|
At the Belle Friday Centre, London Road, Lynsted
Present:
- Councillors: Bowling, Baxter, Champion, Barrett, Jones
- Also in attendance: Mrs Attwood (Clerk)
1 Apologies
Apologies were received from the following who were unable to attend:
- Cllr English – due to holiday.
2 Public Speaking
There were no members of the public present.
3 Declarations of Interest
The Chairman asked if any Councillors wished to declare an interest on any items on the Agenda. Cllr Champion advised that he wished to make a declaration in respect of planning application SW/07/0254 &5. No one else wished to make a declaration.
4 Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 19th March 2007
It was agreed that the minutes were a true record of the meeting and could be endorsed by the Chairman. This was proposed by Cllr Champion, seconded by Cllr Bowling and unanimously agreed.
5 Matters Arising from the Previous Meeting held on 19th March 2007
Millwood Homes had still not responded about car parking at St Paul’s Court. Any other items are included as Agenda items
6 Planning Applications
The following planning applications had been received.
- SW/07/0287 Conversion of public house into 4 flats, London Road (Teynham PC)
It was noted that for this application, SBC had only sent the covering letter for this application which referred to website for the drawing. As this was the first time this had happened, Clerk to clarify with SBC policy on this and also on receiving a copy of decisions made. The Parish Council had no objection to the proposed scheme, providing
- The materials used match the existing building and are in keeping with neighbouring buildings.
- The roof lights are of the “conservation” type, rather than velux, and flush with the roofline
- The Victorian post box in the south eastern elevation - a distinctive feature in the street scene – is retained.
This was proposed by Cllr Baxter, seconded by Cllr Champion, and unanimously agreed. Clerk to write to SBC with Parish Council decision.
- SW/07/0298 Approval of Reserved matters – Amethyst Nurseries
It was noted that for this application was similar to application SW/06/1289 which had been previously withdrawn, though smaller in scale. This had been confirmed by the SBC Case Officer. The Parish Council’s comments dated 13th December 2006 made about the previous application remain valid for this application and should be enclosed with letter to SBC. This was proposed by Cllr Bowling, seconded by Cllr Champion, and unanimously agreed. Clerk to write to SBC with Parish Council decision.
- SW/07/0254 Garage Conversion to Form 4x bedroom + 1 bathroom facility. The George public House, London Road
Cllr Champion was not present while this item was being discussed as he had declared an interest in this planning application at the start of the meeting.
It was noted that application was within the setting of a listed building, but not in a conservation area and the proposal had no kitchen facilities and thus not self contained. The Parish Council had no objection in principle but was concerned that no provision was being made for additional parking. This was proposed by Cllr Bowling, seconded by Cllr Baxter and unanimously agreed. Clerk to write to SBC with Parish Council decision.
7 SBC Planning Decisions Received
The Parish Council noted that the following planning decision had been received
- SW/07/0053 Notification of Grant of Permission to Develop Land at no.9, The Vallance, Lynsted.
8 Other Planning Information
- Planning Committee Meeting for SW/07/0160 (Redevelopment of site at no. 67 London Road, Teynham into 4 apartments)
It was noted that SBC Planning Committee was meeting to consider this application on 29th March 2007. Although the Parish Council had objected to the proposal, Teynham PC had not objected and SBC were proposing to approve the scheme.
- Update on Enforcement Items – Peter Hinckesman letter 19th March 2007
The Clerk advised that SBC’s Enforcement Officer had replied to the Parish Council’s query re outstanding enforcement items. The Enforcement teams view was that none of the three issues merited enforcement items for the following reasons :
- Garage without Planning Permission at Toll House
Although it was accepted that planning permission should have been sought and that it remains outstanding, SBC’s view is that an application if submitted was likely to be acceptable. On this basis Central Government advice is that formal enforcement action in such a case would not be appropriate.
- Structure at no. 4 St Peters Place
Enforcement staff had investigated this structure, and established that it fell within permitted development allowances, and therefore did not require planning permission. The complainant at that time was notified of this.
- Caravan at Four Acres
Enforcement team considered that as the caravan was being occupied by a direct member of the family owning the property, this amounted to an ancillary use that would not require planning permission.
- Report from Cllr Baxter on Planning Course of 17th March
The main messages from this well-attended conference (66 attendees from 39 parishes) were that the County Council was steadily handing over strategic planning to the regional authority. As part of this, there was a danger that protection of countryside by designations (AONBs etc) may be slackened, as traditional and historic boundaries were being lost.
At planning control level, Central Government was setting targets in order to speed up the planning process. In addition, it was difficult to recruit good staff. As a result, the quality of decisions was under threat. It was important that Parish Council act on all important applications in a clear way, based on planning considerations.
A more detailed report will be provided for the Parish Council meeting on 10th April. Speakers’ notes will be circulated.
There being no further business, the meeting closed at 8.35 pm.
|
