To consider any questions submitted by the public.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm on the Wednesday before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330).

The Mayor advised that 2 questions had been received by members of the public.

Question 1 – Mr John Greenhill

What precisely is happening to, and at, the former Adult Education College in College Road, Sittingbourne and what exactly is the current planning application situation having regard to the planning permission in respect of flats/ houses granted to the former owners of the site?

Response – Chair of Planning Committee

Planning permission and listed building consent were granted on the 9th May 2022. Both applications went to Planning Committee in October 2021 with an officer recommendation for approval. The members agreed with this recommendation, subject to the s106 agreement being signed.

There was then a period of delay because, after planning committee, the applicants (Wildwood Limited) put the property on the market and it went to auction, where it was bought by City Developers Limited. This meant that the new owners also needed to be party to the s106 agreement. The s106 agreement was signed by all parties and sealed on the 5th May 2022. To date, no applications to discharge the conditions have been submitted to the Council.

The original applicants (Wildwood Limited) currently have a pre-application (22/502163/PAMEET) lodged with the Council for 10 self-build apartments on land adjacent to the Adult Education Site, which is a designated Local Green Space and sits inside the Strategic Countryside Gap.

Supplementary question

Does the original planning permission of 8 flats and terraced houses remain in situ?

Response

Yes, the planning permission remains in situ.

Question 2 – Mr Julian Speed

Whilst the Council waits 12-18 months before publishing the next Reg 19 consultation, on the grounds of awaiting clarity on planning policy from Government but also of course because the Council has lost control of the Local Plan process, will the Leader confirm that all inappropriate, non-allocated and out-of-scale speculative planning applications will be refused in order to protect the precious green spaces in our Borough and that the existing approved Local Plan will continue to prevail?  I ask this in the hope that before the Local Plan Reg 19 consultation emerges, the Council will also set out a clear timetable for early public communication and engagement.  As I am sure the Leader will agree, residents would benefit greatly from understanding your emerging thinking on development and infrastructure - as opposed to you simply presenting them with an impenetrable fait accompli Reg 19 document, as happened last time, where residents can only comment on complex legal grounds of soundness, compliance and duty to co-operate. 

Response – Leader

Thank you for your question.

First I think it is necessary to correct some inaccurate assumptions. The comment “the Council has lost control of the Local Plan Process’ is simply not true. The Local Plan process is flawed, it makes demands of local councils that are unreasonable, and it is utterly undemocratic. So to suggest we have in any way ‘lost control’ of the process pre-supposes an agreement with that process that quite simply this Council does not share. We are focussed on pushing for the best achievable solutions for Swale, in the face of dreadful legislation. We will not roll over and simply acquiesce in the destruction of our Borough but will fight for what we believe is suitable.  

The Local Plan has been paused to allow for further clarity from the government and this action has allowed the Council to retain control the process of the production of the Local Plan Review. It is hardly this Council that is losing control when one looks at the state of the national government over the past few months. And it is this national government with its changing priorities, contradicting statements and headless chicken approach to future planning that has left many councils without any faith in the current process and deciding that trying to produce a Local Plan in these circumstances is simply an expensive and pointless folly.

Regarding the determination of planning applications all applications, regardless of whether they are on allocated sites or not and whether they are speculative or not must be considered on their individual merits. Applications will continue to be determined in line with national and local policies and guidance as the Local Plan Review continues to emerge. The extant Local Plan, Bearing Fruits, continues to be a material consideration in the determination of applications.

I would like to point out however, that the comments made by some that this means it is a green light for developers is simply not true. We have been in this position effectively since February 2019 when the previous administration’s Local plan failed the 5 year housing test. During that time we have continued to reject inappropriate development and have won many cases at appeal despite the lack of a 5 year supply and the tilted balance. We will continue to prioritise those applications which are in-line with policy and oppose those we find unsustainable and which breach our policies.    

Prior to the Local Plan progressing to Regulation 19 stage full consultation plan will detail the public engagement and consultation that will be carried out.

Regulation 19 consultation is carried out with the purpose of seeking the views of residents, businesses and stakeholders as to whether the Local Plan Reviews are legally compliant and have been positively prepared, are justified, effective and/or are consistent with national and regional policy. Therefore, representations can only be made on these grounds. Consultation at Regulation 18 stage is where interested parties are invited to make representations to the local planning authority about what a local plan with that subject ought to contain.

Recent changes in Central Government has meant that the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill is once again being progressed through Parliament and therefore it is anticipated that once it becomes clear what changes are likely to be introduced the Council will be in a better position to determine how we take the Local Plan through the process.

Supplementary question

The Leader says the Council had not lost control of the local plan process.  Does the Leader not agree that if there had been a second Regulation 18 consultation in February 2021 as many had called for at the time, rather than a flawed Regulation 19 consultation comprising of plans residents were not expecting before realising the error and reverting to Regulation 18 in November, those 9 months would not have been wasted and we might have a new Local Plan in place by now?

Response

I could read out my response again but I won’t, but will refer to your second comment. The Regulation 19 was put together with the expectation that the Government would possibly change housing targets to 14k. It was essential that a consultation went out before then. Nothing in the Regulation 19 was a surprise, it had been through the Local Plan Panel and all elements had been discussed. It is down to Ward Members to alert their residents if they think there is an aspect in it, so they are fully enabled to respond to the Regulation 19. 

Regulation 19 gives us the responses from statutory consultants that we need to argue exactly what Swale can deliver. It’s not enough to put out a Regulation 18 and expect statutory consultees to give us responses. At Regulation 19, responses are given that can be defended at the inspection, so more information is received from a Regulation 19 which enabled us to say how unsuitable Swale was for the level of housing that this Government is trying to put upon us. I don’t regret that and think it was an excellent exercise which gave us the information we need. 

The next Regulation 18, I invite everyone to take part in it. We have followed the process with really astute acumen trying to show that this Government is putting an unreasonable demand on us, gathering the evidence to kick back against their unsustainable housing targets.