To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 July 2014, as a correct record.

(Please note that the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Committee held on 31 July 2014 will be considered at the next meeting of the Committee on 4 September 2014)

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Development Control Committee held on 24 July 2014, be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Including any interests not already registered

Cllrs. Clark and Mrs Parkin declared that they knew the applicant for minute item 40, SE/14/00849/HOUSE & SE/14/00850/LBCALT - Threeways, The Street, Ash TN15 7HA. Cllr. Clarke confirmed that he would speak on the matter but would not vote. Cllr. Mrs Parkin confirmed that she would neither speak nor vote on the matter.

Cllrs. Mrs. Ayres, Clark, Cooke, Edwards-Winser, McGarvey, Miss. Stack and Williamson declared that they had been lobbied in respect of minute item 40 SE/14/00849/HOUSE & SE/14/00850/LBCALT - Threeways, The Street, Ash TN15 7HA.

The Committee considered the following planning applications:

Demolition of South Cottage and Weald Cottage and replacement with a terrace of Four new dwellings with associated parking, garages and landscaping. Access road to rear.

The proposal was for the demolition of South Cottage and Weald Cottage and their replacement with a terrace of four town houses with 2 car parking spaces per property, an access road to the rear, garages and landscaping. The site was in the urban confines of Edenbridge and backed onto industrial units in Commerce Way.

The application was referred to the Committee at the request of Councillor Scholey on the grounds that the proposal was not providing an affordable housing contribution and was not financially viable. Members were referred to the Case Officer’s report.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       -

For the Application:              Neil Goodhew

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllrs. Scholey and Mrs. Davison

Members asked questions of clarification from the Speakers and Officers. Officers confirmed to the Chairman that a CIL payment of £16,000 would be payable on commencement of development. The CIL payment had not been taken account of in the viability assessment on the possible affordable housing contribution. Officers intended that recommended condition 5 would allow Officers to ensure that correct contracts were in place to allow development to take place all at once, before the present site was demolished. This would lessen the chance of a vacant, demolished plot as happened at the neighbouring Beechwood. Officers added that viability was not a material consideration in whether to grant planning permission.

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 said that the applicant had provided all the information asked for, concerning viability, and had satisfied the test. The design of the proposed development was acceptable, if functional. It would provide family houses which were more affordable due to their size.

The motion was put to the vote and it was

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 P300 Revision P1, dated April 2014, stamped amended plan;- Drawing Number P301 Revision P3, dated April 2014, stamped amended plan;- Drawing Number P310 Revision P1, dated June 2014, stamped amended plan;

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

3)    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 dwellings and garages 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 Plan.

4)    The development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Erection of two-storey side extension following demolition of part of the attached listed wall, alterations to rear garden room; minor internal alterations and repairs to chimney stack.

The proposal sought planning permission and listed building consent for the erection of two-storey side extension following demolition of part of the attached listed wall, alterations to rear garden room, minor internal alterations and repairs to chimney stack. The site was at the end of Grade II listed Wallace Terrace and was in the Green Belt.

The application was referred to the Committee at the discretion of the Chief Planning Officer as the recommendation was at odds with conservation advice obtained at pre-application stage by a former Officer of the Council.

Members’ attention was brought to further information contained within the late observations sheet, but did not propose any amendments or changes to the recommendation before the Committee.

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:              Chris Munn

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      Cllr. Pett

Members asked questions of clarification from the Speakers and Officers. Officers confirmed that the Conservation Officer had felt that the size of the extension the symmetry of the property and the historic floorplan were significant characteristics. Officers had telephoned English Heritage and confirmed that the property had not been delisted because of previous alterations. Officers advised that the applicant did intend to match brick with existing elevations, as well as bonding and tiles.

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

Members were disappointed at the handling of the application process, with the applicants suffering from contradictory advice between the former and present Conservation Officers.

A Member indicated that the matter was not clear as even the Conservation Officers had opposing views. Members noted the comments of the Georgian Group that the proposal would “nearly double the footprint of the listed building” and that this was incorrect. Members felt it would be preferable to have a comment from the Georgian Group once the facts of the application had been made clear.

Some concerns were raised by the Committee that the development may overwhelm the host. However Members also indicated the development may provide balance to the terrace as a whole.

A Member suggested that the windows of the proposal perhaps should have matched the existing fenestration. Some Members suggested that the preservation of the fireplace may be beneficial to the conservation of the property, however more information would be needed.

It was moved by the Chairman that the application be deferred to obtain the further information required and so that when the item was reported back to Committee the Conservation Officer would attend the meeting. The motion was put to the vote and it was

Resolved: That consideration of the applications for planning permission and listed building consent be deferred to allow

1)        the Conservation Officer to contact the Georgian Group to obtain a revised response based on clarity over the size of the extension;

2)        the Conservation officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.