Agenda item

There were seven questions from Members of the Public.

Question from Mr John Horne to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

‘The Minister of State for Housing (Rt. Hon Christopher Pincher MP) has published guidance that “Local Councils are expected to address water supply, wastewater and water quality as part of the Local Plan process“. Accordingly, to ensure adequate water facilities for our Borough during the Review Period and within the drought contingency period, what evidence, if any, of suitable undertakings from relevant persons will accompany submission of the Review to the Secretary of State and concurrently achieve compliance with the Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan?’

The Chairman responded to the question.

Question from Mr Peter Coulling to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

‘MBC recently delivered 170% against the Housing Delivery Test, the highest in Kent. That is, MBC delivered 1,599 more homes over those three years than required by the Annual Assessed Needs in the Local Plan. That is now being justified as necessary to make-good under-delivery in the early years of that Local Plan. However, that means it is unnecessary for the Trajectory in the soon-to-be-submitted version of Reg19 to depict, or give rise to, a surge in the early years. Any such surge would again risk early failure against Five Years’ Housing Supply and give rise to an acceleration of population projections and an even greater Housing Needs figure when the Local Plan is again reviewed five years from now.

What additional policies will MBC add as Main Modifications to Reg19 to target a flat Trajectory and to control housing development against that Trajectory to avoid such risks?’

The Chairman responded to the question.

Mr Peter Coulling asked the following supplementary question:

‘Development Plan Documents are fine, but my question was about what additional policies will be put into the main modifications; I am guessing that from your answer that it is concluded that Maidstone Borough Council will just give up on this issue and take whatever the developers deliver against the review. That does not seem right for our borough, does it?’

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Mr Chris Sheppard to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

‘Please will the Committee confirm they delivered 3,878 new homes built in the period April 2018 to March 2021, this is 1,599 new homes or 170% above target?’

The Chairman responded to the question.

Mr Sheppard asked the following supplementary question:

‘Why do you still pursue the need to build the Lidsing garden development of over 2,000 plus new homes in an area of outstanding natural beauty which has no support from anybody but the developers. Please will you confirm that you’re developing your proposals with the neighbouring councils, particularly Medway Unitary Authority and stakeholders and how you intend to deal with the complete lack of infrastructure including health, schools, highways, water and sewerage in this beautiful rural area?’

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Ms Vanessa Jones to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

Of the 2,250 representations submitted, please confirm the number which relate to the Lidsing Garden Community proposal and, of those, how many are objections?

The Chairman responded to the question.

Ms Jones asked the following supplementary question:

‘When processing the representations, do officers work to written guidance and if so, can this please be made public. If there is no written guidance, how does MBC ensure consistency and impartiality. In a quick poll of ‘Against Lidsing’ supporters yesterday, of the 190 people who submitted objections, only 57 have received a unique response ID from MBC. Does this low number concern you and by what date  will everyone receive their number?

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Ms Kate Hammond to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

At January's SPI Committee meeting, a public question asked if you were planning to submit the draft Local Plan without any significant changes. You answered by saying you didn't expect to have to make any changes that would require further consultation and that you fully intended to submit the draft plan for examination in March 2022. Given you have yet to fully analyse the nearly 3,000 Regulation 19 consultation responses and present them before this Committee, can you please explain what you think the point of public consultation is?

The Chairman responded to the question.

Ms Hammond asked the following supplementary question:

‘Does this suggest you are predetermined?’.

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Mr Steve Heeley to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

The draft for submission document of your Local Plan review includes policy LPRSP4(A) Heathlands which proposes a new town east of Lenham with 5,000 homes in the middle of the Kent countryside. The Policy & Resources Committee received an update in January on Heathlands that confirmed only 30% of landowners had agreed to their land being included in the masterplan and had subsequently agreed options. Can you tell me whether you will be submitting your draft Local Plan for Examination in March without 100% of landowners having signed options in place?

The Chairman responded to the question.

Mr Heeley asked the following supplementary question:

‘That doesn’t really answer whether you are going to submit if you haven’t got 100% of landowners. If you’ve got less than all of the 5 principal land owners that own the land for the Heathlands development and if they’re not signed up by point that you submit your plan, will you delay submitting your plan or will you carry on regardless?’

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Mr John Hughes to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

Covid has rapidly accelerated the growth of online shopping and therefore is likely to lead to the closure of more shops in the town centre, which could threaten its “county town” role. How does the Reg19 Plan adapt to this trend and ensure the attractiveness and viability of the whole of the town centre in the future?

The Chairman responded to the question.

Mr Hughes asked the following supplementary question:

‘As you rightly say Maidstone has a great opportunity to develop the Town Centre and make more of the river Medway frontage which will attract lots of people for shopping, leisure and to visit, but there is some critical infrastructure required to do that, and that is two things; a pedestrian bridge from the shopping centre to the other side of the river, to what is in fact the riverside opportunity area and riverside walking and cycling paths, which are mostly there at the moment. I note that in the 2016 Integrated Transport Strategy there was an action, W2, which was to put in place a pedestrian bridge over the Medway and as far as I’m aware no progress seem to have been made in the last 6 years, but I would be very grateful if you could bring me up to date on that. Will the Local Plan Review strengthen the remit for the Town Centre plan to achieve a new central river pedestrian bridge and the enhancement of the riverside setting, particularly in the riverside opportunity  area which it doesn’t do at the moment?’

The Chairman responded to the supplementary question.

Question from Mrs Sue Harwood to the Chairman of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

Mrs Harwood had given notice of her wish to ask a question but was unable to do so at the meeting.

The full responses were recorded on the webcast and made available to view on the Maidstone Borough Council website. The question-and-answer session took place between minutes 6:08 to 32:21 of the recording.

To access the webcast, please use the link below:

Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee Meeting - 8 February 2022 - YouTube