Licensing hearing demonstrates why nothing gets done
Plus next Medway Council could be a long one, last call for Medway Question Time, news in brief, and more
Is a busy road right outside a train station a bad place to put a grocery store? It is if you believe Medway Council’s public health team and other objectors, who are pushing to block a new Tesco opening in Rochester. We’ve got the full details from today’s licensing hearing below. Further down, we look ahead to what could be a very long Medway Council meeting next week, give one last plug to Medway Question Time, round up the latest news in brief, and more.
Licensing hearing demonstrates why nothing gets done
We often hear about the malaise in the heart of government, both national and local, that seems to stop just about anything getting done. Competing interests push back against each other, considerable weight is given to objections in processes, and a fear that doing anything new could be seen as going a bit far seems to stop us from going anywhere.
This morning saw a Licensing Hearing Panel meeting to decide the fate of a potential new Tesco Express in Rochester. We’ve written about this before, with the store already withdrawing one application for a premises licence after objectors raised concerns about the proposal.
To be clear, this meeting and argument is entirely about the ability for Tesco to sell alcohol in their store. There is little from a planning or licensing point of view to stop them from opening a shop in a commercial premises, but the sale of alcohol requires additional consent from the council.
Now, Rochester is known for its lack of meaningful grocery provision. Outside of a couple of Coop stores in the suburbs and a more recent one on Rochester Riverside, there aren’t many options for buying groceries around the High Street. Outside of a couple of off-licences, the limited (albeit lovely) range of Austen’s, the main option is walking over the bridge to Strood.
With Medway Council working to regenerate the area around Corporation Street, it approved a mixed-use building next to the station (and others nearby) where the ground floor is set aside for commercial use, and the flats are above. It’s a fairly normal thing to do in urban areas, which, in theory, creates more vibrant neighbourhoods.
Given Pullman House, the building in question here, is directly adjacent to Rochester train station, the idea of a small grocery store seems like a logical choice in a high footfall area where little other provision exists. Of course, things aren’t that simple though, and the objections came rolling in when the store first applied for a licence earlier this year. This led to Tesco withdrawing their application and returning with a new version with more limited hours, which would mean that they would only be able to sell alcohol up until 9pm on weekdays and 8pm on the weekends.
Inevitably, this didn’t prove good enough for four objectors, who still raised concerns.
To emphasise the point, the entire reason this application required a full licensing hearing today was that there were a grand total of four objections to the store opening.
The first and most significant came from Medway Council’s own public health team, whose concern was based around the store's location being within the Rochester High St Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) area. This policy is designed to limit the amount of off-licence alcohol sales in an area that suffers from alcohol-related crime and problems. It is hard to deny that the centre of Rochester does suffer from these issues, though the public health team’s objection doesn’t set out why the existing off-licences in Rochester High Street are acceptable. The nearby Coop is also deemed acceptable, despite being a little over 100m away from the proposed Tesco, because it sits outside of the line drawn by the council for the CIP area.
The baffling position of the public health team was compounded during the hearing when they cited domestic violence as being a reason to oppose the application. Of course, alcohol-related domestic violence is a serious problem, but the idea it could be stopped by denying Tesco a licence and thus forcing an abuser to walk 100m to the Coop borders on the absurd. The representative of the team proceeded to talk about nearby residential streets that could be impacted by the store, citing Vines Lane as an example, even though it’s a street that is neither nearby nor has any residents, given it runs between Vines Park and Kings School.
Another objector came armed with a pile of FOI data, which he had requested from Kent Police on how many crimes have occurred at other Tesco stores in Medway over the past 12 months. Given that the data obtained about other Express stores showed very few incidents that weren’t shoplifting, it’s hard to see this as quite the slam dunk that the objector clearly thought it was. By the end of the hearing, the same objector ended up arguing that the location just has too high of a footfall for Tesco to operate, which raises questions of exactly how quiet an area needs to be to justify a grocery store.
The final objector to speak at the hearing was Sarah Tranter of the Rochester City (sic) Centre Forum, who raised concerns about general alcohol-related crime while pointing out that the Coop doesn’t regularly have eggs and bread, so she’ll likely buy them from Tesco. The same Tesco that she was there to object to.
None of this is to say that Tesco necessarily came across well during the hearing either. At one point, their representative said they spent time wandering around Rochester and couldn’t see any evidence of street drinking or alcohol-related issues, which rather suggests they walked around with their eyes shut. Or, as it turned out, they did so during a freezing day in February, even if this did lead to a slightly unpleasant exchange where it was implied that all of the issues come from homeless people in the area.
Perhaps the most telling comment came during the summing up from the representative from public health, who argued that the licence should be rejected because Tesco can’t uphold the policies because they can’t control what people do after they buy alcohol in their stores. If this is indeed the bar that is now being set, it suggests Medway Council policy is now for no more licences for any premises to be issued in Rochester and that existing ones should eventually be withdrawn.
All of this returns us to the malaise mentioned at the start of this piece and the lack of joined-up thinking on these issues. If Medway Council doesn’t want things like grocery shops opening up in regeneration areas like Corporation Street, why does their planning policy even allow mixed-use developments with commercial space on the ground floor? If a prime location next to a train station on a busy road isn’t suitable for a grocery store, exactly where is?
Following the meeting, Medway Council’s Licensing Hearing Panel deliberated on the application behind closed doors and will issue a ruling by carrier pigeon in writing within five days. So by next week, we’ll know whether Medway Council thinks a grocery store of an empty unit is the best thing for a prime location like this. Stay tuned.
Have a story you think we might be interested in? Get in touch via hello AT localauthority DOT news. We’re always happy to speak off the record in the first instance…
Medway Council next week could be a long one
Next week, the first regular full Medway Council meeting will be held since Labour technically lost overall control of the authority back in February. Will it make a difference to proceedings? Probably not, but there are some interesting things on the agenda regardless.
There have been ongoing efforts to reduce the length of Medway Council meetings, which have often run beyond midnight, and little seems to be making much difference. The big idea was to reduce the number of motions so that each political group could only submit one motion, and a limited number of councillors could speak on them. This might have seemed like a good idea when the council had three groups and an independent councillor, but it now has four political groups and three independent councillors, all of whom are entitled to submit motions.
Combined with the debacle from the last meeting where the Independent Group’s motion had to be held back to seek legal advice, meaning they get an extra motion this time, we now have seven motions to get through next week. They include the return of that held over Chatham Docks motion (which Labour have submitted a pissy public question about), another from the Independent Group who want more Local Plan data, two on welfare cuts, and, of course, one on potholes. Reform have also submitted their very first motion, demanding better computer software to do their casework on, which isn’t the first move we would have predicted.
Councillor questions include the obligatory ones on potholes, red routes, and local government reorganisation. Elsewhere, the Conservatives are trying to ban solar panels made in China (pretty much all of them) from Medway Council buildings, there are valid questions about the feasibility of school breakfast clubs, and Cllr Anang, whose group has opposed School Streets in Rainham, is demanding that Medway Council do something after a child was hit by a car outside of a Rainham school.
Public questions include (and we wish we were making this up) “How many dinosaurs have you seen in Medway this month?” alongside a question from the Lib Dems about a development in Grain that suggests they’ve definitely been reading this publication.
Medway Council takes place on Thursday 24 April, at the St. George’s Centre in Chatham. There are much worse ways to spend the evening. There are much, much better ways too, but we’ll overlook that part.
Last call for Medway Question Time
If you have any burning questions to put to a panel of signifcant Medway figures, including Leader of Medway Council Vince Maple, then we have the event for you!
Medway Question Time is tomorrow (Wed 16 Apr) at MidKent College in Gillingham. There are still a few places left, so be sure to book your free ticket, and if you like, submit a question to the panel.
We’re really proud of these events. Getting people engaged with local issues and democracy is part of what we want to do with Local Authority, so we’re incredibly grateful to have built the sort of audience that is willing to come out on a Wednesday night to raise their local issues.
Our next Medway Question Time likely won’t be until the autumn after this, so please book a ticket and come along if you’d like to get involved.
In brief
🚓 A fraud investigation into a Medway Council owned company has now entered its sixth year. Specialist officers have been investigating fraud, alleged to be worth hundreds of thousands of pounds, since concerns were first raised in March 2019.
🏗️ Aldi has submitted their planning application to build a new store on Maidstone Road in Chatham, a bit further down the road from their existing store on Maidstone Road in Chatham. It looks a bit like every other application for an Aldi store.
📦 Evri couriers using the Strood depot have found themselves fined for parking while waiting for their parcels. Seems like a well thought out system.
🎾 The never-ending saga of turning the Machine Shop 8 frame at Chatham Dockside into something edges slightly closer to a conclusion with a planning application submitted to reclad the structure. The site is set to become a padel tennis centre because that’s what all the cool kids are into these days.
🍗 KFC in Strood has submitted a licence application to remain open until 5am for delivery drivers to pick up food. The application also seeks to extend the opening hours for regular customers until midnight.
🏪 The BBC has looked at the state of high streets in the southeast by comparing Chatham with Leatherhead in Surrey. Chatham doesn’t come out of it too badly either.
☕ Rochester High Street is set to get a new cafe with Cafe Lounge moving in to the former Fleur de The unit on the corner of Crow Lane.
⚽ Football YouTuber StuntPegg has been to Gillingham to look at the ‘temporary’ stand at Priestfield that’s now been there for 22 years:
More Authority
For our weekend interview, we sat down with Cllr David Finch, leader of the Reform group on Medway Council. He was elected in a February by-election, and we chatted to him about why he stood for election for Reform, why Cllr Spalding isn’t part of their group, whether Reform is a racist party, and more.
“That does show the professionalisation of the party”
Reform’s David Finch was elected as a councillor for Rochester East and Warren Wood following a by-election in February. Steven met Cllr Finch at the Ship and Trades pub, and they spoke about why he stood for election for Reform, why independent councillor Chris Spalding is not part of the group, whether Reform is a racist party, and more.
Footnotes
Follow us on social media! We’re on Facebook, Instagram, BlueSky, and Threads, but not that other one.
If you enjoy Local Authority, please share it with your friends, family, associates, and even your enemies. We have no meaningful marketing budget, so we rely on word of mouth from our readers to find new readers. You can even get some sweet, sweet rewards for sending new readers our way. Details here.
Music that soundtracked the creation of this edition: Great Divide by Semisonic, All Hell by Los Campesinos!, and Compliments Please by Self Esteem.
Your item about Tesco's selling alcohol in Corporation Street completely misses the point. It was not about Tesco's being allowed to open but about it being allowed to sell alcohol in an area already affected by alcohol related crime. Tesco's new store will be in a Cumulative Impact Area which is part of the much considered policy to restrict sales of alcohol in new off licences. This policy was extensively consulted upon and has the support of Medway Public Health, the Police, Medway Full Council and many of us who live near and go to our High Streets. A better option for Tesco's which they clearly do not prefer, is to do what B&M has done in Gillingham High Street and open a store without alcohol sales (so as not to endanger their staff). Tesco's already has stores without alcohol sales as mentioned yesterday. In your unequivocal support for development, do you ever wonder why people get disillusioned when they can't place children at a local school, can't get a GP appointment, breathe terrible air quality and dread going to Medway Hospital?
Thank you for highlighting the Labour 🪴 "public" question next week.