Agenda and minutes

Venue: at the site listed below

Contact: Democratic Services, 01795 417330 

Items
No. Item

407.

Declarations of Interest

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.

 

Minutes:

No interests were declared.

408.

19/500866/OUT, Land at Swale Way, Great Easthall, Sittingbourne, ME10 3TF

10am – (2.3) 19/500/866/OUT Land at Swale Way, Great Easthall, Sittingbourne, ME10 3TF.

Minutes:

The Chairman welcomed Members, officers and members of the public to the meeting.

 

The Area Planning Officer introduced the application which was for the erection of up to nine dwellings.  He explained that it was an outline application for which all matters were reserved, except for access to the site.  An indicative layout set-out the provision of seven dwellings.  The Area Planning Officer explained that there would be pedestrian access to the north of the site, and advised that the site was within the built-up area of Sittingbourne.  He said the application site had originally been allocated as a site for a medical centre.  This had been offered to the National Health Service (NHS) twice and they had declined to take the site on.  As these legal obligations had been met, the site was now being treated as unallocated land.  The Area Planning Officer explained that the barrier to the Community Hall would be removed.  He said that although seven detached/semi-detached dwellings were proposed, this figure could go up to nine dwellings, however this would require a decrease in their size, and a change in the type of units, and some might be flats.  The Area Planning Officer said this would be dealt with under the reserved matters application.

 

The Area Planning Officer advised that Kent County Council (KCC) Highways and Transportation raised no objection to the application.  Environmental Services had raised no objection in terms of noise and air quality.  He said the existing trees on the site would be retained, and there would be additional landscaping.

 

In summary, the Area Planning Officer stated that the proposed development would result in no harm to visual or residential amenity; it was positioned in the built-up area of Sittingbourne; the site was not allocated for a particular use; and KCC Highways and Transportation had no objection on highway safety grounds.

 

Local residents raised objections which included the following points:

 

·         Residents were promised amenities which had not materialised;

·         the site should remain empty so that it could be used in the future for amenities;

·         we were promised facilities such as a shop, doctors, a school, and a link road to the A2; we only had a community hall;

·         the estate was a cul-de-sac, with only one entrance/exit, and was cut-off from Sittingbourne;

·         developers focussed on more housing, rather than the provision of amenities;

·         maintenance issues;

·         residents on the existing estate had been forgotten;

·         the estate was not sustainable;

·         once housing was built on the site, the land was lost for any amenities in the future;

·         there were not enough facilities to attract residents to the area; and

·         when had the NHS last been asked about whether they wanted to set-up a medical facility on the site? They might be more interested now as there was more housing.

 

In response to some of the points made, the Area Planning Officer explained that the NHS had been offered the site a few years ago.  The legal agreement only required the land to be offered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 408.