To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 13 August 2015 (Minute Nos. 147 - 153) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 13 August 2015 (Minute Nos. 147 – 153) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to the following amendment to Minute No. 150/08/15 item 3.2, final paragraph, the word ‘Ward’ to be removed.

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.

Councillor Roger Clarke declared an interest in respect of item 15/503038/FULL.  Councillor Clarke left the room during consideration of this item.

Councillor Peter Marchington declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of item 2.3 15/500819/FULL.  Councillor Marchington left the room during consideration of this item.

Councillor Tina Booth declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of item 2.4 15/502039/FULL.  Councillor Booth left the room during consideration of this item.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 August 2015 (Minute Nos. to follow).

1.    15/500815/OUT 48 Keycol Hill, Bobbing, Kent, ME9 8ND

2.    15/503038/FULL 75 High Street, Milton Regis, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2AR

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 August 2015 (Minute Nos. 154 – 156) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

15/500815/OUT – 48 Keycol Hill, Bobbing, Kent, ME9 8ND

The Area Planning Officer reported that the agent had advised that should it be required, his client would be willing to increase the width of the drive to that required by KCC Highways, and reduce the property to a bungalow, if Members considered that acceptable.

The Area Planning Officer clarified that, contrary to the agent’s comments at the site meeting, the application site did not amount to previously developed or brownfield land.  He explained that residential gardens had been excluded from the Government definition of brownfield land since around 2010.  There was no presumption in favour of developing this site, and in fact, as the report set out, there was a presumption against new residential development here.

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

A Ward Member spoke in support of the application.  He stated that the application site was outside the built-up area boundary for Bobbing and should be approved.

Members raised the following points: would be more sympathetic to the application if a bungalow was proposed with a wider access; and a two storey property in the location was not acceptable as a matter of principle.

RESOLVED:  That application 15/500815/OUT be refused as per the reasons set out in the report.

15/503038/FULL – 75 High Street, Milton Regis, Sittingbourne

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

Members raised the following points: if the application was allowed it could set a precedent and completely change the High Street; the applicant had not provided sufficient market research evidence that a business use would not be viable; would undermine the cohesive nature of Milton High Street; the property was not large enough to allow a shop to operate; had not been a shop at the site for some years; and other properties in the High Street had become residential as they were not viable as a business.

In response to a query from a Member, the Area Planning Officer reported that he was unsure of the legal requirements in respect of toilet facilities for operation of a shop, and considered the key point was that a business had successfully operated from the premises previously.  He stated that officers did not consider that the applicant had provided written evidence that it was not viable as a business.

RESOLVED:  That application 15/503038/FULL be refused as per the reasons set out in the report.

To consider the attached report (Parts 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 2 September 2015.

Tabled Papers for items 2.3 and 2.5 uploaded 07.09.15.

PART 2

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

Parish Councillor Tutt, representing Dunkirk Parish Council, spoke against the application.

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

The Ward Member spoke against the application. 

Councillor Bobbin moved a motion for a site meeting.  This was seconded by Councllor Prescott.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed.

Resolved:  That 15/503738/FULL be deferred to allow the Planning Working Group to meet on site.

The Area Planning Officer reported that one further additional letter of objection had been received which he outlined for Members.

The Area Planning Officer further reported that the applicant had submitted amended drawings which altered a side facing bedroom to two en-suite bathrooms, reducing any possible loss of privacy to the property to the east; and reduced the width of the rear single storey extension by 900mm, taking it further away from the property to the west, and changing the window style to match others in the rear extension.  The Area Planning Officer explained that those changes did not disadvantage any neighbour, but were the applicant’s response to continuing local concern as a concession by the applicant.  They did not alter the officer recommendation, but did reduce the potential impact of the works on the amenities of both neighbours. 

Parish Councillor Spicer, representing Tunstall Parish Council, spoke against the application.

MrViggers, an objector, spoke against the application.

Mr Edwards, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

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

A Ward Member raised the following points: many local residents have raised objection to the application; was already a substantial property and the proposed extension would almost double the size; appreciate the applicant has tried to work with local residents to ease their concerns and would ask the Committee to agree a site meeting to enable them to consider better the impact the proposed extension would have on neighbouring properties.

Councillor Prescott moved a motion for a site meeting.  This was seconded by Councillor James Hunt.  On being put to the vote the motion was lost.

In response to a query from a Member, the Area Planning Officer clarified the width of the house after the proposed extensions and stated that it would be narrower.  He stated that the rear of the proposed extension would not be further back than the neighbour’s garage.

Resolved:  That 15/504647/FULL be approved subject to conditions (1) to (5) in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 191.