Agenda and minutes
Not all meetings are broadcast. The meetings that will be broadcast are as follows: (a) Council; (b) Cabinet; (c) Dover Joint Transportation Advisory Board; (d) General Purposes Committee; (e) Electoral Matters Committee; (f) Governance Committee; (g) Planning Committee; (h) General Purposes Committee and (i) Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
For those meetings that are being broadcast there will be a link to view the live broadcast under the ‘Media’ heading below. Only those items not restricted on the agenda will be broadcast.
Guidance on how to watch live broadcasts of meetings.
The link to view a recording of a meeting that was broadcast can be found on the Council’s YouTube channel (@doverdc)
PDF 159 KBVenue: Council Chamber - Council Offices. View directions
Contact: Kate Batty-Smith Democratic Support Officer
Note: Please note that Agenda Item No. 8 (DOV/13/00163) has been withdrawn.
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: It was noted that apologies for absence had been received from Councillors J S Back and R S Walkden. |
|
|
Appointment of Substitute Members To note appointments of Substitute Members. Minutes: It was noted that, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4, Councillor P M Beresford had been appointed as a substitute for Councillor R S Walkden. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from Members in respect of business to be transacted on the agenda.
Where a Member has a new or registered Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) in a matter under consideration they must disclose that they have an interest and, unless the Monitoring Officer has agreed in advance that the DPI is a 'Sensitive Interest', explain the nature of that interest at the meeting. The Member must withdraw from the meeting at the commencement of the consideration of any matter in which they have declared a DPI and must not participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter unless they have been granted a dispensation permitting them to do so. If during the consideration of any item a Member becomes aware that they have a DPI in the matter they should declare the interest immediately and, subject to any dispensations, withdraw from the meeting.
Where a Member is declaring an Other Significant Interest (OSI) they must also disclose the interest and explain the nature of the interest at the meeting. The Member must withdraw from the meeting at the commencement of the consideration of any matter in which they have declared a OSI and must not participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter unless they have been granted a dispensation to do so or the meeting is one at which members of the public are permitted to speak for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the matter. In the latter case, the Member may only participate on the same basis as a member of the public and cannot participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter and must withdraw from the meeting in accordance with the Council's procedure rules.
Where a Member does not have either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) or Other Significant Interest (OSI) but is of the opinion that for transparency reasons alone s/he should make an announcement in respect of a matter under consideration, they can make a Voluntary Announcement of Other Interests (VAOI). A Member declaring a VAOI may still remain at the meeting and vote on the matter under consideration.
Note to the Code:
Situations in which a Member may wish to make a VAOI include membership of outside bodies that have made representations on agenda items; where a Member knows a person involved, but does not have a close association with that person; or where an item would affect the well-being of a Member, relative, close associate, employer, etc. but not his/her financial position. It should be emphasised that an effect on the financial position of a Member, relative, close associate, employer, etc OR an application made by a Member, relative, close associate, employer, etc would both probably constitute either an OSI or in some cases a DPI. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest from Members. |
|
|
To confirm the attached Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 13 February 2014. Minutes: In respect of Minute No 496, the Chairman confirmed that 'comfort breaks' would be held in future when Members indicated that they needed one as it was important that Members were present for all the debate when determining applications.
The Minutes of the meeting held on 13 February 2014 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
To consider the attached report of the Head of Regeneration and Development. Minutes: The Chairman advised that Application No DOV/13/01007 (Land at The Strand, Walmer) was dealt with elsewhere on the agenda. |
|
|
Application No DOV/13/01007 - Erection of 20 Beach Huts - Land at The Strand, Walmer APPLICATION NO. DOV/13/001007 – ERECTION OF 20 BEACH HUTS ON LAND AT THE STRAND, WALMER
To consider the attached report of the Head of Regeneration and Development. Minutes: The Committee viewed photographs and plans of the site. In respect of recommendation 3) of the report, Members were advised that it should be amended to read 'anchoring of huts to be carried out at installation and thereafter maintained'. With regards to recommendation II of the report, Members were advised that the words 'and matters' should be deleted.
The Principal Planner reminded Members that the application had been deferred at the meeting held on 13 February 2014 for further information regarding the Portaloo, parking and waiting list applicants. Kent County Council (KCC) acknowledged that there would be some increase in parking but this was unlikely to be significant, and it therefore had no objections to the proposal. The additional information on the waiting lists was as set out in the report. It was confirmed that the Portaloo had now been removed from the proposal.
Councillor T A Bond indicated his support for the proposal, particularly now that the Portaloo had been removed. Erecting the huts in the location proposed would have less visual impact than placing them elsewhere. Councillor K E Morris considered that the proposal was acceptable without a Portaloo as public toilet facilities were a relatively short, easy walk away. However, in his opinion, some of the huts were too close to the sea and the arrangement would benefit from the relocation of the front five huts to the east on the plan shown to the Committee. Several Members commented that parking spaces would always be under pressure near the seafront, and the additional beach huts were unlikely to make a significant difference.
Councillor B Gardner stated that he could not support the application as the nearest toilet facilities were too far away, and the proposed random arrangement of the huts was unsuitable. He also sought clarification regarding leasehold conditions and specifically whether leaseholders would be allowed to light fires and barbecues on the beach. The Solicitor to the Council advised that leaseholders would be expected to comply with the conditions of their leases. The Principal Planner clarified that the application site was restricted to the former boat compounds and did not cover the beach which was part of the public realm.
Members discussed whether the application should be deferred once again pending negotiation of the relocation of the five beach huts and clarification of by-laws relating to the beach. However, the majority agreed that this was not necessary and felt that the application could be approved, subject to Officers negotiating the relocation of the five most easterly huts so that they would be more closely related to the other proposed huts.
RESOLVED: (a) That, subject to Officers securing the relocation of the five beach huts that lie furthest to the east, Application No DOV/13/001007 be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Standard time limit;
(ii) Development to be carried out in accordance with approved plans;
(iii) Anchoring of huts to be carried out at installation and thereafter maintained.
(b) That powers be delegated to the Head of Regeneration and Development to settle any necessary planning conditions in line with the issues set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee. |
|
|
APPLICATION NO. DOV/13/0916 - ERECTION OF A DETACHED TWO STOREY BUILDING INCORPORATING A GARAGE AND SUMMERHOUSE AND CREATION OF A VEHICULAR ACCESS - 57 CASTLE AVENUE, DOVER, KENT CT15 1EZ
To consider the report of the Head of Regeneration and Development.
Minutes: The Committee viewed photographs of the site. The Principal Planner introduced the report which outlined proposals for the erection of a two-storey building with a garage and summerhouse at the end of the garden of a residential property in Castle Avenue. Amended plans had been submitted on 6 February 2014. The applicant had agreed to install an electrically operated door on the garage, and KCC had confirmed that it now had no objections on access or highway grounds. In the light of this change, it was proposed to amend recommendation 3) of the report to request details of the garage door and how it would be operated. Members were also advised that the report recommendation should be amended to include a condition seeking materials samples as red brick would be more in keeping.
The Committee was advised that an application for the erection of a dwelling at 63 Castle Avenue had been refused and then dismissed at appeal, the Planning Inspector having raised concerns about the impact of the increased domestic activity that would be generated by a residential building, amongst other things. The application under consideration was fundamentally different in that a residential dwelling was not proposed.
Councillors B W Butcher and J A Cronk expressed concerns about the size of the proposed building which would be more akin to an annexe than a summerhouse given the facilities that the applicant was planning to install. However, they were minded to approve the application, provided suitably robust conditions were attached to prevent its use as a dwelling. Councillor Bond raised concerns about the development's impact on the street scene and the additional traffic that was likely to be generated. Councillor P Wallace commented that the proposed building would affect the privacy of neighbouring properties and lead to over-development of the area. In response to concerns voiced by Councillor Gardner about the inclusion of an internal staircase, it was clarified that this would not make the application acceptable or unacceptable in planning terms. The inclusion of a condition relating to the staircase was therefore unlikely to be considered a reasonable imposition.
The Principal Planner referred Members to paragraphs 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9 of the report which referred to the Inspector's consideration of the proposal for a dwelling at no 63. If Permitted Development Rights were withdrawn in relation to the use of the building and subsequently found to have been breached, it was unlikely that there would be a different outcome to the Planning Inspector's decision on no 63 if the applicant appealed against a refusal by the Planning Committee. It was confirmed that the summerhouse would provide ancillary accommodation to the dwelling-house. Several Members emphasised the importance of the site being monitored by Officers on an ongoing basis in order to ensure that all conditions were complied with.
RESOLVED: (a) That Application No DOV/13/0916 be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Building not to be used as an independent dwelling;
(ii) Removal of all Permitted Development Rights;
(iii) Submission of material samples;
(iv) Standard time limit;
(v) In accordance with approved plans;
(vi) Details of garage roller door and its operation.
(b) That powers be delegated to the Head of Regeneration and Development to settle any necessary planning conditions in line with the issues set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee. |
|
|
APPLICATION NO. DOV/13/00163 – CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS (PROPOSED) FOR THE ERECTION OF A DETACHED GAMES ROOM AND HOME OFFICE AND DETACHED GARAGE WITHIN THE CURTILAGE OF 55 WESTCOURT LANE, SHEPHERDSWELL
To consider the report of the Head of Regeneration and Development. Minutes: The Chairman advised the Committee that this item had been withdrawn from the agenda. |
|
|
Appeals and Informal Hearings To receive information relating to Appeals and Informal Hearings, and appoint Members as appropriate. Minutes: The Committee noted that there was no information to receive regarding appeals or informal hearings. |
|
|
Action taken in accordance with the Ordinary Decisions (Council Business) Urgency Procedure To raise any matters of concern in relation to decisions taken under the above procedure and reported on the Official Members' Weekly News. Minutes: The Committee noted that no action had been taken since the last meeting. |