Agenda and minutes

There were none.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 28 August 2024.

The record of the meeting held on 28 August 2024 was agreed and signed by the Chairperson as correct.

The Committee were advised of the following, as set out in the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

Minute number 252 - Planning application - MC/23/2793 63 Woodlands Road, Gillingham, Medway, ME7 2DU.

The decision taken by the Planning Committee on 28 August 2024, as set out in the minutes, was:

Refused due to the loss of existing parking area and lack of parking for the proposed flats and the lack of private outdoor space.

Final wording to be agreed with the Services Manager – Development Management, Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and Opposition Spokespersons.

The final agreed reasons for refusal were:

The proposed development due to the loss of existing parking area and the lack of parking for the proposed flats would result in an increased pressure on existing on-street parking in an area of high levels of parking stress which would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety contrary to Policy T13 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and paragraph 115 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2023).

The proposed development fails to provide any private outdoor space for the flats and their future occupiers, which would result in an inadequate level of amenity for those occupiers, contrary to the standards set out in the Medway Housing Design Standards (interim) 2011, Policy BNE2 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and paragraphs 131 and 135f of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2023).

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 for 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, he would not take part in the discussion at the Parish Council meetings.

During agenda item 5, Councillor Filmer declared an interest in MC/24/0291 Land adjacent to Fenn Street and Ratcliffe Highway, St Mary Hoo, Rochester, Medway, ME3 8RF and stated that he had a family involvement in Bradford’s Garage which was close to the site.    

Councillor Hubbard, speaking as a Ward Councillor, referred to planning application MC/24/1466 Manor Farm Quarry, Parsonage Lane, Frindsbury, Rochester, ME2 4UT and stated that although the owners and residents of the Manor House were relatives of his wife, he did not and never had a personal interest.  He also stated that in readiness for a planning presentation he did meet a representative of the applicant recently and spoke for a short period of time regarding planning matters relating to this application and the Manor Farm housing estates reserved matter planning application.

All Saints Ward

Full planning application for 44 new homes (use class C3) with the provision of  associated parking, open spaces, SUDs and earthworks. Provision of overflow parking for Fenn Bell Conservation project and enhancement to existing access from Fenn Street on land adjacent to the Fenn Street and Ratcliffe Highway.

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined in detail for a full planning application for 44 new homes (use class C3) with the provision of associated parking, open spaces, Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDs) and earthworks.  The provision of overflow parking for Fenn Bell Conservation project and enhancement to the existing access from Fenn Street on land adjacent to the Fenn Street and Ratcliffe Highway.

The Senior Planner informed Members that in the supplementary agenda advice sheet, an amendment of condition 23 and an additional representation were referenced.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Spalding addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and raised the following points:

• Concerns were given that this site would be car dominant which would increase the volume of traffic.  There would be air quality issues, inadequate bus services, no safe access to local amenities, it would not be in-keeping with the surrounding neighbourhood, it would be unsustainable and would have an adverse impact on the quality of residents’ lives.
• There were missing documents – no reptile report, no pre-application, no traffic survey, hence, Members did not have the full information.
• Although the Esquire traffic survey was set up where the traffic would typically go slow, there were still over 5,000 instances of speeding within one week. 
• Previous planning applications in the area had been refused by the Planning Committee and were then dismissed at appeal.  Why would this be different?
• The Local Plan was out of date, and he quoted the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 11d which quoted “the presumption in favour of development, unless, adverse impacts outweigh benefits as a whole”.  He went on to say that this development was not included in option 1 of the Local Plan Regulation 18 consultation.

The Committee then asked a number of questions and comments, which included:

• S106 Contributions – some Members discussed where the S106 contributions should be awarded and suggested that the contributions be directed more locally such as the library contribution to go to Hoo Library instead of Grain, Strood or any mobile libraries.  The sports improvement contribution to go to Deangate Sports Centre, instead of Hoo Sports Centre.  The primary provision or SEND education to go to a potential new SEND school in Stoke.  Concerns were raised that the contribution for health (£37,196.28) would not make a significant difference and it was requested that once the monies were awarded, it be used straight away.  The public rights of way contribution should be ringfenced and be used within close proximity of the site. 

• Bus services – some Members had concerns regarding the inadequate bus services and that the £50,000 contribution, towards bus service provision improvements would be insufficient.  The Chief Planning Officer said that the contribution would go some way to improve the service, however, more work was required with the public transport providers.

Concerns were expressed regarding the congestion at the Four Elms roundabout and it was asked what could be done to mitigate against this.

• Safety – concerns were raised that although there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 294.

Hempstead & Wigmore Ward

Construction of a replacement multifunctional hall.

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined the application in detail for the construction of a replacement multifunctional hall.

The Committee considered the application and expressed support in developing this site for the community and they considered the proposal would encourage young people to become engaged within their own area.

The Senior Planner clarified condition 12 was included for the submission of lighting to ensure it would have no detrimental impact on neighbouring properties or wildlife.   

Decision:      

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

Strood Rural Ward

Variation of condition 1 (Time Limit) on planning permission MC/20/2806 to amend the requirement for the discontinuation of the in-filling operation until 31st December 2027.

Discussion:

The Principal Planner outlined the application in detail for the variation of condition 1 (Time Limit) on planning permission MC/20/2806 to amend the requirement for the discontinuation of the in-filling operation until 31 December 2027.

The Principal Planner showed Members the calculation of loads required to complete the quarry in-fill, as stated in the presentation.  In May 2024, it had been calculated that the void remained at 346,370 m3.  For the completion of the in-fill 822 average loads per month would need to be achieved and they were currently completing 1,000 loads per month coming into site. 

She confirmed that after attending the site, a good standard was being maintained daily.  Wheel washing was in good order and being done regularly and the road sweeper was in use and would be used more frequently when required.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Hubbard addressed the Committee as a Ward Councillor as his ward boundary aligned with the site.  Councillor Hubbard raised the following concerns:

• This ongoing in-fill of the quarry was controversial.  The work had been active for a long time and a further 3 year extension was proposed with a possible further extension.
• Local residents were unable to enjoy their gardens with the constant bleeping of machinery, noise and dust.  Everything being covered in dust had become detrimental to their mental health.
• Concerns received from Parish Council representations that further restoration and redevelopment of the Manor Farm Barn could not be carried out until the Manor Farm housing development was completed, when the money for the restoration would be available.
• There was a very urgent need to increase housing within Medway, he suggested consulting the developer to request different housing proposals for the 130 homes to be built within the quarry and access via Berwick Way.
• He requested a deferral of this planning application for a site visit.

The Committee considered the application and were disappointed with how long the development had taken to get to this point and asked if there would be a guarantee that it would be completed within the timeframe given.  The Service Manager - Development Management confirmed this was not a planning matter, however, the applicant had calculated they would meet the timescale given.

The Principal Planner confirmed that in relation to noise and disturbance, the hours of operation were: Monday to Friday 8am – 5.30pm and 8.30am – 1pm on Saturday.  A Management Plan was in place and to date, no complaints had been received and the Service Manager – Development Management confirmed that an acoustic fence had been installed.

The Principal Planner clarified that condition 22 dealt with the reduction of dust and was covered in the Dust Management Plan.  To help reduce dust, the in-fill was suppressed by water spray and no settlement period was required as the in-fill was compacted via rollers.

The Principal Planner explained that if the application was refused, the applicant could not continue to infill the quarry from December 2024 onwards, and therefore, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 296.

This report informs Members on the amount of Section 106 funding received between April 2024 and June 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 Section 106 funding received, what agreements had been signed and the bird mitigation contributions received from April to June 2024 and referred to appendix 1 of the report and informed Members how important this report was to keep them updated on the decisions they made.

Members were concerned with the bus services contributions for a number of planning applications, the Chief Planning Officer explained he would be meeting with the public transport team to discuss what the money should be spent on and he confirmed that the relevant Ward Councillors and Parish Councillors would be consulted on what was agreed.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.