This meeting will consider the following outstanding items from the Planning Committee meeting which was adjourned on Thursday 25 May 2022:

Part 2 – 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5

Part 3 – 3.1

Part 5 – 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application as set out in the report.

A visiting Member spoke against the application.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Tony Winckless.

In response to a question, the Senior Planning Officer indicated on the plans where the new position of the pathway to the front door was and she drew attention to conditions (2) and (4) as set out in the report.

Resolved: That application 22/505981/FULLbe approved subject to conditions (1) to (4) in the report.

The Area Planning Team Leader introduced the application as set out in the report.  He drew attention to the tabled paper which included an update on a further representation received, and some minor updates to conditions (1) and (5) and rewording of condition (6) in terms of the proposed landscaping details.  The Area Planning Team Leader added that the fencing to the front would be moved further back into the site and would be painted green.

A visiting Ward Member spoke against the application.

In response to points raised by the visiting Ward Member, the Conservation & Design Manager explained that he had had discussions with Planning Officers and the Applicant in terms of the design.  With the fencing being moved further into the site, plus landscaping to the front of it, he considered on balance that it was an acceptable design, and together with the rewording of condition (6) would result in a more appropriate, softer, greener appearance than what was seen currently.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, to include the updates on the tabled paper, and this was seconded by Councillor Mike Henderson.

Councillor Tony Winckless moved a motion for a site meeting, and this was seconded by Councillor Richard Palmer.

Some Members considered there was no benefit to a site meeting, taking into account, the site’s former use and the mitigation measures that were proposed.

On being put to the vote, the motion for a site meeting was agreed.

Resolved: That application 22/500007/FULLbe deferred to allow the Planning Working Group to meet on site.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application as set out in the report

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Kieran Golding.

A Member was happy with the amendments that had been made to the application, and the Senior Planning Officer confirmed there would be no windows on the side elevation facing the road.

Resolved: That application 23/500240/FULLbe approved subject to conditions (1) to (3) in the report.

The Area Planning Team Leader introduced the application as set out in the report.

A visiting Ward Member spoke against the application.

In response to some heritage issues which had been raised, the Conservation & Design Manager explained that helpful revisions had been made to the scheme.  These had addressed previous issues and would sustain the public house use of the property, important to the character of the area and as an important community facility.  He raised some concern with the loss of the chimneys.  The Conservation & Design Manager also explained that the external staircase was in a fairly discreet position, with the roof to the stair tower appropriately sited below the level of the eaves upon the existing building.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Mike Henderson.

Members considered the scheme protected the use of the building and welcomed the addition of two flats.

Resolved: That application 22/504907/FULLbe approved subject to conditions (1) to (10) in the report, and the receipt of Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy payment.

PART 3

Applications for which REFUSAL is recommended

The Area Planning Team Leader introduced the application as set out in the report.  He drew attention to the tabled update which noted that the application for prior approval set out in the report had since been refused.

Peter Court, the Agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to refuse the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Mike Henderson.

Resolved: That application 21/504388/FULLbe refused for the reasons set out in the report.

PART 5

Decisions by County Council and Secretary of State, reported for information

·                Item 5.1 – Rides House Warden Road Eastchurch

DELEGATED REFUSAL

APPEAL DISMISSED

·                Item 5.2 – Dickens Inn Fourth Ave Eastchurch 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

APPEAL DISMISSED

·                Item 5.3 – Cripps Farm Plough Road Minster

COMMITTEE REFUSAL

APPEAL DISMISSED /COSTS REFUSED

·                Item 5.4 – Manor Farm Key Street Sittingbourne

AGAINST OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

APPEAL ALLOWED

·                Item 5.5 – Toft Wray Lower Norton Lane Teynham

DELEGATED REFUSAL

APPEAL DISMISSED

·                Item 5.6 – Halfacre House Lynsted Lane Lynsted

DELEGATED REFUSAL

APPEAL ALLOWED