Contact your Parish Council

Representation

One representation has been received from Councillor Paine raising the following comments who is unable to attend the committee meeting. 

“I apologise for not being able to make it to the meeting to make my comments in person. I am a council representative for Action with Communities in Rural Kent and their AGM clashes with the date that this item comes to committee. Firstly, I wish to re-iterate that this item was called in by me, not Cllr Beerling. That said, I understand that the concerns I raised are shared by all three of Fant's members. Regarding these concerns - I am extremely grateful for all the work Kevin Hope has put in since I first called this application in. His negotiations have significantly improved the scheme, and I am particularly pleased with proposals for improved landscaping and a reduction of hard standing. It is unfortunate that there were no pre-application discussions with ward members on this site - I am sure we could have saved the neighbours a lot of grief. I agree that an acoustic noise assessment is not necessary for this site (whilst the A26 is busy, this estate is set back a fair distance). I think the comments about the character assessment are fair, but I still urge the Council to consider this area for a pilot 'Neighbourhood Plan'. I think the scheme being recommended for approval is better as a result of the work done by officers since the application came in, but I welcome any further improvements to reduce the impact this

development may have on neighbours”.

Officer Comment

As stated above, the report states that this application was called in to planning committee by Councillor Beerling.  This is incorrect and I would like to amend this to Councillor Paine.

On a separate matter, the report states in paragraphs 5.6.1 and 5.6.2 that the rear elevations of the proposed dwellings within plots B and C would be sited approximately 30m from the rear of the properties within Upper Fant Road.  This distance is in fact approximately 40m and I would therefore like to amend this detail within paragraphs 5.6.1 and 5.6.2.

RECOMMENDATION

My recommendation remains unchanged:

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to conditions