20/501573/FULL Nichols Transport Lydbrook Close Sittingbourne Kent ME10 1NW

The Area Planning Officer introduced the application as set out in the report which had been considered at the Planning Committee on 7 December 2023. He advised that since the Planning Working Group meeting on 20 December 2023, revised plans had been submitted showing the correct relationship between plots 3-5 and, 23 and 25 Lydbrook Close. An area of land adjacent to Plot 3 had been amended to provide further landscaping to the site, and fencing lowered by the site entrance to provide better visibility.

Ann Smith, an objector, spoke against the application.

Councillor Shelley Cheesman spoke as a Ward Member against the application.

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

The Chair invited Members to make comments and points raised included:

·           Appalled that the Planning Committee was given incorrect plans when the application was originally presented to the committee;

·           the developer was trying to justify a development that was not suitable for the area by resubmitting the plans to suit;

·           paragraph 4.8 of the report referred to the measurements not always being accurate, so how could Members believe they were considering a true reflection of the site;

·           the banks of the houses down Borden Lane had been cut back too far and were dangerous to the new developments at Lydbrook Close;

·           due to the height difference between Borden Lane and this development, the properties overlooked directly into the neighbouring properties

·           the developer had submitted incorrect plans for another application and had not always complied with planning permission;

·           there was no obvious condition to ensure that the dangerous banks would be made stable;

·           1.8 metres and 1.5 metres did not sound much of a height difference, but when Members went to visit the site it was obvious how much the development overlooked neighbouring properties;

·           the cutting back of the banks at Borden Lane to fit more housing on the site was not right and proved it was not the right location for this size of development;

·           the planning application that was originally submitted and the way that the developer had gone about the build was not right;

·           the constant late changes and inaccuracies in the application were a concern; and

·           these were not minor amendments, these changes were significant changes.

The Planning Manager (Planning Applications) reminded Members that they needed to consider the application on its own planning merits and whether the proposal was a minor material amendment.

The Chair moved to the vote and the proposal to approve the application was lost. The Chair deferred the meeting so that officers could discuss with the Chair and Ward Member the reasons for refusal.

The Chair moved the following motion: That the application be deferred to officers and delegated authority be given to officers to discuss further revisions to overcome the harm with the developer in consultation with the Ward Members and the Chair of Planning Committee. Should the harm identified not be addressed to the satisfaction of the Ward Members, the application be re-reported to the Planning Committee. In the event that further revisions were not forthcoming, the application be refused by virtue that the relationship of plots 3-5 and changes to land level would give rise to an unacceptable impact upon the living conditions in terms of overlooking of dwellings at 23 and 25 Lydbrook Close, as such the proposal was considered to be unacceptable. In light of this the proposal was considered to be contrary to the Local Plan 2017 and the National Planning Policy Framework. This was seconded by Councillor Simon Clark and on being put to the vote agreed.

Resolved: That application 20/501573/FULL be refused for the following reason,  that the application be deferred to officers and delegated authority be given to officers to discuss further revisions to overcome the harm with the developer in consultation with the Ward Members and the Chair of Planning Committee. Should the harm identified not be addressed to the satisfaction of the Ward Members, the application be re-reported to the Planning Committee. In the event that further revisions were not forthcoming, the application be refused by virtue that the relationship of plots 3-5 and changes to land level would give rise to an unacceptable impact upon the living conditions in terms of overlooking of dwellings at 23 and 25 Lydbrook Close, as such the proposal was considered to be unacceptable. In light of this the proposal was considered to be contrary to the Local Plan 2017 and the National Planning Policy Framework.