Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 September 2019 are correctly recorded and that they be signed by the Chairman.

The Committee noted that Mrs Sharon Thompson, Head of Planning Applications Group had sent her apologies as she was representing the County Council at the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan Public Inquiry.  

(1)       Mr P Bartlett informed the Committee that he would be addressing the Committee in his capacity as Local Member but would not participate in the determination of the application. 

(2)       Cllr Brian Heyes and Mr Vernon Seagar (Godinton Residential Community) addressed the Committee in opposition to the application. Mr Tom Robinson (JLL) spoke in reply on behalf of the applicants.

(3)       Mr R A Pascoe moved, seconded by Mr J Burden that permission be granted and that the applicant be required to undertake further noise monitoring in a manner agreed by the County Planning Authority to demonstrate that the noise condition is being met.

            Lost 5 votes to 6

(4)       Mr A Booth moved, seconded by Mr P M Harman that consideration of the application be deferred to enable the applicant to undertake noise monitoring of the existing facility to demonstrate whether the proposed (retrospective) development is acceptable in terms of noise impact; that the  results of that monitoring be submitted to KCC in support of the application to supplement the modelled noise information that has already been provided; and for the application to be reported back to Committee.

            Carried 9 votes to 2.

(5)       RESOLVED that consideration of the application be deferred to enable the applicant to undertake noise monitoring of the existing facility to demonstrate whether the proposed (retrospective) development is acceptable in terms of noise impact; that the  results of that monitoring be submitted to KCC in support of the application to supplement the modelled noise information that has already been provided; and for the application to be reported back to Committee.

(1)       Mr P Bartlett informed the Committee that he was a Member f Ashford BC which had commented on the proposal.  He had taken no part in its discussions of the proposal and was able to approach the determination of the application with a fresh mind.

(2)       The Principal Planning Officer reported comments received from the Local Member, Mr C Simkins in support of the proposal.

(3)       In agreeing the recommendations of the Head of Planning Applications Group, the Committee added Informatives encouraging the School to make the sports hall available for community use and to increase the number of cycling spaces in order to encourage sustainable transport.

(4)       RESOLVED that:-

(a)          permission be granted to the proposal subject to conditions, including conditions covering a3 yeartime limitfor implementation;  the developmentbeing carriedout inaccordance withthe permitteddetails;  the  submission  and  approval  of  details  of  all  materials  to  be  used  externally, includingdetailsof joinery,colourfinishes,depth of reveals,and detailsof the jointing ofthe claddingpanels;  the submission andapproval ofdetails ofall externallighting,includinghours of operation; thesubmission andapprovalof aschemeof landscaping,includingdetailsof tree planting,softlandscaping,fencing and hardsurfacing; the  submission  and  approval  of  a  School  Travel  Plan  within  six  months  of occupation, and its  ongoingmonitoring andreview thereafter;  the provisionand retentionof carparking,accessand circulationspace,including 5 electricvehiclecharging bays,prior tofirst occupationof theschool; the provisionand retentionof coveredcycle parkingprior tofirst occupationof the school; theprovisionand retentionof vehicleand pedestrianaccesses andvisibilitysplays prior tofirst occupationof theschool; allgates openingaway fromthe highway; thedevelopmentmeeting thesustainable designstandards setoutin theapplication documents tomeet aBREEAM orequivalent standardof ‘verygood’; notree or hedge removal taking placeduring thebird breedingseason; the development beingundertaken inaccordancewith thesubmitted badgermitigation proposals; noworks commencingwithin the30 metrebufferzone aroundthebadger settuntil a walkoversurveyhas beenundertaken andits results submittedand approved, together withdetails ofany furtherrequired mitigation; the developmentbeing undertakenin accordancewith thesubmitted reptilemitigation proposals; the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

(1)       The Principal Planning Officer drew  attention to correspondence from Dr Brian White in respect of the proposal which had previously been circulated to all Members of the Committee.

(2)       The Principal Planning Officer asked the Committee to note that the community use condition set out in the recommendations should be amended to specify that there should be no community use during school hours.  He also asked the Committee to amend the School Travel Plan condition so that it was to be submitted within 6 months of the permission and to add an additional Informative that the updated School Travel should be submitted via the “Jambusters” website.  These amendments were agreed. 

(3)       In agreeing the recommendations, the Committee specified that the Construction Management Plan was to include vehicle parking on site.

(4)    RESOLVED that:-

(a)             permission be granted to the proposal subject to conditions, including conditions covering the standard 3year timelimit for implementation; the developmentbeingcarried outinaccordance withthe permitteddetails; the submissionof aschemetodealwiththerisksassociatedwithcontaminationof the site in order toaddress the comments madeby theEnvironmentAgency;  the submission of aConstructionManagementPlan including parking for construction related vehicles on site; the submissionof averificationreportdemonstratingcompletionoftheworksset outin the approvedremediationstrategyandtheeffectivenessoftheremediationpriorto occupation of the development; the retenti  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

(1)       Mr D S Daley was present for this item pursuant to Committee Procedure Rule 2.27 and spoke.  He particularly stressed his concerns over the absence of parking restrictions in the vicinity of the application site.

(2)       The Principal Planning Officer drew attention to correspondence from Dr Brian White in respect of the proposal which had previously been circulated to all Members of the Committee.

(3)       The Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that the applicants had agreed to install PV panels.  This necessitated an additional condition requiring the submission of details and that they be installed when the development was constructed, and the deletion of the relevant recommended Informative. 

(4)       The Committee agreed to the Principal Planning Officer’s request to amend the native planting condition to include species suitable for bee pollination. 

(5)       RESOLVED that:-

(a)          permission be granted to the proposal subject to conditions, including conditions thestandard 3year timelimit for implementation; the developmentbeing carried outinaccordance with the permitteddetails; submission of detailsof externalmaterials; measuresto protectexisting treesduring construction,including those setoutinthe ArboriculturalMethod and ImpactStatement;  submissionand approval of a Verification Report pertaining to the surface waterdrainage systemto addressmattersraisedby KCCSustainable Drainage;  restriction  of infiltrationof surfacewaterdrainageinto the groundand restrictionof pilingor any other foundationdesi  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

RESOLVED to note matters dealt with under delegated powers since the last meeting relating to:-

(a)         County matter applications;

(b)        County Council developments;

(c)          Screening Opinions under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017; and

(d)         Scoping Opinions under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (None).

RESOLVED to note Kent County Council’s responses to the following consultations:-

(a)          Maidstone BC Local Plan review;

(b)         Maidstone BC Community Infrastructure Levy Regulation 123 List review; and

(c)          Lamberhurst Neighbourhood Plan.