Agenda item

To consider and endorse, or make recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Planning, Highways, Transport and Waste on the proposed decision to approve the GIF 2017 Update attached at Appendix B.

Tom Marchant (Head of Strategic Planning and Policy) and Hannah Clement (Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Project Officer) were in attendance for this item.

1.    Mr Payne (Deputy Cabinet Member for Planning, Highways, Transport and Waste) introduce the report which set out the Kent and Medway Growth and Infrastructure Framework (GIF) that was first published in 2015. The GIF provided robust evidence on housing, economic growth and the associated infrastructure needed for the County up to 2031.

2.    Mr Marchant said that the draft Growth and Infrastructure Framework had been updated since 2015 to include revised housing and population figures and provided a breakdown of the cost for a range of infrastructure up to 2031. The GIF used data from a number of sources and was developed in collaboration with Medway Council, all district and borough councils within Kent and local partners. Mr Marchant paid particular attention to Figure 1 within the report which showed the comparison of figures between the 2015 and 2018 Framework.

3.    In response to questions, Mr Whiting (Cabinet Member for Planning, Highways, Transport and Waste) agreed that paragraph 4.7 within the report required revising to ensure clarity and explained to Members that the GIF would require updating as new housing developments and local plans came to light, to ensure it accounted for the changing demographic and required infrastructure.

4.    Members commented on the housing and population figures. Mrs Cooper (Corporate Director of Growth, Environment and Transport) confirmed that the figures within the report should read a population growth of 396,200 matched by a housing growth of 178,600. In regard to the increase of housing numbers and where these would be situated within Kent, Mrs Cooper informed Members that housing was a national issue, however, in order to respond to the need for sustainable homes for a longer period of time, it was essential to consider the infrastructure needs up to 2050. Extensive plans ensured Kent and Medway were in a strong position to anticipate and plan for sustainable growth far into the future and manage demand under increasing budgetary pressures.

5.       In response to questions around the backlog of highways maintenance, and the new housing methodology, Mr Marchant said that the updated GIF used data from October 2017, data after this point had not be accounted for within the report, however it would be incorporated into the next edition of the framework.

6.    Members asked about the ‘new jobs’ figure and whether this included the new jobs within the anticipated aviation centre at Manston Airport. Mr Marchant said the figure included the job numbers from the Thanet local plan and officers regularly monitored this. It was predominately the decision of Thanet District Council to determine the future use of the site and the supporting infrastructure in terms of jobs and homes. Once that had been determined, the next iteration of the GIF would incorporate those figures.

7.       In response to Members’ concerns around the source of information, Mrs Cooper said that the data was from district sources, such as local plans, and these were then forecasted by KCC.

8.    With regard to questions around utilities, Mrs Cooper said that all aspects of infrastructure had been reviewed to ensure correct infrastructure was identified to accommodate growth. A utilities sub-group had been established to carry out this work however historical drainage systems caused a number of issues. In terms of waste, Mr Wilkin (Director of Highways, Transportation and Waste) worked in conjunction with the Strategic Planning and Policy team to account for future waste need and whilst the price of disposal tonnage decreased, the amount of disposal tonnage increased, this was one example of a number of scenarios that needed to be considered for the longer-term planning.

9.    In response to a question, Mr Marchant said that the framework was not a statutory document and therefore would not be going out for public consultation.

10.  Mr Marchant said that the developer contributions were a live issue and were monitored regularly to ensure opportunities to secure grants were optimised.

11. RESOLVED that the proposed decision to approve the Growth and Infrastructure Framework 2018 update, be endorsed.