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out of date, and he quoted the National Planning Policy Framework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 would be a footpath around the site, how
would pedestrians cross the A228? With
no safe walking or cycling paths, the residents, without their own
transport, would be confined within the development.
Concerns were raised regarding the access onto Fenn Street which
was a narrow but busy country lane and questions were asked
regarding the adequacy of the traffic calming measures. The access onto the Ratcliffe Highway was shared
with the zoo overflow carpark and also led to the Allhallows
Holiday Park.
- Design – a Member
considered that the design was out of character for the area.
- Car dominated development
– with poor public transport, families living there would be
reliant on their own vehicles which would increase
traffic.
The Highways Consultant stated
that condition 23 stated that no more than 50% of the development
herein approved should be occupied until the street calming and
highways works on the Ratcliffe Highway have been
completed. He also confirmed that
the traffic assessment showed that the maximum hourly increase in
vehicles would be 20 additional vehicles within a one hour period,
equivalent to 1 car every 3 minutes.
The Chief Planning Officer
summed up the planning application and discussed the following
points:
- There was a need to find sites to
build homes, referring to the current housing crisis, which
included a great demand to provide affordable homes. He went on to say that currently there were 818
children in Medway living in temporary accommodation.
- The National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) required a 5-year housing land supply and Medway
Council needed to provide sites for 1,658 dwellings per year, which
would equate to 22,500 dwellings by 2041, so although 44 homes
would not solve this, it was an important contribution.
- The NPPF indicated there were three
elements to sustainable development, which were, social, economic
and environmental. The Chief Planning
Officer suggested Members give significant weight to the social
aspect of providing homes to meet the housing need in Medway and
the applicant had agreed to start construction quicker, within 18
months rather than the normal 3 years.
A registered provider had been selected to deliver 11 homes for
affordable rent for 1 and 2 bedroom units.
- Members were requested to give
moderate weight to the economic side, as the application provided
employment opportunities during construction and supported local
building trades serving small to medium enterprises
(SME). There would then be additional
spend available for the local economy after occupation.
- He stated that negligible weight
should be given to the impact of the zoo, although the applicant
said they would use the money to retain the zoo, the homes that
would be provided would be permanent, the zoo may not be so.
- Highway mitigation should be given
moderate weight as the Highways Consultant had confirmed that this
planning application, on highways terms, was acceptable.
- The Chief Planning Officer confirmed
that Four Elms Roundabout was highly congested at peak times,
however, the Highways Consultant clarified that 44 homes would not
justify an impact on the roads and there were proposals to improve
the roundabout as part of a separate proposal.
- He clarified that although Fenn
Street was not within option 1 of the Local Plan Regulation 18, as
stated by the Ward Councillor, the site was included within option
2 and the preferred option, 3.
- The Chief Planning Officer
acknowledged Members’ request to amend some of the S106
contributions and he would be happy to consider them and would
discuss the changes with the relevant ward councillors.
- Although the site was within the
countryside it was not within a site designated of landscape
importance, it was not in an area of outstanding natural beauty or
within a greenbelt area. The
landscaping proposed would help soften the development and make it
more acceptable.
- He confirmed it would be a car
dominated scheme, nothing could change that.
It was requested, by Members,
that a deferral of this planning application be moved and voted on
to allow Members of the Planning Committee to attend a site visit
of the site.
Decision:
Deferred for
a site visit.