PRESENT:  Councillors Sylvia Bennett, Adrian Crowther, Mike Henderson, Bryan Mulhern (Vice-Chairman in the Chair), Prescott and Tony Winckless.

OFFICERS PRESENT:   Janet Dart, Martin Evans, Andrew Jeffers and Alun Millard.           

APOLOGIES: Councillors Barnicott, Mark Ellen, Sue Gent, Peter Marchington and Ben Stokes.

The Vice-Chairman (in the Chair for this meeting) welcomed the applicant, agents, Upchurch Parish Council representatives and members of the public to the meeting.  He outlined the format that the site meeting would take and asked the Planning Officer to introduce the item. 

The Planning Officer introduced the item by noting the site access would be off Marstan Close. The site was within the built-up area of Upchurch, and currently formed part of the rear garden to no. 124 Chaffes Lane.  It had a frontage onto Marstan Close, which the proposal sought to utilise for vehicular and pedestrian access. The proposal allowed for 2 parking spaces and 1 visitor space with a small turning area.  The proposal was assessed as being acceptable as it blended in well with the surrounding area, it could not be overlooked and did not overlook other properties.  The conservatory at 3 Marstan Close was 5 metres away and could not be overlooked.  There would be no overshadowing.

Mr Clayton, the Agent, showed the footprint of the bungalow.  He advised that the parking had been altered following KCC Highways advice.  The bungalow would be occupied by the daughter of the owners of 124 Chaffes Lane.

Mrs New and Mrs Denny, representing Upchurch Parish Council, asked if the area currently fenced off from the property formed part of the owners land.  Mr Harrell confirmed that it did.

Mr Harrell, the owner, explained the land had right of access to Marston Close for 10 years.  He stated the garden was too big for him.  When the road was originally built there should have been two bungalows on the site but they were not built.

Cllr Winckless asked for further clarity on the footprint of the proposed bungalow, Mr Clayton showed him where the walls would extend to.

Cllr Mulhern asked if the existing garage was the property of the owners and if the shared drive would cause problems.  Mr Harrell advised it was owned by a close relative and that they and the intended occupiers of the proposed property were happy with the shared access.

Local residents were invited to speak.  Questions and concerns were raised about the impact of traffic to Marstan Close and if emergency vehicles would be able to access the area.  The KCC Highways Officer advised it had not been assessed as a problem as it was only one additional house.  Originally KCC Highways did object due to lack of turning space, but the plans had been amended to include a turning area.

Local residents also expressed concerns about the impact an extra property would have on the drains as they were old and had previously become blocked.

Members then toured the site with officers and the agents.