The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency. This is particularly important for visitors and members of the public who will be unfamiliar with the building and procedures.

The Chairman will inform the meeting whether there is a planned evacuation drill due to take place, what the alarm sounds like (i.e. ringing bells), where the closest emergency exit route is, and where the second closest emergency exit route is, in the event that the closest exit or route is blocked.

The Chairman will inform the meeting that:

(a) in the event of the alarm sounding, everybody must leave the building via the nearest safe available exit and gather at the Assembly points at the far side of the Car Park.  Nobody must leave the assembly point until everybody can be accounted for and nobody must return to the building until the Chairman has informed them that it is safe to do so; and

(b) the lifts must not be used in the event of an evacuation.

Any officers present at the meeting will aid with the evacuation.

It is important that the Chairman is informed of any person attending who is disabled or unable to use the stairs, so that suitable arrangements may be made in the event of an emergency.

The Chairman ensured that those present at the meeting were aware of the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 13 September 2018 (Minute Nos. 207 - 214) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 13 September 2018 (Minute Nos. 207 – 214) 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.

(c)          Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the room while that item is considered.

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 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 consider the following application:

17/506010/FULL – Southlands, Rook Lane, Bobbing

Members of the public are advised to confirm with Planning Services prior to the meeting that the application 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 October 2018.

Reports shown in previous Minutes as being deferred from that Meeting

The Senior Planner referred to the previous decision of the Planning Committee to defer the item, and drew attention to a letter from County Councillor Mike Whiting that had been circulated to Members.  The Senior Planner clarified that the previous use of the site had included 24 bed spaces but it was not the only use, and advised that the proposed use included a day centre room, limited to 50 square metres, which the applicant intended to offer to groups to use as a day centre. Taking this into consideration, the advice from Kent County Council (KCC) Highways & Transportation remained that there would be fewer vehicle movements from the proposed use than the former use.

In respect of air quality, the Senior Planner read out advice from the Environmental Protection Team Leader regarding the readings from the diffusion tube at Keycoll Hill, but that it was too early to state categorically that there was an issue at this location with air quality.  However, as there would be less traffic than the previous use of the site it was likely that air quality would not be worse than previous and possibly better. 

The Senior Planner also clarified that the paragraph numbers in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) referred to in the July 2018 report were out-of-date as a new NPPF had been published.  However, there was no substantial change in national policy relating to this site.

The Senior Planner also showed Members the amendments in the design of the building which included changes in the height and design of the roof line/elevations.

Parish Councillor Graham Herbert, representing Bobbing Parish Council, spoke against the application.

Joanne Prudence, an Objector, spoke against the application.

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions, and questions were asked regarding air quality (in terms of when monitoring had started and when it would be possible to give a view); the number of trees on site now and how many would remain after the proposed development; how Section 106 money would be allocated if the application was approved; and whether there was a shortage of care beds in the Sittingbourne/Swale area.

In response to questions from Members, the Senior Planner advised that he could not comment further on the air quality advice given by the Environmental Protection Team, other than it was likely that there would be a decrease in the traffic generated and so it would not be any worse than through the existing lawful use of the site. He did not have information about when monitoring had started.  He advised that three standard trees would be removed as referred to in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 281.

Item 3.1 has been withdrawn from the agenda.

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 10 October 2018.

PART 2

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

The Area Planning Officer summarised the application, referring to the previously approved application on the site, and explained that the size, location and external appearance of the application was the same as what had been approved, save for the addition of two roof lights.

Parish Councillor Stephen Harvey, representing Newington Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions, during which the Area Planning Officer confirmed that the application was for three bedrooms.  A Member referred to the proposed condition (3) and asked that consideration was given to native species and improvements to biodiversity.

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

The Committee debated the proposal to approve the application, which centred on the following themes:

·         The intention of the applicant and whether the building would be changed to a four bedroom property in the future;

·         The design in terms of whether it looked like a bungalow;

·         The roof height was the same as the application previously agreed by the Committee, the only change was the addition of two roof lights.

On being put to the vote, the motion to approve the application was lost.

Councillor Mike Henderson moved a motion to refuse the application, which was seconded by Councillor Mike Baldock.

At this point the Head of Planning Services used his delegated powers to ‘call-in’ the application.

Resolved:  That as the Planning Committee was minded to make a decision that would be contrary to officer recommendation and contrary to planning policy and/or guidance, determination of the application be deferred to a future meeting of the Committee.

PART 3

Applications for which REFUSAL is recommended

The Chairman advised that this application had been withdrawn.

The Area Planning Officer referred to paragraph 8.08 on page 76 of the report and advised that a further copy of the letter had been received but this did not change the officer recommendation.  In respect of paragraph 8.22 on page 79, he advised that a further survey had been undertaken in June 2018 which recommended that temporary bat boxes and a bat loft  ...  view the full minutes text for item 282.