Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Argyle Road, Sevenoaks. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services 01732 227165  Email:

No. Item


Minutes pdf icon PDF 73 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 January 2024, as a correct record.



Resolved: That the Minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 25 January 2024 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.



Declarations of Interest or Predetermination

Including any interests not already registered


Cllrs Harrison and Malone declared for Minute 58 – 23/03279/FUL – Co-op, 30 – 32 Hever Road, West Kingsdown, Kent TN15 6HD that they were Ward Members, but remained open minded.



Declarations of Lobbying


There were none.



23/03279/FUL - Co-op, 30 - 32 Hever Road, West Kingsdown Kent TN15 6HD pdf icon PDF 2 MB

To divide the existing supermarket unit into 3 separate Class E Commercial, Business and Service units, consisting of a gym at no. 30, a barber at unit 1, 32 and a hair and beauty salon at unit 2, 32.


The proposal sought planning permission to divide the existing supermarket unit into 3 separate Class E Commercial, Business and Service units, consisting of a gym at no. 30, a barber at unit 1, 32 and a hair and beauty salon at unit 2, 32. The application had been referred to the Committee by Councillor Bulford out of concern for its impact on neighbour amenity and parking.


Members’ attention was brought to the main agenda papers.


The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:


Against the Application:


For the Application:


Parish Representatives:

Cllr Ian Bosley

Local Members:

Cllr Bulford


Members asked questions of clarification of the speakers which focused on noise and the impact on parking, as the proposal could necessitate longer stays than from customers using the supermarket.


In response to questions, the officer explained that a noise condition had not been included in the recommendation, as they considered it would not be reasonable under the Planning Policy Guidelines and the National Planning Policy Framework. The application was only for changes to the shop front, not for a change of use, because gyms and shops were both Use Class E. Members were advised however that the applicant had given their agreement for this additional condition. The officer explained that the plans showed the site ownership, and did not include the internal layouts of proposed development; toilets and fire escapes were not included at this stage.


Officers considered that cars were able to park on nearby roads including Multon Road while others passed. It was not felt that a Construction and Environmental Management Plan was reasonable, as the development would not involve long periods of construction or heavy goods vehicles. There had been no objection from the Highways Authority with regards to parking.


It was moved by the Chairman that the recommendations within the report, alongside an additional condition relating to the submission of a noise impact and acoustic assessment and details of any necessary mitigation as well as the closing of the external doors, be agreed.


Members discussed the application. They noted that the building was owned by the developer, and thus avoiding noise issues that would impact his tenants would be a priority. They discussed whether the changes to the frontage would influence the noise generated, noting that the additional exits to properties could generate adverse noise for certain residents directly above them. It was felt an acoustic assessment would also be appropriate, because of the proposed new internal walls.


An amendment was moved by Cllr Malone and duly seconded by Cllr Harrison that an additional condition be imposed restricting the opening hours of the units from 9am – 7pm. Members discussed the amendment, noting that the applicant’s consent for audio restrictions related to the initial hours proposed, and that the shop at the site previously was open from 7am – 10pm. Members thought that restricting the opening time would not be a reasonable restriction, as planning permission was not being granted for use.


The amendment was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.


Back to top