Interview with the Economic Development Manager.

The Chairman welcomed the Director of Prosperity and Regeneration, Alison Broom, the Assistant Director of Development and Community Strategy, Brian Morgan, and the Economic Development Manager, John Foster to the meeting.  The witnesses gave a brief overview of the contents and purposes of the draft regeneration statement, highlighting that the impetus had been the Council’s new emphasis on regeneration.  The document had been produced to bring together regeneration policies and activities into one document, including objectives and actions arising from the Sustainable Communities and Economic Development strategies.  The document would evolve with strategy and policy, including details of regeneration in the Town Centre identified in the Local Development Framework.  The Regeneration Statement explained the relationships between economic development, regeneration and tacking social deprivation and outlined the Council’s approach to undertaking regeneration. 

Communities and Local Government’s National Framework for Regeneration’s definition of regeneration had been adopted in the draft statement and Members agreed this definition for Maidstone.  The statement also prioritised the regeneration projects to be undertaken.  A Councillor queried why Park Wood, an area containing much social deprivation and problems, had not been mentioned and prioritised in the statement.  Mr Morgan informed Members that areas in Park Wood were incorporated in the statement under ‘Areas of housing in the control of Maidstone Housing Trust’ and ‘Improve the value of land and building assets…’.  A separate piece of work was also being undertaken with regard to tackling deprivation in and regenerating Park Wood.  Mrs Broom advised Members that the priority of Park Wood regeneration had been raised on a number of occasions in formulating the document..  The Committee agreed that further clarification on regeneration priorities was necessary.

A Councillor was concerned that the statement did not propose a safeguard for preventing unattractive developments in the Town Centre.  Mr Morgan highlighted that inappropriate developments were safeguarded through design principles and protective policies such as conservation areas, but acknowledged that the determination of an unattractive development was subjective.  Members therefore agreed that the Regeneration Statement should be amended to include an awareness of the importance of safeguarding Maidstone’s historic sites from inappropriate development.

Mr Foster informed Members that unemployment rates in Maidstone had been at 1.1% last year and had risen to 2.7% in April 2009 but had remained at 2.7% during May and June 2009.  A Member queried what central Government could specifically do to help Maidstone and was advised that ultimately regeneration required money at all stages.  However Mr Foster also noted that Maidstone was in a fortunate position as it had secured growth point money.

The Committee voiced its support for the regeneration statement subject to the clarity of regeneration priorities and the inclusion of safeguarding historic sites, in addition to the following amendments:

·  The lack of punctuation in 1.1 and 1.2 be addressed; and

·  Regeneration successes in Maidstone be incorporated into the statement.

A member of the public referred to the covering report in the meeting agenda and raised concern that the Council had produced a regeneration statement as an alternative to reviewing its Economic Development Strategy.  The Chairman and Mrs Broom explained that the covering report alluded to the Committee’s work programme and that the regeneration statement had been considered by the Committee as an alternative item for the Committee’s work programme.  An Economic Development Strategy review would ultimately be undertaken at a later date.  The member of the public also voice concerns over errors within the Economic Development Strategy, and stated that out-of-date information within that strategy meant that it would not provide a sound foundation for devising a Regeneration Strategy.

Resolved:  That

a)  Further clarity with regard to the regeneration priorities be made in the Regeneration Statement;

b)  The Regeneration Statement be amended to include an awareness of the importance of safeguarding Maidstone’s historic sites from inappropriate development;

c)  The lack of punctuation in 1.1 and 1.2 be addressed;

d)  Regeneration successes in Maidstone be incorporated into the statement; and

e)  The Committee’s support of the Statement be conveyed to the Cabinet subject to the previous recommendations.