09.30 am – 1.1 14/502582/FULL Freesia Grovehurst Road, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2RB

10.15 am (approximately) – 2.3 14/505395/FULL 17 Dane Close, Hartlip, Kent, ME9 7TN

11.15 am (approximately) – 2.4 15/500955/FULL Land at Rear of Seager Road, Sheerness, Kent, ME12 2BG

PRESENT: Councillors Barnicott (Chairman), Sylvia Bennett, Bobbin, Derek Conway, Sue Gent, Mike Henderson, Prescott and Ben Stokes. 

OFFICERS PRESENT:  Rob Bailey, Martin Evans and Kellie Mackenzie.

APOLOGIES: Councillors Andy Booth and Peter Marchington.

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

The Planner introduced the application which was for demolition of the existing bungalow and the construction of 15 new houses with a new access road at Freesia, Grovehurst Road, Sittingbourne.  The Planner reported that the site was allocated for 16 dwellings within the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 and would provide a new vehicle access in the centre of the site with a terrace of three dwellings to the north and two detached dwellings to the south.  The road led to a cul-de-sac where nine dwellings were provided with one detached dwelling close to the existing garages.  There would be a separation distance of 3.5 metres between Plot 5 and ‘The Spinney’, the closest dwelling to the application site, a second access would also be provided at this point.  Plot 6 was 15 metres to the rear of The Spinney and would be screened by the existing garage.  The parking spaces and visitor/shared parking spaces suggested complied with Kent County Council (KCC) Parking Standards and KCC Highways raised no objection to the proposal.  The Planner reminded Members that the application had been unanimously approved at the Planning Committee on 12 March 2015.

Mr Biring, the agent, explained that they had liaised closely with Swale Borough Council’s (SBC) planning officers and KCC Highways to ensure that local resident objections were resolved.  Mr Biring stated that with regard to concerns about the removal of the boundary wall they were ‘relaxed’ about whether it should remain or be removed.  Mr Biring explained that in terms of design they had tried to ensure that the proposed dwellings fitted in with the surrounding streetscene. 

Local residents raised the following points: one access road would be safer than the two proposed; owner of 25 Grovehurst Road objected to removal of the boundary wall as it clearly marked the boundary; the deeds for adjoining properties in Grovehurst Road showed that they had two parking spaces each; plots 5 would have a serious detrimental impact on the amenity of The Spinney, blocking light to their study, a bungalow at this plot would be better; proposed dwellings at the front of the development should be the same height as existing properties in Grovehurst Road; and concerns that it would have an adverse impact on the already busy local road network.

In response to questions, the KCC Highways Officer stated that any new access had to have a dropped kerb to ensure flush passage through for pedestrians.  One access would be better, but this may not be practical and was a logistical issue for the applicant.

In response to a query from a Member, the agent stated that a wall would be provided to ensure there was a steady transition from the upper part of the development to the lower part. 

Members then toured the site with the officers, agents and applicant.