and maintenance across various development types, supporting improved surface water management and flood resilience.  

The Senior Flood, Drainage and Specialist Projects Officer informed Members that Cabinet had approved to adopt the technical guidance on 18 November 2025.

The Senior Flood, Drainage and Specialist Projects Officer advised that as the Lead Local Flood Authority and a statutory consultee, this technical guidance would be referenced against all future planning applications as a material planning consideration in the determination of those applications.  Hence the presentation to members in advance of their consideration of the Planning applications on the Committee agenda.    

The Senior Flood, Drainage and Specialist Projects Officer explained that she reviewed the weekly planning applications list and corresponded with the relevant Planning Officer if further flood risk information was required.

Decision:      

The Committee noted the report.

Rainham South East Ward

T1- Oak - fell to ground and treat the stem to stop regrowth.

Discussion:

The Tree Specialist Consultant outlined the application in detail for T1 - Oak - fell to ground and treat the stem to stop regrowth.

The Committee considered the application noting that if the Planning Committee refused to fell the oak tree, the Council could be liable for costs. 

The Tree Specialist Consultant confirmed that while the applicant had submitted what was required to determine the application, the evidence provided to support the application was not comprehensive.  It was normal, in an Arboricultural Report, to have various soil readings submitted at different depths, this only had one reading at one depth. The moisture content showed the soil was very dry, however, there was no evidence that this was due to the tree, it could have been from other factors.  Compared to London clay standards, the soil was very dry but as only one reading was submitted, that could be due to other factors including gravel underneath.  She confirmed that the applicant, as a non-tree expert, may not have been aware of the requirement to provide multiple samples.  The basic level information was likely provided by a loss adjuster.  Often insurers recommend the removal of a tree as they considered that was the only way to protect the property.  She explained that only at the point that the planning application was refused, would the Council be responsible for costs. 

The Tree Specialist Consultant confirmed that the oak tree was approximately 150 years old, which was not even halfway through its life cycle.

Members acknowledged that the oak tree could draw out the moisture in the soil, however, this year had been a very dry summer, and this may have been the reason for this result.

The Tree Specialist Consultant advised that once Members determined this application and if they decided to refuse the planning application, the applicant may not be able to sell their property and would struggle to re-mortgage if underpinning was required and while the works were taking place, they would have to move out.  Although it may be that underpinning would not be required.

Members stated that the oak tree was a valuable feature within the skyline and was part of the character of the area.

The Chief Planning Officer clarified that if the application was refused and the applicant claimed against the decision, the Council would require more information as part of any insurance claim as only the basic information was provided.

The Tree Specialist Consultant confirmed that if the applicant had submitted their planning application on the planning portal, the Planning Team would not have been able to change the planning application.  Members asked whether advice could be added to the Medway website which could inform applicants on what evidence would be necessary to substantiate an application to fell due to subsidence caused by surrounding trees.  

Following a question as to whether a replacement tree would need to be sought if the tree was felled, the Tree Specialist Consultant confirmed that as this oak tree was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 447.

Fort Pitt Ward

Demolition of existing buildings and structures and construction of a new food retail store (Use Class E(a)), with access, car and cycle parking, landscaping and associated works.

Councillor Campbell withdrew from the meeting to speak as a Ward Councillor.

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined the application in detail for the demolition of existing buildings and structures and construction of a new food retail store (Use Class E(a)), with access, car and cycle parking, landscaping and associated works.

The Senior Planner brought Member’s attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which amended Recommendation B by adding another S106 contribution, additional representations and amendments to the Planning Appraisal in the report.

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

• Although there was a need for supermarkets, there was no need for a supermarket at this location.  The local corner shops currently served the residents of the local area. The Aldi at Horsted Retail Park was only a few minutes’ drive away.
• Concerns regarding the amount of heritage in the area and the fact that the store would be close to the cemetery, which was used by local residents.  There would be a lot of noise during the construction process which would disturb the peace and solace you would find in the cemetery.
• Disagreed with the assessment of the traffic, there was only one lane of traffic in each direction and this was a common place for accidents or roadworks.  Adding construction vehicles would not be practicable and having three or four roads leading into one, would create a congested junction. 
• The entrance onto Maidstone Road would not be safe due to the trees blocking visibility.  Would they use other local roads to avoid any congestion?
• The traffic at the Aldi at Horsted Retail Park regularly gets backed up as there were not enough parking spaces, would this be the same on this site, would this result in customers parking in the neighbouring streets?

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Maple addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and outlined the following points in support of the application:

• This was a balanced application with residents for and against this development, however, he understood how difficult the impact to local residents could be.
• He supported the job opportunities which would be 40 long term jobs within the Aldi store and from the construction process.
• Access to local supermarkets for residents without a car, and having this close by, would be important.
• This could alleviate the traffic at the other Aldi Store.
• Two additional conditions to be added:  within the construction plan to have the potential to have regular meetings with the developers for residents to raise any concerns and an agreement for a quarterly meeting with Aldi, once opened, for residents to speak to staff and raise any issues or concerns.

Members agreed to the additional two conditions that the Ward Councillor suggested.

The Committee discussed the planning application noting the points raised by the Ward Councillors and suggested within condition 11, could swift bricks be included. 

The Senior Planner confirmed that under condition 17, relating to sustainable transport and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 448.

Construction of a terrace of four dwellings with associated parking and landscaping.

Discussion:

The Service Manager - Development Management outlined the application in detail for the construction of a terrace of four dwellings with associated parking and landscaping.

Decision:      

Approved with conditions 1 to 15 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Cuxton, Halling and Riverside Ward

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) to allow for a minor material amendment to planning permission MC/22/2915 for the addition of loft floors to all units except unit 6 and the provision of an entrance gate.

Discussion:

The Service Manager - Development Management outlined the application in detail for the variation of condition 2 (approved plans) to allow for a minor material amendment to planning permission MC/22/2915 for the addition of loft floors to all units except unit 6 and the provision of an entrance gate.

Following a query from a Member, the Service Manager – Development Management confirmed that the reason this planning application had come to the Planning Committee was because there had been 5 or more representations contrary to the officer’s recommendation.  

Decision:      

Approved with conditions 1 to 9 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Lordswood and Walderslade Ward

Reserved Matters application for Phase 2 (for the construction of 36 residential units together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks) pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

Discussion:

The Principal Planner gave one presentation for agenda items 10, 11 and 12, however, discussions and the decision were made individually for each planning application.

The Principal Planner outlined the Reserved Matters application for Phase 2 (for the construction of 36 residential units together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks) pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

The Principal Planner explained that discussions were ongoing regarding the school site, once handed over to the Local Authority, a planning application would be submitted.

Decision:      

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

Lordswood and Walderslade Ward

Reserved Matters application for Phase 3 (For  the construction of 263 dwellings including houses, apartments, convenience store together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks)pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

Discussion:

The Principal Planner outlined the Reserved Matters application for Phase 3 (For  the construction of 263 dwellings including houses, apartments, convenience store together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks)pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

The Committee discussed the application in detail, and a Member drew attention to the new Spine Road in the development and whether it would be wide enough to accommodate more traffic which would include large refuse lorries going to the local household waste and recycling centre which was located on Shawstead Road.  The Highways Consultant confirmed that he had reviewed the tracking of larger refuse vehicles, and they would fit within the designated road network.  The Principal Planner informed Members that in relation to the current Shawstead Road which was very narrow, a much wider road would be provided.  Traffic models were being looked at with regards to traffic accessing the household waste and recycling centre and numbers associated with the new school.

The Principal Planner confirmed that this was a challenging site due to the topography.  Most of the houses within this phase would be 2 - 2 ½ storeys high with pitched roofs. There would be a few flat blocks which would be 3 storey with a flat roof to reduce their prominence, while the commercial block with residential above would be 4 storey with a ridged roof but this was considered acceptable due to its location and to highlight its public use. 

Decision:      

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

Lordswood and Walderslade Ward

Reserved Matters application for Phase 4 (for the construction of 198 residential units including affordable housing together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks) pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

Discussion:

The Principal Planner outlined the Reserved Matters application for Phase 4 (for the construction of 198 residential units including affordable housing together with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space, infrastructure and earthworks) pursuant to Outline application MC/19/0765 (APP/A2280/W/21/3280915) - Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of up to 800 dwellings with a primary school, supporting retail space of up to 150sqm and a community or nursery facility with an associated road link between North Dane Way and Pear Tree Lane and other road infrastructure, open space and landscaping.

Decision:      

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

This report is presented to the Planning Committee informing Members on current planning performance and the Local Plan.  The report covers the period from 1 July to 30 September 2025.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out performance for the period 1 July to 30 September 2025.

The Chief Planning Officer drew Members’ attention to the number of compliments which had been received and were set out on pages 231 to 232 of the report.

Members extended their thanks to the Chief Planning Officer and his team for all their hard work and acknowledged the amount of work that went into producing the results shown in the report.

The Chief Planning Officer brought Member’s attention to the planning application fees on page 219 of the report and explained the figures for August 2025 were inaccurate and the approximate amount would be £80,000.

The Chief Planning Officer explained that the number of units under construction (appendix E) showed a reduction compared to recent years.  He believed this was due to the economy, the building safety requirements and the delay to secure approvals for developments with 6 storeys or above, which was delaying construction.  

The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that a new Tree Officer had been appointed and would be starting soon which would see a reduction in the number of tree applications that the Tree Consultant dealt with.

The Chief Planning Officer was asked whether he could include, in the next Performance Report, how many developments that had been approved that were more than 2 years old and had not yet been started.  He explained that planning permission normally required commencement within 3 years though for some larger scale developments that may be amended to 18 months to 2 years.  He confirmed he would investigate whether it was possible to report on permissions that had not commenced within the required time period and had therefore lapsed.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report and requested that the Chief Planning Officer

express the Committee’s appreciation for the levels of achievement to staff

within the Planning Service.

This report informs Members of appeal decisions.  The summary of appeal decisions for those allowed or where decisions were made by the Committee contrary to Officer recommendation is listed by ward in Appendix A.

Discussion:

The Chief Planning Officer gave a summary of the appeal decisions referred to in appendix A to the report.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.

This report informs Members on the amount of Section 106 funding received between July to September 2025 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 Planning 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 appeal decisions referred to in appendix 1, 2 and 3 to the report.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.

This report summarises the content of agenda item 21 (Derelict Buildings: 1 April 2025 – 30 September 2025 Report) 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 document.

        Decision:

        The Committee agreed to exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of agenda item 17 (Derelict Buildings: 1 April 2025 – 30 September 2025 ) 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 12 (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 technical guidance outlines the requirements and best practices for Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) in planning applications and condition discharge submissions within Medway, ensuring alignment with national policy and local flood risk strategies. It provides detailed expectations for SuDS design, implementation, verification, and maintenance across various development types, supporting improved surface water management and flood resilience.

        Discussion:

        The Chief Planning Officer gave a summary of the Derelict Buildings:

1 April 2025 – 30 September 2025 referred to in Appendix A and B to the report. 

        Decision: 

The Committee noted the report.