To consider the following applications:

Def Item 1, 18/503057/FULL, Land at Perry Court (Care Home), Faversham

Def Item 2, 18/502735/FULL, Land at Perry Court (Hotel & Retail), Faversham

Members of the public are advised to confirm with Planning Services prior to the meeting that the applications will be considered at this meeting.

Requests to speak on these items must be registered with Democratic Services (democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call us on 01795 417328) by noon on Wednesday 9 October 2019.

Tabled Papers added 10 October 2019.

Reports shown in previous Minutes as being deferred from that Meeting

The Senior Planning Officer referred Members to the tabled paper for this item which set-out additional consultee comments and a further condition requested by Southern Water requiring details of foul drainage.  He reminded Members that the application had been deferred on 18 July 2019 to review the design and to look again at the renewable energy measures.  The Senior Planning Officer showed the Committee the before and after designs.  Gables were now provided to the projecting bays, and the material palette had been simplified, with no render.  The scheme now proposed to integrate PV slates on the south side of the roof, covering an area of 110 – 140 square metres.  The provision of 20 car parking spaces had been acceptable to Kent County Council (KCC) Highways and Transportation, but following Member concerns, two further spaces had now been added which was in excess of the parking provision required by KCC.

Town Councillor Julian Saunders, representing Faversham Town Council, spoke in support of the application.

Mrs Jo Kemp, on behalf of the Applicants, spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions.

A Member asked if there was a condition requiring local bricks and materials?  The Senior Planning Officer explained that there was a condition requiring samples of the materials to be used, but it did not state local materials.  The Major Projects Officer acknowledged the need to decrease carbon emissions by reducing transport of materials and said there was scope to amend the condition to make it clear that the materials were to be locally sourced.

A Member asked what arrangement would be made for the properties within the application site to be on mains drainage?  The Senior Planning Officer explained that mains drainage would be installed for the wider Perry Court development.  He understood that the capacity had been designed to incorporate the care home, and the adjacent site as well.  Currently there was no confirmation of the technical details, but Southern Water had requested a condition for this.  The Member asked about the off-site highway works, including works to the A2/A251 junction and the pedestrian crossing at the Abbey School, and for confirmation that the £300,000 had been received by KCC?  The Senior Planning Officer explained that the £300,000 would be paid prior to the occupancy of the first dwelling on the site, and he was not aware of any occupancy, as reported by the Member, but if this was the case, this would be looked into.

A Member requested further details of the open spaces for the residents of the care home.  The Senior Planning Officer explained that there were communal gardens around the home and these were 14 metres deep to the south of the grounds, and there were other areas of green to the north of the care home as well.

A Member asked what the rating was of the EV charge points and the Senior Planning Officer explained that this was not confirmed at this stage, but was subject to a planning condition.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by Councillor Ben J Martin.

Members were invited to debate the application and raised points which included:

·         Pleased to see the applicant/agent take-on Members’ concerns with the design of the building, it was far superior to what it had been;

·         the delivery hours (0700 hours to 2300 hours) should be amended to 0700 hours to 2100 hours;

·         welcomed the design changes, but the removal of the render resulted in the building not suiting the streetscene;

·         amendments to the roof lines and projections were an improvement;

·         disappointed that there were not more projections on the roofs; and

·         overall this was an improvement.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following amendment and addendum:  That no deliveries should take place outside the hours of 0700 hours and 2100 hours Monday to Sunday, and an additional condition to stipulate that the building materials were locally sourced and made, including bricks.  This was seconded by Councillor Ben J Martin.

Members spoke to the amendment and made comments which included:

·         Appreciated the sentiment of going for local, but this could be difficult to do;

·         this would tie the developer down too much;

·         this should not be a condition, but stated ‘across the board’ as an informative to developers generally; and

·         the amendment should be treated as two separate items.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following amendment:  That no deliveries shall take place outside the hours of 0700 hours and 2100 hours Monday to Sunday.  This was seconded by Councillor Ben J Martin and on being put to the vote the amendment was agreed.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following addendum:  That where possible local building materials, in particular bricks, were sourced in Swale.  This was seconded by Councillor Ben J Martin and on being put to the vote the addendum was agreed.

Resolved:  That application 18/503057/FULL be approved subject to conditions (1) to (31) in the report, with an amendment to condition (3) to refer to the use of local materials, particularly bricks, being sourced in Swale where possible, and condition (7) in the report so that no deliveries shall take place outside the hours of 0700 hours and 2100 hours Monday to Sunday, and one further condition requiring details of foul drainage.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the report and reminded Members that the application had been called-in at the 12 September 2019 meeting.  The report provided advice on various issues that had been raised at that meeting.  This included the design of the buildings.  He outlined the changes as noted in the report and explained that there was now greater clarity in the hotel building, to provide more depth to the building with the timber cladding further away from the brick work.  The Brise Soleil detailing on the supermarket had been increased in size.  The Senior Planning Officer reported that the EV fast charge points had been added to the hotel site.  Sustainable transport funding had increased from £20,000 to £30,000 following negotiations with KCC Highways and Transportation for additional bus stop facilities.  The Senior Planning Officer referred to the two tabled updates for this item which included responses to an air quality report from the University of Kent from the Environmental Protection Team Leader.

Town Councillor Julian Saunders, representing Faversham Town Council, spoke in support of the application.

Miles Young, an objector, spoke against the application.

Scott Davidson, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions.

A Member asked if there was a local trade agreement for construction?  The Senior Planning Officer explained that this had not been discussed to-date, but a clause could be added to the Section 106 Agreement if Members wished to.

A Member asked if the hotel and retail parts of the application could be considered separately and the Senior Planning Officer explained that as they were submitted under one application, a split decision could not be made.  The Member also asked whether officers were content that the retail study from the WYG retail consultant was up-to-date, as a food store had closed down in Faversham after the report had been done.  The Senior Planning Officer explained that the retail study was up-to-date, it gave robust advice on Borough-wide retail issues.

A Member sought clarification on the failure of the applicant to provide a Retail Impact Assessment (RIA) not complying to Policy MU7 of the Local Plan, and the lower threshold of when an assessment was required.  The Senior Planning Officer advised that this recommendation had not been subject to public consultation or formed part of an emerging plan policy or guidance document and so little weight could be put on that.  He added that if WYG had considered a RIA was required, they would have said so, as they were the same company that undertook the Retail Needs Study.

A Member asked what measures would be in place to mitigate air quality issues?  The Environmental Protection Team Leader referred to the report that Members had received and was also tabled at the meeting.  He said the report indicated that there would be no adverse effect from the development, and so mitigation was very minor.  He explained that it was difficult to quantify what levels of pollution there would be in the town.  He stated that the level of adverse effect on the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) was negligible.  The Member said that court findings had required developers to show that they had reduced harm on a development.  The Environmental Protection Team Leader explained that the report referred to above had been written prior to the court decision.  He said that issues of mitigation were taken very seriously.

A Member requested details of bus stops in the vicinity of the development.  The Senior Planning Officer explained that at the moment there was a bus stop facility for going south, towards Ashford.  There was no convenient location on the other side, but funding could deliver a layby for a bus stop facility.

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by Councillor Ben J Martin.

Members were invited to debate the application and raised points which included:

·         The applicant had improved the supermarket design, but the hotel design still needed to be amended; and

·         the application should be deferred.

Councillor Simon Clark moved the following amendment to condition (30):  That no deliveries should take place outside the hours of 0700 hours and 2100 hours Monday to Saturday, and no deliveries should take place on a Sunday or Bank Holiday outside the hours of 0900 hours and 2000 hours, and these would then negate the need for the Delivery Management Plan 2018.  This was seconded by Councillor Tony Winckless.

There was some discussion on whether the amendment should be delegated to officers, subject to discussions as to whether these times worked for the two businesses.  On being put to the vote the amendment was agreed.

Members made further comments on the substantive motion:

·         Concerned with the change from a convenience store to a supermarket;

·         additional vehicles would impact on air quality;

·         queuing traffic on the A2/A251 would get worse;

·         needed to be mindful on the impact on the town centre, with a potential trend of discounted supermarkets taking more trade than more traditional supermarkets;

·         shoppers would not visit the town centre after shopping at this supermarket;

·         this type of supermarket was needed;

·         the convenience store would have been sustainable;

·         there were no supermarkets in the southern part of Faversham;

·         the design had improved;

·         sustainable measures improved;

·         no reason to object;

·         in principle did not object, but still did not like the design; and

·         these buildings were in a prominent position and the design needed to be right.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following motion:  That the application be deferred so that the design of the hotel and retail unit could be improved.  This was seconded by Councillor Simon Clark.

Members made the following comments in response to the motion:

·         Torn, as the design could be improved, but it was reasonable at the moment, and was in-keeping;

·         the Council did not have good design policies and guidance for developers in the first place;

·         there were plenty of design options for the hotel chain to choose from their portfolio; and

·         deferral was not needed, it was good to have retail competition.

At this point the Senior Planning Solicitor drew Members’ attention to paragraph 3.19 in the report which outlined the concern that Members had with the development.   He reminded Members that the application had already been deferred and called-in, and questioned what could be achieved by deferring it again.

The Conservation and Design Manager considered the hotel design was a strong and contemporary design and complementary to other large buildings on site.  Both the hotel and supermarket were on higher ground than the houses along Ashford Road, and so a flat roof was more beneficial as it was not so imposing.  The contemporary design also fitted in well with the proposed business units on the site, and so there was an overall context to the design. High quality building materials would be used.  The hotel was articulated in a vertical plane with projection forward to the main façade to enliven the appearance.  The Conservation and Design Manager considered the design to be clean and crisp, and worked well in the location.

The motion for deferral was put to the vote and lost.

Members spoke to the substantive motion and made the following comments:

·         No objection to the hotel, but the supermarket was a convenience store in the outline application;

·         loss of sustainable development without the convenience store;

·         impact on viability of the town centre, traffic and air quality;

·         considered the impact of the development was not negligible;

·         traffic queues at the A2/A251 junction would be very substantial;

·         signalising of the junction would reduce delays dramatically, and this needed to happen before the development was built;

·         reports indicated that by 2031 the junction would be beyond capacity, irrespective of this application;

·         hotel was fine, could not support the supermarket; and

·         precautionary principles should be applied at the A2/A251 junction to protect public health.

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following addendum:  That a condition be added so that where possible, local building materials, in particular bricks, were sourced in Swale.  This was seconded by Councillor Simon Clark.  On being put to the vote the addendum was agreed.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 19(2) a recorded vote was taken on the motion to delegate to officers to approve the application subject to conditions (1) to (41) in the report, resolution over the process to secure bus stop improvements on Ashford Road, completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure highways contributions (£99,960 requested by KCC Highways and Transportation and £27,105 requested by Highways England) and a £20,000 contribution towards off-site EV points and voting was as follows:

For:  Councillors Cameron Beart, Roger Clark, Simon Clark, Tim Gibson, James Hall, James Hunt, Carole Jackson, Richard Palmer, Paul Stephen, Ben J Martin and Tony Winckless.

Against:  Councillors Monique Bonney, David Simmons and Tim Valentine.

Resolved:  That delegated powers be given to officers to approve application 18/502735/FULL subject to conditions (1) to (41) in the report, and the amendment of conditions (3) and (30) to refer to the use of local materials, particularly bricks, being sourced in Swale where possible, and to control delivery hours to between 0700 and 2100 hours Monday to Saturday, and 0900 and 2000 hours on Sundays, Bank Holidays and Public Holidays, resolution over the process to secure bus stop improvements on Ashford Road, completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure highways contributions (£99,660 requested by KCC Highways and Transportation and £27,105 requested by Highways England) £30,000 for sustainable transport measure, and a £20,000 contribution towards off-site EV points.