To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 2 April 2015 (Minute Nos. 596 - 602) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 2 April 2015 (Minutes Nos. 596 – 602) 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 15 April 2015 (Minute Nos. to follow).

1.     14/502582/FULL – Freesia, Grovehurst Road, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2RB

2.     14/505395/FULL – 17 Dane Close, Hartlip, Kent, ME9 7TN

3.     15/500955/FULL – Land at Rear of Seager Road, Sheerness, Kent, ME12 2BG

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 15 April 2015 (Minute Nos. 603 – 606) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to the inclusion of Cllr Mulhern’s apologies.

14/502582/FULL Freesia, Grovehurst Road, Sittingbourne, ME10 2RB

The Major Projects Officer reported that further to concerns raised by a local resident that some residents had not been made aware of the date of the site meeting, records of the consultation carried out had been checked and all those who had commented on the application had been invited to the meeting.  In addition, the two neighbours who had suggested they were not informed of the site meeting had been written to in order to clarify the situation.

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

A Ward Member raised concern that plots 3 and 5 would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the occupiers of ‘The Spinney’.  He was also concerned about the impact the access to the site would have on Grovehurst Road.

The Major Projects Officer advised that the site was allocated for housing in the Local Plan and he did not consider that the proposal would have an adverse impact on adjoining dwellings.  Kent County Council (KCC) Highways raised no objection to the scheme following receipt of amended drawings.  The Major Projects Officer explained that the Section 106 Agreement dealt with standard issues (in accordance with Local Plan policy) and that no affordable housing would be provided at the site.

In response to a query about access for wheelie bins, the Major Projects Officer stated that the plans showed that there would be a gap in the fence ensuring that the vehicle access was maintained.

There was some discussion about the retention of the boundary wall.  A Member suggested that a replacement brick wall should be provided to improve the appearance of the site.  The Major Projects Officer suggested that officers be delegated to work with the applicants to ensure a wall, rather than a fence, was provided.  This was agreed by Members.

Resolved:  That application 14/502582/FULL be delegated to officers to approve, subject to conditions (1) to (23) in the report and discussions with the applicant to ensure that a replacement brick boundary wall was provided.

14/505395/FULL 17 Dane Close, Hartlip, Kent, ME9 7TN

The Planning Officer reported that Councillor Wright, a Ward Member, had submitted a letter raising objection to the application and that this had been emailed to Members of the Planning Committee.

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

A Ward Member spoke against the application.  He considered the extension was too large and bulky for the site.

Members raised the following points: was a fairly large extension but was well to the rear of the property; the southern part of the estate was blocked by two large houses so it was not an ‘open’ estate; and nobody had a right to a view.

In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 609.

To consider the attached report (Parts 2, 3 and 4).

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 22 April 2015.

PART 2

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

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

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

A Ward Member spoke against the application.  He raised the following concerns:  why had KCC Highways allowed a road through footpath ZR617?; proposed dwellings would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area; would prefer to see single storey dwellings as this would reduce concerns about overshadowing; insufficient parking proposed; too many properties for the site; out-of-keeping with the area; would prefer cream weatherboarding not black; the 14 metre high leylandii left on the site was dangerous and should be removed; and concerned that the soakaway would not prevent flooding.

Councillor Mike Henderson moved the following addendum: That condition (12) be delegated to officers to re-word to include wording explaining that native trees were being planted to improve the ecology of the site.  This was seconded by Councillor Barnicott.  On being put to the vote the addendum was agreed.

In response to a query, the Senior Planner drew attention to condition (3) in the report which required the weatherboarding to be painted cream.

In response to queries about the footpath, the Head of Planning drew attention to paragraph 9.04 of the report which stated that the KCC Public Rights of Way Officer raised no objection.  The Major Projects Officer considered that erection of signs warning of children crossing would be onerous. 

Some Members considered that the leylandii should be removed from the site.

Resolved:  That application 15/500686 be delegated to officers to approve subject to conditions (1) to (18) in the report and the re-wording of condition (12) to include wording to explain that native trees were being planted to improve the ecology of the site and removal of the leylandii tree.

The Planning Officer drew attention to errors in the report: page 12 – reasons for refusal should be crossed out; and page 14, paragraph 2.05 – proposed house will be 500mm shorter and 800mm wider.

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

A Ward Member spoke against the application.  He considered it was over-intensive for the plot and would have an adverse impact on the adjoining neighbour.

A Member requested that the landscaping condition be re-worded to make it clear why native tree planting was requested.

The motion to approve the application was lost.

Councillor Andy Booth  ...  view the full minutes text for item 610.

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 identify 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 items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 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 report (Part 6).

6.2 added as an urgent item 23.04.15.

6.1 14/504232/FULL – Orchard Cottage, Canterbury Road, Faversham – retrospective change of use of existing agricultural store and greenhouse to retail outlet, training and storage facility; hardstanding/turning circle.

The Senior Planner reminded Members that earlier in the meeting they had resolved to grant permission for the change of use of the site and additional hardstanding and therefore was not seeking enforcement action for that.  The Senior Planner explained that the adverts were still on the site together with other structures such as storage containers and the rendering wall.

The Senior Planner also reminded Members that back in November 2010 another planning application for Orchard Cottage had been considered to form a new vehicular access to the property with a new crossover access onto London Road.  The Committee resolved to grant planning permission which was subject to conditions including one that required the footpath to the east of the site on Canterbury Road to be extended to meet up with the new access.  The Senior Planner explained that the condition also required details of these works to be submitted first, but that the applicant had not submitted any details as required by the condition nor had they carried out the works to extend the footpath.

The Senior Planner sought delegation to serve an appropriately worded enforcement notice to deal with the above matter requiring the details to be submitted and the works carried out.

Councillor Mike Henderson moved the following motion: That the request for enforcement action be withdrawn and any requirement for enforcement action be considered at a later date with a new report brought to Committee if appropriate.  This was seconded by Councillor Andy Booth.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed.

Resolved:  That the request for enforcement action be withdrawn and any requirement for enforcement action be considered at a later date with a new report brought to Committee if appropriate.

6.2  SW/13/1075 – Faversham Linen Services, Ashford Road, Faversham – non-compliance with planning conditions and approved plans.

The Chairman drew attention to the tabled report.

Resolved: That appropriate Enforcement action which might include both the service of an Enforcement Notice and/or a Stop Notice pursuant to the provisions of Sections 172 and 183 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, requiring full compliance with all conditions of approval SW/13/1075 be taken.

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.

Members agreed to the suspension of Standing Orders in order that the Planning Committee could complete its business.