Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Remote Meeting - The public proceedings of the meeting will be broadcast live and recorded for playback on the Maidstone Borough Council website
Contact: Ryan O'Connell 01622 602503
Apologies for Absence
It was noted that apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Clark, McKay, Newton, Perry and Springett.
Notification of Substitute Members
The following Substitute Members were noted:
Councillor Brice for Councillor Perry
Councillor Garten for Councillor Springett
Councillor Harper for Councillor McKay
Councillor Mrs Joy for Councillor Clark
Councillor Powell for Councillor Newton
The Chairman said that, in his opinion, the updates to be included in the Officer presentations should be taken as urgent items as they contained further information relating to the applications to be considered at the meeting.
Notification of Visiting Members
Councillors Eves, Kimmance and Spooner had given notice of their wish to speak on the report of the Head of Planning and Development relating to planning applications 19/501600/OUT and 19/506182/FULL (Land West of Church Road, Otham, Kent) and were present at the meeting.
Disclosures by Members and Officers
There were no disclosures by Members or Officers.
Disclosures of Lobbying
All Members stated that they had been lobbied on the report of the Head of Planning and Development relating to applications 19/501600/OUT and 19/506182/FULL (Land West of Church Road, Otham, Kent).
RESOLVED: That the public be excluded from the meeting in the event of Members wishing to discuss the information contained in the exempt Appendices to the report of the Head of Planning and Development relating to applications 19/501600/OUT and 19/506182/FULL (Land West of Church Road, Otham, Kent) because of the likely disclosure of exempt information pursuant to paragraph 5 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (Legal Proceedings), having applied the public interest test.
19/501600/OUT - OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR UP TO 440 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS, INFRASTRUCTURE, DRAINAGE, LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE (ACCESS BEING SOUGHT WITH ALL OTHER MATTERS RESERVED FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION) - LAND WEST OF CHURCH ROAD, OTHAM, KENT
19/506182/FULL – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR 421 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS, INFRASTRUCTURE, DRAINAGE, OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING - LAND WEST OF CHURCH ROAD, OTHAM, KENT
The Committee considered the report of the Head of Planning and Development concerning applications 19/501600/OUT and 19/506182/FULL for 440 or 421 dwellings respectively on land west of Church Road, Otham. These applications had been referred to the Committee for determination pursuant to paragraph 30.3 (b) of Part 3.1 of the Council’s Constitution and paragraph 17 (b) of the Local Code of Conduct for Councillors and Officers Dealing with Planning Matters (Part 4.4 of the Constitution).
It was noted that:
· The outline application was originally reported to the Planning Committee on 24 October 2019 with an Officer recommendation for approval. The Committee agreed to defer consideration of the application for further negotiations.
· The outline application was reported back to the Planning Committee on 28 May 2020 together with the full application. Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee voted to refuse each application for three reasons.
· Pursuant to paragraph 30.3 (a) of Part 3.1 of the Council’s Constitution and paragraph 17 (a) of the Local Code of Conduct for Councillors and Officers Dealing with Planning Matters (Part 4.4 of the Constitution), before the votes were taken, Planning and Legal Officers advised the Committee that they did not consider each reason for refusal to be sustainable and that they could have significant cost implications. The Head of Planning and Development gave a costs warning in respect of each application. Therefore, the decisions of the Committee were deferred to its next meeting on 25 June 2020.
· On 11 June 2020, the applicant lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) on the basis of non-determination of the outline application. This meant that the decision on the application would be made by PINS and not the Council. The Committee would now need to inform PINS what decision it would have made and therefore what position the Council would take at the appeal. The appellant had requested a Public Inquiry procedure and the Officers had advised PINS that they considered this to be appropriate. The Council had instructed Counsel and preliminary work was underway for the appeal.
· At its meeting on 25 June 2020, the Planning Committee considered Counsel’s advice on the strength of the reasons for refusal and the associated risk of costs at appeal. Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee resolved to refuse the full application and to inform the Planning Inspectorate that if the applicant had not lodged an appeal on the basis of non-determination it would have refused the outline application for the following reasons:
1. Whilst mitigating increased traffic congestion on Deringwood Drive, the ... view the full minutes text for item 200.
Duration of Meeting
6.30 p.m. to 9.45 p.m.