Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED: That all items on the agenda be webcast.

It was noted that apologies for absence had been received from Councillors English and Willis. 

It was noted Cllr de Wiggondene would be a few minutes late but would be attending.

The following substitute members were noted:

·  Councillor B Mortimer for Councillor English, and;

·  Councillor F Wilson for Councillor Willis.

Councillor Burton, Cabinet Member for Planning, Transport and Development was present as a witness for items 8 Strategic Housing Market Assessment Update and item 9 Maidstone Borough Local Plan – key issues arising from consultation (Regulation 18).

Also in attendance reserving their right to make representations were Councillors Blackmore, Gooch, Hogg and McLoughlin.

In attendance as observers were Councillors Ells, Edwards-Daem, Joy and Sargeant.

There were no disclosures by Members or Officers.

RESOLVED: That the items on the agenda be taken in public as proposed.

RESOLVED:  that the minutes of the meeting held on 22 July 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed after the following amendments were made:

Page 6 – the name of the café in Tunbridge Wells corrected to read ‘Vello Café’.

Page 7 – third bullet from the bottom – remove the words ‘and provide improvements to the Maidstone gyratory system.’

A report on the key findings arising from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment Addendum report by Sarah Anderton, Principal Planning Officer, Spatial Policy.

Sarah Anderton, Principal Planning Officer presented her report on the key findings arising from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) Addendum report.  The firm, G L Hearn, had been commissioned jointly by Ashford, Tonbridge and Malling and Maidstone Borough Councils to undertake separate SHMAs for each authority following a common methodology.

Ms Anderton explained the original SHMA carried out for Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) had reported an ‘objectively assessed housing need’ figure for the borough of 19,600 homes for the period 2011 to 2031.  Cabinet had agreed this figure at its meeting of 27 January 2014.

Ms Anderton went on to explain MBC commissioned a focused update of selective elements of the SHMA as an addendum to the main report.  The majority of the main SHMA was unchanged and would continue to be a key part of the evidence base for the emerging Local Plan.  Two specific pieces of information published since the main SHMA were:

1.  The publication of the Office of National Statistics’ 2012–based Sub-National Population Projections (SNPP) on 29 May 2014, and;

2.  The finalised National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) published in March 2014 – this indicated that Local Planning Authorities should assess and quantify future needs for elderly person’s accommodation, including residential care homes.

The 2012-based SNPP were significant because they were the first to be published taking full account of the 2011 census results and covered the period to 2037, the full Local Plan period.

The methodology used was the same as for the original SHMA.

The revised projection for future dwelling requirements (2011-31) (‘objectively assessed need’) was 18,600.  This showed a reduction in the total requirement of 1,000 dwellings compared to the main SHMA report.

Ms Anderton explained the importance of noting this figure (18,600) as this was the estimated housing need figure (the demand) for the period of the Local Plan.  This was different and separate from the supply of housing land available in the borough, the housing target figure for the borough, which would be set in the emerging Local Plan.

Ms Anderton continued to explain that the NPPG indicated local planning authorities needed an understanding of their residential care home needs for the future.  This was confirmed in March 2014 and was not in the guidance for the original SHMA.

The assessment of care home needs (residential care homes and nursing homes) had drawn on data from Kent County Council’s Adult Accommodation Strategy (July 2014) together with the ONS’ projections for the increase in the institutional population aged 75+.

The need identified for elderly care home spaces (2011-31) was 960.  This was in addition to the need for 18,600 new dwellings over the same period.

During lengthy discussion the Committee raised the following points:

·  Concerns regarding the reliability of the revised figure were raised after it being explained earlier in the year that the Committee had to accept the figure of 19,600.  It was explained it would not have been prudent to wait for the up to date figures to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

A report on the key issues arising from representations on the draft Maidstone Borough Local Plan, submitted during public consultation (Regulation 18) which ran from 21 March to 7 May 2014by Sue Whiteside, Team Leader, Spatial Policy Team.

Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development presented the report.

Mr Jarman explained the report was a summary of the issues arising from representations on the draft Maidstone Borough Council Local Plan, submitted during public consultation (Regualtion18) which ran from 21 March to 7 May 2014.

Mr Jarman went on to say Officers had made no judgements on the representations made. Representations on land allocations would be presented at a later meeting.

Mr Jarman then gave the Committee a brief overview of the report.

Mr Jarman explained if everything went according to the plan the Maidstone Borough Local Plan would go before examiners in February 2016 and would be adopted in July 2016.

During discussions the following points were raised:

·  All representations made during the consultation would be considered by Members and Officers.  However, the Council would have to justify any changes made to the draft plan.

·  Mr Jarman explained the public consultation process was fundamental to the local planning process.  The Council had spent a considerable amount of time on the consultation and confirmed the public would be listened to when shaping the Local Plan.

·  Neighbourhood Plans and the Local Plan should be aligned.  There should be no competition between them.  Mr Jarman confirmed Officers were timetabling in meetings with parish councils to discuss the differences between Neighbourhood Plans and the Local Plan to achieve alignment between the two.

·  Mr Jarman confirmed the next stage was to carefully consider all representations made. It was confirmed by Mr Jarman that parties who had made representations, which had been used to change the Local Plan, would be notified.

RESOLVED:

a)  That the key issues arising from representations submitted during the Maidstone Borough local Plan Regulation 18 public consultation be noted;

b)  That it be recommended when representations to the Local Plan are collated, each representation be provided with a response explaining why the representation had been / not been taken forward and included in the Local Plan using the template report attached to the agenda for the meeting.

RESOLVED: That the revisions to Article 6 of the Council’s Constitution, set out in Appendix A to the report of the Overview and Scrutiny Officer, be noted.

RESOLVED: That the draft Future Work Programme, set out in the report of the Overview and Scrutiny Officer, be agreed subject to the following amendments:

·  That Cabinet Member priorities be provided in a written report and included with the agenda for the meeting of 16 September 2014 for noting;

·  That the Community Infrastructure Levy – preliminary draft charging schedule be included on the agenda for the meeting of 30 September 2014;

·  That a report on Affordable Housing policy for the draft Local Plan be provided for the 18 November 2014 meeting.

6:30pm to 10:13pm.