10.30am – 15/502716/FULL Breach Farm Paddocks, Land North-east of Breach Farm Bungalow, Breach Lane, Upchurch, Kent, ME9 7PE

11.45am (approximately) – 15/500819/FULL Land adjoining Driftwood, Imperial Drive, Warden, Kent, ME12 4SE

PRESENT:  Councillors Bobbin, Richard Darby, Mike Dendor, Mike Henderson, Bryan Mulhern (Chairman) and Prescott (Vice-Chairman).

OFFICERS PRESENT:  Rob Bailey, Philippa Davies and Ross McCardle.

APOLOGIES:  Councillors Cameron Beart, Mark Ellen, Sue Gent and James Hunt.

The Chairman welcome the Agent, Parish Council representatives and seven members of the public to the meeting.

The Planning Officer introduced the application which was for the change of use of land to a single gypsy pitch with associated development, including one static caravan, one touring caravan, an amenity building, and shipping container.

The Planning Officer reported that the Ward Members had objected to the application and 13 letters of objection had been received.  The comments were outlined in the report for the 3 September 2015 Planning Committee meeting.  Newington and Upchurch Parish Councils objected to the application.  Kent County Council (KCC) Archaeology raised no objection, subject to the conditions already set out in the report.

The Planning Officer advised that the site scored high on the methodology of assessment criteria for gypsy and traveller sites, so the principle was there.  He further advised that there would be landscaping at the site, and as it was far enough away from neighbouring properties, the impact was minimal.

Mr Durr, the agent, provided an overview of the application and advised that the applicant had owned the land for 30 years.  The site was a brownfield site and it would provide a home for a local person who kept horses on the adjacent land.  The agent explained that the planned landscaping would mean that the site was not visible from the lane.

A representative from Newington Parish Council considered the area had a higher proportion of gypsy and traveller sites than other sites in the Borough.  He raised concern that KCC Highways had referred to the wrong lane in the report; local connections were not good, there were infrequent bus services and pedestrian access to the site was difficult; the site was near to two listed buildings; the application would have an adverse effect on residential amenity; the amount of proposed landscaping showed there was a lot to conceal; this had only been a brownfield site for 30 years; the area was greater than was needed for this application; use of the land was related to  the applicant’s business, but report stated land should not be used for business/industrial use; and the policy considerations only justified temporary permission.

The Planning Officer confirmed that KCC Highways had commented on the correct site.

Local residents raised the following comments:  comments sent to Swale Borough Council had not been acknowledged; there had been a significant change in the nature of this area over recent years; this was one step too far, this had to stop; disagreed with the approach that the report had taken; this was not just about policy, equitable change in the area should also be considered; concerned with the continuous line of ribbon development; was not against the application, but would prefer to see a house here that fitted in with the surrounding area; concerned that the site could be extended further; and the density of gypsy and traveller sites was excessive for the area.

In response to questions from Members, it was confirmed that the applicant was currently travelling; access was solely to the application site, but there was another access to the farm land further along the lane; and the shipping container would be painted green.

Members then toured the site with the Planning Officers.