Agenda and minutes

In the absence of the Chairman (Councillor Wilby), the Vice-Chairman (Councillor Summersgill) took the Chair.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Cleator, Cox, M Naghi and Wilby.

The following Substitute Members were noted:

Councillor English for Councillor Wilby

Councillor Greenan for Councillor Cox

Councillors Coates, Harper and Milham were present as Visiting Members for items 13 (24/505022/FULL – 3-5 Bower Place, Maidstone, Kent) and 19 (24/504962/FULL – Grange Park, 9 St Michaels Road, Maidstone, Kent).

Councillor Conyard attended the meeting as an observer.

There were none.

The Chairman stated that he intended to take the update reports of the Head of Development Management and any verbal updates in the Officer presentations as urgent items as they contained further information relating to the applications to be considered at the meeting.

With regard to item 13 (24/505022/FULL – 3-5 Bower Place, Maidstone, Kent), Councillor Greenan stated that prior to being aware that she would be a Substitute Member at the meeting, she had visited the application site on her own with the applicant with no Officers or other Members present.  She would leave the meeting while the application was discussed.

See also Minute 253 below.

The following disclosures of lobbying were noted:

RESOLVED:  That all items on the agenda be taken in public as proposed.

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting held on 16 January 2025 be approved as a correct record and signed subject to Minute 230 being amended to refer to Councillor Milham.

There were no petitions.

207.  24/503344/FULL - CHANGE OF USE OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION ON THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE BUILDING TO A 7-BEDROOM HMO (SUI GENERIS) FOR 10 OCCUPANTS - THE GEORGE, BENOVER ROAD, YALDING, MAIDSTONE, KENT

208.   

209.  The Head of Development Management advised the Committee that he had nothing further to report in respect of this application at present.

24/501759/FULL - CHANGE OF USE OF LAND FOR THE SITING OF 2NO. STATIC CARAVANS, 2NO. TOURING CARAVANS AND ERECTION OF 2NO. DAY ROOMS FOR GYPSY/TRAVELLER USE WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING (PART RETROSPECTIVE) - PLOT 1 THE MEADOWS, LENHAM ROAD, HEADCORN, KENT

The Head of Development Management advised the Committee that he had nothing further to report in respect of this application at present.

24/502769/FULL - ERECTION OF A SELF-BUILD 4-BEDROOM DWELLING WITH AN ASSOCIATED GARAGE, PARKING AND LANDSCAPING - LAND NORTH EAST OF REDWOOD GLADE, BREDHURST, KENT

The Head of Development Management advised the Committee that it was his recollection that the reason for deferral was about the potential for protected species both on the site and adjacent to the site.  It was not to do with biodiversity net gain because it was a proposed self-built plot and there had been specific reference to the need to see the comments of KCC Ecology.  In addition, representations had now been received from National Highways about land ownership and this would all be discussed in more detail later in the meeting.

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

Ms Sabalis, a concerned resident in the Residents’ Association speaker slot at the discretion of the Chairman, Mr Baker, an objector, Mr Smith, for the applicant, and Councillors Harper, Coates and Milham, Visiting Members, addressed the meeting.

RESOLVED:

1.  That permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, with:

  The amendment of condition 8 (External Lighting) to require low level and/or motion sensor lighting to minimise harm to residential amenity.

  The amendment/addition of conditions to improve landscaping and to create more quality communal outdoor space by reducing the number of bicycle parking spaces and areas of hardstanding.

  An additional condition about boundary treatments to require post and rail fencing (or similar) around the grassed areas to prevent vehicles from parking on/driving over them.

An additional condition requiring the incorporation of 10% onsite renewable or low carbon energy production.

  An additional informative regarding the installation of anti-idling signs.

2.  That the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  7 – For  1 – Against  3 - Abstentions

Having stated that prior to being aware that she would be a Substitute Member at the meeting, she had visited the application site with the applicant on her own with no Officers or other Members present, Councillor Greenan left the meeting while this application was discussed.

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

In introducing the application, the Development Management Team Leader advised the Committee that there were six bedrooms at the property rather than the five referred to in paragraphs 1.02 and 6.06 of the report.  There was an additional bedroom in the basement but use of the property as a house of multiple occupancy would remain permitted development at this scale.  If Members were minded to grant permission, she would recommend an additional condition to detail the approved plans for the scheme.

Ms Wissenden, an objector, Mrs Manning, a concerned resident in the Residents’ Association speaker slot at the discretion of the Chairman, Ms Wright, agent for the applicant, and Councillors Harper, Coates and Milham (Visiting Members) addressed the meeting.

During the discussion, Councillor M Thompson advised the Committee that he was the Ward Member for the applicant and had provided him with advice and support of a general nature.  He had taken advice on his participation in the debate on the application which supported his view that he was not pre-determined.  He therefore intended to speak and vote when the application was discussed.

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Development Management, the Committee resolved to refuse permission.  In making this decision, Members considered that:

·  The proposal individually and cumulatively with previous extensions results in harm to the amenity of adjacent neighbouring properties by being unduly overbearing and causes a loss of privacy and overlooking exacerbated by the elevated position of the dwellings, position of windows and the bulk and mass of the resultant dwellings.

·  The roof alterations by reason of the loss of the simple roof design, the materials used and the increased bulk and mass of the resultant dwellings overwhelm and detract from the original design creating a significantly prominent, poorly designed and out of character appearance harmful to the visual amenity of the host dwellings and the wider street scene.  This harm is exacerbated by the hard surfacing of the front gardens which detracts from the visual amenity of the street scene.

·  The application site is located close to the town centre but within an area of parking stress and failure to provide/demonstrate adequate parking for the larger dwellings should be included in the reasons for refusal.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused and that the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to finalise the reasons for refusal and supporting narrative based on the issues summarised above.

Voting:  8 – For  2 – Against  0 – Abstentions

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

RESOLVED:  That subject to:

A.  The prior completion of a legal agreement in such terms as the Head of Legal Partnership may advise to secure the Heads of Terms set out in the report;

  AND

B.  The conditions set out in the report,

the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to grant permission and to be able to settle or amend any necessary Heads of Terms, planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  10 – For  0 – Against  1 – Abstention

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management.

Councillor Crickett of Coxheath Parish Council addressed the meeting.

RESOLVED:  That subject to no new material planning considerations arising from the press notice expiring on 20 February 2025, the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to grant permission subject to the conditions set out in the report with an additional condition relating to noise mitigation and to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  10 – For  0 – Against  1 – Abstention

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

In introducing the application, the Development Management Team Leader advised the Committee that he needed to correct paragraph 6.34 of the report relating to private amenity space because in this case the rear garden space was smaller than the ground floor footprint of the dwelling.  However, this was considered to be acceptable because of the way the building had been designed to fit in with the neighbouring terrace and that was deemed to be of more importance than meeting the exact garden space standard.

Ms Wooler, an objector, and Councillor Crickett of Coxheath Parish Council addressed the meeting.

RESOLVED:  That consideration of this application be deferred to seek a parking stress survey (in accordance with the Lambeth methodology) from the applicant and to review compliance with private amenity space standards.

Voting:  11 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management.

It was noted that objections raised by Headcorn Parish Council had been dealt with.

RESOLVED:  That permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and that delegated powers be given to the Head of Development Management to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  11 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions

The Committee considered the report and the urgent update report of the Head of Development Management.  It was noted that the urgent update report circulated at the meeting superseded the update published on 11 February 2025 to provide further context on the recent appeal decision and how it affected this application, clarity regarding landownership and clarity on conditions being amended/added.

The Democratic Services Officer read out a statement on behalf of Mr Carter, an objector.

RESOLVED:

1.  That permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report as amended by the urgent update report circulated at the meeting (amended conditions 7 and 16 and additional condition 20).

2.  That the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  8 – For  1 – Against  2 – Abstentions

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management.

Ms Diamond, an objector, Councillor Titchener of Ulcombe Parish Council, and Mr Tamsett, for the applicant, addressed the meeting.

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Development Management, the Committee resolved to refuse permission.  In making this decision, the Committee considered that the loss of the play area/amenity space and the over intensification of the number of pitches within a constrained site negatively impacts upon the amenity of residents contrary to policy.  The Committee was also mindful of the appeal decision in relation to application 15/500326 which emphasised the quality of life issues.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused and that the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to finalise the reasons for refusal based on the issues summarised above.

Voting:  10 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions

Note:  Councillor Spooner left the meeting during consideration of this application.  He returned to the meeting, remained in the public gallery and did not participate in the discussion and voting.

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management.

Councillor Brown of Harrietsham Parish Council and Mr Mckay, for the applicant, addressed the meeting.

RESOLVED:

1.  That permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

2.  That the Head of Development Management be given delegated powers to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.

Voting:  11 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management setting out details of appeal decisions received since the last meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

6.00 p.m. to 10.20 p.m.