Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 16 October 2013.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2013 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the removal of the duplicated Minutes and Declarations of Interest text on page 1 and the amendment of a minor typographical error on page 4, paragraph 1 of item 13/01936/HOUSE – 2 Church View, Beenham (Declaration of Interest text).

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any Personal, Disclosable Pecuniary or other interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

(Note: The Chairman, with the consent of the Committee, reserves the right to alter the order of business on this agenda based on public interest and participation in individual applications.)

(Councillor Geoff Mayes declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4(2) by virtue of the fact that he had received representations from both the applicant and objectors. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

(Councillor Mollie Lock declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4(2) by virtue of the fact that as a dog owner in the local area she might make use of this proposed facility at a future date. As her interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest she determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 13/01832/FUL in respect of a change of use from retail A1 shop/office to mixed use of retail and sui generis (dog grooming).

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr John Morden, Parish Council representative, and Mr Martin Winter, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Morden in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    The Parish Council’s preference would have been to consider this site in its entirety which would have included the car maintenance facility as well as the proposal for dog grooming. This would have provided the Committee with an opportunity to consider the total impact this site could have on this area of King Street. However, this application was not inclusive of the rear of this site (car maintenance) and this would be the subject of a later application. In terms of this proposal, the Parish Council had no planning grounds for objection.

·                    Car parking was not an issue if customers were only staying to drop off and collect their dogs.

·                    The level of noise would be minimal as dogs were proposed to be kept inside and Mr Morden felt that, if approved, a condition of approval should be for the installation of air conditioning within the premises to enable windows and doors to be kept shut, thereby minimising noise.

·                    There had been a shop in this location for many years and the Parish Council was supportive of local businesses. People living within the immediate vicinity of 37 King Street would already be aware of this being a retail unit which, if approved was granted, would continue.

·                    In response to a question from Councillor Mayes, Mr Morden confirmed that the Parish Council did object to a separate application in relation to the car maintenance aspect of the site.

Mr Winter in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    He reiterated that a shop had existed in this location for many years, prior to the erection of some neighbouring properties.

·                    Mention had been made by objectors of this application being for two businesses. This was not the case, with the proposal only being for a dog grooming business. It was however hoped that in future it would also be possible to extend this to allow for the purchase of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.(2)

Purpose: To inform Members of the results of recent appeal decisions relating to the Eastern Area Planning Committee.

Members noted the outcome of appeal decisions relating to the Eastern Area.