The Head of Planning and Development explained that non-immediate Article 4 Directions were proposed in order to remove permitted development rights on sites identified as good office stock.  A similar report had been considered by the Strategic Planning, Sustainability and Transportation Committee on 11 September 2018, and the Head of Planning and Development addressed the concerns previously raised by the Committee.  It was stated that the requirement to submit a planning application resulted in opportunities to agree S106/CIL funding with developers.  Furthermore, negotiations could take place with developers to enhance the quality of development designs.

Councillor Purle spoke on the item as a Visiting Member.

The Committee commented that:

·  The further development of policies and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) needed to be considered.  This ensured that the Planning Committee was able to control developments effectively.

·  Pre-application discussions between the Council and developers were mutually beneficial.  These conversations did not typically take place if office to residential conversions were made under permitted development rights.

·  The assessment of potential sites where further Article 4 Directions could be made would benefit from a quantitative assessment of occupancy rates.

·  The timescales for further exploratory work needed to be clearly defined.

In response to questions from the Committee, the Head of Planning and Development said that:

·  The total number of office to residential completions totalled 691.  This significantly exceeded the target of 350.  These developments, however, were one-bed or studio apartments.  The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) required the development of a variety of housing types, such as family housing.

·  A vibrant town required a balance of uses, such as residential, leisure and work provision.  Protecting good office stock ensured that employment opportunities, and employment land, was protected.

·  The NPPF stated that Article 4 Directions needed to be necessary.  Therefore, an Article 4 Direction could not be applied to all office stock in the Borough.  Instead, the best office stock needed to be identified as suitable for an Article 4 Direction.

RESOLVED: That:

1.  A non-immediate Article 4 Direction is made on the following sites; County Gate, Medway Bridge House, 23 – 29 Albion Place, Sterling House, Maidstone House, Romney House, Gail House, Kestrel House, Knightrider Chambers, County House (Earl Street), 62 Earl Street, 66 Earl Street, 72 King Street and Clarendon Place.

2.  The Head of Planning and Development exercise delegated authority to confirm the directions, in consultation with the Head of Legal Services, following statutory consultation on the made directions.

3.  Exploratory work is initiated on making further Article 4 Directions on office sites both within and outside of the Town Centre, with a report to be added to the work programme for a future meeting of this committee, with the earliest opportunity for this report to be identified in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman.

Voting:   For – 7  Against – 2   Abstentions – 0

Note: Councillor Garten requested that his dissent be noted.