Issue - meetings

Councillors Prendergast and Round stated that they had been lobbied.

The Committee considered the report and the urgent update report of the Head of Planning and Development.

Mr Norton, an objector, and Mr Smith, for the applicant, addressed the meeting.

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee agreed to refuse permission by five votes to four with three abstentions.  In making this decision, Members felt that the proposed development would cause adverse impacts on highway and pedestrian safety and cause harm to the residential amenities of the surrounding area.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.  The proposed development will cause adverse impacts on highway safety by virtue of potential vehicle parking along Station Approach and will result in obstructions and impacts which would compromise pedestrian safety contrary to Policy DM1(ix) of the emerging Maidstone Local Plan.

2.  The proposed development by virtue of its use would cause harm to the residential amenities of the surrounding area by virtue of noise, odour and disturbance as a result of comings and goings and vehicle movements which would be contrary to Policy DM1(iv) of the emerging Maidstone Local Plan and Paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

FURTHER RESOLVED:  That the following informative be attached to the decision:

If the applicant were minded to resubmit the application, then Members may consider a shorter temporary planning permission more appropriate in the circumstances to monitor the impacts arising from the development.

Voting:  11 – For  0 – Against  1 – Abstention

Note:  Councillor Powell entered the meeting after this application had been introduced by the Principal Planning Officer (6.10 p.m.), and did not participate in the discussion or the voting.