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.

9.30am – 15/500815/OUT 48 Keycol Hill, Bobbing, Kent, ME9 8ND

10.30am (approximately) - 15/503038/FULL 75 High Street, Milton Regis, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2AR

PRESENT:  Councillors Mike Baldock, Cameron Beart, Roger Clark, Richard Darby, Mike Dendor, Sue Gent, James Hall, Mike Henderson, James Hunt, Bryan Mulhern (Chairman) and Ben Stokes.

OFFICERS PRESENT:  Rob Bailey and Philippa Davies.

APOLOGIES:  Councillors Bobbin and Andy Booth.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant, agent and two local residents to the meeting.

The Area Planning Officer introduced the outline application, with all matters reserved except access.  The application was for a two-storey, three bedroom dwelling and new single-storey pitched double garage, within the curtilage of no. 48 Keycol Hill.  The existing triple garage would be demolished and the existing access, shared by nos. 44, 46 and 48 would be used by the new property.

The Area Planning Officer reported that two letters of objection had been received and Kent County Council (KCC) Highways had also objected to the application; their comments were summarised in the report for the 13 August 2015 Planning Committee meeting.  

Mr Day, the Agent, explained that the proposed dwelling would be the same height as the existing bungalow, and he advised that there was flexibility with both the height of the proposed dwelling, and the  increased width of the access, as requested by KCC Highways.  He considered, that as it was possible to turn on-site, there would not be an impact on the A2.  He explained the property had good access links; was using previously developed land; there was no overlooking; and no loss of amenity.  In response to a question, Mr Day explained that the access to the site could be widened.

In response to a question, the Area Planning Officer advised that as it was an outline application, the description could be amended to a bungalow and conditions could be imposed on widening the access at the same time.  However, if Members decided this was appropriate, it would be sensible to seek details of any alterations to the access at the same time.

In response to a question by a local resident, the Area Planning Officer advised that since the application was refused in 2008, the Kent and Medway Structure Plan no longer existed, but that the remaining policies of the Swale Borough Council Local Plan remained in place.

Local residents made the following comments: concerned with the additional use of the access driveway; this was a busy and dangerous road, cars were often parked on the pavement and road; vehicles turned on the driveway from the A2, it was not practical to shut the gate all the time to address this; and there was insufficient parking.

The Area Planning Officer advised that ownership issues of the driveway was a private legal matter, not a planning consideration.

Members then toured the site with the Area Planning Officer.

PRESENT:  Councillors Mike Baldock, Cameron Beart, Roger Clark, Richard Darby, Mike Dendor, Sue Gent, James Hall, Mike Henderson, James Hunt, Bryan Mulhern (Chairman) and Ben Stokes.

OFFICERS PRESENT:  Rob Bailey and Philippa Davies.

APOLOGIES:  Councillors Bobbin and Andy Booth.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant, agent and four members of the public to the meeting.

The Area Planning Officer introduced the application which was for a change of use from A1 and C3 use to C3 use only, so that it would be converted from commercial to residential use.  He explained that a similar application had been refused in 2014 as there had been insufficient marketing to demonstrate that there was no demand for the retention of the property as retail use.  The subsequent appeal had been dismissed on the grounds that the change of use would result in harm to the vitality and viability of the High Street and that insufficient marketing information had been submitted.

The Area Planning Officer reported that the change of use would not harm the listed building; there were no works proposed; and there was no significant impact on highway safety and convenience.   He explained that the application was contrary to Policy B3 of the Local Plan, and it did not indicate that there was no demand for the retention of the shop as retail use.

The agent provided a brief history of the property and the background to the application.  He explained that the amount of mortgage available for mixed use properties was not sufficient for the property to be sold as mixed use.  He considered the High Street should be more residential, and to make use of redundant businesses in this way.  He further added that the property had been empty for five years and adequate marketing had been carried out.  He advised that it was not possible to carry out robust marketing, as it could not be marketed as mixed use.

A Ward Member explained that the vitality of Milton High Street was in decline.

The applicant reported that he had tried to market the property with commercial agents, with no success.

Members of the public made the following comments:  the High Street was being killed off by lack of parking and decrease in footfall; supported the application; shops were becoming less viable, and this was a common sense approach.

Members then toured the site with the Area Planning Officer.