Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary Interests (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

(c)           Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the meeting while that item is considered.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

No interests were declared.

10am – Land East of Crown Quay Lane, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 3ST

The Chairman welcomed Members, the Agent, Applicant, officers and members of the public to the meeting.

The Development Manager explained the safety procedures put in place as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.  He asked those in attendance to adhere to Government guidance by wearing face coverings and keeping their distance from each other.

The Major Projects Officer gave an overview of the application.  He explained that the application was for 107 residential dwellings together with associated access, infrastructure, drainage, open space and landscaping at Land East of Crown Quay Lane, Sittingbourne.  The proposals included 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom flats and houses and he considered they were of a high quality and design.  The proposal also included 11 affordable dwellings and 156 parking spaces and 17 visitor spaces.  The site was 2.1 hectares in size and that the site was 500 metres from Sittingbourne town centre, and 600 metres from the railway station.  The latter distance was queried by a Member, and the Major Projects officer agreed to check this and update at the Planning Committee meeting.

The Major Projects Officer reported that 3 letters of objection had been received and there had been no objections from statutory consultees.  The application was supported by policies in the National Planning Policy Framework and the Swale Borough Local Plan (Bearing Fruits 2031).  It was also delivering a 15 to 23% biodiversity net gain and a 20% reductionin CO2 emissions compared to the level in the current Building Regulations, and considered the application should be supported subject to the conditions outlined in the report and an appropriate Section 106 Agreement.

A representative of Supreme Concrete, and adjoining business, raised concern about the impact of noise and lighting from their business on proposed residents resulting in complaints against their business.  He considered that the applicant could improve the current arrangement of flats on the site and further improvements to the highway aspects of the proposals.

The Major Projects Officer reported that following concerns raised about lighting at the Planning Committee on 27 May 2021, the case officer had liaised with the applicant’s agent about Members’ concerns.

The applicant was invited to speak.  He made the following points:

·         Some of the proposed flats would overlook the Creekside;

·         a walkway/trail was being provided along the Creekside;

·         the required level of affordable housing would be provided;

·         the application would provide improvements to Crown Quay Lane;

·         was in a sustainable location;

·         was a brownfield site and earmarked for housing by the Council;

·         if the site could not be developed for housing then the only other option would be to put it forward for industrial use; and

·         it was the right time to develop the site.

The Ward Member was invited to speak.  The Ward Member, also a Member of Planning Committee, raised concern that the smell from the creek could be an issue for occupiers of the dwellings.  The Major Projects Officer explained that the odour from the creek at low tide was a natural process,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.