sw/07/1209 - land adjacent to 45 imperial drive, warden

PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Sandra Garside, Elvina Lowe, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Alan Willicombe.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Joanne Hammond, Alun Millard (Kent Highway Services) and Phil Taylor.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mrs Farmer (local resident), Mr Harris and Mr Hobbs (Agent).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Monique Bonney, Simon Clark, Brenda Hammond and Jean Willicombe.

sw/07/1291 - hawarden, tunstall road, tunstall

PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Sandra Garside, Elvina Lowe, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Alan Willicombe.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Rob Bailey, Joanne Hammond and Alun Millard (Kent Highway Services).

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mrs Atkins (Tunstall Parish Council), Mrs Elgar, Mr and Mrs Ledger and Mr and Mrs Tinsley (local residents) and Mr and Mrs Smith (Applicants).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Monique Bonney, Simon Clark, Brenda Hammond and Jean Willicombe.

sw/07/0546 - wellwood farm, seed road, doddington

PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Sandra Garside, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Alan Willicombe.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Kellie Mackenzie, Alun Millard (Kent Highway Services) and Graham Thomas.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mrs Sue Gunner and Mrs Val Buckett (Newnham Parish Council), Mr Graham Cuthbert (Doddington Parish Council), Kate Dickinson (Local Resident), Mrs E Foster (Applicant), Mr Foster (Applicant's Husband) and Mr John Burke (Agent).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Monique Bonney, Simon Clark, Brenda Hammond and Jean Willicombe.

sw/07/1202 - lavender cottage, selling

PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Sandra Garside, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Alan Willicombe.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Kellie Mackenzie, Alun Millard (Kent Highway Services) and Graham Thomas.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Councillor Andrew Bowles (Ward Member), Brian Wicks (Architect), Bill Bunce (Applicant), Jane Stephenson (Local Resident), Ron Hutton, (Local Resident), Margaret Hutton, (Local Resident), Vanessa A Port (Local Resident), Colin Port (Local Resident),
APOLOGIES: Councillors Monique Bonney, Simon Clark, Brenda Hammond and Jean Willicombe.

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

part b minutes for information

sw/07/1209 - land adjacent to 45 imperial drive, warden

The Planning Officer explained that the proposal was for a two bedroomed detached house on the corner plot adjacent to 45 Imperial Drive. The frontage would be in line with no. 45 and would have an 11 metre wide rear garden. To address the issue of overlooking there would be one velux window for the bathroom at the rear of the property.

Mr Hobbs, the Agent, considered that the application would fit into the existing street scene and had adequate parking arrangements.

Councillor Pat Sandle spoke on behalf of Warden Parish Council. The Parish Council raised concern that the area was overdeveloped and that the community could not sustain further development.

Mrs Farmer, a local resident, raised concern that the proposed dwelling would end up larger than the plans indicated. She also spoke regarding drainage issues; the loss of the corner plot as open space; and access to the road from the property. She emphasised that the road was on a bend and not a junction.

The Chairman asked for information on drainage from the Agent. The Agent explained that the drains would be connected to the original main drainage system but he would look into this further.

Mr Millard (Kent Highway Services) advised that they were satisfied with the proposed access and considered that there would be sufficient visibility at the bend for vehicles.

Members discussed the road layout and the proposed access for the dwelling.

Members then toured the site and asked the Planning Officer and Highway Officer questions which they answered.

sw/07/1291 - hawarden, tunstall road, tunstall

The Planning Officer explained that the application was for the conversion of a bungalow to a two storey dwelling. There would be an increase from 6.1 metres to 7.05 metres in the ridge height and 2.6 metres to 3.9 metres in the height of the eaves. There would be no west facing windows. The site was adjacent to Tunstall Conservation Area and the bungalow was one of two single storey dwellings in the vicinity. He reported that a previous application had been refused by the Planning Committee on the grounds of the impact on residential amenity on the neighbouring property 'Alverstoke'. The current proposal had been amended to reduce the ridge and eaves height to address these issues.

The Planning Officer advised that Tunstall Parish Council raised concern regarding the loss of light to 'Alverstoke'. He considered that the application would not result in a significant degree of harm to the residential amenities of surrounding properties. He explained that the roof pitched away from 'Alverstoke' and advised that it was Council practice that overshadowing of flank windows should not normally be a reason for refusal. He considered that the development would not impact on the appearance of the Conservation Area.

Mrs Smith, the Applicant, explained that the pitch of the roof had been reduced. She considered that the road contained a mix of properties and a chalet bungalow would not look out of place in the street scene. She reported that they had considered an extension to the rear of the property with their Architects but this had not been considered advisable.

Mrs Atkins, representing Teynham Parish Council, spoke regarding their concern on the loss of light to 'Alverstoke'.

Local residents raised the following concerns: that the increase in the height of the dwelling would have an overbearing impact on 'Alverstoke', leading to a loss of light to their side windows; the proposal would look out of place in the road; the two different pitch angles would have a unfavourable visual impact; it was an unattractive proposal; it would affect the visual symmetry of the property with the neighbouring property 'Alverstoke'; it would overlook 'Orchard Cottage' and lead to a loss of privacy.

Members then toured the site and asked the Planning Officer and Highway Officer questions which they answered.

sw/07/0546 - wellwood farm, seed road, doddington

The Area Planning Officer explained that the proposal was a mixed application for farm diversification change of use to permit limited seasonal opening to the public, extension to themed model shed and additional farm buildings for farmstay, animals and machinery.

He drew Members' attention to the existing plan and the proposed plan. The site comprised a detached house and approximately 13 acres of land, half of which was woodland. The applicant ran the site as an animal welfare and rescue centre for rare sheep and goats, free range pigs, cows, chicken, geese, ducks and pheasant, a number of horses and ponies plus exotic animals.

The Area Planning Officer outlined the history of the site and explained that four planning applications had been submitted in 2003 which had been approved. An application for cctv/floodlight tower was refused and was subsequently reduced to a height not requiring planning permission. In 2003 a retrospective planning application for a high wooden fence was submitted and approved, subject to landscape requirements. High metal entrance gates and brick and flint flanking walls were then erected, and an enforcement notice was served in March 2005. An appeal was lodged, but too late to be accepted, and negotiations resulted in some remedial works to reduce the impact of the gate and wall. Further complaints about the site were received and investigations by enforcement officers established that further wooden buildings, a mini-railway line, concrete and tarmac paths through the woodland, pergolas a fenced and surfaced pond area and works to a new sand school had also been begun. In 2006 the applicant started opening the property to the public on limited days, including school parties. The two wooden sheds near the northern site entrance had been turned into display areas for toys of Star Wars and Lord of the Rings characters.

The site was within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty as recognised within the North Downs Special Landscape Area.

Members of Doddington and Otterden Parish Council had previously visited the site. Otterden Parish Council raised a number of concerns which included; increase in traffic, increased noise and harmful impact on the AONB. Both Doddington and Newnham Parish Council raised objection to the application.

Eight letters of objection had been received from local residents, largely concerned with the potential rise in traffic along Seed Road.

He advised that neither Southern Water, the Environment Agency or Kent Highway Services raised any objection.

He reported that the Council's Tourism Development Officer had visited the site and considered the site to be well organised and a valuable experience for children. She considered the site represented a unique visitor attraction and supported the principles of the proposal subject to careful and sensitive visitor management plans to limit numbers. She considered however the toy film set did not sit well with the remainder of the site and its expansion would be better elsewhere.

The Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Unit considered the site was out of keeping with the Landscape Character of the Kent Downs AONB and considered the site boundary treatments, management of the woodland and other landscaping not appropriate in the Kent Downs AONB.

The Area Planning Officer considered that a balance needed to be struck between providing suitable tourism sites whilst still protecting landscape issues and the views of the local residents and Parish Councils.

The Agent reported that the applicant was Mrs Foster, not her husband. Mrs Foster had previously owned an animal sanctuary in Murston which had grown and that was why she had moved to this site. They had discussed with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and several other groups ways on diversifying the site. He explained that to open the site to the public the applicant needed to apply for a zoo licence which involved complying with legislation laid down by the Health and Safety Executive and other environmental departments. The site had been opened approximately nine times during the last year. Organised school trips had also taken place at the site. He considered a temporary permission to be a sensible way forward.

The Newnham Parish Council representative advised they were concerned about access to the site and also concerned that paths in the woodland had been tarmaced.

The Doddington Parish Council representative advised that they had received letters from local residents concerned particularly that traffic would increase. He also asked if this were allowed where would the development end.

Kate Dickinson (Local Resident) raised concern that the proposal would lead to an increase in traffic and that accidents would occur. She was also concerned that the site was starting to resemble a theme park.

Mr Millard (Kent Highway Services) considered that it was a small operation and unlikely to generate high volumes of traffic. They had requested granting permission for one year so that the position could be reviewed after that time.

In response to a question from a Member, the Agent advised that a business plan for the site had been provided and that some signage would be needed. The development would be open during the school holidays and at Easter and Christmas. Most visitors to the site were under 12 year olds and family groups.

Members then toured the site and asked the Area Planning Officer and the Agent questions which they answered.

sw/07/1202 - land rear of lavender cottage, the warren, selling

The Area Planning Officer explained that the application was for a two storey four bedroom property located in the rear garden of Lavender Cottage, The Warren, Selling. He showed Members the plan of the proposed development. He explained that the rear of the property would be level with the rear elevation of the neighbouring property, No. 4 The Warren. Amended drawings now showed tile hanging at first floor level to enhance the appearance of the proposed house. He reported that the site was located within the built up area boundary of Selling, but that it was outside the AONB.

Selling Parish Council objected to the application as they considered it too large for the plot and too close to the adjoining properties.

Kent Highway Services raised no objection to the application subject to the dimensions of the garage being increased to 5.5m to comply with Kent Vehicle Parking Standards.

Six letters of objection had been received from local residents raising the following issues; too close to adjoining properties, highway safety, out of character with spacious area, de-value houses and loss of privacy.

He reported that the proposals were in line with Policy H5 (infilling) and considered the proposals to be acceptable in principal.

The Agent reported that he considered the application had been sensitively designed. He reported that the ridge line was lower than adjacent properties and that the application sat well and did not affect other properties.

The Ward Member considered it would be very difficult to include the new development without changing the whole aspect of the site. He considered it would be detrimental to adjoining owners.

Local residents raised the following objections; detrimental to residential and visual amenities, harmful to living and enjoyment, proposed house not in character, too large, keeping of leylandii would affect the foundations of No 4, the proposed drive would be parallel to No. 4 making it dangerous if both vehicles backed out simultaneously, junction of the Warren already dangerous due to on-street parking, increased traffic will increase the risk of accidents, overlooking, detrimental to privacy of adjoining properties and access implications for the development of the new dwelling.

Members then toured the site and adjacent gardens and asked the Area Planning Officer and the Agent questions which they answered.