Agenda item

This report sets out progress made within the areas covered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Economic Growth and Regulation which fall within the remit of this Committee.

Discussion:

Members received an overview of progress made on the areas within the scope of Councillor Chitty, Portfolio Holder for Planning, Economic Growth and Regulation which fell within the remit of this Committee as set out below:

• Economic Development
• Employment
• High Streets
• Local Plan
• Markets
• Planning Policy
• Regulation – Environmental Health/Trading Standards/Enforcement and Licensing (executive functions only)
• Social Regeneration
• South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership

The Portfolio Holder responded to Members’ questions and comments as follows:

• Markets – The Portfolio Holder noted the Committee’s support for the possible merging of the Rochester Farmers Market and the Artisan Market. In response to concerns that following the redevelopment of Strood Town Centre, the Strood Market had discontinued, she advised that as part of the redevelopment proposals, Strood Market had been temporarily relocated but it had subsequently become clear that the stallholders no longer found a market in Strood to be viable due to the wider retail offer available in Strood. Therefore, the market stallholders had left to take up places elsewhere.

• Discretionary Grant Fund Scheme (DGF) – In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder informed the Committee that the take-up of the DGF scheme had been high with grant funding awarded to 319 Medway businesses. Both the Committee and the Portfolio Holder expressed appreciation to the Economic Development Team for their work in supporting businesses through the Covid-19 pandemic. The Portfolio Holder commented that at the current time it was not yet possible to provide statistics as to businesses that had closed as a result of the pandemic, but once further information was available, this could be shared with the Committee.

• Locate in Kent – In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder informed the Committee that Locate in Kent worked with all types of businesses where they had expressed an interest in opening in or relocating to Medway.

In response to a question as to whether particular industries were targeted to relocate or set up in Medway, the Portfolio Holder advised that whilst Medway had an excellent record of attracting technology, food and engineering industries, there were benefits to having a mixed economy and therefore no particular type of industry was specifically targeted. She also gave an assurance that the Council continued to work closely with the Universities.

• Apprenticeships – Referring to paragraph 2.5.1 of the report, clarification was sought as to whether the target of creating 30 new apprentice opportunities was sufficient taking into account that a greater number of apprentice placements had been available in past years. In response, the Portfolio Holder advised that despite the Covid-19 pandemic, businesses were continuing to show an interest in apprentice placements but she did not have the latest statistics as to the number of apprentice opportunities currently available. She agreed to supply this information outside of the meeting.

• Greeters in Rochester High Street – In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder confirmed that ‘greeters’ had been available in town centres across Medway to welcome the return of shoppers after the first lockdown and to provide information and advice upon social distancing measures.

• Avoidance of disruption due to Brexit and use of Chatham Docks – In response to a question concerning possible disruption due to Brexit and whether increased use could be made of Chatham Docks, the Portfolio Holder advised that potential use of Chatham Docks was outside the control of the Council. She advised that it was inevitable that the new Brexit regulations would create difficulties for some businesses and the Council would provide support where possible.

• Regeneration schemes - Lower Thames Crossing and London Resort – In response to a question as to how Medway could benefit from regeneration projects concerning the Lower Thames Crossing and London Resort, the Portfolio Holder provided an assurance that discussions on plans for the Lower Thames Crossing were continuing as this regeneration scheme would have a significant impact on transport and traffic in Medway.

Discussions were also continuing concerning any benefits that could be forthcoming arising from the London Resort development.

• Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF) and the Local Plan – In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder advised that she was satisfied that having HIF and the Local Plan under one Portfolio was not a conflict of interest.

• South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership (STG) – The Portfolio Holder advised that the STG offered an excellent service and had reduced overall costs for those local authorities involved. As a result, the number of local authorities joining the Partnership had continued to increase.

• Social Regeneration – In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder stressed the importance of social regeneration and bringing communities together to identify improvements and opportunities for the provision of education, employment and improvement to their surroundings.

• Air Quality and the Four Elms Hill Air Quality Action Plan – The Portfolio Holder advised upon the delays in progressing the Four Elms Hill Air Quality Action Plan due to concerns raised by Highways England. She advised that the issue of air quality and climate change was an important issue and there was now a Portfolio Holder with specific responsibility for climate change.

The Portfolio Holder also advised that as part of the planning process, developers were requested to include within new developments options to help reduce pollution and thus improve air quality.

In response to a question the Portfolio Holder confirmed that the number of air quality monitoring sites would be increased at a future date.

In closing, the Portfolio Holder suggested that if any Member had any questions or wanted information about services within her portfolio, she would welcome them approaching her direct.

Decision:

The Committee thanked the Portfolio Holder for attending the meeting and answering questions and noted:

a)            that the Portfolio Holder has offered to supply further information as to the level of grants awarded to businesses with such information to include:

·         how many business have been supported;

·         the levels of support provided;

·         the types of businesses supported; and

·         the level of employment provision that has been protected.

b)            that the Portfolio Holder has offered to supply the following further information on apprenticeships:

·         the number of apprentice schemes available;

·         the types of businesses where apprentice schemes are offered;

·         the interest shown by businesses in joining the apprenticeships scheme.

c)            that the Portfolio Holder has offered to pass on the Committee’s appreciation to the Economic Development Team for their work in supporting businesses through the Covid-19 pandemic.