Item 15 Pages 23 – 50 APPLICATION: 20/502770/FULL
Holman House, Station Road Staplehurst
Following the publication of the Committee Agenda, three further representations have been received, which make the following summarised comments relevant to the consideration of the application (Members can view the full comments on-line).
The Yews – (Immediate neighbour to the north)
· Does not consider that the amendments overcome their concerns regarding overlooking and privacy and proposed windows will still dominate and overlook the garden
· The proposals still add an additional floor to the existing building
· The three additional units will result in the over-intensification of the site
· The acoustic fence should be within the applicant’s site
Officer Comment – These issues are all addressed within the report. Whilst there are additional windows proposed, with the mitigation suggested, Officers still consider that no material worsening of privacy will result.
Silverwood – (circa 175m to the south)
· The driveway is narrow, previous occupiers used to park their vans in the Church car park
· Concerned that unit 1 has a front door that opens onto a parking area.
· Suggest that some flats are still below standard.
· All flats are required to have private amenity space.
Officer Comment – The driveway arrangements are as previously approved. KCC Highways do not object to the one additional vehicle parking space to the rear, nor the two to the front. The Council’s aerial imagery of the site shows vehicles previously parked to both the front and rear. Unit 1 has three options, its own front door, the main front communal door and the rear communal door. In terms of amenity areas, the provision of balconies is not always possible where existing buildings are converted. As highlighted in the main report at Annex 1, two flats have large terraces, one a smaller terrace, whilst a reasonable sized communal garden is also proposed.
Church Cottage – (Circa 120m North)
· Parking for 10 cars is over-intensification and will lead to noise and pollution.
· Unclear how the landlord will manage the risk of additional parking – could be up to 20 cars
Officer Comment – Neither KCC Highways nor the EHO have raised any concerns. The nature of the access and parking layout is such that it simply does not allow for additional informal parking. The management of the parking will be a matter for future residents and the freeholder.
Matters raised that are not relevant to the questions raised by Committee are:
· No evidence of a fire risk assessment (this is a matter dealt with under Building Regulations.
· Because the application is over-time, there are pressures to approve it (this is not the case)
· Minutes do no record the full discussion of the previous meeting (Members will be aware that the minutes are not intended to be a transcript)