Minutes of the Board Meeting of St. Mary’s Island Residents’ Association Ltd.
(SMIRA)
held at the Community Centre on Tuesday 15th January 2013
commencing at 7:00pm
Present:
Chair: David Taylor (DT)
Directors: Leslie James, Barry Woolford, Keith Robinson, Bob Muid.
Visiting Members: Paul Witty, Vanessa Punnett, Arthur Fearria, Roger Best, Susan Price, Alan
Bennett, Wendy Pinder, Carol Curness de Witty, Clare Muid, Brian Viney and Dawn Elms.
CMT Representatives: Kerry Rudge (Residential Services Officer)
Medway Councillors: Craig Mackinlay
Invited Guests: Yusuf Çinar (Community Safety Officer), Sue Kemsley (PCSO), Jill
Brotherwood (Moat Housing), Martin Simmons (Kent Fire)
Apologies for absence: Cllr. Andrew Mackness, Matthew Hill (CMT), Alan Sneller, Sonia Allen.
Steve Farrin may be late.
Item 1/13: Minutes of the previous meeting: The minutes of the last meeting were approved
subject to a few amendments; proposed by Carol Curness de Witty, seconded by Keith Robinson.
Item 2/13: Matters arising:
No right turn at the Co-op from SMI
There has been a number of incidents where cars from St. Mary’s Island have turned right from
the bridge into the road leading to the Co-op (this is a no right turn). This land is adopted highway
and the responsibility of Medway Council. The plan is to extend the pedestrian crossing island
southwards by a few metres to engineer-out the ability for vehicles to turn right at that location.
Medway Council are unable to justify funding to carry out the required works as there are no
official accident reports to evidence the requirement. As it is felt by island residents and Chatham
Maritime Trust (CMT) that the works are essential to reduce the risk of an accident CMT and
Cllrs Andrew Mackness and Craig Mackinlay have kindly agreed to cover the cost.
Post Meeting Note: This matter is now being delayed as Medway Council insist that they use
their own preferred contractor and must follow their lengthy procedure for instructing works.
They do not expect to be in a position to proceed until the new financial year but are looking to
install temporary plastic bollards in the meantime.
The Historic Group
Andrew Ducat, Phil and Barry Woolford are to have a pre-meeting to put some material together
for presentation at the inaugural meeting of the Historic Group on Friday 22nd February 2013 at
7:00pm in the Community Centre. It will be a group of people who will all take part, to a degree,
in researching the history of the island – more of a collective. We won’t know how successful it is
likely to be until the first meeting. Notification of the meeting will be put on the Community
Centre website and notice board.
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 1 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
20mph Speed Limit
David Taylor and Alan Sneller met with representatives from Kent Police, CMT, Medway
Council Neighbourhood Safety, and Cllr Andrew Mackness on 28th November 2012 outside the
Ship & Trades public house. The following came out of the meeting:
1. Kent Police policy is not to enforce 20 mph zones at it is resource intensive and Medway
road traffic collision statistics do not justify police attention around SMI.
2. Apparently the traffic-calming measures engineered into the ring road are not sufficient to
meet 20mph zone specifications.
3. SMI secondary roads are natural 20mph areas anyway.
4. Some remedial work is required by Medway Council to make the default 30mph limit
around the ring road enforceable anyway (currently it isn’t).
5. PCSO Sue Kemsley has helpfully organised a road-safety poster campaign with local
children e.g. “Fast Cars Kill Kids” etc.
Sue has been trained to use the portable radar speed detection system and is looking for some
volunteers to join her so that we can record people’s speed and registration number. They are then
sent a letter if they were speeding. We can use the equipment at any point on the island where
residents feel it is needed. It’s non-confrontational and will only be for data rather than
enforcement. Matthew Hill has given Sue permission to deploy the speed camera van on CMT
land near to Meddoc as people often speed over the bridge when leaving SMI.
Post Meeting Note: A call for volunteers to help Sue has been put on the SMIRA website.
There is clearly a spilt in opinion across SMI regarding the speed limit with young families being
pro-20mph and predominantly child-free couples not being in favour.
Cllr Craig Mackinlay asked if we could investigate the cost of a static radar speed display sign.
Post Meeting Note: Bob Muid has found a radar speed sign which shows
the car’s speed and if it’s over 30mph it also shows SLOW DOWN. The sign
is £1,524 including delivery and VAT. We would need to have it fitted,
although there is already a suitable post (currently displaying an illegal
30mph roundel), and connected to a supply of electricity. There is a lamp
post reasonably near but we would need permission from Highways to
connect to their electricity supply and also obtain planning permission for
the sign.
Lighting in Central Walk
This is going ahead; Countryside are drawing up a specification to go out to tender. These will be
low level bollard lighting. Hopefully they will be vandal resistant as much as possible.
Walkway over the lock entrance
SMIRA were promised that this would be open in November 2012. David Taylor asked HCA to
look into the matter as they issue the lease for the lock and MDL reported that they will open the
access across the lock gates at the end of the two week maintenance shutdown (at the end of
January). They have been let down by contractors which is why there has been such a long delay.
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 2 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
Item 3/13: Chair’s report:
David Taylor introduced Jill Brotherwood from Moat Housing who look after most of the social
housing on SMI.
Jill explained the two types of social housing. All Moat housing clients come via the Council’s
housing register. They have general needs housing which is rented and a proportion of shared
housing which is part buy/part rent. The occupants of the rented properties are on probation for
one year and they do not have an assured tenancy. After a year if there is a problem with a tenant
(e.g. anti-social behaviour or non-payment of rent) Moat can only take them to court and then if
the judge decides, Moat can evict the tenants. Within a year, if there is a problem with a tenant,
Moat can serve a Section 21 notice which means that they don’t need to go to court to evict the
tenant. For shared ownership the owner/tenants have a lease with Moat but should they cause a
problem it is much more difficult to get possession or take legal action and it all costs money.
Moat have a person in their team, Ann Justice, who deals with anti-social behaviour. Kerry Rudge
(CMT) now works closely with the team at Moat in order to deal with problems quickly.
If residents have any issues with Moat properties can they please contact Kerry Rudge in the first
instance (01634 891888 or kerryrudge@cmtrust.co.uk). For continual problems Moat will need
good evidence to take tenants to court, so logs, photos etc. are very important for residents to
keep. Moat like to discuss problems with tenants rather than write letters but if these remain
unresolved action is taken; Moat have recently evicted a tenant from SMI for anti-social
behaviour.
Low level problems such as non-upkeep of gardens fronting public areas are more difficult to deal
with as a judge will never make someone homeless for not looking after their garden. Moat sign
up to the SMI covenants and encourage their tenants to be law abiding citizens. In order to
encourage this Moat are trialling a system at another part of Medway where they provide different
levels of service according to the behaviour of the tenants (i.e. there could be a loss of privileges).
If an issue with a property is persistent Moat will deal with it and recharge the tenant. Sue
Kemsley asked that if any residents have an issue with anti-social behaviour, graffiti etc. they
should contact the police on 999 if the crime is actually taking place, or on 101 to make a
complaint. They should also obtain a crime reference number. Sue Kemsley can also be contacted
on 0777 222 6226. If graffiti is removable then it is not criminal damage but is anti-social
behaviour. Notification to the police can be done anonymously and residents can also request that
they don’t get a visit from the police should they wish to remain anonymous in their locality.
Sue Kemsley, Kerry Rudge and Yusuf Çinar will be having regular meetings with the housing
officer from Moat, in the future. Cllr. Craig Mackinlay asked that Moat react quickly to issues that
residents raise and not let things drag on.
The SMI covenants cannot be changed and if there is a breach of covenant Kerry Rudge should be
informed.
A resident asked if there was any legislation which made the construction of social housing on
SMI compulsory. It was explained that when a developer applies for planning permission for a
project the planning authority will insist on a certain percentage of social housing. In Medway this
is currently 25%, in London 30% and when the final phase is built on SMI the overall percentage
of social housing on SMI will be 15%. This is all wrapped up in what’s known as a Section 106
agreement. There is no legislation that insists social housing is built; this is purely policy. The
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 3 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
resident stated that they were promised, when they bought their property on SMI in 2001, that
there would be no social housing. They suspect that this could be a breach of contract and will be
obtaining legal advice.
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: The original planning consent was
granted alongside a section 106 agreement which outlined that 200 affordable homes would be
provided on the Island. In 2001 affordable homes would have already been provided on the
Island. In 2005 permission was granted under reference MC2004/1207 to extend the Outline
Planning Permission for a further 8 years. A supplemental s106 Agreement was entered into at
this time which increased the total number of affordable homes to be provided to 246.
For the avoidance of doubt it has never been the case at any time that no affordable housing
would have been provided.
My only explanation to the residents’ comments is that possibly they were told there was not
affordable housing on the Phase that was being sold e.g. Sector 4 (The Fishing Village) does not
have any affordable housing.
*Note that Andrew correctly states that the supplemental s106 agreement (21/12/2005) increased
the total number of affordable homes to 246. However, in previous communications between
CML and SMIRA, this number seems to have increased to 256. SMIRA has enquired where the
extra 10 came from and we await an answer.
There was a worry that if properties in the final phase weren’t sold privately they may become
social housing. Jill Brotherwood stated that Moat were not in a position to purchase any vacant
properties on SMI.
Cllr. Craig Mackinlay said that he and Andrew Mackness were pushing hard for the majority of
the last phase of social housing to be an Extra Care Facility and the remainder shared ownership.
AGM report: attendees were happy with the AGM and had no further issues.
Replacement of Central Walk notice board: Bob Muid will progress this.
Post Meeting Note: We have found a suitable A1 size landscape notice board (2 rows of 4 x A4
portrait sheets) plus a header row for “St. Mary’s Island Residents’ Association Ltd. (SMIRA)”.
We have money set aside for the purchase and installation of the board.
Item 4/13: Secretary’s report:
We have two new members since the last meeting. Our company accounts have been filed with
Companies House.
Item 5/13: Treasurers report:
Since the last meeting we have had a large expense of £1,160.00 due to the printing and delivery
of the newsletter and AGM notices and documents. A £250 grant from CMT was received,
earmarked for the Historic Group. As at 21st December our balance stands at £3,360.66 and there
is still a bill to go through for £38.00 for room hire. Approximately £1,000 of the remainder is set
aside for the purchase and installation of the replacement Central Walk notice board.
Item 6/13: Website:
The SMIRA website, www.smira.info, has had a refresh and went live on 24th December. Since
then we have had 399 unique visitors, 336 first time visits and the most viewed page is the news
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 4 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
page. The site was designed so that visitors can find the current items easier, since SMI is
currently going through an important phase with lots of things going on.
All the details of the masterplan for the final phase of SMI build-out can be found on the website
(including the presentation boards from the consultation meeting).
Any keen photographers who would like to contribute images for the website please contact Bob
at admin@smira.info. We need more good images and the photographers will be acknowledged.
Post Meeting Note: There is now a means to add your email address to our list for posting news
and meeting minutes etc.
Item 7/13: Chatham Maritime Trust Report:
In the absence of Matthew Hill, Kerry Rudge gave the CMT report. Some items have already
been covered such as the no right turn at the Co-op.
All the CCTV cameras in the Community Centre are now working and two additional cameras
have been installed. There is also one outside the Centre monitoring that area.
On 23rd February 2013 in the afternoon there will be a percussion workshop held at the
Community Centre. This relates to some sponsorship that CMT made to the Jazz Festival (23rd
September) and as part of this it was agreed that Rowan would do a percussion workshop, mainly
for children, at the Community Centre. Everyone can come and have a ‘bash’. Please contact
Kerry or the SMICC office for more details or to register for the event.
The New Year’s Eve party was a success; Martine and Cara were thanked for organising the
event.
CMT are looking to install a CCTV camera at the Starfish playground. A consultation letter has
gone out to residents in the immediate area who would be affected by the installation of such a
camera. The response to the letter is generally positive.
CMT’s contractor, having been asked to provide a quote for some ‘no parking’ signs for the
doctor’s surgery and Community Centre car park, went ahead and installed them without
approval. As part of the consultation exercise, CMT has now sent out letters explaining about the
issues related to parking in the area as they have received many complaints from users of the
Centre and doctor’s surgery. CMT are considering introducing permit parking during the day
(8:30am-5:00pm). The deadline for comments has been extended to 15th February. It was asked if
visitors to the pharmacy would be allowed to park in the car park, as at present. The island
pharmacy makes no contribution to the car park but CMT are working with Moat to find a
solution to this issue.
There have been a number of occasions recently with problem parking. A van has been parked in
the car park all day and its owner was not involved in any activity either at the doctor’s or the
Community Centre. Another car parked actually on the recently laid paving, causing damage.
Nothing can be done about these incidents because there is no signage saying that parking is only
for users of the Community Centre or the doctor’s surgery. CMT plan to rectify this situation so
that they can give a parking ticket to repeating offenders.
There was a condition in the original planning consent that a drop-off and pick-up area be
included as part of the construction of the new school. Unfortunately, this original permission
lapsed and this requirement was not included in the current planning permission.
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 5 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: I have reviewed the original planning
consent granted on 3rd July 1996 under reference 93/0730GL and the s106 Agreement relating to
education and cannot seem to find anything relating to a drop off point for the school.
We are continuing to investigate how our design or indeed alternative arrangements can be
progressed to alleviate the current situation at school opening and closing times but feel that it
should be made clear that unless I have missed something it is not an obligation on the developer
that emanates from either the original Outline Planning Permission or the original s106
Agreements.
* Brian Viney has found the planning document GL 97/0468/93/0730 (18th Sept 1997) which
states: “The building [primary school] shall not be occupied until provision for drop off and pick
up parking for parental use is constructed in accordance with plans to be submitted to and
approved by the Local Planning Authority.”
David Taylor is to have a meeting with Jonathon Sadler (HCA) where one of the items to be
discussed is a temporary drop off point on the land to be developed and after development for
there to be extra parking provision.
Post Meeting Note: Jonathan Sadler agreed to take this matter to the next CML Board meeting
together with the request that a temporary drop - off and pick - up area be constructed on the
existing undeveloped land close to the school.
CMT are sending out SMIRA application forms and welcome letters to all new owners on SMI.
They also send out a Friday flyer by email every week, although mainly aimed at south of basin
users, if any residents would like to be copied in please contact Kerry.
The door alarm on the Community Centre has been fixed and the replacement blinds are on order
and should be installed soon.
The issue of misuse of the disabled parking bays outside the Co-op was raised but it is not a
requirement of their lease to do anything about it. CMT have asked the Co-op to look into it but
they can’t enforce anything.
Item 8/13: Homes and Communities Agency:
David Taylor is to have a meeting with Jonathon Sadler to discuss a number of issues.
Item 9/13: Ring Road adoption, landscaping and Traffic Regulation Orders consultation:
The adoption has fallen back, mainly due to the weather but also some other issues. It is now
expected in the first quarter of 2013.
Regarding the secondary road adoption, David Taylor had a walk around with representatives
from Redrow and Barratt on their respective development sectors. On 22nd January he is to meet
with CML to walk round the first sector of Countryside. SMIRA policy is to promote the
reinstatement of the original landscaping plans and ensure ongoing maintenance to a good
standard.
A resident asked what were the benefits of having the ring road adopted if there would be no
reduction in the CMT service charge. The service charge never paid for road works, street signage
or street lighting. These were paid for by CML and the lighting in particular has often been a
problem as they inspect only twice a year. Once the road is adopted, Medway Council will be
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 6 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
responsible for the street surfaces, lighting (inspected every 3 weeks in winter, 5 in summer),
street sweeping and gritting the roads during the winter.
Item 10/13: Peel Ports update:
The last forum was on the 10th August 2012 and we need to request another meeting as they were
supposed to be quarterly.
Item 11/13: Bus services to St Mary’s Island:
Arriva are due to have a meeting with representatives from SMIRA to discuss outstanding issues.
These include scheduling to arrange services to coincide with trains to and from London at
Chatham railway station as well as to finalise the location where the bus will stop to lose time to
maintain the prescribed timetable.
Everyone welcomed the new bus shelter at Stones Roundabout but it was requested that the
convoluted timetable be replaced with the small A5 easy-to-understand version.
It was asked why large empty double decker buses were deployed to the SMI route. It turns out
that they can only use available buses whatever their size.
Item 12/13: Youth Club:
The youth club is running okay. Martine and Cara, who organised the New Year’s Eve party, have
donated two games, football and ice-skating, to the youth club that were purchased for the New
Year’s Eve party. Cara and Martine still hold the funds raised from the event, on behalf of CMT,
to put towards something for the Community Centre that will benefit all the users.
Item 13/13: Planning matters:
The Sector 4F application for planning permission made by CML was only a variance on the
original application of 2008: 10 dwellings with garages, associated parking and amenity spaces.
Links to the planning submission are on our website: http://www.smira.info/news.html#Sector4F
SMI Final Phase Masterplan
Countryside Maritime Limited (CML), a joint venture between Countryside Properties and the
landowners, Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), working in partnership with PCKO
Architects, presented their plans for the final phase build out on St. Mary’s Island at a
consultation meeting at the SMI Community Centre on Thursday 10th January 2013. There were
forms at the meeting so that residents could leave their comments on the development. PCKO and
CML thought that the response from the residents was very good; they had a lot of people attend.
Cllr. Andrew Mackness had serious concerns about the amount of social housing proposed (97
units, 28.61% of the final phase). Although social housing is very important, because of the way
the island was built out, the last phase has more affordable housing than the earlier phases and this
could dramatically change the demographic. CML have responded to this concern by proposing
an Extra Care Facility for the elderly and people with disabilities which would ‘absorb’ 60 out of
the 97 proposed social housing units. Cllrs. Andrew Mackness and Craig Mackinlay are also in
favour of the facility. This is not a private ‘warden controlled sheltered housing’ scheme where
people buy an apartment in the complex; it is a rented apartment scheme run by a social landlord
(such as Century 21).
Jill Brotherwood, from Moat Housing, raised the fact that the elderly were being encouraged to
remain in their own homes where they could be cared for more cheaply. One attendee at the
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 7 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
consultation, Cllr. Goulding, suggested that Medway already had more than enough of this type of
facility and therefore it was not guaranteed that such a facility would gain planning permission.
Post Meeting Note: Since then SMIRA has been informed that the information given by Cllr.
Goulding is incorrect. The landowners (HCA) are also in favour of such a facility so, although
SMIRA can’t be given any assurances at this stage, it is very likely that such a facility will gain
planning permission.
Andrew Mackness, who couldn’t attend the SMIRA meeting, asked that a statement from him be
read out:
“As you will be aware there has been much concern raised by residents about the build out of
SMI in relation to affordable property which was originally highlighted by myself. Much of these
concerns were voiced at the consultation. I have raised this issue on many occasions and will
continue to do so along with Craig (Cllr. Mackinlay), to support residents’ concerns that we
share.
Irrespective of the planning permission already granted a number of years ago, it cannot be right
to allow any density of affordable housing to increase above current levels already established on
the island, if the quality of the island and a lifestyle which people have bought into, is not to be
affected in a negative way. We must all work together to achieve the best outcome possible for all
residents.
Whilst much has been achieved by SMIRA and the Councillors in River Ward to reduce the build
out figure of around 28.61% affordable against the current levels of 12.45%, to 13.26%, with the
introduction of an Extra Care Facility, we must not necessarily stop negotiations there. We
should try to ensure the balance of affordable is further reduced as it seems are the wishes of
many residents. Perhaps more elderly accommodation would assist in addition to those we have
already secured to offset the affordable elements.
I would suggest that we await the detailed results of the consultation and then decide a move
forward which could involve a petition of some nature that Craig and I could present at full
council.
Regards
Andrew”
There was some confusion about the extra care facility; some residents thought that it could be a
facility for residents on the island. However, it is only for people who are on the social housing
register not private owners.
Jill Brotherwood (Moat Housing) said that almost 50% of their affordable housing on SMI is
shared ownership. She reminded the meeting that the residents in shared ownership housing could
eventually buy the remainder of the equity, thereby becoming private owners and reducing the
number of affordable housing units on SMI. It would, therefore, be a good idea to push for the
maximum amount of shared ownership in the final phase proportion of social housing.
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: In light of the comments from the Moat
representative it should be spelt out for clarity that in terms of tenure splits for affordable housing
the s106 agreements dictate that this should be 60% rented and 40% shared ownership.
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 8 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
*It states in that s106 agreement that CML have to build 60% rented and 40% shared ownership
but that both have to be 40% 1 bedroom, 30% 2 bedroom, 20% 3 bedroom and 10% 4 and 5
bedroom. Bob Muid has asked Jill Brotherwood from Moat if she can give us the breakdown on
the sizes of their affordable housing on the Island.
*Another condition of schedule 1 of the s106 agreement, dated 1995 (the original document),
states that “where affordable housing is included in any phase of the development… no more than
20 such units shall be located together”.
A discussion took place on what form a petition to Medway Planning Department could take.
Some attendees wanted a survey and others a petition. It was decided to hold a small meeting of
interested parties and directors of SMIRA to take this forward. It was also suggested that SMIRA
invite someone from Medway Planning to come and talk to us about the issues raised at the
meeting.
A suggestion was made that, since the final phase was originally supposed to be the showpiece of
the island, CML should reduce the number of properties by building larger executive properties
on the marina and riverside. The number of social housing units would therefore need to be
reduced to keep the percentage of social housing constant.
Post Meeting Note: Since this SMIRA meeting the meeting of interested parties was held and a
plan of action made. David Taylor reported to the meeting that, following assurances received in
his subsequent meetings with HCA and Medway Council, it was very likely that the Extra Care
Facility would be included as part of the development. SMIRA and SMI residents should continue
to lobby for the Extra care Facility and to promote that the remainder of the affordable housing be
shared equity.
It was decided to encourage residents to lobby Andrew Mackness with support for the Extra Care
Facility and a push for the majority of the remainder of the affordable housing to be shared equity.
Information to this effect was put on the SMIRA website (www.smira.info) and on the SMIRA
notice boards. Everyone on the SMIRA email list was also sent the information and asked to pass
it on to other residents. http://www.smira.info/news.html#SMIRALobby
Barry Woolford raised that originally it was proposed that there would be no commercial activity
on the island.
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: The original planning permission sets out
that approval was granted for the following:
"the erection of up to 1700 dwellings together with community, educational and commercial areas
and associated open spaces, highway and service infrastructure"
In fact the Outline permission allows for up to 28,000 sq. ft. of commercial space with no more
than 20,000 sq. ft. in any one building. Therefore the assertion that it was originally proposed that
there was no commercial activity on the Island appears to be incorrect.
In the masterplan there is shown a café, restaurant and offices. Some residents were extremely
unhappy about the proposals but some residents liked the idea of a café or restaurant. David
Taylor replied that there was a feeling that the Island didn’t have a heart or hub and that a good
quality restaurant or café would provide one. The location of the restaurant near the marina means
that part of their trade would probably come from the boat owners and access would also be via
the road bridge over the lock.
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 9 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: For clarity we can advise that following
the public consultation we have taken the decision to remove the restaurant element of the
scheme, however the cafe is still being progressed.
The offices came about because it was felt that Chatham Maritime Trust should have a presence
on the Island and they needed a bit more room than the Coach House could provide. They would
take up a proportion of the office space themselves, the rest being offered to residents on the
island who, maybe, work from home but occasionally need office facilities (meeting room,
photocopier, high speed internet etc.).
Barry expressed concern about the vacant restaurant and bars sites on the Quays development on
Basin One. It was explained that there were several interested parties wanting to move into the
site but the fact that the rental terms and conditions were not favourable in the current market was
not helping.
Post Meeting Note: The first residents of ‘the dark tower’ have finally moved in so it is expected
that something will start happening with the commercial units soon.
Residents at the SMIRA meeting raised concerns about the restaurant and café. It was feared that
any café would end up as a downmarket franchise such as Macdonalds, attracting undesirable
visitors from off the island.
Any Other Business:
Barry Woolford has been in touch with CML about the street lighting, which in his area is
defective. They are either off or permanently on. David Taylor will raise this with Andrew Usher
of CML.
A question was raised about progress about the Southern Water rebate. Southern Water have
written back to David Taylor requesting addresses of the properties concerned. It was suggested
that it could be residences on the whole island, however, it is likely that it is only residences on
the riverside or basins which may discharge their surface water and rainwater into the Medway or
dock and not the sewers. David Taylor will continue to investigate.
Post Meeting Note: Andrew Usher (CML) has written: All surface water drainage at St. Mary's
Island is drained into a series of Outfalls which discharge directly into the River Medway.
*However, a condition of planning application 93/0730GL prohibits surface water discharging
into any water course or feature unless agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. I
have been advised by Andrew Usher that “Planning approval has been granted for the surface
water drainage system.”
Yusuf Çinar has spoken to waste services about signage regarding dog excrement. Most of their
signage all has the Medway phone number on it and this is not applicable to SMI. However Yusuf
has found some without a telephone number on and asked if they were suitable for putting on
lampposts on SMI. Everyone agreed.
Date and time of next meeting: Tuesday 26th February 2013 commencing at 7:00pm
Produced by Bob Muid
Page 10 of 10
Adopted 26th February 2013