PADDOCK WOOD TOWN COUNCIL
The Podmore Building, St Andrews Field, St Andrews Road
Paddock Wood, Kent, TN12 6HT
Telephone: 01892 837373
MINUTES of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting held on Monday 5th July2021 at 7.45 pm
PRESENT: Cllr C Williams, in the chair
D Sargison, Cllr M Ridger,
IN ATTENDANCE: Mrs C Reilly Deputy Clerk
APOLOGIES Cllr R Moon
PE13 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST.
PE14 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
To APPROVE the minutes of the meeting held on 21st of June,2021.
These were not available for signing and would go on the agenda for the next meeting.
PE15 PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
|Application||Address and proposal||Comments|
|a) 21/01908/FULL||2 Pearsons Green Cottages Pearsons Green Road Brenchley Tonbridge Kent TN12 7DE. Small single storey rear extension, infill side flank extension with upper first floor minor m3 enlargement with Wealdon type weatherboarding to upper levels and render lower finishes||Cllr C Williams proposed and Cllr M Ridger seconded that the Council have no objection to the application provided provision is made for disposal of any additional surface water run off. Unanimous.|
|b) 21/01609/SUB||Mascalls Court Farm Mascalls Court Road Paddock Wood Tonbridge TN12 6NB. Submission of details in relation to Condition 11 (Surface water drainage); Condition 15 (Foul Drainage); Condition 16 (Sewers); Condition 17 (Ground floor levels); Condition 22 (External Materials) for phases 2 and 3 of 14/506766/HYBRID.||Cllr M Ridger proposed and Cllr C Williams seconded that the Council object to the discharge of these conditions on the following grounds:
· They support KCC’s stated reservations regarding insufficient detail provided as regards the details of surface and foul water drainage solutions and finished floor levels.
· The foul drainage system as proposed is NOT the round town new ring main sewer referred to as this has not been with drawn as a solution by Southern Water. It simply attaches to the existing overloaded and overflowing sewage network and results in no betterment for any of the existing capacity issues.
· The Council understand that any improvements to the Waste Water Pumping Station will not be completed in time to assist with this additional connection.
· Southern Water have not fulfilled the undertaking they gave to the local MP , Greg Clark, to report back on what CCTV survey work has been done on the existing system to confirm date used in their modelling.
· The surface water drainage levels do not make sense. They appear to indicate a fall in levels in the wrong direction to achieve drainage.
|c) 21/00665/FULL||Land Rear Of 7 – 9 Station Road Paddock Wood Tonbridge Kent. Redevelopment of land for a mixed-use development incorporating up to 14no. residential apartments (Use Class C3), office use (Use Class E), and flexible uses including office/community use (Use Classes E/F1.2/F.2) with associated access and parking||Cllr C Williams proposed and Cllr D Sargison seconded that the Council object to the application on the following grounds
· It is an over intensive development of the site with the overall building height being even higher than the Churchill development adjacent.
· There is no agreed access to the high street (Commercial Road ) from the ‘public area’ and therefore no actual community open space as referred to.
· The S106 contribution is minimal and insufficient to mitigate for the impact of the development and for the number of dwellings proposed which also fail to include any affordable housing.
· Loss of parking plus insufficient parking for the new dwellings.
· Details of drainage proposals are inadequate for an area subject to surface water flooding.
· It is in direct opposition to the aspirations for the town centre of both the Draft Local Plan and the Paddock Wood Neighbourhood plan draft policies allowing no scope for a town centre redevelopment thus placing the commercial viability of the town centre at risk.
· The Council also confirms that the applicants have been invited to attend both PWTC meetings and Neighbourhood Plan meetings to discuss the proposals but have declined to do so.
|d) 21/01777/FULL||20 Kiln Way Paddock Wood Tonbridge Kent TN12 6LF. Demolish an existing conservatory and replace with a dining room extension||Cllr C Williams proposed and Cllr D Sargison seconded that the Council have no objection to the application. Unanimous.|
|e) 21/01522/FULL||Paddock Wood Distribution Centre Transfesa Road Paddock Wood Tonbridge TN12 6UU. Re-cladding of the existing industrial/warehouse units||Cllr Cllr D Sargison proposed and Cllr M Ridger seconded that the Council have no objection to the application subject to proper disposal of old cladding. Unanimous.|
|f) 21/01997/FULL||27 The Greenways Paddock Wood Tonbridge Kent TN12 6LS. Demolition of garage; Proposed two storey side extension and front first floor dormer extension||Cllr C Williams proposed and Cllr M Ridger seconded that the Council object to the application on the grounds that :
· It’s bulk and the suggested black weather boarding makes it overly dominant and obtrusive on the street scene.
· There are no proposals submitted to deal with additional surface water runoff which is already an issue on the adjacent Badsell Road
|g)21/02129/EIASCO||Land South And South East Mascalls Court Road Paddock Wood Tonbridge Kent . EIA Scoping Opinion – Development of approximately 1,200 dwellings and related facilities||Cllr C Williams proposed and Cllr M Ridger seconded that the Council object to the premature submission of this EIA Scoping report for a proposed development on the grounds that
· The application is premature in that the sites are allocated as part of the TWBC PSDLP. As such, an application ahead of this Local Plan and it’s policies being in place together with it’s Supplementary Policies, will prejudice the Master Planning process that is supposed to deliver the strategic housing allocations in Paddock Wood /Capel in a holistic manner to ensure good design and provision of infrastructure.
· In addition to this the master planning process for all the allocations is designed to provide for the sharing of the burden of costs associated with flood mitigation, community facilities, road improvements and other essential infrastructure. By beginning the process of a premature application the applicants are clearly trying to avoid contributing to these costs. This will prejudice the sustainability of all the developments with the 1500 units making up just under 40% of the entire allocation.
· Large areas of both sites are within flood zone 2 and 3 and no modelling has been done on the cumulative effects upon drainage infrastructure of the three sites currently under construction and this should be provided to inform the scope of any development on these additional sites.
· No modelling has been done on the cumulative effects upon local roads infrastructure of the three sites currently under construction and this should be provided to inform the scope of any development on these additional sites.
· The commencement of development on these sites in addition to the 3 under construction would raise strategic issues of development management in a town where the road system is already over burdened and where residents will be adversely impacted with noise, pollution and disruption over a period of several years throughout the town and the surrounding area.
|h)21/02092/FULL||47 Le Temple Road Paddock Wood Tonbridge Kent TN12 6HY. Single storey rear extension.||Cllr M Ridger proposed and Cllr C Williams seconded that the Council have no objection to this application. Uanimous.|