10 am – Item 2.4 application 24/500508/FULL Camwa Ash, Bull Lane, Boughton under Blean, Faversham, Kent, ME13 9AH.

The Chair welcomed the applicant, the applicant’s agent, a representative from Boughton-under-Blean Parish Council and members of the Planning Committee to the meeting.

The Team Leader (Planning Applications) introduced the application which sought the conversion of the existing garage to a utility room and the erection of a side extension to be used as a store, as set out in the report submitted to the Planning Committee on 18 July 2024.  He reminded Members that the site was within both the built-up area of Boughton-under-Blean and the Boughton Street Conservation Area.  He indicated the closest Grade II listed buildings to the site and said there had been no neighbour response to the application.  Boughton-under-Blean Parish Council had objected to the application.

The agent outlined the proposed extension in terms of its storage use and explained that matching brickwork would be used.

The representative from Boughton-under-Blean Parish Council raised the following points:

·         The hedge to the front of the site had no protection and if it died the proposed development on the site would become more visible;

·         it looked as though the new structure would be visible above the hedge line;

·         the scale of the extension was too large for this prominent position;

·         it was in close proximity to Grade II listed buildings;

·         if the hedge was not there the new structure would be very visible;

·         referring to Council policy, considered there was no public benefit to this development;

·         this did not ‘conserve and enhance the streetscene’ as set out in Policy DM14; and

·         the parish council would have preferred a pitched roof.

In response, the agent said there was a covenant on the hedge for it to be retained.  The Team Leader explained that legal covenants were not planning considerations.  In response to a Member’s question, the agent confirmed that none of the hedge would be removed.

The Working Group viewed the application site from different points along the main road, from diagonally across the road, from outside the neighbouring property on The Street, opposite the application site on Bulls Lane and then they viewed the site from inside the applicant’s garden.  It was confirmed that the inner second hedge would likely be removed as the new structure was built; that the top of the extension would just be visible above the hedge line; the extension would be set back 0.2 metres (7.87 inches) from the line of the house; and the extension would be above the lower brick part of the house. 

The height of the end of the brick line on the house was measured as being 2.48 metres (98 inches), whilst the height of the hedge was 2.69 metres (106 inches), and the Team Leader confirmed the extension was 4.2 metres wide (165.35 inches).

The agent showed the working group the kitchen extension to the rear of the property which was a similar design to the proposed extension. 

The Team Leader reminded the Working Group that just because something was visible it did not automatically mean it gave rise to harm.  Officers considered the proposals to be well designed and appropriate for the site.