The Chairman welcomed to the Committee Mr. Martin Rayner a Highways Engineer from Kent County Council, Ms. Claire Pamberi the new Sevenoaks District Council Development Control Manager and Mr. Leslie Roberts who was Sevenoaks District Council’s new Legal Services Manager.

Minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 26 July 2012 and 1 August 2012

Resolved: That the minutes of the meetings of the Development Control Committee held on 26 July 2012 and 1 August 2012 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Including any interests not already registered

Cllr. Miss. Thornton notified the meeting that she had a disclosable pecuniary interest in item 4.2 - SE/11/03327/FUL - Land Adjacent To Woodseaves, 5 Knole Paddock, Seal Hollow Road, Sevenoaks  TN13 3RX. She left the meeting while the item was considered.

All members of the Committee declared that they had been lobbied in respect of item 4.1 - SE/12/01279/FUL - Caffyns PLC , 80 London Road, Sevenoaks TN13 2JD.

Cllr. Mrs. Dawson further declared that she had been lobbied in respect of item 4.2 – SE/11/03327/FUL - Land Adjacent To Woodseaves, 5 Knole Paddock, Seal Hollow Road, Sevenoaks  TN13 3RX.

The Committee considered the following planning applications:

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a Lidl food store with 70 car parking spaces, 12 covered secure bicycle spaces & 4 short term bicycle spaces and associated landscaping. Closure of existing site access and creation of new site access. Erection of 2m high boundary fencing to rear & North West side of site. 

Permission was sought for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site and the erection of a 1,918sqm (gross external floor area) food store building. The proposal also included the provision of 70 car parking spaces, cycle parking, landscaping and the repositioning of the site access.

Officers considered that subject to the receipt of an acceptably worded and completed S.106 undertaking to limit the retail offer on the site to a “deep discounter” type store (including a restriction on product lines and services provided) and to provide an air quality contribution, the proposal was acceptable.

Members’ attention was drawn to the tabled Late Observations sheet including further representations from Lidl, local residents, the Sevenoaks Society and the Sevenoaks Conservation Council.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Brian Peacock

For the Application:              Jason Gratton

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllr. Mrs. Hunter

In response to a question the Officer from Kent Highways confirmed that peak traffic flows had been considered for the morning and afternoon rush hours and the weekend rather than events linked specifically to Lidl stores. The junction improvement scheme at the site was to improve access manoeuvrability rather then capacity. Early on Highways Officers had considered possible access from Morewood Close but had been informed the applicants had no control over the relevant land.

Some Members were concerned that the projected increase of traffic flow, particularly at the morning peak time, had been underestimated. The Kent Highways Officer clarified that the figure discounted some traffic where the customers were already expected to travel past the site.

A Member enquired whether deliveries could be limited to one per day with an increase to two in December to cope with peak demand at Christmas. Officers confirmed this could be considered by Officers under the amended condition 18 management plan. The representative of Lidl accepted that this would be viable.

It was MOVED by the Vice-Chairman and was duly seconded that the two recommendations in the report, as amended by the Late Observations Sheet, be adopted.

The Committee noted the considerable public support for the application and agreed that a deep discount store would fill a niche market in Sevenoaks.

Some Members were concerned by the impact the shop would have smaller corner-shops in the area. They also noted the concerns of the Local Ward Member that the shop could exacerbate an existing traffic problem.

A Member proposed an amendment to condition 5 that the opening hours be 09:00 to 21:00 Monday to Friday. This was duly seconded. Following debate this amendment was put to the vote and there voted –

4 votes in favour of the amendment

12 votes against the amendment

The original motion, as amended by the Late Observations sheet, was put to the vote and there voted –

15 votes in favour of the motion

1 votes against the motion

Resolved: That

a)subject to the receipt of an acceptable completed S.106 undertaking before 13  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

Erection of detached dwelling with integral garage

The proposal sought permission to erect a dwelling on land at the rear of No. 5 Knole Paddock. The dwelling would be a 5 bed property, arranged over 2 storeys and T-shaped in footprint. The scheme included an integral garage and space for parking two vehicles to the front of the garage. A new access would be constructed in a relatively central position on the site.

Officers considered that the proposed dwelling, due to its position and scale in relation to the boundary with the drive, would be unduly prominent and detrimental to the informal, verdant and spacious character of the drive. In the absence of a completed S106 agreement, the development would also not secure an appropriate off site contribution towards affordable housing.

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:              Peter Hadley

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      -

In response to a question Officers confirmed they did not believe overlooking was a reasonable objection to the application.

It was MOVED by the Vice-Chairman and was duly seconded that the recommendation in the report to refusepermission be adopted.

Some Members noted that that although higher than Birchwood, the application site was significantly lower than Falcon House and was lower than the land across the road. They also considered that the proposed dwelling would not have a greater visual impact than existing dwellings on the road.

Other Members considered that the proposal was not significantly different from the previous site application, which had been refused.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

6 votes in favour of the motion

8 votes against the motion

It was moved by the Chairman and duly seconded that:

“a) subject to the receipt of an acceptable completed S.106 Undertaking before 23 September 2012 to provide an acceptable financial contribution towards affordable housing, permission should be GRANTED subject to conditions to be agreed by Officers in consultation with Local Members. Conditions should include retention of boundary treatment as part of the landscaping.

b) if an acceptable S106 Undertaking is not received by 23 September 2012 permission be REFUSED as the development would fail to provide an off-site contribution towards affordable housing and would be contrary to Policy SP3 of the Sevenoaks Core Strategy.”

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

9 votes in favour of the motion

5 votes against the motion

Resolved: That

a) subject to the receipt of an acceptable completed S.106 Undertaking before 23 September 2012 to provide an acceptable financial contribution towards affordable housing, permission should be GRANTED subject to conditions to be agreed by Officers in consultation with Local Members. Conditions should include retention of boundary treatment as part of the landscaping.

b) if an acceptable S106 Undertaking is not received by 23 September 2012 permission be REFUSED as the development would fail to provide an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Demolition of existing asbestos garage and erection of a steel structure garage

The proposal was for permission to demolish an existing 1950s style asbestos flat roof precast concrete garage and erect a steel structure garage.

Officers considered that due to the sheet cladding the design and visual appearance the proposed garage would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and street scene would be unacceptable as the site was in the Green Belt and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

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

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              -

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllr. Horwood

Cllr. Horwood also read out a statement on behalf of the applicant who was unable to attend the meeting.

It was MOVED by the Vice-Chairman and was duly seconded that the recommendation in the report to refuse permission, as amended by the Late Observations Sheet, be adopted.

Some Members felt that the proposal was a significant improvement on the existing structure, especially as the current structure was falling down and contained asbestos. They also noted the comments of the Local Member that the proposed garage was unlikely to be seen by those who passed the site. The Parish Council and local residents had not objected to the proposals.

In response to a question Officers confirmed that there was a duty to use high quality materials given the site of the application. Councillors commented that if the design was poor then it did not matter that the site was unlikely to be seen. One Member suggested that the proposal seemed more suited for agricultural or industrial use.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

10 votes in favour of the motion

7 votes against the motion

Resolved: That the application be delegated to the Group Planning Manager for refusal as per the report and amended plans received.

Installation of external insulation system

The proposal was for the installation of an external insulation system. The proposed development would place insulation board over the wooden cladding with a sand/cement render finish which would increase the width of the wall by 100mm. The site was one of eight semi-detached dwellings of a similar design, it was in the urban confines of Sundridge and in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Officers considered that the proposal would have a minimal impact upon the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and as viewed from within the street the impact of the rendering would have a minimal impact upon the design of the dwelling and would not impact detrimentally upon the street scene. The proposal would not harm the amenities of the locality and would not impact upon the Area of Archaeological Potential.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              -

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Jolley

Local Member:                      -

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

The Local Member who sat on the Committee believed the dwelling to be part of a cohesive group of artisan dwellings and that the proposals would be out of keeping. He felt the Council should, in accordance with the NPPF, value of the design of the built environment and respond to local character and history.

Other Members of the Committee noted the concerns of the Local Member and the parish councillor but felt there were inadequate planning reasons for refusal taking into account that the buildings were not in a conservation area.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

13 votes in favour of the motion

3 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)      The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 04A, 05A, 06A

For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3)      No works shall be carried out on the land until samples of the smooth render to be applied to the exterior of the external insulation system and its colour has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The development shall be carried out using the approved materials, finish and colour.

To ensure that the appearance of the development is in harmony with the existing character of the dwelling as supported by Policy EN1 of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan.