Agenda item

This report considers a draft Masterplan for development at Rochester Airport. The committee’s views on the draft Masterplan are sought as part of a current public consultation process.  Following consultation, the intention is to adopt a final version of the Masterplan as planning policy guidance to shape future development at the site.

Discussion:

The Planning Policy and Design Manager introduced the report to the committee. He explained that Rochester Airport was a strategically important site for the regeneration and growth of Medway and had the potential to meet a significant proportion of the area’s future employment.

Consultation was open to the public and businesses for comment until 20 September 2013. The current consultation provided more detail on proposals for developing the area in comparison to previous consultations and a report setting out results of the initial consultations was set out at Appendix 1.

The masterplan had been submitted to Council on 25 July 2013 and Cabinet on 6 August 2013. A summary report on the early findings of the consultation would be presented to this committee at the next meeting.

A copy of the Masterplan was attached to the report at Appendix 2.

Members welcomed the report and raised a number of points and issues including:

Financial Justification – A member stated that they welcomed the partial redevelopment of the airport as it would create much needed jobs in the community. It was felt that the current proposals to spend £4.4 million would benefit only a small proportion of the local residents. There was concern that there had been no reports detailing the pros and cons of having a single runway at the airport. It was felt that a full Community Impact Study should be taken to allow a range of options to be considered with regards to the redevelopment of the airfield. It was suggested that building an urban park was one option that could be a better use of the land and bring a higher rate of return on investment. Concerns were also expressed about the value for money, as taxpayers would be required to meet the cost for the development of the airport.

A member commented that the current lease on the airfield was nearly at an end, and that it would be more appropriate in times of austerity to look at how the land could bring about the greatest economic output and was not dependent upon spending the money on a residual flying area.

A comment was made that the current proposed investment would help facilitate the growth of jobs and the creation of a more advanced technological park. The return on investment would not be instant, however in the long term the Council envisaged a significant economic benefit to Medway as a whole. It was felt that if investment was not made then the airfield might cease to exist, which could be detrimental in the long run to the local community.

Number of movements at the airport – Officers were asked to clarify the total number of movements on the site. A member questioned the statement that there were 35,000 movements a year and doubted that this would increase to 50,000 once the site had been re-developed.

Officers explained that the total number of movements were specific to aircraft that were taking off and landing and nothing more. The committee was advised that the number of movements was not currently controlled, however the total number of flights and hours of operation could be capped through the planning permission process.

Land at Woolmans Wood – A member asked for clarification on the land ownership of Woolmans Wood. Officers informed the committee that the land had been owned by the Council, but had been sold to a private developer, however there was a covenant in favour of the Council.

Impact on residents – A member commented that having Rochester Airport in Medway was an asset that most towns would be envious of, and the masterplan ensured the future of the airport. Some members commented that there had been nothing to suggest that the masterplan proposals caused more disruption to local residents, as the airport would still be used primarily for pleasure flights.

There was concern that the masterplan did not recognise the loss of amenity space to residents.

It was felt that the masterplan did not address road access sufficiently, in particular Maidstone Road and the Horsted Roundabout. There was the possibility that a high volume of traffic could cause congestion at peak times of the day.

A member proposed a recommendation to Cabinet, which was seconded, that the Council should undertake a Community Impact Study to assess how the proposed residual flying arrangements would impact on those living locally, and a full options appraisal to assess what other uses the residual airfield area could be put to, if flying were discontinued.

On a vote (5 in favour, 8 against) this recommendation was not agreed.

Decision:

The Committee noted, the draft Rochester Airport Master Plan, welcomed the improvements to the Rochester Airport site and the employment opportunities and recommended that the Cabinet adopt the Masterplan.