Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bowler and Etheridge.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 27 July 2016.

The record of the meeting held on 27 July 2016 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct. 

Referring to Minute 187, (planning application MC/16/0713 – Asda 387 Maidstone Road, Chatham ME5 9SE), attention was drawn to the additional condition 12 set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet which had been approved by the Head of Planning under delegated powers as follows:

Condition 12

The development shall be implemented in accordance with the design and specification as set out in The Environmental Risk Assessment Rev A 16.06.14, Farsight Security Services Ltd reference RD/jdnl0310, Asda Stores Ltd. Environment Policy, Daily-Weekly Checklist and drawing numbers (400) 01 rev C, (200) 04 rev D and (200) 03 rev E and the e-mail from Deloitte Real Estate received on 15 June 2016.  Following implementation and prior to the first use of the Petrol Filling Station, the as-built report (to include drawings and photographs) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall thereafter be retained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To maintain the source protection zone for a public water supply borehole in accordance with Policies BNE23 and CF12 of the Medway Local Plan 2003.

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.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

The Chairman informed the Committee that planning application MC/16/1847 – 94 – 100 High Street, Chatham had been deferred from consideration at this meeting owing to the need for further work to be undertaken on the proposed Section 106 agreement.

Luton and Wayfield

Details pursuant to conditions 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 16, 18 and 20 attached to planning permission MC/15/3743 which relates to the demolition of redundant office and laboratory buildings and construction of 71 x three-bedroom houses; 11 x four-bedroom houses; 12 x one-bedroom flats; 8 x two-bedroom flats and 8 x three bedroom flats together with 193 car parking spaces and associated landscaping.

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined background to the application and referred to the materials on display at the meeting.

Decision: 

The details submitted in pursuant to condition 4 be approved.

River

Conversion of existing building into 16 flats (9 x one bedroom, 3 x two bedroom, 3 x three bedroom, and 1x four bedroom).

Decision:

It was noted that this application had been deferred from consideration at this meeting to enable further work to be undertaken on the proposed Section 106 agreement. 

Gillingham South

Construction of 6 x one bedroom flats - Demolition of existing dwelling and garages.

Discussion:

The Senior Planner outlined the planning application.

During discussion, a Member suggested that whilst it was acknowledged that the proposed development had provision of parking for residents, having regard to the competition for parking in the vicinity of the application site, an additional head of agreement be approved precluding future occupiers from obtaining visitor parking permits and daily permits.

Decision:

Approved subject to:

A)           The applicant completing a Unilateral Undertaking to

i)             secure a contribution of £1,341.48 (£223.58 per dwelling) towards Designated Habitats Mitigation; and

ii)            preclude future residents of the development from being granted visitor parking permits and daily parking passes.

B)           Conditions 1 – 8 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.

Hempstead and Wigmore

Construction of a single storey front extension, together with a two-storey side/rear extension and a single storey rear extension - demolition of garage to rear.

Discussion:

The Head of Planning reported upon the planning application in detail and, referring to the character of the area outlined the planning issues that needed to be considered by the Committee in determining this planning application.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Rodney Chambers OBE spoke on this application as Ward Councillor and expressed concern that should this application be approved it could set a precedent for similar applications which could change the character of the street scene from being semi-detached properties to an appearance of being terraced. He therefore requested that the Committee undertake a site visit so that they could see the street scene and the layout of the houses in the road. He stated that if the Committee was minded to approve a site visit he would reserve any other comments he had on the application until a later time.

Decision:

Consideration of this application be deferred pending a site visit.

Twydall

Prior Notification of a proposed change of use from office (Use Class B1) to residential dwelling  (Use Class C3).

Discussion:

The Head of Planning advised the Committee that this was not a planning application but a request for prior approval. He explained that ordinarily, this would have been dealt with under delegated powers had it not been for the number of objections received. However, attention was drawn to the only grounds upon which the Committee could refuse to approve the application as set out on pages 59 – 61 of the agenda.

Attention was also drawn to amendments to the proposal section of the report and the planning appraisal, details of which were set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

The Committee discussed the request for prior approval and expressed concern as to the proposal to change use of the office to four studio flats. Members considered that the studio flats would be very small and they would have preferred the premises to be converted into two one bedroom flats.

The Head of Planning assured the Committee that the applicant would still have to apply for Building Regulations and Officers would undertake inspections so as to ensure that the works were carried out as detailed.

The Committee noted that they had no alternative but to confirm that prior approval was required for the development and that prior approval be granted but they wished it to be noted that the Committee did not like the proposed change of use in its submitted format and, had it been in a position to do so, it would have been refused.

Decision:

Prior approval be required and prior approval be granted subject to:

A)           A contribution of £894.32  for Designated Habitats Mitigation;

B)           Conditions 1 and 2 as set out in the report for the reasons stated in the report.