Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 23 August 2012

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 23 August 2012 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Including any interests not already registered

No declarations of interest or predetermination were made.

Cllrs. Mrs Dawson and Ms. Lowe declared that they had been lobbied in respect of item 4.2 SE/12/01031/HOUSE - 51 Greenhill Road, Otford, Sevenoaks TN14 5RR.

The Chairman announced that, with the consent of the Members of the Committee, item 4.4 SE/12/01530/CAC - Cavendish House, Clenches Farm Road, Sevenoaks TN13 2LU would be considered before item 4.3 SE/12/01529/FUL - Cavendish House, Clenches Farm Road, Sevenoaks TN13 2LU.

The Committee considered the following applications:

Demolition of existing garage. Erection of a part two storey part first floor extension to the side of the property, the construction of a glazed link leading to a two storey structure incorporating a garage and gym with games room over. New cladding to first floor and the construction of a new access and driveway.

The proposal sought permission for the demolition of the existing garage, erection of a part two storey part first floor extension to the side of the property and the construction of a glazed link leading to a two storey structure. The application also sought permission to re-clad the first floor. The site was within the Village of Otford Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Officers considered that the glazed link represented an inappropriate addition to the building to the detriment of its design, character and appearance. The proposed development would also result an uninterrupted built form across most of the application site and this would result in the site appearing cramped, contrary to the established spatial character of Greenhill Road.

Members’ attention was drawn to the tabled Late Observations sheet. It was noted that a Members’ Site Inspection had been held for this application.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Graeme Mair

For the Application:              Steve Herbert

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllr. Edwards-Winser

In response to a question Officers confirmed the main dwelling and garage would have footprints of 153m² and 79 m² respectively. Due to its angle the structure would be between 1m and 3m from the boundary fence with no. 53 Greenhill Road. The applicant clarified that he did not intend to remove foliage from that boundary.

It was MOVED by the Chairman and was duly seconded that the application be refused on two grounds. The first was that the proposed glazed link by reason of its overall design and materials failed acceptably to integrate with or relate to the character and design of the existing building. The second was that the proposed glazed link and two storey structure would create an uninterrupted extension of the built form across almost the entire width of the application site which when coupled with the overall size, scale and bulk of the two storey structure would represent a cramped and incongruous form of development.

Following a proposal from a Member of the Committee the motion was altered so that the second reason for  refusal also include that due to its height, bulk and mass the development would have an adverse impact onto the visual amenity of the residents of no. 53.

A Member of the Committee noted that most of the properties in the area had built form across the width of the plot. Additionally Otford Parish Council had not objected to the proposal in principle. Several Members considered the link to be a positive addition to the site.

Other Members of the Committee noted the comments from the neighbour at no. 53 that the size of the property could seem dominating and overbearing due to the slope of the site.

The amended motion to refuse permission was put to the vote and there voted –

7 votes in favour of the motion

8 votes against the motion

The Chairman declared the motion to be LOST.

It was MOVED and was duly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

The erection of a detached four bedroom house

The proposal was for approval for the erection of a two storey detached dwelling towards the northern boundary of the site and was currently gardens for Little Grange. The application proposed to use the existing access onto the site, which also served Little Grange to the south. The site was within the built confines of Westerham and was in the Westerham Conservation Area.

Officers considered that the additional dwelling would maintain a low density which was a distinctive character of the surrounding area. The design and choice of materials would not appear as incongruous or contemporary at odds with the scale and appearance of existing buildings. The proposal preserved the amenity of adjoining properties.

Members’ attention was drawn to the tabled Late Observations sheet. It was noted that a Members’ Site Inspection had been held for this application.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              MR B R Walters

Parish Representative:         Linda Rodgers

Local Member:                      Cllr. Mrs. Bracken

It was explained that the policy target for density would be for 2.1 dwellings in rural settlements on a plot this size.

It was MOVED by the Chairman and was duly seconded that the recommendation in the report to grant permission subject to conditions be adopted.

It was proposed by a Member that the start time for construction and demolition works on Saturdays in condition 8 was too early. An amendment to the motion was agreed that Officers would have delegated authority to amend this condition so the works could not begin before 0800.

Some of the Committee noted the comments of the Local Member that the proposed development would be out of character with the surrounding area and at best may need time to “settle in”. Much of the area was 200 years old and intimate. The site was also noticeable as it was on a hill.

It was suggested by others that the proposal did not harm the conservation area. The area consisted of a mixture of building styles and would not be particularly prominent from any public viewpoint or dwelling.

The amended motion was put to the vote and there voted –

11 votes in favour of the motion

4 votes against the motion

Resolved: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1)         The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

In pursuance of section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2)         No development shall be carried out on the land until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwelling hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The development shall be carried out using the approved materials.

To ensure that the appearance of the development is in harmony with the existing character of the area as supported by Policy EN1 of the Sevenoaks District Local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

Demolition of the existing dwelling and attached garage

Conservation Area Consent was sought to demolish the existing dwelling and attached garage. The site was within the Kippington Road Conservation Area and had been identified in the Kippington Road and Oakhill Road CAMP as “contributing to character”.

Officers informed the Committee that the existing structures were considered a heritage asset under section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework and, unless a particular exemption applied, there was a presumption against demolition. Demolition would detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Members’ attention was drawn to the tabled Late Observations sheet.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              Justine Digweed

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllr. Mrs. Hunter

In light of comments by the speakers, Members requested that Officers clarify whether the applicant had submitted any evidence to indicate whether the existing buildings were structurally unsound. No such documents had been received. Members believed this information was required before a decision could be made, due to the weight put on this matter by the public speakers.

It was MOVED by the Vice-Chairman and was duly seconded that the applications both for Conservation Area Consent and Planning Permission be deferred for the applicant to produce a full structural survey.

Officers clarified that they would need time to consider any such evidence once received.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

12 votes in favour of the motion

2 votes against the motion

Resolved: That the application for Conservation Area Consent be deferred for the applicant to produce a full structural survey.

Demolition of the existing dwelling and attached garage and erection of a detached house and garage

Resolved: That the application for Planning Permission be deferred for the applicant to produce a structural survey.