Decisions

Use the below search options at the bottom of the page to find information regarding recent decisions that have been taken by the council’s decision making bodies.

Alternatively you can visit the officer decisions page for information on officer delegated decisions that have been taken by council officers.

Earlier - Later

Decisions published

05/03/2020 - Schedule of Decisions ref: 137    Recommendations Approved (subject to call-in)

Decision Maker: Planning Committee

Made at meeting: 05/03/2020 - Planning Committee

Decision published: 19/03/2020

Effective from: 05/03/2020

Decision:

PART 2

 

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

 

2.1 REFERENCE NO -  18/506328/OUT

APPLICATION PROPOSAL

Outline Application for the erection of 20 residential dwellings (access being sought, all other matters for future consideration).

ADDRESSLand Lying To The South Of Dunlin Walk Iwade Kent ME9 8TG  

WARD Bobbing, Iwade And Lower Halstow

PARISH/TOWN COUNCILIwade

APPLICANT BDW Kent

AGENT

 

There were tabled papers for this item.

 

Mr Scott Finch, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application.

 

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by the Vice-Chairman.

 

A Ward Member who was also a member of the Planning Committee spoke against the application. He raised the following points: the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to residents and local school children; there was a lack of parking in the area; loss of a footpath and recreation area; the local roads and infrastructure were at breaking point; Sandling Way was a dangerous access point; this was infill development and it was over-intensive.

 

A Ward Member who was not a member of the Planning Committee spoke against the application.

 

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

 

·         Needed a clear analysis of the traffic implications of the Barton Hill Drive application;

·         this site was not allocated for housing;

·         the site was difficult to get to and was not in a suitable location;

·         it was a quiet walk, and the development would completely change the aspect for local people;

·         it was over-development;

·         this was unnecessary and unsuitable; and

·         not happy with the ecological mitigation measures.

 

In response, the Major Projects Officer suggested a condition could be added to the application to state that none of the dwellings be occupied before M2 Junction 5 was either commenced or finished.

 

Councillor Tony Winckless moved a motion for a site meeting.  This was seconded by Councillor Mike Baldock.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed.

 

Resolved:  That application 18/506328/OUT be deferred to allow the Planning Working Group to meet on site.

 

2.2 REFERENCE NO - 19/504059/FULL

APPLICATION PROPOSAL

Installation of six modular prefabricated 1100 litre bin-stores to the front of Wentworth House (retrospective).

ADDRESSWentworth House Wentworth Drive Sittingbourne Kent ME10 1TU 

WARD Borden And Grove Park

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL

APPLICANT Mr Shaun Morris

AGENT

 

The Area Planning Officer explained that there was an error on page 66 of the report and the dimensions should read: 3.3 metre width; 1.4 metre depth and 1.8 metre height.

 

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by the Vice-Chairman.

 

Councillor Mike Baldock, who called-in the application, explained that the bin stores had appeared, without planning permission.  He said they should be located in a more suitable location as they stuck out into the street view.  He also considered they would be used by passers-by.

 

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

 

·         These were an eyesore;

·         the bins themselves could be placed in this position without planning position;

·         the bin stores should be re-located behind the building line;

·         preferred to have the bin stores, rather than just the bins;

·         this caused harm to the residential amenity;

·         there were more suitable places to put the bin stores; and

·         there should be some soft landscaping.

 

Councillor Simon Clark moved the following motion:  That the application be delegated to officers to approve subject to the applicant re-siting the bin stores further into the site, or else refuse on the grounds of loss of visual amenity on the open character of the streetscene, if the bin stores were not re-located, and in consultation with the Ward Members.  This was seconded by Councillor Monique Bonney.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed.

 

Resolved:  That application 19/504059/FULL bedelegated to officers to approve subject to the applicant re-siting the bin stores further into the site, or else refuse on the grounds of loss of visual amenity on the open character of the streetscene, if the bin stores were not re-located, and in consultation with the Ward Members. 

 

2.3       REFERENCE NO - 19/506038/REM

APPLICATION PROPOSAL

Reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, including external lighting and pedestrian crossing following an outline application 18/500041/OUT for erection of a new Community Hall, outside recreational facilities and car parking.

ADDRESSLand Fronting Painters Forstal Road Ospringe Kent ME13 0EG 

WARD East Downs

PARISH/TOWN COUNCILOspringe

APPLICANT Painters Forstal Community Association

AGENT Red House Design

 

The Development Manager referred to the tabled paper for this item which showed an amended site location plan.  He outlined the tree and hedge planting that was proposed and said that conditions (3), (6) and (7) needed to be amended to reflect the new drawing number.  Two emails had been received from objectors to the application and they had raised points which included:  this was built next to a residential area, it could be built elsewhere; this development should not affect the community; it would intrude on the garden and garden room of the neighbouring property; and it should be located where it would not upset anyone.

 

Parish Councillor Andrew Keel, representing Ospringe Parish Council spoke with some concerns about the application.

 

Professor Ben Bennett, a supporter, spoke in support of the application.

 

Mr Robert Dodgson, an objector, spoke against the application.

 

Mr Brian Lloyd, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application.

 

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by the Vice-Chairman.

 

A Ward Member who was also a member of the Planning Committee welcomed the principle of the development, but raised concern with the location of the hall, adjacent to Pawley Farm.  He considered it to be detrimental to the residential amenity of the Farm, and that there was space available to move the building towards the left hand corner.  He also suggested that if the application was approved that condition (2) be amended to include consultation with the Ward Member, and that hedging be limited to a height of 2 metres adjacent to Pawley Farm to reduce the potential for overshadowing, and that the Ward Member be consulted on condition (5) and (9) of the appendix.

 

Councillor David Simmons moved a motion for a site meeting.  This was seconded by Councillor Mike Baldock and on being put to the vote the motion was agreed, with the Chairman using his casting vote.

 

A Member requested that the site be marked out so that the proposed footprint of the building could be identified.

 

Resolved:  That application 19/506038/REM be deferred so that the Planning Working Group could meet on site.

 

2.4       REFERENCE NO - 19/500768/FULL

APPLICATION PROPOSAL

During the winter months, the stationing, unoccupied, of 1 welfare unit and 15 mobile homes used residentially in the preceding agricultural season to accommodate seasonal workers at Owens Court Farm, as shown on drawing 22259/56/200219V2 (Revised)

ADDRESS Owens Court Farm Owens Court Road Selling Faversham Kent ME13 9QN

WARDBoughton And Courtenay

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL Selling

APPLICANT F W Mansfield & Son

AGENT Hobbs Parker Property Consultants

 

Parish Councillor Amanda Saunders, representing Selling Parish Council spoke with some concerns with the application.

 

Mr Holman, an objector, spoke against the application.

 

Jane Scott, the Agent, spoke in support of the application.

 

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by the Vice-Chairman.

 

A Ward Member who was also a member of the Planning Committee welcomed the revised plan rotating the caravans by 90 degrees.  He raised concern with the proximity of the site to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  He supported the suggested conditions submitted by Selling Parish Council, including the change of entrance from the north west to the south east which he considered would have less impact.  The Ward Member suggested that the parking area be moved to the welfare unit and vice-versa, and whether this could be investigated.  The Planner explained that the stationing of the caravans throughout the growing season constituted permitted development, and Members were being asked to consider the stationing when it was not the growing season.

 

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

 

·         There was no need for this application, local people should be able to be found to work on the site;

·         needed to consider the setting of the AONB;

·         the Permitted Development Rights (PDRs) needed to be removed; and

·         needed to see whether there were any Public Rights of Way (PROW) nearby with regard to the setting of the AONB and its proximity to the application site.

 

In response, the Planner advised that agricultural PDRs could not be removed, and he added that as the site was 100 metres outside the AONB, the AONB unit had not been consulted, and he reminded Members that in any case there were already agricultural buildings nearby.

 

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following motion:  That the application be deferred to look into whether there were any PROWs nearby from where views of the application site/AONB could be seen.  This was seconded by Councillor Tim Valentine.

 

Members made the following further comments:

 

·         The access to the site could also be looked at with the applicant;

·         it would be difficult to re-site the access as it would be right outside the entrance to the agriculture engineer;

·         the mitigation measures suggested by the Parish Council were sensible ideas;

·         it was often difficult to get local fruit pickers; and

·         concerned with the amount of cars that could be coming onto the site.

 

The Area Planning Officer explained to Members that they could not take into account the impact of PDRs because they did not require planning permission.  He re-iterated that it was the impact of the storage over winter that was being considered.

 

Resolved:  That application 19/500768/FULL be deferred to allow more information to be sought regarding the existence of any PROWs and consequently the visual impact of the development on the AONB.

 

 

PART 5

 

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

 

·                     Item 5.1 –  106 Scrapsgate Road, Minster

 

COMMITTEE REFUSAL

 

APPEALS DISMISSED

 

A Member welcomed the decision.

 

·                     Item 5.2 –  Blean Cottage, Hickmans Green, Boughton Under Blean

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL ALLOWED

 

·                     Item 5.3 –  Funton Brickworks Raspberry Hill Lower Halstow

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL DISMISSED

 

A Member was disappointed with the decision.

 

·                     Item 5.4 –  61 Playstool Road Newington

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL DISMISSED

 

·                     Item 5.5 –  One Acre Blind Marys Lane

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL DISMISSED

           

            A Member welcomed the decision.

 

·                     Item 5.6 –  Loyterton Farmhouse Tickham Lane Lynsted

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL ALLOWED

 

·                     Item 5.7 – The Old School, Dunkirk

 

DELEGATED REFUSAL

 

APPEAL ALLOWED