Laura Graham Inspector

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK EXAMINATION MEDWAY COUNCIL Date: 14 November 2013 Mr Brian McCutcheon Planning Policy & Design Manager Medway Council Gun Wharf Dock Road Chatham Kent ME4 4TR Dear Mr McCutcheon Thank you for your letter of 28 October. I am not in a position to agree, or otherwise, with your view regarding the threshold of 900 units per annum for considering that objectively assessed needs cannot be accommodated in the Plan as submitted. Nonetheless, I note that an increase from 815 dpa, as currently proposed, to 900 dpa would entail an uplift of over 10% in total dwelling numbers, and I would need to be satisfied that this additional level of development can be accommodated without significant amendments to the strategy. However, it will not be possible for me to work on the Medway examination in accordance with your suggested timetable. I will need to give careful consideration to the modifications you may propose in order to come to a conclusion on whether they are so significant as to amount to the Plan being rewritten, in which case it would not be appropriate for the Examination to continue. I will also need to consider whether the updated evidence base adequately supports the revised plan. As you may be aware, I am also carrying out Examinations at Rother District Council and Brighton and Hove City Council. I am already committed to work on these two examinations until at least the end of January 2014. Given the uncertainty over the continuation of the Medway Examination, I will reconsider an appropriate timetable for the examination after 29 November. Laura Graham Inspector Gun Wharf, Dock Road, Chatham, Kent, ME4 4TR Tel: 01634 333880 Fax: 01634 332862 Adam Waters, Programme Officer [email protected] . .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Progress Summary
CLIMATE EMERGENCY PROGRESS CHECKLIST - 10 December 2019 NB. This is work in progress! We have almost certainly missed some actions. Please contact [email protected] with any news or updates. County/Authority Council Status County/Authority Council Status Brighton & Hove BRIGHTON & HOVE CITY COUNCIL DECLARED Dec 2018 KENT COUNTY COUNCIL Motion Passed May 2019 WEST SUSSEX COUNTY COUNCIL Motion Passed - April 2019 Ashford Borough Council Motion Passed July 2019 Adur Borough Council DECLARED July 2019 Canterbury City Council DECLARED July 2019 Arun District Council DECLARED Nov 2019 Dartford Borough Council DECLARED Oct 2019 Chichester City Council DECLARED June 2019 Dover District Council Campaign in progress West Sussex Chichester District Council DECLARED July 2019 Folkestone and Hythe District Council DECLARED July 2019 Crawley Borough Council DECLARED July 2019 Gravesham Borough Council DECLARED June 2019 Kent Horsham District Council Motion Passed - June 2019 Maidstone Borough Council DECLARED April 2019 Mid Sussex District Council Motion Passed - June 2019 Medway Council DECLARED April 2019 Worthing Borough Council DECLARED July 2019 Sevenoaks District Council Motion Passed - Nov 2019 EAST SUSSEX COUNTY COUNCIL DECLARED Oct 2019 Swale Borough Council DECLARED June 2019 Eastbourne Borough Council DECLARED July 2019 Thanet District Council DECLARED July 2019 Hastings Borough Council DECLARED Dec 2018 Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council Motion Passed July 2019 East Sussex Lewes District Council DECLARED July 2019 Tunbridge
[Show full text]
Transport for the South East – Consent for Submission of Proposal to Government
CABINET 7 APRIL 2020 TRANSPORT FOR THE SOUTH EAST – CONSENT FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL TO GOVERNMENT Portfolio Holder: Councillor Phil Filmer, Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services Report from: Richard Hicks, Director of Place and Deputy Chief Executive Author: Michael Edwards, Head of Integrated Transport Summary This report seeks Cabinet support for the creation of a Sub-National Transport Body for the South East, confirmation of Medway’s position as a constituent authority, and consent for the submission of a Proposal to Government for statutory status. 1. Budget and Policy Framework 1.1 Medway Council does not have a stated policy position on Sub-National Transport Bodies. It is possible, however, to align the principles behind its creation with the Council’s priority of maximising regeneration and economic growth. 2. Background 2.1 Transport for the South East (TfSE) formed as a shadow Sub-National Transport Body (STB) in June 2017, and brings together sixteen local transport authorities: Bracknell Forest, Brighton and Hove, East Sussex, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Medway, Kent, Portsmouth, Reading, Slough, Southampton, Surrey, West Berkshire, West Sussex, Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham. The Shadow Partnership Board also includes arrangements for involving five Local Enterprise Partnerships in its governance process, along with two National Park Authorities, forty-four Boroughs and Districts in East Sussex, Hampshire, Kent, Surrey and West Sussex, and representatives from the transport industry. 2.2 TfSE’s aim, as set out in its vision statement, is to grow the South East’s economy by delivering a safe, sustainable, and integrated transport system that makes the South East area more productive and competitive, improves the quality of life for all residents, and protects and enhances its natural and built environment.
[Show full text]
Download Annual Public Health Report
Choosing Health in Medway The Annual Report of the Director of Public Health 2004 Medway Teaching Primary Care Trust As Chair of Medway Teaching Primary Care Trust I welcome the first Annual Health Report of our Director of Public Health, Dr Anita Sims. As part of our National Health Service, Medway PCT has two major objectives:- - to improve the health of the people of Medway, and - to reduce health inequalities in our communities If we are to achieve these objectives we need a base from which to start and an effective plan of action. This Annual Report forms the foundation on which this process is based and Dr Sims, as a member of Medway PCT’s Board, will be instrumental in guiding the continuing development of our health policies by helping us ensure that priorities are determined by reference to it. Healthy communities can only be achieved by consensus and with people and organisations working together effectively. We have achieved significant success already in this, particularly in terms of our integrated working with Medway Council. I am delighted with the support of Medway Council and the commitment of staff to this process in both organisations and look forward to the continuing development of these arrangements which are so crucial to the well-being of our community. Eddie Anderson Chairman Medway PCT I am very pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to the first Annual Health Report of the Director of Public Health since 1991. The importance of health, a feeling of well-being and an active, healthy lifestyle cannot be underestimated.
[Show full text]
Annex F –List of Consultees
ANNEX F –LIST OF CONSULTEES Local highway authorities Leicester City Council Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Leicestershire County Council Bath & NE Somerset Council Lincolnshire County Council Bedfordshire County Council Liverpool City Council Birmingham City Council Local Government Association Blackburn & Darwen London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Blackpool Borough Council London Borough of Barnet Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Bexley Borough of Poole London Borough of Brent Bournemouth Borough Council London Borough of Bromley Bracknell Forest Borough Council London Borough of Camden Bradford Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Croydon Brighton and Hove City Council London Borough of Ealing Bristol City Council London Borough of Enfield Buckinghamshire County Council London Borough of Greenwich Bury Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hackney Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hammersmith and Cambridgeshire County Council Fulham Cheshire County Council London Borough of Haringey City of York Council London Borough of Harrow Cornwall County Council London Borough of Havering Corporation of London London Borough of Hillingdon County of Herefordshire District Council London Borough of Hounslow Coventry City Council London Borough of Islington Cumbria County Council London Borough of Lambeth Cumbria Highways London Borough of Lewisham Darlington Borough Council London Borough of Merton Derby City Council London Borough of Newham Derbyshire County Council London
[Show full text]
Draft Rother District Council Environment Strategy PDF 291 KB
Rother District Council Report to: Cabinet Date: 27 July 2020 Title: Consultation Report – Draft Rother District Council Environment Strategy Report of: Ben Hook – Head of Service, Acquisitions, Transformation and Regeneration Cabinet Member: Councillor Field Ward(s): All Purpose of Report: To report the results of the public consultation for the draft Environment Strategy, and the recommendations of the Climate Change Steering Group Officer Recommendation(s): Recommendation to COUNCIL: That the Rother Environment Strategy 2020-2030 be approved and adopted, subject to the inclusion of the items listed in paragraphs 14 and 15 of the report, identified through the consultation process and recommended by the Climate Change Steering Group. Introduction 1. At its meeting on 16 September 2019 (Minute C19/38 refers), full Council agreed the following resolution to: i. Declare a ‘climate emergency’. ii. Review and update urgently Rother District Council’s current carbon strategy. iii. Pledge to do what is within our powers, to make Rother District carbon neutral by 2030, taking into account both production and consumption emissions. iv. Call on the Government to provide any additional powers and resources necessary for Rother District to achieve the target of becoming carbon neutral by 2030, and to implement best practice methods to limit global warming to 1.5ºC. v. Request that Cabinet establishes a Steering Group to report to full Council within six months with an Action Plan, outlining how the Council will address this emergency. The Carbon Neutral 2030 Action Plan will detail the leadership role Rother District will take in promoting community, public, business and other Council partnerships to achieve this commitment throughout the District.
[Show full text]
East Sussex Against Scams Partnership Charter Partners
East Sussex Against Scams Partnership Charter Partners The East Sussex Against Scams Partnership (ESASP) is a group of local organisations - businesses, charities, clubs, community enterprises, councils, societies, voluntary groups and others - committed to taking a stand against scams. The following have signed up to the ESASP Charter, pledging to work in partnership supporting each other’s efforts with the aim of making East Sussex a scam-free county: Action in rural Sussex (AirS) Active in Recovery (AiR) 63 Age Concern Eastbourne Charter 47 Age UK East Sussex Partners Charter Association of Carers signed Partners up! signed up Care for the Carers Chiddingly Parish Council ChoicES Recruitment Citizens Advice East Sussex (incorporating Eastbourne, Hastings, Lewes District, Rother District and Wealden) Columbus Point Residents Association Eastbourne Crowborough Town Council East Dean and Friston Parish Council East Sussex Association of Blind and Partially Sighted People (ESAB) East Sussex Community Voice delivering Healthwatch East Sussex East Sussex County Council East Sussex Federation of Women’s Institutes East Sussex Fire & Rescue Service East Sussex Hearing Resource Centre (ESHRC) East Sussex Seniors’ Association (ESSA) Eastbourne Blind Society Eastbourne Dementia Action Alliance Eastbourne Volunteers ECK Bookkeeping and Accounts Limited Please note: East Sussex County Council neither endorses nor guarantees in any way the organisations listed above. They are listed on the basis of their pledged support of the ESASP. Page 1 ESPAN
[Show full text]
Download Medway Council Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan
MEDWAY COUNCIL Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan November 2017 DOCUMENT CONTROL Amendment History Version No Date Author Comments 5 24/11/17 Taryn Dale Final Report Sign-off List Name Date Comments Tom Pinnington 24/11/17 Approved for distribution to client Distribution List Name Organisation Date Bob Dimond Medway Council 24/11/17 Medway Council 2 Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Project Brief ............................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Methodology and Approach ...................................................................................................... 6 2 BACKGROUND AND POLICY REVIEW ...................................................................................... 7 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 National Context ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Local Policy Context ................................................................................................................ 12 2.4 Demographic Profile ...............................................................................................................
[Show full text]
Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 Submission and It Sets out How the Duty to Cooperate Has Been Met in Preparing This Plan
Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 – Site Allocations & Development Management Policies Duty to Cooperate Statement December 2018 Contents Introduction 3 Context 4 Cross Boundary Strategic Planning Priorities 4 Key Relationships and Ongoing Work and Outcomes 7 Appendix – Statements of Common Ground 10 2 1 Introduction 1.1 The Localism Act 2011 places a duty on local planning authorities and other prescribed bodies to cooperate with each other on strategic planning matters relevant to their areas. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) reiterates this duty and requires an independent inspector to assess whether the plan they are examining has been prepared in accordance with the duty. 1.2 This statement has been prepared as a supporting document to the Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 submission and it sets out how the Duty to Cooperate has been met in preparing this plan. 1.3 The Duty to Cooperate requires ongoing constructive and active engagement on the preparation of development plan documents and other activities relating to sustainable development and the use of land. In particular it applies to strategic planning matters where they affect more than one local planning authority area. 1.4 Most cross-boundary issues affecting the district were dealt with in the recently adopted Local Plan Part 1and do not fall to be re-opened. Local Plan Part 2 is not a strategic plan; rather it is the detailed implementation of the existing strategic plan – the Local Plan Part 1. 1.5 In the Report on the Examination into the Lewes District Local Plan Part 1 – Joint Core Strategy1 published on 22nd March 2016 the Inspector confirmed in his assessment of the duty to cooperate: “The Councils have established effective and on-going working relationships with neighbouring and nearby local planning authorities, particularly through the East Sussex Strategic Planning Members Group and the Coastal West Sussex and Greater Brighton Strategic Planning Board.
[Show full text]
Rother District Council
Rother District Local Plan – Inspector’s Report Section 9 – Employment Developments on this single track railway would necessarily be relatively infrequent and there is a lack of evidence before me to support assertions that the operation of the railway would destroy the peace or tranquillity of the valley or that the previous extension to Bodiam had such an effect. The low embankments and suitably-designed river bridges would have a limited visual impact on what is a large scale open landscape. 9.55 However it is more difficult to predict the visual impact of the works that would be necessary to cross the various roads since these crossings have not been designed. If, as appears likely (see below), the relevant authorities would only sanction a bridge crossing of the A21 and B2244, that would require considerable engineering structures to take the road over the railway or vice versa. These works would include the bridge itself and necessary associated cuttings or embankments. Embankments appear to be the more likely given the location of the crossings within the river flood plain where cuttings could take the road or railway below the level of the water table. To achieve the necessary clearance, embankments would probably be significantly taller and wider than the original railway embankments with a greater landscape impact. However the actual impact on the AONB cannot be predicted without a designed scheme. Impact on farming operations and on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers 9.56 Subject to detailed consideration at the planning application stage, I consider that the proposed route is likely to be sufficiently remote from residential property that the noise or other emissions from the railway would not be unacceptably harmful to the living conditions of the occupiers.
[Show full text]
Core Strategy
Mm m ‘surface water flooding- Dec 13’ Rother Local Plan Core Strategy Adopted 29 th September 2014 www.rother.gov.uk/corestrategy Rother District Council Town Hall, Bexhill-on-Sea TN39 3JX 01424 787000 www.rother.gov.uk 2 Rother District Council Rother Local Plan Core Strategy Adopted September 2014 Contents Part I – Introduction and Context 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 7 2. Policy Context ...................................................................................................... 9 3. ‘Portrait’ of Rother District .................................................................................. 11 4. Main Issues .......................................................................................................... 17 Part II – Vision and Objectives 5. Spatial Vision ....................................................................................................... 23 6. Strategic Objectives ............................................................................................ 25 Part III – Spatial Strategies 7. Overall Spatial Strategy ...................................................................................... 29 8. Bexhill .................................................................................................................. 45 9. Hastings Fringes .................................................................................................. 57 10. Rye and Rye Harbour .........................................................................................
[Show full text]
Access Protection Marking Application Pack Sep 20
eastsussex.gov.uk ACCESS PROTECTION MARKING - GUIDANCE NOTES 1. How does an Access Protection Marking (APM) work? APMs are an advisory white line painted in front of a kerb which has been lowered to allow vehicle access, for example driveways. APMs can be very effective in deterring inconsiderate parking which restricts or blocks access. If you do not have a dropped kerb we will not consider an application for an APM. You can apply for consent to install a dropped kerb by contacting East Sussex Highways on 0345 60 80 193 or at www.eastsussexhighways.com. 2. Enforcement of APMs APMs are not legally enforceable by the Police or by Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs). In Civil Enforcement areas (Hastings, Eastbourne, and Lewes and Rother Districts) CEOs can, at the request of a resident whose access is blocked, issue a Penalty Charge Notice to a vehicle parked across a dropped kerb and blocking access. An APM is not required for CEOs to enforce this. To report a vehicle parked in this way you should contact our enforcement contractor, NSL Services who will be able to send a CEO to the area. 3. Charges for APMs There is a £46 charge for providing this marking. If the access is wider than 10 metres £1 is added to the charge for each additional metre. APMs will not be installed until payment is received. If you are a blue badge holder there is no charge for an APM, provided you live at the address. You will need to provide your Blue Badge serial number.
[Show full text]
Local Authorities Involved in LAD2, Organised Into County Area Consortia for the Purpose of the Scheme
Local Authorities involved in LAD2, organised into county area consortia for the purpose of the scheme. Bedfordshire Bedford Borough Central Bedfordshire Luton Borough Milton Keynes Berkshire Bracknell Forest Reading Slough West Berkshire Windsor & Maidenhead Wokingham Buckinghamshire Buckinghamshire Council Cambridge Cambridge City East Cambridgeshire District Fenland District Council Huntingdonshire District Peterborough City Council South Cambridgeshire District East Sussex Eastbourne Borough Hastings Borough Lewes District Rother District Council Wealden District Council Essex Basildon Braintree Brentwood Borough Council Castle Point Chelmsford Colchester Epping Forest Harlow Maldon Rochford Southend on Sea Tendring Thurrock Uttlesford District Hampshire Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council East Hampshire District Council Hart District Council Rushmoor Borough Council Test Valley Borough Council Winchester City Council Hertfordshire Broxbourne Borough Dacorum Borough East Herts District Council Hertsmere Borough North Hertfordshire District St Albans City & District Stevenage Borough Three Rivers District Watford Borough Welwyn Hatfield Borough Kent Ashford Borough Council Canterbury City Council Dartford Borough Council Dover District Council Folkestone & Hythe District Council Gravesham Borough Council Maidstone Borough Council Medway Council Sevenoaks District Council Swale Borough Council Thanet District Council Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council Tunbridge Wells Borough Council London Barking & Dagenham Bexley Bromley Camden City
[Show full text]