Agenda and minutes

To approve the record of the meeting held on 18 November 2015.

The record of the meeting held on 18 November 2015 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct. 

The Committee noted that in accordance with Minute 496 of the meeting on 18 November 2015, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman had approved the following conditions for planning application MC/15/2986 – 86 Hopewell Drive, Chatham:

1.         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan, received 1 September 2015 and Elevations (1 RevA), Floor Plan (1 RevA), Block Plan, received 20 August 2015.

2.         The use hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours of 09.30 to 21.30 Mondays to Fridays inclusive and between the hours of 09.30 to 17.30 on Saturdays and 10.00 to 18.00 on Sundays and, Public Holidays.

3.         If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a method statement, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority. The Method Statement must detail how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

4.         Within one month of the date of this decision, a scheme to minimise the transmission of noise from the use of the premises, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Noise from the premises should be controlled, such that the noise rating level (LAr,Tr) emitted from the development shall be at least 10dB below the background noise level (LA90,T) at the nearest residential facade. All measurements shall be defined and derived in accordance with BS4142: 2014. All works which, form part of the approved scheme shall be completed before any part of the development is occupied and shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details.

5.         Within 6 months of the date of this permission a pedestrian access link and gate to Hopewell drive in line with the entrance to the premises, shall be provided. The gate/entrance shall only be used during week day time (Mon Friday 9-5) for emergencies but shall be available for use in the evening and weekends at all times the premises are open. The gate/entrance shall thereafter be retained.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Carr and Etheridge.

The Chairman will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report. 

There were none.

The Chairman informed the Committee that former Councillor Stephen Kearney had recently passed away. As Councillor Kearney had served for many years on the Planning Committee, Members observed a minute’s silence in his memory.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other interests

The Chairman, Councillor Diane Chambers advised the Committee that as she had had discussions with individuals concerning planning application MC/14/2395 – Gibraltar Farm, Ham Lane, Hempstead, Gillingham she would vacate the chair and leave the meeting for the consideration and determination of this planning application. In her absence the Vice Chairman would chair the meeting for this particular planning application.

Councillor Purdy, referring to planning application MC/14/2395 – Gibraltar Farm, Ham Lane, Hempstead, Gillingham advised the Committee that she had an interest in the protection of the Capstone Valley and therefore she would leave the meeting for the consideration and determination of this planning application.

In addition, Councillor Purdy referred to planning application MC/15/2078 – 27 Watling Street, Gillingham and advised the Committee that as she had previously spoken as Ward Councillor objecting to this planning application, she would withdraw from the meeting for the consideration and determination of this planning application.

Councillor Saroy referred to planning application MC/15/2078 – 27 Watling Street, Gillingham and advised the Committee that as a member of the Darland Residents Association, she would leave the meeting for the consideration and determination of this planning application.

Councillor Wildey referred to planning application  MC/14/2395 – Gibraltar Farm, Ham Lane, Hempstead, Gillingham and advised the Committee that as he wished to address the Committee as Ward Councillor on this particular planning application, he would withdraw from the Committee and take no part in the determination of the planning application.

Rainham Central

T1 – Oak Fell 

Discussion:

The Senior Tree Officer outlined the request for permission to fell an oak tree that was the subject of a Tree Preservation Order within the garden of the application property.

Decision: 

The applicant be refused consent to fell the oak tree numbered T1 at 14 Tanker Hill, Rainham.

Rainham South

T1 Oak - Dismantle and grind main root balls

T2 Oak - Dismantle and grind main root balls 

Discussion:

The Senior Tree Officer outlined the request for permission to fell two oak trees that were the subject of Tree Preservation Orders at 164 Burnham Walk, Parkwood, Gillingham.

The Committee discussed the application noting that the trees had been inspected and some work had been undertaken to both trees to remove deadwood. In addition, the canopies had been lifted over the roof of both numbers 162 and 164 Burnham Walk  to give a circa 4m clearance.

Decision: 

The applicant be refused consent to fell the oak trees numbered T1 and T2 at 164 Burnham Walk, Parkwood, Gillingham. 

Lordswood and Capstone

Outline application with some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout, scale) for construction of up to 450 market and affordable dwellings with associated access, estate roads and residential open space.

Discussion:

In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman chaired the meeting for this planning application.

The Planning Consultant outlined the planning application in detail and in doing so drew attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which set out the following additional information:

·         Representations from Highways England

·         Representations from Kent County Council’s Ecological Advice Service

·         A summary of information received from the applicant’s agent relating to:

-       the appeal decision concerning planning application MC/14/0285 - Land at Station Road, (Bakers Field), Rainham

-       Housing Land Supply position;

-       Formal Open Space provision;

-       A summary of discussions between the applicant and Highways England regarding Junction 3 of the M2; and

-       The capital receipt that the Council would receive to permit access from the North Dane Way spur to the application site.

·         The Officer’s response to the points raised by the applicants agent.

The Planning Consultant advised the Committee that this was an outline application with some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout, scale) for the construction of 450 market and affordable dwellings with associated access, estate roads and residential open space.

He drew specific attention the comments received from Highways England advising that it would not be in a position to provide definitive comments upon whether the mitigation measures supplied by the applicants for the operation of Junction 3 of the M2 until January 2016. It was therefore suggested that if the Committee was minded to refuse the planning application, the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to issue the decision notice following the receipt of Highways England’s full comments relating to the impact of the development upon the operation of Junction 3 of the M2, unless Highways England’s representation raise new or unresolved issues.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Wildey addressed the Committee as the local Ward Councillor and Councillor Rodney Chambers addressed the Committee as the Ward Councillor for the adjoining Ward.

Both Ward Councillors outlined in detail their objections to the planning application and the effect that the proposed development would have upon the area of local landscape importance for Capstone, Darland and the Elm Court Area.

Concern was expressed as to the vehicular access into and out of the site and the effect that additional traffic would have upon the local road network and particular reference was made to the proposed emergency access to the application site which would involve emergency vehicles travelling along a single track road.

In addition, both Ward Councillors expressed concern that the proposed development would result in the loss of a substantial area of greenfield land which was located within a setting of outstanding natural beauty

It was also stressed that the proposed development of 450 dwellings would have a serious impact upon demand for local facilities such as school places and health services, in addition to having a negative affect upon the local water supply and air quality.

The Ward Councillors drew attention to the limited public transport serving this particular area of Medway and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 575.

Watling

Change of use to add taxi office (sui genius) to existing money shop (A2) to create a mixed use.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning reminded the Committee that this application had been deferred from consideration on 21 October 2015 to enable Officers to obtain further information as to the size of the reception area for the taxi office, how the proposed money shop and taxi office would work together and how the money shop would be accessed.

The Head of Planning confirmed that following discussions with the applicant, it had been established that the A2 use (money shop) would primarily be operated on-line and that any customers visiting the premises for this purpose would be by appointment only. It was confirmed that access to the store could be via the existing Beechwood Avenue entrance which was located next to the A2 office shown on the floorplan.

The Committee discussed the application and in response to questions, the Head of Planning confirmed that the proposed taxi office would be operational 24 hours. Information had not been supplied as to the proposed hours of operation for the money shop.

He also confirmed that the premises was served by three parking spaces, two of which would be used by the owner of the business and his partner when they were in the building and this would leave one space available for a taxi in the event that the driver may need to call into the office. It was however, envisaged that the taxi drivers would be out on the road for the majority of the time.

In response to questions, the Head of Planning confirmed that the proposed money shop would be in a separate part of the premises to the taxi reception area and therefore it was unlikely that taxi customers would be accessing that part of the premises.

In considering this planning application, a Member suggested that a further condition be approved restricting the parking of vehicles to those spaces indicated on the submitted plans.

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 and 2 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report and with an additional condition 3 as follows:

3.         All parking associated with approved uses shall only take place within the spaces laid out within the site as shown on drawing 15.09.01 Revision A.

Rainham South

Outline application with all matters reserved for the construction of a first floor extension with dormer windows to form three 1-bedroomed flats including rear land balcony, stairway and parking.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application in detail and advised the Committee that this was an outline application with all matters reserved for the construction of a first floor extension with dormer windows to form three 1 bedroomed flats including rear land balcony, stairway and parking.

He advised the Committee that this was a re-submission of application MC/14/1697 which had been refused by the Committee on 11 September 2014 and he drew attention to the previous ground for refusal as set out on page 73 of the agenda. He further advised that a subsequent appeal against refusal had been dismissed on 16 March 2015.

The Head of Planning stated that the application now submitted, whilst addressing some of the concerns of the Planning Inspector, failed to demonstrate that there would not be an adverse impact on the viability and vitality of the shops in terms of ensuring the provision of adequate  servicing arrangements.

The Committee discussed the report noting the comments of the Head of Planning.

Decision:

Refused on the ground set out in the report.

Watling

Change of use from residential care home (Class C2) to House of Multiple Occupation (sui generis use).

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application and referred in particular to Policy H7 of the Local Plan which set out advice regarding houses in multiple occupation and the criteria upon which they were to be assessed.

The Committee discussed the application and sought clarification as to whether the commissioning local authority for places for in the premises for homeless individuals would be Medway Council or another local authority.

It was confirmed that in addition to the requirement for planning permission, the applicant would also be required to obtain a House in Multiple Occupation Licence from the Council. However, such licence would not specify from which local authority area the tenants would be drawn.

Decision: 

Consideration of this application be deferred to enable Officers to obtain further information as to which local authority would be commissioning the placements at the premises.

Peninsula

Outline application with all matters reserved for redevelopment of former farm site to provide a residential development of up to 50 dwellings (Use Class C3), open space, infrastructure, landscaping and associated works.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application and advised the Committee that this application was for outline planning permission, with all matters reserved for the redevelopment of the former Street Farm site to provide a residential development of up to 50 dwellings, open space, infrastructure, landscaping and associated works.

He advised the Committee that whilst the applicant had agreed to meet the cost of a range of proposed Section 106 contributions,  the applicant had submitted a viability assessment which stated that it was not viable to provide 25% affordable housing on site as well.

The Committee discussed the application and requested that Officers continue negotiations with the applicant on the issue of provision of affordable housing within the development.

In addition, a Member suggested that if the planning application was resubmitted for consideration and recommended for approval, the proposed Section 106 contribution for open space provision be redirected to a site or sites on the Peninsula rather than the Great Lines Heritage Park.

Decision:

a)            Consideration of this application be deferred to enable Officers to hold further discussions with the applicant on the provision of affordable housing within the proposed development; and

b)            If the planning application is resubmitted and recommended for approval, the Section 106 contribution for open space provision be amended to direct such contribution of a site or sites on the Peninsula. 

Rainham North

Construction of 3 five-bedroomed detached dwellings with associated parking and access road.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application and advised the Committee that since despatch of the agenda one further letter of representation had been received, details of which were summarised on the supplementary agenda advice sheet along with the comments received from Kent County Council’s Ecological Advice Service and Southern Water.

The Head of Planning advised that the officer’s response to the points raised by the Kent County Council’s Ecological Advice Service had been addressed under proposed condition 9.

A Member suggested that prior to determining the planning application, the Committee undertake a site visit.

Decision:

Consideration of the application be deferred pending a site visit. 

Walderslade

Construction of four three bedroomed dwellings with associated parking.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application in detail.

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 13 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report. 

Hempstead and Wigmore

Construction of a detached 3 bedroom house with vehicular crossover and parking area.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application and drew attention to a correction to the description of the planning application as set out in the report in that the proposal was for the construction of a detached 2 bedroomed house not a 3 bedroomed house.

The Committee discussed the planning application.

Decision: 

Approved subject to:

a)            The applicants signing a Unilateral Undertaking under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure £223.58 towards Designated Habitats Mitigation.

b)            Conditions 1 – 6 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Rainham South

Construction of a detached garage to side with associated land level changes.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application in detail.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Wicks addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and outlined residents concerns that the proposed development would create an unlit alleyway which could encourage anti-social behaviour and increase a feeling of insecurity for existing residents and that the development would result in the isolation of the existing property at No. 6 and create a loss of light.

Decision:

Approved with conditions 1 – 6 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

This report summarises the content of agenda item 17, which, in the opinion of the proper officer, contains exempt information within one of the categories in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. It is a matter for the Committee to determine whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of document.

The Committee agreed to ask the press and public to leave the meeting because the following item contained sensitive information relating to current legal proceedings. The information was considered to be exempt under paragraph 6 of part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. 

This report sets out information relating to Section 215 enforcement for the period April – June 2015.

Discussion:

In the absence of the Environmental Services Manager, the Head of Planning undertook a brief presentation on Section 215 enforcement proceedings for the period April – June 2015.

Decision: 

The Committee noted the report and presentation.