Somerton, Sheen Cottage, and Clare Lodge – Land to rear of St Mary’s Lane – erection of four dwellings, two with integral garages and two detached garages including formation of new vehicular access and provision of parking spaces. Mrs Bridges, Mr and Mrs Bruce and Mr and Mrs Bayliss of the above addresses

Comments for this  application were submitted after the last Meeting – additional comments were that the proposal is in contradiction with policy guidelines laid out in Action Plan. It was suggested that back garden development could provide more allotments rather than houses Refusal

5 St Mary’s Close – demolition of existing garage and erection of new single storey extension – Mr Tero of that address

It was felt that the loss of parking had been addressed and that it was better than a flat roof. Approval

Holbeam Wood Oasts, Wallcrouch – revised proposals for conversion of square oasts and barn with lean-to to dwelling originally approved RR/96/1141/L to include repositioned and new openings and internal alterations.

Mr and Mrs Mulleneux of Holbeam Wood FarmhouseCllrs. have a conflict of interest and can not comment on this application

Applicant Present
The application is to move the permitted northern facing windows to the western wall,  to enjoy the view and benefit from the warmer facing wall, improving carbon footprint.  It was felt to be an improvement to the plan. Approval

Cottenden Farm, Stonegate – Relocation and revised proposals of two farm buildings originally approved under planning  RR/2003/1538/P and RR/2003/1539/P from East Lymden to Cottenden Farm – Mr Dacre  East Lymden  Ticehurst

It was felt that as the two farms had amalgamated, it was a sensible proposal, but  there is a dwelling that is believed to have an agricultural tie on it, close to the buildings and Cllrs. requested clarification that this is also in the applicants ownership prior to approval as farm buildings should be a significant distance from dwellings if that is not the case.Approval

Springfields – Land at Ticehurst – provision of 8 standard width and 1 accessible width parking bays – Rother Homes

A resident of Springfields addressed the meeting and pointed out that the 9 parking spaces could be improved upon within the area under consideration and has consulted with a surveyor.  If all the residents of this area owned cars it would be insufficient – diagonal parking could improve the plan – The speaker offered to provide such a plan Refusal

32 Rosehill Ticehurst – Addition of rear dormer – Mr and Mrs Fraser of that address

Prior to discussion Mr and Mrs Fraser put forward their concerns that members of the committee might have a prejudice against them.  It was agreed that due to their perception of this, any member of the BDT would contribute to discussion but not vote on this matter. Applicants present and 4 members of the public.  Mrs Fraser explained that they had reduced the size of the dormers in the proposal and that the permitted velux windows would have compromised neighbours privacy anyway.  Neighbours expressed concerns about their privacy and the height of the building compared to theirs, thus affecting their back garden as well as front.  No 31 Rosehill told the Committee that RDC had advised them that one dormer would be acceptable not two. Cllrs. felt that  the privacy issue had still not been resolved and that a single dormer would have been preferable Refusal

Clare House – replace front door with new part solid wood door and retention of timber detailing to shop front - Wellbeing Boutique

It was unanimously felt that the shop façade was not in keeping with the other village shops – permission has only temporarily been granted for a 2-3 night stay for women albeit internal photos show one double bed.  The Hawkhurst branch has been closed down and there appears to be no activity at the Ticehurst shop.  No register of guests required by RDC has been forthcoming for inspection with the application.  The statement in application 2006/2403 stated that they would not seek to alter the shop front – Cllrs. felt it was important to retain ‘shops’ in the village and not allow them to turn into residential sites. The site is within the conservation area of an old village, and this frontage was felt to be totally out of keeping  Refusal

Abbey Lea – addition of dormers to existing garages (retrospective) and erection of three bay car port with staff flat over including dormers and roof lights Mr and Mrs Van Kan

It was felt that as long as the building was linked to the house with a 106 agreement, this should be approved  Approval