To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 20 November 2014 (Minute Nos. 354 - 358) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 20 November 2014 (Minute Nos. 354 – 358) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Director of Corporate Services as Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

No interests were declared.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 December 2014 (Minute Nos. to follow).

2.4 14/500338 – 165 Minster Road, Minster-on-Sea, Isle of Sheppey, Kent, ME12 3LH

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 December 2014 (Minute Nos. 380 – 381) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

2.4 14/500338 – 165 Minster Road, Minster-on-Sea

In response to a query raised at the site meeting, the Planning Officer confirmed that the Environment Agency had been consulted and raised no objection to the application.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation for approval and this was seconded.

Ward Members spoke against the application and raised the following points: over-intensive development in a residential area; would cause overshadowing and was too close to adjoining properties; and loss of garden space.

Resolved:  That application 14/500338 be approved subject to conditions (1) to (3) in the report.

To consider the following applications:

1.    SW/14/0479 - Greystone, Bannister Hill, Borden

2.    14/500561 - Former HBC Engineering Site Power Station Road, Minster

Members of the public are advised to confirm with Planning Services prior to the meeting that these applications will be considered at this meeting.

Requests to speak on these items must be registered with Democratic Services (democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call us on 01795 417328) by noon on Wednesday 10 December 2014.

Deferred Item

Reports shown in previous Minutes as being deferred from that Meeting.

The Area Planning Officer reported that the applicant had provided an amended plan showing acceptable sightlines that were 20 metres x 20 metres and Kent County Council (KCC) Highways raised no objection to the amended plan.  The Area Planning Officer further reported that following receipt of the amended plans, notices had been served on the land-owners both sides of the site and any objections they may have needed to be received by 25 December 2014.

The Area Planning Officer requested that unless objections raising new issues were received, he be given delegated authority to approve the application.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation for approval and this was seconded.

Resolved:  That application SW/14/0367 be delegated to officers to approve subject to conditions (1) to (11) in the report and no objections raising any new issues being received by 25 December 2014 from the land owners either side of the development in relation to the amended sightlines.

The Chairman drew attention to the confidential information paper from legal which was tabled.  He advised Members that if they wished to discuss the paper then they would need to consider it in closed session.

Members advised that they had noted the paper and agreed that no discussion on its contents was necessary.

The Major Projects Officer reported that one further letter of objection had been received raising points already outlined in the report and also concerns about future traffic levels as a result of the development, particularly at peak periods.  The Major Projects Officer drew attention to an additional letter received from the applicant’s agent which responded to points in respect of highway implications of the development, which was also tabled.

The Major Projects Officer reported that KCC Highways raised no objection.

The Major Projects Officer sought delegation to approve the application subject to the signing of a suitably worded Section 106 Agreement and conditions (1) to (24) as set out in the original report.

Mr Walsh, an objector, spoke against the application.

Mr Rees, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation for approval and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 408.

To consider the attached report (Sections 2, 3 and 5).

The Council operates a scheme of public speaking at meetings of the Planning Committee.  All applications on which the public has registered to speak will be taken first.  Requests to speak at the meeting must be registered with Democratic Services (democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417328) by noon on Wednesday 10 December 2014.

SCHEDULE OF DECISIONS

PART 2 – Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended.

The Major Projects Officer reported that KCC Highways raised no objection, consistent with their response to the very similar application submitted earlier in the year.  They noted: ‘The traffic generation data has been accepted and considered a realistic indication of the proposed and existing vehicle movements through the access, given the extant agricultural use.”  They requested a condition in respect of car parking, but this was already included in the report. 

The Major Projects Officer reported that further to 3.4 on page 44 of the report the nearest dwelling was actually approximately 390 metres from the nearest dwelling (on Barton Hill Drive), not 440 metres, but this was nevertheless further than the equivalent distance under the refused scheme and within the guidelines for this type of development as outlined in the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance for stable buildings.

The Major Projects Officer explained that the application was also supported by a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment which had established that the impact on views would be negligible.

The Major Projects Officer considered that this was an appropriate use for the site, and that there were certainly no planning reasons for the application to be refused.

Mr Aldous, an objector, spoke against the application.

Mr Sharpe, the Agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded.

A Ward Member spoke against the application and raised the following points: proposed hedges would not be enough to mitigate the damage that the application would have on the area; would have an adverse impact on the local road network, particularly the A2500 Lower Road and Barton Hill Drive; traffic flow figures were flawed; for 65% of the year there were low vehicle movements at the site due to the fact that it was agricultural land; increase in horse boxes and associated traffic would cause problems to the existing road infrastructure; damage to visual amenity; vista would be damaged forever; and loss of agricultural land.

Members considered the application and raised the following points: this application was the same as the previous application which had been refused; was already a dangerous road and the application would make it worse; increase in mud on the road; was grade 3 agricultural land so not the best quality; and was a small development which would add real biodiversity improvements to the area.

In response to queries, the Major Projects Officer reported that foaling would be carried out at a site in Bredgar.  He advised that  it was proposed to take the land out of agricultural use in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 409.

To decide whether to pass the resolution set out below in respect of the following item:

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act:

1. Information relating to any individual.

2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual.

3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information.

6. Information which reveals that the authority proposes:

(a) to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or

(b) to make an order or direction under any enactment.

Resolved:

(1)   That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1, 2, 3 and 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act:

1.    Information relating to any individual.

2.    Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual.

3.    Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

6.  Information which reveals that the authority proposes:

(a) to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or

(b) to make an order or direction under any enactment.

To consider the attached reports (Section 6).

6.1  ENF/SHE/13/016 – 54 Second Avenue, Sheerness

Resolved:  That an Enforcement Notice be issued pursuant to the provisions of Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, requiring the removal of the wooden fencing or its reduction to no more than one metre in height within one month of the Notice taking effect.

That the Head of Planning and the Head of Legal Partnership of the Council be authorised to prepare and serve the necessary documentation, including the precise wording to give effect to this decision.

6.2 ENF/HAR/14/006 Land at Spade Lane, Hartlip adjacent to Splayfield Farm

Resolved:   That an Enforcement Notice be issued pursuant to the provisions of Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, requiring removal of the caravan from the land within one month of the Notice taking effect. 

That the Head of Planning and the Head of Legal Partnership of the Council be authorised to prepare and serve the necessary documentation, including the precise wording to give effect to this decision.

6.3  ENF/IWA/13/013 – Iwade Garage, 36 Ferry Road, Iwade

The Chairman drew attention to the tabled report.

Resolved:  That no further action be taken.