Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 21 March 2013

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 21 March 2013 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Including any interests not already registered

Cllrs. Piper and Williamson declared that they knew the applicant for item 4.3 SE/12/03416/HOUSE - 29 Vine Avenue, Sevenoaks TN13 3AH.

Cllr. Raikes declared that he lived opposite to the application site for item 4.4 SE/13/00429/HOUCON - Lansdowne, 19 Woodside Road, Sevenoaks TN13 3HF.

Cllr. Miss. Thornton declared that she had received statements from Cllr. Mrs. Hunter concerning items 4.1 SE/13/00081/REM - Former Sevenoaks Police Station, Morewood Close, Sevenoaks Kent TN13 2HX and 4.2 SE/12/02643/HOUSE - 74 Brattle Wood, Sevenoaks  TN13 1QU. These would be read out to the meeting during debate on those items.

The Committee considered the following planning applications:

Reserved matters (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) pursuant to condition 2 of SE/11/02471/OUT - Proposed demolition of the former police station and erection of up to approximately 52 residential units.

The proposal was for approval of reserved matters for redevelopment of the former Sevenoaks police station site, pursuant to outline planning permission granted under SE/11/02471. This permission had secured development for “the erection of up to approximately 52 residential units”. The reserved matters submitted were for the layout, scale and appearance of the buildings, the means of access and landscaping of the site.

The development would consist of 4 residential blocks totalling 55 apartments and 40 percent of these would be Affordable Housing. The blocks were designed with contrasting grey and red brick with timber cladding; the recessed top floor of Block A had a grey metal exterior. The application site was within the town confines of Sevenoaks.

The Officer’s report stated that the application met the terms of the outline permission and that the siting, layout and appearance of the buildings, the means of access and landscaping of the site were be acceptable and in accordance with development plan policies.

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

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              Andy Meader

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Hogarth

Local Member:                      Cllr. Eyre

A statement from Cllr. Mrs. Hunter was read to the meeting by Cllr. Miss. Thornton.

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

The Committee raised serious concern at the design of the blocks. Members noted the concern of the Town Council that the site was at a prominent entrance to Sevenoaks. It was noted that original designs for Block A had been elliptical and made more of a statement. However, the layout was acceptable as proposed.

However the development design was dull and there were no other structures in Sevenoaks with a contrasting grey and red design. It was felt timber would not wear well over time. The Committee felt strongly that the design was unacceptable, particularly in that location.

It was moved by Cllr. Davison and duly seconded that the item be deferred for Officers to discuss design revisions with the applicants in consultation with the Local Members. The item would return to the Committee for decision.

The motion was put to the vote and it was -

Resolved: That consideration of the application be DEFERRED for Officers to discuss design revisions with the applicants in consultation with the Local Members.

Extension of existing garage with habitable room over. Amended plans received 12 February 2013

The proposal was for the erection of a two storey front extension, namely the extension of the existing garage with habitable room over, projecting 2.2m in front of the existing property.

The property was a large detached property located in an area characterised by large detached properties of varying appearance, scale and character. The street had a spacious open character, with the properties set back considerably from the road.

Officers considered that the development would not, on balance, detract from the character and appearance of the varied street scene and the spacious open character would be retained. Nor would the development have a detrimental impact upon the amenities of the neighbouring properties.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Gerry Wood

For the Application:              Richard Sonnex

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Eyre

Local Member:                      -

A statement from Cllr. Mrs. Hunter was read to the meeting by Cllr. Miss. Thornton.

A Member noted that the new window in the front elevation of the extension was smaller than the existing windows. The agent for the application confirmed it was done in scale to match the size of the extension but this could be amended.

In response to a question the Officer clarified that the Planning Inspector had not stated an appropriate size for the extension when the appeal was considered to SE/11/01795/FUL.

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

Members did note that at a previous appeal the Inspector had found that there was a general building line along the road. No.78 Brattle Wood had set a precedent for projecting to the front of the properties but it was felt the application property was closer to the road and more prominent.

It was suggested that the present application was modest and did not cause demonstrable harm.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

9 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)         The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used on the existing building.

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.

3)         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Proposed block plan, SA/201108/03, SA201108/4, SA201108/5, SA201108/6, SA201108/7 all dated 12th Feb 2013.

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

Erection of a two storey side extension; two single storey rear extensions, alterations to rear roof design incorporating first floor extension; demolition of existing garage; erection of new garage with cycle store; removal of existing decking area and erection of paved terrace with low level garden store underneath; alterations to the fenestration.

The proposal was for a number of extensions at 29 Vine Avenue.

The site was within the urban confines of Sevenoaks in an area containing a variety of building styles and ages. It was a corner plot between Vine Avenue and Hitchen Hatch Lane, close to Pound Lane. It was set slightly higher than the highway and was bordered by mature vegetation to the east and north. The site benefited from extant permission from 2010 for the erection of a two storey extension and basement, new front dormer, resized dormer and extension to garage.

The Officer’s report advised that the proposed garage was 0.8m higher than the existing garage, would still be subservient to the house and incorporated materials on the dwelling. The development would respect the context of the site and would not have an unacceptable impact on the street scene. Any potentially significant impacts on the amenities of nearby dwellings could be satisfactorily mitigated by way of the conditions imposed.

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

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              Martin Bush

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Hogarth

Local Member:                      Cllr. Raikes

In response to a question the speaker for the application confirmed he was aware of the increase in area of impervious material. They would arrange a large soakaway in the rear garden to reduce the flooding effect. Part of the boundary wall would be removed to allow access for plant and equipment; they would try to reuse the bricks when the wall was replaced.

Officers confirmed that they would request that any vegetation replaced would be of an appropriate 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.

Members felt the conditions, particularly those relating to landscaping, would make a significant difference.  The design of the garage would be in keeping with the existing dwelling. The proposal was a balanced design

The motion was put to the vote and it was unanimously -

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:- Drawing Number 397/A1/12 Revision C, dated December 2012, stamped 26 February 2013;- Drawing Number 397/A1/10 Revision B, dated December 2012;- Drawing Number 397/A1/11 Revision B, dated December 2012; stamped 26 February 2013;

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

3)         No development shall be carried out on the land until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extensions hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council. The development shall be carried out  ...  view the full minutes text for item 136.

Variation of condition 1 of SE/11/02457/FUL to Erection of wooden garden shed with amendment to staining in natural oak

Planning permission had been granted retrospectively for the erection of a shed (ref SE/11/02457) and the proposal was for the variation of condition 1 to allow for staining in natural oak. The existing permission included a condition that the shed be treated with a dark green woodstain.

Officers considered a natural oak colour would go a little way to soften the impact of the shed but would not be sufficiently camouflaging to make the shed acceptable. The shed would appear as an incongruous feature and would have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the streetscene. It would not respect its setting and would not incorporate materials of a high standard.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Dr Pook

For the Application:              -

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Hogarth

Local Member:                      Cllr. Raikes

Some Members queried why there had been a condition to stain green and that this could look unnatural. Officers stated that it would fit closer to the vegetation.

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

Members felt it important to support the Officers’ recommendation and suggested that the Enforcement Team investigate the non-compliance.

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

7 votes in favour of the motion

5 votes against the motion

Resolved: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:-

A natural oak wood-stain would not be sufficiently camouflaging to make the shed acceptable. The resulting structure would be contrary to policies EN1 of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan and SP1 of the Core Strategy as a development that does not respect its setting and incorporates materials which are not of a high standard.