Meeting documents

Planning Working Group
Monday, 4 March 2013

planning working group

MINUTES of the Meeting held at the site below on Monday 4 March 2013 from 9:30 am to 10:05 am.

 

site visit

PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Bobbin, Mike Henderson, Ben Stokes, and Ghlin Whelan.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Philippa Davies and Graham Thomas.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mr John Collins (Agent), Mr Alan Stewart (Graveney with Goodnestone Parish Council), Mr and Mrs Ganderton and Mr and Mrs Montague (local residents).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Andy Booth, Mark Ellen, Roger Truelove, Alan Willicombe and Jean Willicombe.

 
602  

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

 
603  

sw/12/1585 (2.12) - cleve hill farm, cleve hill, graveney, nr faversham

The Area Planning Officer explained that the proposal was for the change of use and conversion of a barn to provide four B1 and B8 units with associated parking. Three units would have their access to the side, whilst the fourth would use the existing access to the building. The footprint of the building would remain the same and the cladding to the building would be replaced. The Area Planning Officer also advised that no bats were present within the application site. Access to the site would be via the narrow lane which at times had limited visibility, and although there had been one fatal accident, this had not been due to lack of visibility. He advised that the service road to the London Array was a more suitable access road. This road was fenced and gated, it was not a long term measure, but was due to be removed once the final phase of the substation was complete. The Area Planning Officer reported that agricultural use of the building created around eight cars per day; the proposed new use was thought to generate around 25 vehicles per day which was not expected to have a significant impact on road safety and there would be a decrease in large agricultural type vehicles.

The Area Planning Officer reported on views from consultees. He advised that Graveney Parish Council had raised concern with access to the site and foul water treatment. KCC Highways considered access to the site should be along the London Array access route, but had also explained that if this was not possible, refusal on highway grounds would be difficult to defend, unless the impact of the proposal was thought to have a severe consequence, which was unlikely. The Head of Service Delivery had requested conditions relating to construction hours and contamination. Natural England had requested an additional condition in relation to surface water drainage. The Environment Agency did not object, subject to relevant conditions. Protect Kent had stated that the proposal was not for local needs or related to agriculture and had raised concern with the noise levels which were audible as there was little background noise and the proposal was contrary to policies aimed at supporting rural diversification.

The Agent advised that he fully understood the condition ensuring the site was not used in connection with any distribution activity or business. He explained that the applicant did not see a reason to restrict access to the site to the London Array service road, and that a condition was not necessary to do this.

The Parish Council representative raised the following points: Graveney and Goodnestone Parish Council had concerns with the generation of traffic from the proposed application; the vehicle figures could be more than projected; issues with drainage; support job creation; there had been several 'near misses' at the junction of Cleve Hill; the road was too narrow; no control over the amount of vehicles using the road; and the location was inappropriate for the proposed change of use.

Local residents raised the following points: the 'near misses' were very real to local residents; issues of tractor incidents and loss of vehicle loads onto residential property; access to the site was dangerous; potential for large increase in vehicle movements; the proposal would set a precedent; road condition was in a poor state and likely to get worse; vehicle movements, especially at harvest time, throughout the night; congestion problems; bad visibility to left when leaving the site; entrance/exit was not good; use of cess-pit would increase; lack of drainage for foul water; and the use of the London Array service road would help to alleviate some of our concerns.

A member of the public distributed some papers in relation to access issues to the site which the Chairman advised would be viewed by Members prior to them making a decision on the application.

In response to a question regarding access, the Area Planning Officer advised that London Array were concerned about use and security of their access road. The Agent suggested that if Members considered the London Array service road should be used as access, a condition could be applied to the application to reflect this. He clarified that they were not refusing to be bound to use only the London Array access road, but that the applicant does not consider such a restriction to be necessary. In response to whether the site was being used as a distribution centre, the Area Planning Officer confirmed that a grain drier was on site and this generated traffic in relation to that use.

Members then toured the site with the Area Planning Officer.

 
All Minutes are draft until agreed at the next meeting of the Committee/Panel

View the Agenda for this meeting

 

Related pages