(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 12/06/2019

Public Document Pack

A G E N D A

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Wednesday 12 June 2019 at 5.00 pm Council Chamber, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN1 1RS

Members: Councillor Noakes (Chairman), Councillors Bland (Vice-Chairman), Atwood, Backhouse, Bailey, Mrs Cobbold, Podbury, Poile, Pound, Reilly, Mrs Thomas and Warne

Quorum: 5 Members

1 Chairman's Introduction (Pages 5 - 6) Announcement on procedural matters.

2 Apologies (Pages 7 - 8) Apologies for absence as reported at the meeting.

3 Declarations of Interest (Pages 9 - 10) To receive any declarations of interest by Members in items on the agenda.

4 Declarations of Lobbying (in accordance with the Protocol for Members taking part in the Planning Process, Part 5, Section 5.11, Paragraph 6.6) (Pages 11 - 12) If a Member has been lobbied in connection with any application on the agenda, this should be declared at the start of the meeting, whether by, or in support of, the applicant or objectors.

Members in doubt about such a declaration are advised to contact the Legal Services Manager/Monitoring Officer before the date of the meeting.

5 Site Inspections (Pages 13 - 14) To note the application sites visited, as recorded at the meeting.

6 To approve the minutes of the meeting dated 10 April 2019 (Pages 15 - 22)

7 To approve the minutes of the meeting dated 8 May 2019 (Pages 23 - 30)

Page 1

8 R eports of Head of Planning Services (attached) The running order of the applications listed below is subject to change and will be agreed by the Chairman and announced at the meeting. (A) Application for Consideration - 17/01608/FULL - Avante Care & Support, Barnetts, 68 Frant Road, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN2 5LR (Pages 31 - 86) (B) Application for Consideration - 18/03527/FULL - Flat 3, 23 Lime Hill Road, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN1 1LJ (Pages 87 - 94) (C) Application for Consideration - 18/03839/OUT - Land North Of Santer House, Red Oak, Hawkhurst, Cranbrook, Kent (Pages 95 - 118) (D) Application for Consideration - 19/00365/FULL - Land Opposite 46 Quarry Road, Quarry Road, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN1 2YB (Pages 119 - 146) (E) Application for Consideration - 19/00994/FULL - Bowling Pavilion & Green, Calverley Grounds, Mount Pleasant Avenue, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN1 1QY (Pages 147 - 152) 9 Appeal Decisions for Noting - 24 April to 20 May 2019 (Pages 153 - 154)

10 Date of Next Meeting (Pages 155 - 156) The next Planning Committee meeting to be held on Wednesday, 3 July 2019, at 5pm.

11 Urgent Business (Pages 157 - 158) To consider any other items which the Chairman decides are urgent, for the reasons to be stated, in accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Cheryl Clark Town Hall Democratic Services Officer ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS [email protected] Kent TN1 1RS

Tel: (01892) 554413

mod.gov app – go paperless

Easily download, annotate and keep all committee paperwork on your mobile device using the mod.gov app – all for free!.

Visit www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk/modgovapp for details.

Page 2

All visitors wishing to attend a public meeting at the Town Hall between the hours of 9.00am and 5.00pm should report to reception via the side entrance in Monson Way. After 5pm, access will be via the front door on the corner of Crescent Road and Mount Pleasant Road, except for disabled access which will continue by use of an 'out of hours' button at the entrance in Monson Way

Notes on Procedure

(1) A list of background papers appears within each report, where appropriate, pursuant to the Local Government Act 1972, section 100D(i).

(2) Members seeking factual information about agenda items are requested to contact the appropriate Service Manager prior to the meeting.

(3) Members of the public and other stakeholders are required to register with the Democratic Services Officer if they wish to speak on an agenda item at a meeting. Public places are limited to a maximum of four objectors and four supporters. The deadline for registering to speak is 4.00 pm the last working day before the meeting. Each speaker will be given a maximum of 3 minutes to address the Committee.

(4) All meetings are open to the public except where confidential or exempt information is being discussed. The agenda will identify whether a meeting or part of a meeting is not open to the public. Meeting rooms have a maximum public capacity as follows: Council Chamber: 100, Committee Room A: 20, Committee Room B: 10.

(5) Please note that the public proceedings of this meeting will be recorded and made available for playback on the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council website. Any other third party may also record or film meetings, unless exempt or confidential information is being considered, but are requested as a courtesy to others to give notice of this to the Democratic Services Officer before the meeting. The Council is not liable for any third party recordings.

Further details are available on the website (www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk) or from Democratic Services.

If you require this information in another format please contact us, call 01892 526121 or email [email protected]

Accessibility into and within the Town Hall – There is a wheelchair accessible lift by the main staircase, giving access to the first floor where the committee rooms are situated. There are a few steps leading to the Council Chamber itself but there is a platform chairlift in the foyer.

Hearing Loop System – The Council Chamber and Committee Rooms A and B have been equipped with hearing induction loop systems. The Council Chamber also has a fully equipped audio-visual system.

Page 3 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 1

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Chairman’s Introduction

Procedural Item:

Announcement on procedural matters.

Page 5 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 2

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Apologies for Absence

Procedural Item:

Apologies for absence as reported at the meeting.

Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 3

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Declarations of Interest

Procedural Item:

To receive any declarations of interest by members in items on the agenda. For any advice on declarations of interest; please contact the Monitoring Officer before the meeting.

Page 9 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 4

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Declarations of Lobbying (in accordance with the Protocol for Members taking part in the Planning Process, Part 5, Section 5.11, Paragraph 6.6)

Procedural Item:

If a Member has been lobbied in connection with any application on the agenda, this should be declared at the start of the meeting, whether by, or in support of, the applicant or objectors.

Members in doubt about such a declaration are advised to contact the Legal Services Officer/Monitoring Officer before the date of the meeting.

Page 11 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Site Inspections

Procedural Item:

To note the application sites visited, as recorded at the meeting.

Page 13 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Wednesday, 10 April 2019

Present: Councillor Noakes (Chairman) Councillors Heasman (Vice-Chairman), Backhouse, Bland, Mrs Cobbold, Dawlings, Dr Hall, Mackonochie and Podbury

Officers in Attendance: Stephen Baughen (Head of Planning Services), Cheryl Clark (Democratic Services Officer), Margaret Parker (Development Planner - KCC Highways), David Joyner (Transport & Development Manager - KCC Highways), Peter Hockney (Development Manager), Lee Colyer (Director of Finance, Policy and Development (Section 151 Officer)), Jo Smith (Lawyer), Richard Hazelgrove (Senior Planning Officer), Kevin Hope (Principal Planning Officer), Marie Bolton (Principal Planning Officer), Debbie Maltby (Conservation and Urban Design Officer) and David Scully (Landscape and Biodiversity Officer)

Other Members in Attendance: Councillors Holden, McDermott, Palmer and Thomson.

CHAIRMAN'S INTRODUCTION

PLA155/18 The Chairman opened the meeting, introduced Committee members and officers in attendance, and outlined procedural matters of the meeting.

APOLOGIES

PLA156/18 Apologies for absence were recorded from Councillors Elliott, Pope, Scholes and Mrs Thomas.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

PLA157/18 Councillor Bland advised that he had taken Monitoring Officer advice in relation to any potential declarations of interest regarding application 17/02980/OUT and confirmed that he had no pecuniary or significant other interest to declare. He also confirmed that he had not fettered his discretion in any way and would approach the application with an open mind.

DECLARATIONS OF LOBBYING (IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROTOCOL FOR MEMBERS TAKING PART IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, PART 5, SECTION 5.11, PARAGRAPH 6.6)

PLA158/18 Application 17/02980/OUT Councillor Mrs Cobbold declared that she had been lobbied by an objector and all other members of the Committee present declared that they had been lobbied by supporters of the application.

Application 18/01063/FULL All members of the Committee except Councillor Mrs Cobbold and Councillor Noakes declared that they had been lobbied by objectors. Councillors Podbury, Bland, Backhouse, Mackonochie, Dawlings, Mrs Cobbold, Heasman and Noakes declared that they had been lobbied by supporters of the application.

Application 18/02165/FULL Councillors Podbury, Bland and Mackonochie declared that they had been lobbied by objectors and Councillors Bland and Backhouse declared that they

Page 15 Agenda Item 6

had been lobbied by supporters of the application.

Application 18/02324/FULL Councillor Podbury declared that she had been lobbied by objectors to the application.

Application 19/00109/FULL There were no declarations of lobbying.

SITE INSPECTIONS

PLA159/18 The Chairman advised that earlier that day members of the Committee had the opportunity to visit the sites in respect of applications 17/02980/OUT, 18/01063/FULL, 18/02165/FULL and 18/02324/FULL.

TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 6 FEBRUARY 2019

PLA160/18 RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting dated 6 February 2019 be recorded as a correct record.

REPORTS OF HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

PLA161/18 The Chairman confirmed that the order of business was as set out in the agenda.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 17/02980/OUT - STREATLEY HORNS ROAD HAWKHURST CRANBROOK KENT TN18 4QT

PLA162/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 17/02980/OUT and this was summarised at the meeting by Mrs Bolton, Principal Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer advised that additional representations had been received and consequently she updated as follows: i. The buffer between the development and ancient Woodland excluded gardens and was in accordance with Forestry Commission and National England advice. ii. A 5 year supply of deliverable housing for the Borough of Tunbridge Wells had still not been demonstrated. iii. In respect of paragraph 14 of the NPPF (February 2019), the Hawkhurst Local Plan was acknowledged but whilst it set out policies for the supply of housing, it did not also include allocations for housing. Therefore as all of the required criteria were not met, the protection provided by the NPPF did not apply.

Registered Speakers - There were 5 speakers who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public objectors  Mrs H Waters, a local resident  Mr R Goodman, a local resident

Page 16 Agenda Item 6

Public supporter  Mr G Norton, on behalf of Wealden Homes

Parish/Town Council representative  Councillor Escombe, Chairman, Hawkhurst Parish Council

Borough or ward members (not Committee members)  Councillor Thomson, a ward member for Hawkhurst and Sandhurst

Committee Member Debate: Members raised and discussed a number of issues including some matters raised by the registered speakers. It was explained that the length of time taken for the application to come to Committee had been largely due to the lack of information supplied with the original application with the final ecology report having been received in November 2018. The provision of a pond in the centre of the development had resulted to provide ecological enhancement and meet drainage needs.

As the application was for outline permission only, detailed designs of the properties proposed would only have been provided at a subsequent reserved matters stage. The presenting officer confirmed that contributions had been proposed as part of a s106 agreement, acknowledged that the proposal incorporated some very positive elements, but explained that in the absence of a 5 year housing supply, the application had to be considered against the criteria of the NPPF as updated in February 2019.

Members noted the relative distance of the development from local facilities, its incursion into the countryside and sustainability issues. Members also raised concerns about additional traffic from the development and the cumulative impact of this and other developments on the main crossroad in Hawkhurst but it was reiterated that KCC had to consider each application separately and had not raised any objections on grounds of highway safety. Members of the Committee supported the officer view that on balance, exceptional circumstances had not been sufficiently demonstrated and the harm to the AONB and historic setting outweighed other benefits of the scheme.

RESOLVED - That application 17/02980/OUT be refused for the reasons as set out in the agenda report.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/01063/FULL - OS PLOT 3100 FIELDWAYS HAWKHURST CRANBROOK KENT

PLA163/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/01063/FULL and this was

Page 17 Agenda Item 6

summarised at the meeting by Mr Hope, Principal Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated as follows: iv. An additional representation had been received but the matters raised had already been addressed in the agenda report. v. A petition had also been received with 627 signatures objecting to double yellow lines on Copthall Avenue. vi. The Communities and Local Case Working unit had indicated that the Secretary of State was considering “calling in” the application but it was explained that this was not a matter affecting members decision making at this Planning Committee.

Registered Speakers - There were 9 speakers who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public objectors  Mr P Hay, a local resident  Councillor P Whittle speaking in a personal capacity as a local resident  Mrs W Coxeter, a local resident

Public supporters  Mr A Wagstaff, Managing Director, Dandara  Mr A Williams, Director, Define, on behalf of the applicant

Parish/Town Council representative  Councillor Escombe, Chairman, Hawkhurst Parish Council

Borough or ward members (not Committee members)  Councillor Thomson, a ward member for Hawkhurst and Sandhurst  Councillor Holden, a ward member for Benenden and Cranbrook and also a County Councillor  Councillor Palmer, a ward member for Hawkhurst and Sandhurst

Committee Member Debate: Members raised and discussed a number of issues including many of the matters raised by the registered speakers. In response to questions, Mr Hockney made it clear that it was not sufficient for the Council to be close to attaining a 5 year supply of deliverable housing. He referred to the detailed explanations provided in the agenda report and reiterated that the current estimate of 4.97 years supply was very much a “best case” position. Mr Hockney also clarified the position in respect of the Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan (HNP). He read out paragraph 14 of the updated NPPF (February 2019) and confirmed that as the HNP did not include allocations for housing as well as policies, all of the necessary criteria had not therefore been met.

Members were particularly concerned about issues of safety due to the increase in traffic, congestion and the loss of parking both in the immediate area and at the crossroads at the centre of Hawkhurst resulting from the proposed development, proposed parking restrictions, and the cumulative impact from other proposed developments. Members repeatedly queried and challenged TWBC Planning Officers and KCC Highways Officers over the number of traffic movements and the reduction in available parking on

Page 18 Agenda Item 6

Copthall Avenue as they considered these conflicted with the views and needs of local residents. Officers present at the meeting confirmed, however, that in their opinion, the assessments undertaken in respect of the proposed development conformed with the relevant methodology and standards required, and on the basis of these, there was not considered to be either an unacceptable or severe impact on the road network or on highway safety. Officers referred to and reiterated explanations already provided in the agenda report relating to the cumulative impact, likely growth and potential mitigation that would only be fully assessed on completion of the Local Plan. There was concern that the access route to the new development failed to comply with the Kent Design Guide but KCC officers advised that this guide related to the design of new rather than existing highways.

A number of other issues were explored including lack of local distinctiveness in design, lack of connectivity with the wider area, impact on residential amenity, access to the village hall and harm to the AONB but none of these were considered sufficient reason to refuse the application. Notwithstanding praise for the quality of the development itself and the planning officer explanations of the wider public benefits, members of the Committee still felt that local residents and particularly those in Copthall Avenue would be particularly and adversely affected by the access route. Consequently members sought advice from Mr Hockney to provide a suitable wording in planning terms to reflect their given viewpoint.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered within the report and the debate, a motion was proposed by Councillor Podbury, seconded by Councillor Mackonochie and a vote was taken to refuse the application, contrary to the officer recommendation, for the reasons discussed relating to the poor design of the access arrangements to the site and the harm to the area and the way it functioned.

RESOLVED - That application 18/01063/FULL be refused for the reason as set out below:

1) The access arrangements and highway mitigation for the proposed development would amount to poor design that would equate to harm to the area and the way it functions contrary to paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/02165/FULL - LAND TO THE EAST OF HEARTENOAK ROAD HAWKHURST CRANBROOK KENT

PLA164/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/02165/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer advised that there had been one further representation but this had only raised similar issues to those already

Page 19 Agenda Item 6

covered in the agenda report.

Registered Speakers - There were 4 speakers who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public objector:  Parish Councillor Hunt in his personal capacity as a local resident.

Public supporter:  Mrs H Richardson, Associate Planner, Batcheller Monkhouse on behalf of Millwood Homes, the applicant.

Parish/Town Council representative  Councillor Escombe, Chairman, Hawkhurst Parish Council

Borough or ward members (not Committee members)  Councillor Palmer, a ward member for Hawkhurst and Sandhurst

Committee Member Debate: Members raised and discussed a number of issues including some of the matters raised by the registered speakers. In particular they had concerns that the local narrow and winding lanes were not suitable to access the site. Members also repeated queries relating to the weight and relevance of the Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan (HNP). It was clarified that because the HNP did not include allocations for housing as well as policies, the necessary criteria from the NPPF had not therefore been met (there was no onus on the Government Inspector to mention the lack of allocations). Additional explanations were provided regarding the 3 year supply of deliverable housing sites referred to in paragraph 14 of the NPPF (February 2019) as opposed to the 5 year supply referred to in note 7 of paragraph 11. In response to questions relating to highways, it was clarified that the junction of Heartenoak Road and Cranbrook Road was already the subject of works required by a condition applied in respect of application 13/02636.

RESOLVED - That application 18/02165/FULL be approved subject to the completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Head of Legal Partnership Mid Kent Legal Services by 30 April 2019 unless a later date be agreed by the Head of Planning Services and subject also to the plans, conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report.

Page 20 Agenda Item 6

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/02324/FULL - SPA HOTEL LANGTON ROAD ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS KENT TN4 8XJ

PLA165/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/02324/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations – None.

Registered Speakers - There were 2 speakers who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public objector:  Mr A King, a local resident.

Public supporter:  Mr M Gomez, Director, BTL Design, agent to the applicant.

Committee Member Debate: Members raised and discussed a number of issues including some matters raised by the registered speakers. In respect of the extent of the development, its location in the Green Belt, its impact on the environment and ancient woodland, officers referred to those matters covered in more detail in the agenda report. Planning officers also summarised the need to weigh up the various factors in respect of sustainability and very special circumstances when coming to their recommendation. It was clarified that the access way would not be adopted by KCC Highways and would remain and be managed as a private drive way. Delineation of the pedestrian and vehicle areas would be by means of differing road surfaces.

Decision/voting - Some members remained concerned that the proposal was acceptable and might lead to further encroachment into the Green Belt but a motion was proposed by Councillor Backhouse, seconded by Councillor Heasman and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation.

RESOLVED - That application 18/02324/FULL be approved subject to the plans, conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 19/00109/FULL - WAR MEMORIAL, MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT

PLA166/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 19/00109/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations – None.

Page 21 Agenda Item 6

Registered Speakers – None.

Committee Member Debate: Members raised queries regarding some of the materials to be used. It was understood that York stone was to be used for the steps but otherwise the finishes and materials were subject to finalisation in accordance with condition 6).

RESOLVED - That application 19/00109/FULL be approved subject to the plans, conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report.

APPEAL DECISIONS FOR NOTING - 22/01/2019 TO 26/03/2019

PLA167/18 The list of appeal decisions provided for information was duly noted.

URGENT BUSINESS

PLA168/18 RESOLVED – That there was no urgent business for consideration.

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

PLA169/18 RESOLVED – That the next Planning Committee meeting take place on Wednesday 8 May 2019, at 5pm.

NOTES: 1. In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, paragraph 4.2 of Council Procedure Rules, it was agreed to continue the meeting after 4 hours had elapsed. 2. Councillor Dr Hall left the meeting at 9.25pm after consideration of application 18/02324/FULL. 3. The meeting concluded at 9.45 pm. 4. Due to equipment and microphone issues, there is no audio recording of this meeting.

Page 22 Agenda Item 7

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Wednesday, 8 May 2019

Present: Councillor Noakes (Chairman) Councillors Backhouse, Bland, Dawlings, Dr Hall, Mackonochie, Podbury and Mrs Thomas

Officers in Attendance: Stephen Baughen (Head of Planning Services), Cheryl Clark (Democratic Services Officer), Peter Hockney (Development Manager), Lee Colyer (Director of Finance, Policy and Development (Section 151 Officer)), Jo Smith (Lawyer), Richard Hazelgrove (Senior Planning Officer) and Kevin Hope (Principal Planning Officer)

Other Members in Attendance: Councillor McDermott

CHAIRMAN'S INTRODUCTION

PLA170/18 The Chairman opened the meeting, introduced Committee members and officers in attendance, and outlined procedural matters of the meeting.

APOLOGIES

PLA171/18 Apologies for absence were reported from Councillors Mrs Cobbold, Pope and Scholes.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

PLA172/18 18/03409/FULL Councillor Dawlings advised that he had referred to the Council’s Lawyer and declared that he had attended meetings when the application was discussed but had not offered an opinion and was able to keep an open mind in considering the application at this Planning Committee.

DECLARATIONS OF LOBBYING (IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROTOCOL FOR MEMBERS TAKING PART IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, PART 5, SECTION 5.11, PARAGRAPH 6.6)

PLA173/18 18/03409/FULL All members of the Committee present declared that they had been lobbied by objectors to the application. Councillor Dawlings declared that he had also been lobbied by a supporter of the application.

18/03514/LAWPRO No declarations of lobbying were made.

18/03805/OUT No declarations of lobbying were made.

19/00577/FULL No declarations of lobbying were made.

19/00614/LBC No declarations of lobbying were made.

Page 23 Agenda Item 7

SITE INSPECTIONS

PLA174/18 The Chairman confirmed that earlier that day, members of the Committee had the opportunity to visit sites in respect of applications 18/03409/FULL, 18/03805/OUT, 19/00577/FULL and 19/00614/LBC.

TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 10 APRIL 2019 (TO FOLLOW)

PLA175/18 RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting dated 10 April 2019 be presented to a future meeting.

REPORTS OF HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

PLA176/18 The Chairman confirmed that the order of business be item 7A, followed by item 7C and then item 7B, 7D and 7E.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/03409/FULL - LAND REAR OF FIELD HOUSE, STANDEN STREET, BENENDEN, CRANBROOK, KENT TN17 4HP

PLA177/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/03409/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated as follows: i. One additional representation had been received which raised similar issues to those already expressed by objectors; ii. KCC Economic Development had repeated their request for S.106 contributions (£432.14 library book stock and high speed broadband); iii. The Benenden Neighbourhood Plan (BNP) had progressed to publication of its first rough draft plan. Consultation on the plan commenced on 23 February 2019 and included TWBC among the organisations due to provide feedback. iv. The rough draft plan proposed allocating 4 sites for development, 3 sites being Previously Developed Land plus one Greenfield site adjacent to the village LBD, which was intended to provide Alms Houses. The site for consideration under application 18/03409 was not one of the sites proposed for allocation within the plan. v. Having regard to the requirements of Para 48 of the NPPF 2019 and Paragraph: 007 Reference ID: 41-007-20170728 of the NPPG, the first rough draft plan only carried limited weight in the planning process as it was still at the pre Regulation 14 consultation stage. vi. A further e-mail representation had suggested that the reasons for refusal should have included highway safety. Mr Hazelgrove advised that this had been discussed in paragraphs 10.87 – 10.99 and elsewhere within the agenda report but in summary KCC had not considered these issues constituted sufficient reason for refusal. vii. As a result of clarification about the location of protected tree reference T6, it was proposed that the reason for refusal be amended as follows: The proposal fails to demonstrate that a boundary tree currently

Page 24 Agenda Item 7

protected by a Tree Preservation Order (which is identified as having suffered structural failure and is shown to be removed on the submitted plans) can satisfactorily be replaced, given the proximity to Plots 8 and 9. It would also lead to future pressure to remove/reduce/prune a further TPO protected tree due to its proximity to Plot 7. The proposal is thus contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and saved policies LBD1 and EN13 of the Tunbridge Wells Local Plan 2006.

Registered Speakers - There were 2 speakers who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public Supporter  Mrs Beth Watts, Associate Planner, Bloomfields, agent on behalf of the applicant

Parish/Town Council representative  Cllr Julie Lewis, Vice-Chairman of Benenden Parish Council

Committee Member Debate: Members raised a number of issues and Mr Hazelgrove clarified that a total of 22 car parking spaces were proposed as part of the development, comprising 2 per dwelling and the balance for visitor parking. On the question of sustainability, Mr Hazelgrove also confirmed that there were no shops in Iden Green and the nearest would be in the villages of Sandhurst or Benenden. There was no further member debate although one member highlighted that the harm to the Conservation Area was still important regardless of the technical ‘less than substantial’ reference, and reiterated other key matters contained within the reasons for refusal.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered, a motion was proposed by Councillor Dr Hall, seconded by Councillor Mrs Thomas and a vote was taken to refuse the application in line with the officer recommendation including changes to the condition relating to tree T6.

RESOLVED - That application 18/03409/FULL be refused for the reasons as set out in the agenda report and with a revised reason (2) as set out below:

Amended refusal reason (2) The proposal fails to demonstrate that a boundary tree currently protected by a Tree Preservation Order (which is identified as having suffered structural failure and is shown to be removed on the submitted plans) can satisfactorily be replaced, given the proximity to Plots 8 and 9. It would also lead to future pressure to remove/reduce/prune a further TPO protected tree due to its proximity to Plot 7. The proposal is thus contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and saved policies LBD1 and EN13 of the Tunbridge Wells Local Plan 2006.

Page 25 Agenda Item 7

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/03805/OUT - LAND ADJACENT TO HORNBEAM AVENUE, SOUTHBOROUGH, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT

PLA178/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/03805/OUT and this was summarised at the meeting by Kevin Hope, Principal Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated the following: i. A change to the first line of Part A of the recommendation to state:- “Grant subject to the completion of a legal agreement as a memorandum of understanding (annexing a draft planning agreement to be completed as a condition of sale of the site and under Section 106…….” ii. Changes to some of the contributions within part A of the recommendation to refer to a per dwelling figure: • £4115.00 per applicable house/ £1029.00 per applicable flat - towards Phase 1 expansion of Tunbridge Wells Grammar School for Boys. • £358.70 per dwelling - towards Southborough Hub - Library element iii. An additional condition relating to Condition 1 showing the retention of trees and landscaping.

Registered Speakers - There was one speaker who had registered and who spoke in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules):

Public supporter  Mr Bryn Warlow, Architect, Hazle, McCormack Young.

Committee Member Debate: Mr Hope clarified that the application was for outline planning permission and he was therefore unable to provide further detail on several matters raised, which would be dealt with at a later stage as part of a full application. It was confirmed, however, that no change was proposed to the Public Right of Way within the site. In respect of one member’s concern that Japanese Knotweed had been identified on the site, Mr Hope confirmed that this had been dealt with by the provisions of condition 7. No further issues were raised but a member commented that he was pleased about the number of existing trees that would be retained.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered within the report and the debate, a motion was proposed by Councillor Backhouse, seconded by Councillor Mackonochie and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation as amended and with the additional condition as updated.

RESOLVED - That application 18/03805/OUT be approved subject to the completion of a legal agreement as a memorandum of understanding (annexing a draft planning agreement to be completed as a condition of sale of the site and under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and compensation Act 1991), in a form to be agreed by the Head of Legal Partnership Mid Kent Legal Services by 14 June 2019 unless a later date be agreed by the Head of Planning services to secure the following:  The provision of at least 35% affordable housing within the site;

Page 26 Agenda Item 7

 A contribution of £4115.00 per applicable house/ £1029.00 per applicable flat - towards Phase 1 expansion of Tunbridge Wells Grammar School for Boys;  £358.70 per dwelling - towards Southborough Hub - Library element;  A contribution of £1,150.00 towards the design of the cycle route and works on the link between Juniper Close and Dowding Way including removal/repositioning of railings, vegetation clearance and improved signing;  A contribution of £719 per bedspace for Youth/Adult Recreation Open Space towards Southborough Hub sports pavilion;

And subject to the conditions, plans, informatives and Part B as set out in the agenda report, and the additional condition as set out below:

Additional Condition

(17) The details submitted in pursuance of Condition 1 shall include the retention of the trees and landscaping within the blue land (as shown on plan number 1998 001 P1 – Site Location Plan).

Reason: In order to retain existing trees which provide a significant contribution to the area and in order to protect the integrity of the site of local nature conservation value

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/03514/LAWPRO - 4 BIRCH CLOSE, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT TN2 3TJ

PLA179/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/03514/LAWPRO and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations – None.

Registered Speakers – None.

Committee Member Debate: In response to a query, Mr Hazelgrove confirmed that it was not an option for the width of the proposed area of dropped kerb to be varied by the Committee. Determination of the application was restricted to whether the proposal required planning permission and had come before the Committee only because part of the land was in the ownership of the Council.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered, a motion was proposed by Councillor Podbury, seconded by Councillor Mrs Thomas and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation.

RESOLVED - That application 18/03514/LAWPRO be approved subject to the informative as set out in the agenda report and a Lawful Development

Page 27 Agenda Item 7

Certificate be issued.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 19/00577/FULL - TUNBRIDGE WELLS LIBRARY, ADULT EDUCATION CENTRE, MUSEUM & ART GALLERY, MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT

PLA180/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 19/00577/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations – Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated on a minor alteration to condition 15 in respect of a proposed art installation.

Registered Speakers – None.

Committee Member Debate: There was concern over the removal of glazing within the barrel roof and in response Mr Hazelgrove advised that the reduction in light was not considered substantial as the end wall would remain fully glazed. There was also concern over the additional zinc on the barrel roof, as a result of which, one member felt unable to support the proposal, as she felt zinc was not in keeping with the rest of the building. Mr Hazelgrove added that final details of materials were subject to condition. A further member comment was noted that the original pink colour of the brickwork might become apparent if it were cleaned.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered within the report and the debate, a motion was proposed by Councillor Mrs Thomas, seconded by Councillor Mackonochie and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation and the amended condition proposed.

RESOLVED - That application 19/00577/FULL be approved subject to the plans, conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report and the amended condition as set out below.

Amended condition

15) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved details of a public art installation which relates to the fencing/gates to the rear of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (unless a satisfactory alternative arrangement without a public art installation is similarly agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority).

Full detailed plans of the installation shall be provided complete with specification for materials, finish and location. A timetable for installation shall also be provided. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and retained

Page 28 Agenda Item 7

thereafter.

Details (covering all of the above requirements) of any subsequent change to the fencing/gates or art installation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the revised public art installation being displayed.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development and to protect the character and appearance of the area

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 19/00614/LBC - TUNBRIDGE WELLS LIBRARY, ADULT EDUCATION CENTRE MUSEUM AND ART GALLERY, MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT

PLA181/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 19/00614/LBC and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer advised that Condition 9) was a more correctly worded version of Condition 5), which should therefore be deleted.

Registered Speakers – None.

Committee Member Debate: members had no further comments to make in respect of the Listed Building Consent.

Decision/voting - On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered, a motion was proposed by Councillor Backhouse, seconded by Councillor Bland and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation with the amendment to the conditions as updated.

RESOLVED - That application 19/00614/LBC be approved subject to the plans, conditions and informatives as set out in the agenda report, excluding condition 5), which is deleted.

APPEAL DECISIONS FOR NOTING - 26/03/2019 TO 23/04/2019

PLA182/18 The list of appeal decisions provided for information was duly noted.

Page 29 Agenda Item 7

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

PLA183/18 RESOLVED – That the next Planning Committee meeting take place on Wednesday 12 June 2019, at 5pm.

URGENT BUSINESS

PLA184/18 RESOLVED – That there was no urgent business for consideration.

NOTES: 1. For full details of the proceedings, an audio recording of the meeting is available on the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council website. 2. The meeting concluded at 6.15 pm.

Page 30 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 17/01608/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Redevelopment of a former care home site to provide residential scheme of 26 dwellings comprising three-storey apartment block containing twelve apartments, three two-storey terraced blocks providing twelve houses, one flat over carport spaces and one two-storey detached lodge ADDRESS Avante Care & Support Barnetts 68 Frant Road Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent TN2 5LR RECOMMENDATION GRANT subject to completion of Section 106 Agreement (see section 11.0 of report for full recommendation) REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE This application was considered at Planning Committee 13.12.2018. The applicant has sought an amendment to Condition 33, which was previously agreed by Planning Committee. The changes are considered to be more than a reasonable change for accuracy and enforceability and therefore it is considered appropriate to report the application to Planning Committee to seek a revised resolution. INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL The following are considered to be material to the application: Contributions (to be secured through Section 106 legal agreement/unilateral undertaking): - Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub £8,787.25 - NHS contribution £ 19,260 - Adult and Youth recreation of £ 56,800.75 - Commuted sum for Affordable housing £583,500 Net decrease in numbers of jobs: 1 site caretaker would be provided as part of the scheme. However, the operation of the now vacant care home would have provided employment. The building is now vacant and the site is no longer operational and therefore providing employment. Estimated average annual workplace salary spend in Borough through net increase in numbers of jobs: £13,465 The following are not considered to be material to the application: Estimated annual council tax benefit for Borough: £4,513 Estimated annual council tax benefit total: £45,130 Annual New Homes Bonus (for first 4 years): £26,000 Estimated Loss of annual Band H Council tax benefit for Borough: £358 WARD Pantiles & St Marks PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Beechcroft Developments Ltd N/A AGENT Savills (UK) Ltd. DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE

Page 31 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

26/06/2019 07/07/17 Various RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): 17/01608/FULL Redevelopment of a former care home site to Resolved provide residential scheme of 26 dwellings to Grant comprising three-storey apartment block containing on 13 twelve apartments, three two-storey terraced December blocks providing twelve houses, one flat over carport spaces and one two-storey detached lodge 2018 00/02106/FUL Part demolition and extension of existing residential Grant 16/02/01 care home and full refurbishment.

99/00001/FUL Two new conservatories, access ramps and Grant 22/02/99 associated landscaping

98/00672/FUL Single storey extension for new day centre for 15 Grant 06/08/98 persons

MAIN REPORT

1.0 BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The application the subject of this report went to Planning Committee on 13th December 2018. It was resolved to permit the scheme for 26 dwellings subject to conditions and the completion of a S106 Agreement, to secure financial contributions to meet the infrastructure needs of the development. This report and the associated conditions are attached as Appendix A.

1.02 Following the discussion, Planning Committee resolved to grant planning permission for the scheme subject to the completion of the Section 106, conditions contained within the main report and amendments to the conditions set out in the minutes attached as Appendix B.

1.03 The description of the site remains as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 The proposal remains as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

3.01 The summary information remains as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

Page 32 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

- Ashdown Forest Ashdown Forest 15 Km Habitat Regulation Assessment Zone – (located within the 9 to 10 km zone for Ashdown Forest SAC/SPA) - Conservation Area Tunbridge Wells (located along the eastern boundary of the site, along the Frant Road). (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990) - Inside the Limits to built development (the LBD is located further south of the site, along St Mark’s Road). - Tree Preservation Order - protected tree belt located to the south side of the site – adjoin the rear gardens of Waterfield. - Wind Turbine Development Consultation Ar Biggin Hill Airport

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF): National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG):

Development Plan: Site Allocations Local Plan Adopted 2016 Policy AL/STR 1: Limits to Built Development

Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 - CP1 – Delivery of Development - CP4 – Environment - CP5 - Sustainable Design and Construction - CP6 – Housing - CP9 – Development in Royal Tunbridge Wells

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006: - EN1 – Development Control Criteria - EN5 – Development within or affecting Conservation Areas - EN10 – Sites affecting Archaeological Interest - EN13 – Protected trees - H2 – Small and Intermediate Sized dwellings - H5 – Residential Development within the LBD - TP4 – Access to the Road network - TP5 – Vehicle parking standards - TP 9 Cycle parking - R2 – Recreation open space in development of more than 10 bedspaces - CS4 – Development contributions to school provision for developments over 10 bedspaces

Supplementary Planning Documents; - Affordable Housing 2007 - Recreation Open Space SPD 2006 - Renewable Energy SPD update (2016) - Local Heritage Asset SPD - Contaminated Land SPD (2016)

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 No additional representations received. See original Committee Report at Appendix A for previous representations.

Page 33 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

7.01 Additional consultations received since the resolution to grant are set out below. See original Committee Report at Appendix A for previous consultation responses.

7.02 NHS West Kent Clinical Commissioning Group 01.05.2019 – confirmation that the change to the condition would not affect the sum requested towards healthcare provision. It is only a change in the number of units that would have an impact.

7.03 KCC Planning Applications 09.05.19 – Confirmation received that if over 18 years old occupiers only, KCC would not be seeking any education (Primary or secondary) contributions, just the cultural hub sums.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS

8.01 Applicant’s supporting comments remain as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

9.01 Background papers and plans remain as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

10.0 APPRAISAL

Principle of Development 10.01 Since the application was heard at the December 2018 Planning Committee, the Housing Supply situation has been re-assessed.

10.02 Work on the Council’s new Local Plan has been progressed with an anticipated submission date of December 2020. Recent updates to Planning Policy Guidance and the NPPF (2019) have changed the way that local authorities must calculate their housing targets.

10.03 NPPF Para 73 requires the Council to identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirement set out in adopted strategic policies, or against their local housing need where the strategic policies are more than five years old. In addition there must be an additional buffer of between 5% and 20%, depending on the particular circumstances of the Authority.

10.04 The NPPF requires, based on the housing delivery test, that currently a 5% buffer be included in TWBC’s five year supply calculations.

10.05 Every year a position is established regarding the five year supply, based on the position in April of that year. This requires detailed monitoring work. This detailed work has been undertaken and has determined that the Council has a 4.69 year housing supply at this present time.

10.06 In view of the above, the five year supply position is similar to the position on 13th December 2018 (when the resolution to grant permission was made by Planning Committee).

Page 34 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

10.07 Therefore, the consideration of the elements of the scheme and whether it comprises sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF remains as set out in the original committee report at Appendix A.

10.08 Other material planning considerations remain as considered in the original committee report at Appendix A.

10.09 The key change since consideration at the December 2018 Planning Committee, is the proposed change to condition 33. The previously agreed condition was:-

No unit of accommodation shall be occupied at any time other than:-  By a person aged 55 or older;  A spouse, partner or companion as appropriate of such a person and living as a single household;  A spouse, partner or companion who was living as a single household with such a person who has since died.

Reason: The application was assessed on this basis, and accordingly mitigation for impact on education and children’s playspace was not considered necessary.

10.10 The applicant has indicated that they are not prepared to accept an over 55 age restrictive condition, preferring instead to have a condition that focuses on downsizing from a larger property and that prevents occupation for under 18 year olds.

10.11 Therefore it is proposed to amend condition 33 to prevent occupation of the site by under 18 year olds. This is because the scheme is clearly intended as a downsizing scheme with high specification communal areas and not intended to be occupied by children. As such, the proposal does not intend to provide for mitigation for such an age group, in terms of contributions towards education and children’s playspace. Therefore, it is considered that such a condition is considered to be appropriate and reasonable in planning terms.

10.12 The proposed new condition 33 is:-

No unit of accommodation shall be occupied other than by persons aged 18 or above, that have downsized from a larger property. A register shall be maintained of all occupiers, that demonstrates the development is occupied by persons downsizing the size of the dwelling they occupy, which shall be available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority at any reasonable time.

Reason: The application was assessed on this basis, and accordingly mitigation for impact on education and children’s playspace was not considered necessary.

10.13 The proposed contributions have been reassessed by the NHS and Kent County Council and have been confirmed as still being required to provide mitigation from the additional demand. For the reasons set out in the committee report at Appendix A, the occupants of the scheme proposed, could reasonably expect to use generate infrastructure requirements, for which sums have been secured, being the cultural hub, NHS contributions and adult and youth recreation. Active adults are likely to occupy the development, and therefore the adult and youth recreation sum is considered to be justified. These sums can be secured through the completion of the S106 Agreement. The proposed condition would enable the site to be occupied as intended and contribute towards meeting the Borough’s housing needs, whilst preventing the uncontrolled occupation of the site as a C3 residential use.

Page 35 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Other matters 10.14 The wording of Condition 23 is also proposed to be reworded, for clarity. The condition relates to vehicle fast charge points, specifying the number of charging points required. There are no other implications that would result from the change in wording.

Conclusion 10.15 The site is located at the edge of the tier one settlement in the spatial strategy for Tunbridge Wells. It is located on a main route into the town centre and located on public transport routes. The site would be sustainable and in close proximity to services and public transport. The scheme would contribute to meeting housing need and provide choice and variety and would provide a suitable level of affordable housing, and developer contributions that directly relate to the need generated on the site. In the balance of issues, with the clear need for new housing development, it is not considered that there are any other material considerations that would indicate the application should be refused. The amended condition 33 is considered to adequately control the age group that can occupy the development, whilst mitigating appropriately for its future occupants. Approval is therefore recommended, subject to the completion of a legal agreement and conditions. The applicant has been requested to comment and agree the proposed pre-commencement conditions, these are now agreed.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION –

A – Delegated powers to GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Head of Legal Partnership by 26.06.2019 (unless a later date is agreed by the Head of Planning Services) to secure the following:

(i) Developer Contributions as follows:

- Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub £8,787.25 - NHS contribution £ 19,260 - Adult and Youth recreation of £ 56,800.75 - Commuted sum for off site affordable housing £583,500 (ii) Payment of the Council’s reasonable legal fees for the negotiation and satisfactory completion of the legal agreement.

And subject to the following conditions:

1/ The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2/ The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 FD 16 - 1430 - P- 55 Rev D– Proposed site layout  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 150 Rev A Plots 1-4 Ground Floor Plan

Page 36 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

 FD 16 - 1430 - P- 151 Rev A Plots 1-4 First Floor Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 152 Rev A Plots 1-4 Roof Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 155 Rev A Plots 1-4 Front Elevation  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 156 Rev A Plots 1-4 Rear Elevation  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 157 Rev A Plots 1-4 Flank Elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 160 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Ground Floor Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 161 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 First Floor Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 162 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Roof Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 165 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Front Elevation  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 166 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Rear Floor Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 167 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Flank Elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 170 Plots 13-24 Ground and first Floor Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 171 Plots 13-24 Second floor and roof Plan  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 175 Plots 13-24 Front and right flank elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 176 Plots 13-24 Rear and left flank elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 180 Plot 25 Plans  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 185 Plot 25 Elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 190 Plot 26 Plans  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 195 REV B Plot 26 Elevations  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 700 Rev A - Proposed site sections (1)  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 701 Rev A - Proposed site sections (2)  FD 16 - 1430 - P- 702 Rev A Proposed site sections (3)  BEE20873 01C Tree Reference Plan  BEE20873 03A Tree Protection Plan  8161058/6205A Swept Path Analysis  Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement (with written Statement).  Tree Report

Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved.

3/ Prior to the commencement of the development a Code of Construction Practice shall be submitted to and approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction of the development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved Code of Construction Practice and BS5228 Noise Vibration and Control on Construction and Open Sites and the Control of dust from construction sites (BRE DTi Feb 2003).unless previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The code shall include: - An indicative programme for carrying out the works - Measures to minimise the production of dust on the site(s) - Measures to minimise the noise (including vibration) generated by the construction process to include the careful selection of plant and machinery and use of noise mitigation barrier(s) - Maximum noise levels expected 1 metre from the affected façade of any residential unit adjacent to the site(s) - Design and provision of site hoardings - Management of traffic visiting the site(s) including temporary parking or holding areas - Provision of off road parking for all site operatives - Measures (including wheel wash) to prevent the transfer of mud and extraneous material onto the public highway - Measures to manage the production of waste and to maximise the re-use of materials

Page 37 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

- Measures to minimise the potential for pollution of groundwater and surface water - The location and design of site office(s) and storage compounds - The location of temporary vehicle access points to the site(s) during the construction works - The arrangements for public consultation and liaison during the construction works

Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents and in the interests of highway safety. This is pre-commencement to ensure that the site set up is secured at an early stage to ensure highway safety and the amenity of local residents.

Materials and details 4/ Notwithstanding the details submitted, prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, written details including source/ manufacturer, and samples of bricks, tiles, cladding and all roofing materials to be used externally shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out using the approved external materials.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

5/ Prior to commencement of above ground construction works, detailed plans and information regarding the following aspects of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details:

a) Details and drawings relating to fenestration profiles, colour, and to include window recess and reveals,

b) The detailed design of any balcony structures, and shared entrance doorways to flats to include materials, lighting, door, colour and canopy design;

c) Details (including section drawings) relating to materials to be used in the construction of all walls, fences or other means of enclosure, and;

d) Details for the storage and screening of refuse.

e) Details of cycle storage

f) Details of external lighting.

Reason: To ensure the built quality of the development.

6/ Prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, details of the finished ground floor levels, shown in relation to the existing and proposed site levels as well as eaves and ridge heights of neighbouring buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development.

Drainage 7/ No development shall take place until details for the disposal of foul sewage and surface water have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Page 38 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Reason: To avoid pollution of the surrounding area. This is pre-commencement to ensure that suitable drainage is designed at early stage to prevent flood risk.

8/ Development shall not begin until a detailed sustainable surface water drainage scheme for the site has been submitted to (and approved in writing by) the local planning authority. The detailed scheme shall demonstrate that the surface water generated by this development (for all rainfall durations and intensities up to and including the climate change adjusted critical 100 year storm) can be accommodated and disposed of without increase to flood risk on or off-site. The drainage scheme shall also demonstrate that silt and pollutants resulting from the site can be adequately managed to ensure there is no pollution risk to receiving waters.

Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal and to ensure ongoing efficacy of the drainage provisions. This is pre-commencement to ensure that suitable drainage is designed at early stage to prevent flood risk.

9/ No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until details of the implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. Those details shall include:

i) a timetable for its implementation, and ii) a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the sustainable drainage system throughout its lifetime.

10/ Where infiltration is to be used to manage the surface water from the development hereby permitted, it will only be allowed within those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated to the Local Planning Authority’s satisfaction that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters and/or ground stability. The development shall only then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect the vulnerable groundwater resources and ensure compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Contamination 11/ If during construction/demolition works evidence of potential contamination is encountered, works shall cease and the site fully assessed to enable an appropriate remediation plan to be developed. Works shall not re-commence until an appropriate remediation scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and the remediation has been completed.

Upon completion of the building works, this condition shall not be discharged until a closure report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The closure report shall include details of;

Page 39 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

a) Details of any sampling and remediation works conducted and quality assurance certificates to show that the works have been carried out in full in accordance with the approved methodology.

b) Details of any post-remedial sampling and analysis to show the site has reached the required clean-up criteria shall be included in the closure report together with the necessary documentation detailing what waste materials have been removed from the site.

c) If no contamination has been discovered during the build then evidence (e.g. photos or letters from site manager) to show that no contamination was discovered should be included.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

Trees and Landscaping 12/ No development shall take place until the recommendations set out in the submitted Arboricultural method statement (AMS) ref BEE20873aia AMS A, and in accordance with the current edition of BS 5837, has been implemented in full, including the supervision measures set out within the AMS.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve and enhance biodiversity.

13/ No development shall take place until details of tree protection in accordance with the submitted Tree Protection Plan BEE20873-03A, and the current edition of BS 5837, has been implemented in full. All trees to be retained must be protected by barriers and/or ground protection.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained and to ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

14/ Notwithstanding the details submitted, no development shall take place until a landscape scheme designed in accordance with the principles of the Council's landscape character guidance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, to include hard and soft landscaping. The scheme shall show all existing trees, hedges and blocks of landscaping on, and immediately adjacent to, the site and indicate whether they are to be retained or removed. It shall detail measures for protection of species to be retained, provide details of on site replacement planting to mitigate any loss of amenity and biodiversity value together with the location of any habitat piles and include a planting specification, a programme of implementation and a 5 year management plan. The submitted scheme shall demonstrate an enhanced boundary screening to the south east, where the site abuts 70 Frant Road, and shall provide additional screening in the form of heavy standard trees and ever green planting. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

Page 40 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

15/ No development shall take place until a plan of the proposed services into the site has been submitted to and approved in writing. All services shall be installed to NJUG specifications where appropriate.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained and to ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development. This is a pre-commencement condition to ensure that trees are protected at an early stage of the development.

16/ Prior to the commencement of site clearance, demolition, construction or above ground works, a scheme for the enhancement of biodiversity on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall take account of any protected species that have been identified on the site and have regard to the enhancement of biodiversity generally. It shall be implemented in accordance with the approved proposals within it and carried out in perpetuity.

Reason: To protect and enhance existing species and habitats on the site in the future.

17/ Prior to above ground construction works, a scheme to demonstrate that the internal noise levels within the residential units will conform to the standard identified by BS 8233 2014, Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings - Code of Practice, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The work specified in the approved scheme shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation of the premises and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to protect the occupiers of the dwellings from undue disturbance by noise.

Highways and access 18/ The area shown on drawing number FD 16-1430-P-55 Rev D as vehicle parking space, garages and turning shall be provided, surfaced and drained in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the use is commenced or the premises occupied, and shall be retained for the use of the occupiers of the development in perpetuity. No permanent development, whether or not permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) shall be carried out on that area of land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to the reserved parking spaces.

Reason: Development without provision of adequate accommodation for the parking of vehicles is likely to lead to parking inconvenient to other road users.

19/ The access and parking area hereby approved, shall be surfaced with in a bound material with adequate drainage within the site to ensure no surface water drains onto the public highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

20/ Prior to commencement of development, before any other work commences, the access and improvements to the access, shown on plan number Glanville plan 6205 A, are to be provided and thereafter retained in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Page 41 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

21/ No gates or barriers shall be erected across the access onto Frant Road.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Sustainability 22/ No dwelling shall be occupied until a residential Travel Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan measures shall subsequently be implemented and thereafter maintained within three months of the first occupation of any dwelling hereby permitted.

Reason: In order to realise a sustainable pattern of development in the area.

23/ Prior to the occupation of any of the units hereby approved, details of the provision of at least 2 'fast charge' electric vehicle-charging points, including a timescale for its provision, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The charging points shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and in accordance with an agreed timescale and retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development that meets the needs of current and future generations.

24/ Prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, written and illustrative details for renewable energy technologies shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which meets the needs of current and future generations.

25/ Prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, written details for water conservation, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of water conservation.

26/ Prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, written and illustrative details for energy conservation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development, which meets the needs of current and future generations.

27/ Prior to occupation of the development, Low Nox boilers, shall be installed within each dwelling and shall thereafter be maintained.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which meets the needs of current and future generations.

Page 42 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

accordance with a written programme and specification which has previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded.

29/ Before the occupation of any part of the building, details of the balconies/terraces shall be submitted to and approved in writing, to include, screening privacy panels to the terraced dwellings, to be installed to a height of 1.8m from the terrace or balcony, to be of obscured glass Pilkington level 3 or higher. The balconies shall be installed and maintained thereafter, in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the locality.

30/ Before first occupation, the windows at first floor level and above, on the east and west elevations of the apartment building, shall be fitted with obscured glass (privacy level/grade 3) and shall be non opening up to a height of 1.7m, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The obscure glazing shall thereafter be retained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard against overlooking and loss of privacy in the interests of amenity of occupiers of neighbouring properties.

31/ Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order), no windows, or similar openings shall be inserted in the west elevation of plot 12, southern elevation of plot 4, or the north elevations of plots 25 and 26, at first floor level, other than as hereby approved. Any windows shown to be fitted with obscure glass on the plans hereby approved, shall be installed with Pilkington level 3 or higher, and shall thereafter be retained as such.

Reason: To protect the residential amenities of adjacent dwellings

32/ Prior to the commencement of above ground construction works, details of the boundary treatments, including sections, materials and any repairs, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatments shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of protecting character and amenities.

33/ No unit of accommodation shall be occupied other than by persons aged 18 or above, that have downsized from a larger property. A register shall be maintained of all occupiers, that demonstrates the development is occupied by persons downsizing the size of the dwelling they occupy, which shall be available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority at any reasonable time.

Reason: The application was assessed on this basis, and accordingly mitigation for impact on education and children’s playspace was not considered necessary.

B – If the applicant fails to enter into such an agreement by 31.07.2019 the Head of Planning Services shall be authorised to REFUSE permission for the following reasons (unless a later date is agreed by the Head of Planning Services):

Page 43 Agenda Item 8(A) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

(1) The proposal would not provide affordable housing and would therefore conflict with Core Policy 6 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010.

(2) The proposal would fail to provide developer contributions towards the Cultural Hub, as requested by Kent County Council, and would therefore conflict with Core Policies CP1 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010 and Policy CS4 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

(3) The proposal would fail to provide for youth and adult recreation and would therefore conflict with Core Policies 1 and 8 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010 and Policy R2 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

(4) The proposal would fail to provide for health care and would therefore conflict with Core Policy 1 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010.

Case Officer: Marie Bolton

NB For full details of all papers submitted with this application please refer to the relevant Public Access pages on the council’s website. The conditions set out in the report may be subject to such reasonable change as is necessary to ensure accuracy and enforceability.

Page 44 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 17/01608/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Redevelopment of a former care home site to provide residential scheme of 26 dwellings comprising three -storey apartment block containing twelve apartments, three two-storey terraced block s providing twelve houses, one flat over carport spaces and one two-storey detached lodge ADDRESS Avante Care & Support Barnetts 68 Frant Road Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent TN2 5LR RECOMMENDATION - GRANT subject to completion of Section 106 Agreement (see section 11 of report for full recommendation ) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - The NPPF requires local authorities to significantly boost the supply of housing. Tunbridge Wells Borough is unable to demonstrate a five year supply of housing. - In the absence of a five year supply of housing, the Development Plan housing supply policies are “out -of-date”. Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that where relevant policies are out-of-date that permission for sustainable development should be granted unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted (and all other material considerations are satisfied). - The site is located within the Limits to Built Development and is also considere d to be located within a sustainable location. Policy H5 (now out of date) of the 2006 Local plan makes provision for redevelopment of redundant sites. The site is previously developed land, the loss of the care home is considered to be justified. - The dwelling mix is considered suitable in relation to the proposed occupier. - The use of the existing access and level of parking on the site would be adequate. - The impact on trees and ecology on the site would be acceptable. - The applicant has agreed to Section 106 contributions and obligations to address the additional demand that would be placed on local services. - It is not considered that there are any environmental issues, or impact on residential amenity, trees or ecology, that could not be satisf actorily addressed through conditions or the S106 Agreement.

INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL The following are considered to be material to the application: Contributions (to be secured through Section 106 legal agreement/unilateral undertaking): - Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub £8,787.25 - NHS contribution £ 19,260 - Adult and Youth recreation of £ 56,800.75 - Commuted sum for Affordable housing £583,500 Net decrease in numbers of jobs: 1 site caretaker would be provided as part of the scheme. However, the operation of the now vacant care home would have provided employment . The building is now vacant and the site is no longer operational and therefore provid ing employment. Estimated average annual workplace salary spend in Borough through net increase in

Page 945 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018 numbers of jobs: N/A The following are not considered to be material to the application: Estimated annual council tax benefit for Borough: £3,992 Estimated annual council tax benefit total: £39,920 Annual New Homes Bonus (for first 4 years): £26,000 Estimated Loss of annual business rates benefits for Borough: £347 REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Thi s proposal comprises more than twenty dwellings and is recommended for approval and therefore is reported to Planning Committee as required by the Council’s constitution. WARD Pantiles & St Marks PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Beechcroft Developments Ltd N/A AGENT Savills (UK) Ltd. DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 30/08/17 07/07/17 07.07.17 & 15.11.18 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): Planning Application Extensive history including works to trees, extensions and refurbishment to the care home. History in relation to the buildings on the site can be summarised as follows; Reference Proposal Decision Date 00/02106/FUL Part demolition and extension of existing Grant 16/02/01 residential care home and full refurbishment.

99/00001/FUL Two new conservatories, access ramps and Grant 22/02/99 associated landscaping

98/00672/FUL Single storey extension for new day centre for 15 Grant 06/08/98 persons

MAIN REPORT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The application site is located on the busy Frant Road, located to the south side of Tunbridge Wells. The site is occupied by a vacant care home and comprises a large, deep care home, orientated north to south, on the western part of the application site. To the south east corner, there is a two storey dwelling, part of the site, and the site managers dwelling.

1.02 To the north, south and west, there are residential properties of a large, detached, character. The Rugby club is located to the east, beyond the Frant Road. There is a detached neighbour to the south side of the site, that fronts onto the Frant Road and is modern and two storeys in height.

1.03 The detached dwelling (No.66), within the site, faces away from the main road and faces into the site. This dwelling, along with the main care home on the site, are vacant. There is a large beech tree in the grounds of Number 66. The site is

Page 1046 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

enclosed by mature landscaping and trees, and protected from long views from public vantage points. It is only the trees to the south western boundary that are protected by a Tree Preservation Order, the Beech tree does not appear to be covered nor are the trees to the north and western boundaries, however, the eastern boundary trees are protected by virtue of their location within the Conservation Area.

1.04 Levels rise up towards the south, there being some 2m difference in land levels between the height of the southern boundary and tarmac within the existing site. .

1.05 The neighbouring property to the south, immediately abuts the site, and has a first floor window that appears to be obscure glazed. The dwelling has velux roof lights on the side extension facing the site.

1.06 When viewed from outside of the site in Waterfield, protected trees on the southern boundary are visible. Dwellings on this boundary are large, link attached dwellings, similar dwellings are located west. Unobscured windows face the site from the west, and gardens abut the site.

1.07 Close boarded fencing bounds the southern boundary, and north west boundary. There is thick tree screen around the site and heavy landscaping.

1.08 The wider character of the area is one of two storey residential development, in landscaped grounds. Double yellow lines, line the Frant Road, outside of the site. There are bus stops either side of Frant Road, in the vicinity of the site.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 The proposal seeks permission for the demolition of the existing care home and detached dwelling on the site and replacement with a residential scheme of 26 dwellings comprising three-storey apartments containing 12 units of accommodation, three two storey terrace blocks providing 12 houses, one flat over car port spaces and one two storey, detached lodge.

2.02 The scheme would provide 12 two bed bedroom plus study, dwellings, in the form of two storey terrace dwellings. There would be an additional 12 two bed, plus study, units provided within the apartment building. A four bed, plus study, unit would be provided in the form of a detached two storey dwellings and a 2 bed flat would be provided above the car port.

2.03 The existing access onto Frant Road would be improved to serve the development, with 34 parking spaces provided in the centre of the site.

2.04 The dwellings would be set amongst landscaped grounds, with protected trees being largely retained. One C category tree is proposed for removal – T28 Hawthorn. This tree is stated to be compromised by being over-run with ivy growth, and not desirable for retention. As good arboricultural practice the additional removal of the U category trees T30 - 33 is recommended within the Arboricultural report.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-) Site Area 0.70 Hectares 0.70 Hectares No change Land use(s) including floor area(s) 1,453.6 26 units +26 Number of jobs 1 0 -1

Page 1147 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Car parking spaces (inc. disabled) 15 34 +19 Cycle spaces 0 25 25 No. of storeys Max. 2 Max 3 +1 Max height 7.8m to ridge 12.2m to ridge + 4.4m (care home) (apartment block). Units 1 -4, 5-8 & 9-12 Max 8.5m Unit 25 6.5m Unit 26 8.2m Max eaves height 5.2m (care 7-8.2m +3m home) (apartment building) Units 1 -4 5-8 & 9-12 Max 5.6m Unit 25 4.2m Unit 26 5.6m No. of residential units Care home C2 26 +26 separate Use Class units No. of bed spaces 38 80 +42 No. of affordable units None None (Off site No Change contribution offered or 2 units – see report)

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

- Potential Archaeological Importance Moat Farm, St Marks Road, T Wells (An area of potential Archaeological importance is located to the west of the site, surrounding the Moat. This area overlaps into the western part of the site.) - Area of Special Advert Control Area Of Special Advert Control (proposal is for residential development and therefore this constraint is not applicable). - Ashdown Forest Ashdown Forest 15 Km Habitat Regulation Assessment Zone – (located within the 9 to 10 km zone for Ashdown Forest SAC/SPA)) - Conservation Area Tunbridge Wells (located along the eastern boundary of the site, along the Frant Road). (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990) - Inside the Limits to built development (the LBD is located further south of the site, along St Mark’s Road). - Tree Preservation Order - protected tree belt located to the south side of the site – adjoin the rear gardens of Waterfield. - Wind Turbine Development Consultation Ar Biggin Hill Airport

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework 2018 (NPPF): National Planning Practice Guidance 2018 (NPPG):

Development Plan: Site Allocations Local Plan Adopted 2016 Policy AL/STR 1: Limits to Built Development

Page 1248 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 : - EN1 – Development Control Criteria - EN5 – Development within or affecting Conservation Areas - EN10 – Sites affecting Archaeological Interest - EN13 – Protected trees - H2 – Small and Intermediate Sized dwellings - H5 – Residential Development within the LBD - TP4 – Access to the Road network - TP5 – Vehicle parking standards - TP 9 Cycle parking - R2 – Recreation open space in development of more than 10 bedspaces - CS4 – Development contributions to school provision for developments over 10 bedspaces.

Supplementary Planning Documents; - Affordable Housing 2007 - Recreation Open Space SPD 2006 - Renewable Energy SPD update (2016) - Local Heritage Asset SPD - Contaminated Land SPD (2016)

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

3 sites notices were erected on 08/06/17, one sited on a lamppost within Waterfield, one in front of number 8 Waterfield and one to the front of the site on Frant Road. The application was also advertised in the press on the 16.06.2017 that expired 07.07.2017.

6 objections received from 6 addresses, summarised as set out below.

Residential amenity Concern raised that the changes in levels on the site, use of obscure glazing and boundary treatments would not protect privacy; Concerns raised regarding loss of light; Border along the rear gardens with Moat Farm should be stronger; New block should be started from a lower level as possible; Concern that the 3 storey height of the apartment block and sideways views would result in overlooking; Apartment block should be 2 – 2 ½ storeys in height; Concern raised at the position of the terrace housing and the balcony’s .

Character Consideration should be given to the height of the apartment block.

Parking and Access Insufficient parking spaces for residents and visitors;

Page 1349 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

If permitted, enforcement resources should be committed to prevent infringements and dangers; Consideration should be given to improve vehicular access from Frant Road/A267 when turning right into 68 Frant Road from a southerly direction.

Trees T30 appears healthy and suitable to be retained; No plans for landscaping, maintenance and restoring trees.

Refuse Store Currently sited where it could cause odour and attract vermin, request the bin store is moved away from the fence/border; No refuse plans pre, during or post build.

Ecology Concern that the ecological survey was carried out after a dry winter and not under optimal conditions as the report states; There is an abundance of reptiles on the site – a further survey should be considered.

Other matters What assurances are there that the proposed age restriction of the development would not change; Concern that noise and dust will be created during the construction phase and that there would be issues regarding security. The opportunity should be taken to upgrade the pavement fronting the development and then relocate the bus stop, setting it back from the road; Crossing point outside the rugby club should be upgraded; A healthy beech tree was removed in 2014; aerial photographs should be taken and held on file together with a new tree survey to prevent a similar occurrence. Other Matters have been raised including the loss of value to neighbouring dwellings, which is not a planning matter.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency 7.01 05.06.2017 - No comments to make on this planning application as it falls outside the EA’s remit as a statutory planning consultee.

Kent Police 7.02 15.06.2017 – No objection raised and an informative or condition is requested, although to date the applicant/agent has not communicated with Kent Police. It is noted that reference is made to the NPPF within the planning statement – but there has been no communication. There is merit in pre-application meetings. Kent Police would be grateful if the applicant’s attention could be drawn to the Kent Design Initiative.

7.03 The use of a condition or an informative would address statutory duties under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1988 and show a clear audit trail for Design for Crime Prevention and Community safety.

Southern Water 7.04 23.06.2017 – No objections raised to the scheme. Initial indications indicated that Southern Water can provide foul sewage disposal to service the development.

Page 1450 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Southern Water requires a formal application for a connection to the public sewer to be made by the applicant or the developer.

7.05 A request is made that should this application receive planning approval, an informative is included indicating that a formal application is required and the relevant contact details.

7.06 The Council’s Building Control officers or technical staff should be asked to comment on the adequacy of soakaways to dispose of surface water from the proposed development. It is requested that a condition is attached to any consent regarding the need for submission of details of the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage disposal, to be submitted to and approved in writing in consultation with Southern Water.

7.07 The applicant should also be advised that a wastewater grease trap should be provided on kitchen waste pipe or drain installed and maintained by the owner or operator of the premises. Should any sewer be found during construction works, an investigation of the sewer will be required to ascertain its condition, number of properties served and potential means of access before any further works commence on site. The applicant is advised to contact Southern Water.

Scottish Gas 7.08 No comments received.

UK Power Network 7.09 09.06.2017 – No objections to the proposed works.

Upper Medway Internal Drainage Board 7.10 No comments received.

Wealden District Council 7.11 12.06.2017 – No objections raised subject to comments that can be summarised as follows; when the Council assess the application under “The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010” as the ‘competent authority’ the principal issues of concern would be air quality on sensitive roads over the Ashdown Forest (SAC) and the additional recreational pressures to the Ashdown Forest Special Protection Area (SPA). Your attention is drawn to regulation 61 of the 2010 Habitat Regulations. WDC considers it essential that such an assessment is made, and the effects of all the plans and projects, both approved and proposed, are taken into account in the assessment (i.e. and in combination assessment).

7.12 A ‘competent authority’ before deciding to undertake, or give any consent, permission for, a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either along or in combination with other plans or projects) must make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of t he site’s conservation objectives.

7.13 Subject to the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council as competent authority (under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010) giving this proposal appropriate consideration under these regulations, no objections are raised.

KCC County Archaeologist 7.14 04.07.2018 – No objections raised to the scheme. The site of the application lies close to a medieval moated complex which was expanded in the post medieval period. Remains associated with this high status residence may be revealed in the

Page 1551 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

development site and a condition is recommended on any consent to secure details of a watching brief to be undertaken.

KCC Highways 7.15 21.11.18 - 11.12.17 – confirmation received that plan (6205A) demonstrates access and turning for the 11.4m refuse vehicle and as such address previous recommendation for refusal of the application. Conditions recommended regarding securing the improved access as per the revised plan Granville Plan 6205A – prior to commencement, access to be in a bound material and drained within the curtilage of the site and no gates to be erected. Conditions also recommended regarding provision and retention of parking spaces as shown and a CMP is required. Two informatives are required regarding works to the highway that require separate consent of the highway authority prior to the commencement of works on site and the longer informative regarding any works affecting any highway land. Layout is not to an adoptable standard and KCC Highways would be grateful for confirmation as to the developers intentions regarding adoption, notice should be served on the highway authority to confirm that the scheme will remain privately in perpetuity.

7.16 15.09.17 – KCC Highways confirmed that the highway authority would expect a development of this scale in this sensitive location on the network to accommodate all vehicles which are likely to serve the site and this includes refuse and confirm access, parking and turning arrangements are inadequate as shown.

7.17 21.07.2017 – Initial comments noted the some of the details of the redevelopment scheme are not acceptable to the highway authority.

7.18 Frant Road, the A267, is identified in the local plan as a primary distributor route and carries a significant volume of traffic. The site is in close proximity to the junction with Forest Road where there is a high level of turning movements and the right turn lane extends towards the access to the site and there are also bus stops in close proximity.

7.19 The highway authority would expect a development of this scale, in this sensitive location on the network to accommodate all vehicles which are likely to serve the site and this includes the refuse vehicle. The highway authority is working closely with TWBC to improve flows on the arterial routes into the town, including for sustainable modes, and development must take responsibility to ensure that it does not overspill activity to the highway and create future hazards.

7.20 Revisions are therefore required so that the internal layout of the site can accommodate the refuse vehicle. Without such provision the highway authority would recommend refusal on the basis that the scheme has not made adequate provision for the service vehicles and is likely to create additional hazards on the highway.

7.21 It is not clear as to whether the scheme is to be put forward for adoption and attention is drawn to the KDG which sets out the design criteria for a shared surface. A number of details including provision of margin strips and lighting will need to be addressed if the scheme is to be put forward. It is also commented that the TS does not give the details of the typical levels of activity associated with the existing use as this would assist in placing the current proposals in context of the existing use.

KCC Lead Flood Authority 7.22 23.06.2017 – No objection raised to the scheme subject to conditions. The Planning Application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment prepared by Granville May

Page 1652 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

2017. The drainage strategy utilises permeable pavement with discharge to the surface water sewer in Frant Road. No ground investigation has been undertaken. From our available desk information the site is shown to be the Ashdown Beds which are anticipated to be compatible for infiltrating drainage measures. We would expect that the feasibility of infiltration on the site is properly investigated prior to undertaking detailed design and it is utilised to the full extent before discharging to the sewer in Frant Road.

7.23 Notwithstanding the comments above, should your Authority be minded to grant permission to these proposals, we would therefore suggest that the following conditions are attached: SuDs, Implementation, maintenance and management of the SuDs scheme and condition covering management of SuDs where infiltration is to be used.

KCC Planning Applications 7.24 February 2018 - Revised request £50,691.00 for primary education, £62, 757.00 for secondary education and £8,787.25 towards the Tunbridge Wells cultural Hub.

7.25 05.06.2017 – Financial request for primary and secondary sums – £50,691.00 towards additional classroom at Broadwater Down Primary school and £35,986.95 towards the expansion at Bennett Memorial school. £8,787.25 towards the Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub – the Adult Education Element. Informative requested regarding installation of a High Speed fibre optic Broadband.

KCC Minerals and Waste Planning Policy 7.26 23.06.2017 – No objection raised

TWBC Conservation 7.27 Verbal updated, it is agreed that there would be less than substantial harm to the heritage assets.

7.28 30.06.17 – The application documents have been reviewed and in general the Conservation Officer is happy with the design ethos chosen and the general layout within the site. However, some reservations are expressed regarding the massing and height of the three storey block which would dominate the site.

The Conservation Officer comments that this element to be harmful to the character of the area, being mostly two storey. The site however lies outside the conservation area boundary and the development as a whole is unlikely to have a detrimental impact upon its setting.

7.29 The site is in close proximity to a scheduled monument, it is suggested that the county archaeologist is contacted for advice in this regard.

TWBC Trees 7.30 Updated comments 26.09.18 – plans reviewed along with the recent comments of the arboricultural consultant - whilst there are still some concerns , it is not considered that they amount to a sustainable objection and therefore no tree objections are raised to the proposal. If the proposal were to be approved, it is recommended that a condition is applied to say that it should be carried out in accordance with the submitted AMS and TPP , and that a system of arboricultural supervision be carried out in accordance with the recommendations in the AMS.

7.31 Updated comments 6.12.17 – note that changes have been made to the layout to move the bocks mentioned further away from the trees, concern still raised regarding

Page 1753 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

the proximity of these dwellings to the trees that the trees will cause pressures because of shading due to the proximity and orientation, especially given the small garden areas.

7.32 29.08.2017 – There are trees around the site boundaries. Those on the south boundary are protected by TPO, those on the east boundary are protected by virtue of being in the conservation area, those on the North boundary are not protected. The trees are described in the AIA accompanying the application.

7.33 The proposal is to demolish the nursing home and construct housing. Most of the trees would be retained. The AIA is very comprehensive, and includes a good TPP and suitable AMS which allows for arboricultural supervision at all the key stages. If the proposal were to be approved the tree officer would be satisfied if these formed a part of the approved documents. If adherence to them was conditioned then good tree protection would be obtained. The tree officer is also satisfied with the tree pruning and removal specified.

7.34 However, concerns have been raised regarding the proximity of the fronts of the proposed units 01-04 and 05-12 to the trees on the boundaries, which are protected by CA status and TPO respectively. Para 3.14 of the AIA states that as the new buildings would be a little further away than the existing, no pressures are anticipated. The tree officer comments that this may not be the case. The use of the former building was markedly different from the proposed residential use. This is compounded by the fact that units 02-04 have trees to the rear as well, and that units 05-12 have no useable recreation space to the rear. It is considered likely that there would be pressure to prune trees because of shading. It may not be fair or realistic to rely on a TPO to protect trees from any pressure in the long term.

7.35 No particular concerns are raised regarding the proximity of trees to other units on the site. Any services into the site should be installed to NJUG specification. In terms of landscaping, subject to details on species (which trees and their location), the tree officer is generally satisfied, although more screening behind 19 Moat Park would be beneficial. Conclusion – concerns raised for the reasons specified above. If minded to approve, standard conditions to be applied if approved, Arb method statement (as submitted), Tree Protection (as submitted), soft landscaping (more detail needed) and services to be installed to NJUG specifications.

TWBC Landscape & Biodiversity Officer 7.36 09.08.2017 – Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 18 th April 2017 and Protected Species Survey Report 4 th June 2017 GreenLink Ecology - Reports have been prepared by suitable professionals to a recognised methodology and as such the findings are accepted. A small number of common species of bats were found to be roosting on site and so suitable mitigation under a licence will be required. The L & B Officer sees no reason why a licence would not be granted in this case.

7.37 The report recommends that as part of the mitigation a scheme of bat boxes are incorporated into the building which can be secured by condition. As mitigation measures are also required at the demolition stage, it would be appropriate to seek a scheme of mitigation enhancement for biodiversity as part of a single pre-demolition condition. This would cover a scheme of bird and bat boxes for the buildings, some measures within the grounds as well as measures during demolition.

7.38 Landscape proposals Drawing BEE20873 11A Rev A ACD Environmental – this drawing shows hard and soft landscaping. Hard landscaping concept and materials would be acceptable although the pedestrian crossing on the Frant Road should

Page 1854 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

probably be tarmac rather than blocks. General principles are acceptable but there is some concern regarding tree species in that there is a lack of native species and a lack of a tree of any substantial mature size. Sorbs aria ‘Majestica advised against, preference to see Sorbus aucuparia and native birch, Betula Pendula. Further details would be required with regards to more detailed plans but this can be secured by standard landscape conditions.

7.39 Comment is made on the appearance of the use of false chimneys, and only incorporating and encouraging their use in support of the wood fuel industry. Quality detailing required.

TWBC Environmental Officer 7.40 23.11.18 – confirmation received that the Environmental Officer is satisfied with conditions to improve the sustainability of the development, including Travel plan, electric vehicle charging points, renewable energy technologies, water conservation, energy conservation and installation of low Nox boilers.

7.41 24.07.2017 – Application could not be supported until queries are addressed – regarding energy – it is questioned whether the balance of reduction could be altered to the same effect such that energy efficiency measures result in a 9% reduction and renewable energy technology creates a further 10% reduction. This would create the same 19% reduction overall but prioritise a fabric first approach as best practice. However, it is noted that the applicant is proposing to reduce baseline emissions by 2.7% followed by a 17% reduction using renewable energy technology, this is in line with the Renewable Energy SPD and associated 2016 update.

7.42 Page 14 of the Sustainability Statement, the applicant makes reference to achieving the Building Regs optional tighter water consumption target. However they are referring to the mandatory target of 125ipppd rather than the tighter target of 105lpppd. The applicant is asked to confirm which figure they will be using.

7.43 Regarding sustainable transport, the developer might like to consider whether allocating a parking bay for a car club vehicle and/or providing infrastructure for electric vehicle charging (cabling and plug in sockets) would be feasible.

TWBC Client Services 7.44 No objections raised, comment that it is not clear whether the refuse shown is for the flats or houses. The concerns given by KCC Waste and Transportation are noted and the requirement for the specified 11.4mt refuse freighter vehicle should be able to enter a site, turn within the site to carry out collections and exit in forward gear onto the highway. Aware of the comments from KCC Highways and delays cause if the collecting vehicle stands stationary on the highway. Bins to be purchased through TWBC.

TWBC Environmental Health 7.45 12.06.2017 & 28.11.17 – No objections raised subject to conditions. It is noted that the site is near to a busy road leading to potential for road traffic noise to affect residential units.

7.46 The current and former use of the site gives rise for potential for land contamination to have been caused.

7.47 The site is not within the air quality management area but the overall scale of the development is such that it should include measures to mitigate its impact on emissions.

Page 1955 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

7.48 Conditions requested relate to the following – Land contamination, internal and external noise levels, Emissions Factor Toolkit, 1 publically accessible EV rapid charge point, and Code of Construction practice.

TWBC Parking 7.49 05.06.2017 – No specific objection to the proposal, although there are a number of potentially misleading statements in the TS that calls into question some of the conclusions, particularly in relation to car use and parking provision.

7.50 IGN 3 is the most current Kent based guidance on parking provision and is some 9 years old. Car ownership has continued to rise, particularly in the south east and there are a number of instances where inadequate on-site provision (where parking levels were dictated by IGN 3 or its predecessor) in new development which have caused problems on nearby streets. Whilst this may not happen here because of the nature of the surrounding area, and the extent of on street parking control, it would still be preferable to see a higher level of on-site provision to allow for visitors etc.

7.51 No mention is made of on-street parking controls adjacent to the site and whilst these could be argued as potentially ensuring no adverse impact on safety or movement, the counter to that is that they provide no opportunity for legal overspill parking nearby in situations where on-site provision cannot cope with demand.

TWBC Housing 7.52 23.04.18, 04.05.18, 28.06.18, 14.09.18, 04.12.18 Confirmation received that the contribution of £583,500 towards off site provision would be a better solution to meeting housing need. Potentially offering a subsidy of 55-60k per unit for 9 social rented homes. The two on site units suggested for discounted market sale would be very difficult to secure in perpetuity and the demand for this type of housing is unknown. In addition, the service charges at £3000 per year would not be affordable. However, this sum should be secured much earlier in the development than the proposal of 80% market occupation. The issue of triggers at the point in which the affordable contribution is secured will need to be discussed. 980 households are waiting for affordable/rented housing and the funds need to be secured early on.

7.53 The commuted sum offered for off site provision for affordable housing can be utilised by TCHG to assist in the provision of affordable housing units on their garage sites in the Borough. The amount is enough because the sites are in the ownership of the Housing Association and therefore site purchase is not applicable. These schemes already have planning permission and collection of the sum would need to be at an early stage following consent.

7.54 Comments received from the Housing Register and Development Manager can be summarised as follows; Queries the implications of the revised NPPF regarding vacant building credit, acknowledgement that the affordable housing requirement would be decreased to 4 units. Not seen it used in Tunbridge Wells. If accepted – the units should be rounded to 5 units. Preference would be for the units on site rather than off site due to the high need for affordable housing across all age groups. Suggest the applicant asks the RP’s whether they would take them on.

Page 2056 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Comments on the non provision on site, centre around the decrease in values of the market housing and that the downsizers would not want affordable housing there as it won’t fit the product. A viability assessment would be required to run the scenario on and off site. TWBC do not have formula for off site contribution currently, this is negotiated on a site by site basis. As regards the numbers of units, it would be important to see the applicant has contacted local providers to prove the point. TCHG may particularly be interested. They are unlikely to take as four units in the flats and developer unlikely to provide as houses. On site provision should not be sought as four houses units within the block would be difficult to manage from a RSL perspective, and this type of housing as a rented home can prove unaffordable (affordable rents charged by RP’s are set at 80% of the open market value). Service charge is also likely to be expensive in this type of block designed for older people. Due to the need for affordable housing – there are approximately 1000 households on the TWBC housing register waiting for social housing, we should insist a suitable offer towards off site affordable housing is made. Housing need taken from the housing register shows local need in Tunbridge Wells, Showfields and Ramslye. It is accepted that there is a need to provide for the ageing population and the need for affordable housing is high too. It is not clear whether the whole site is to be age restricted but there is a need for downsizing accommod ation for the over 55’s who are renting from an RP too so potentially the affordable housing could be age restricted too. TCHG have confirmed that the sum proposed could only provide one x two bed house off site assuming 65K for land and £150,000 for the build cost. Approximately £800,000 would be required to build four homes.

TWBC Parks 7.55 23.11.2018 - Confirmation received that the Adult and Youth contribution could be allocated towards Hawkenbury and would not exceed the five contributions.

NHS West Kent Clinical Commissioning Group 7.56 03.10.17 & 21.02.2018 – Following comments that no objection was raised but the would need to seek a healthcare contribution, further clarification has been received that the application for funds was made for the healthcare contribution for a single site (Rowan Tree Surgery) which is the branch surgery of Clanricarde Medical Practice. This is the practice that would be directly impacted by the expected population growth from this development and as a result would need investment as detailed in the original application to support the new patient registrations.

7.57 It is confirmed that this practice has not had any other monies identified for projects. Due to the time lapse between the application for the contribution and money being available, and could be 5-10 years away, the exact project is not therefore specified and it is likely that the practice will have accepted new patients from this development by this time, or taken the decision not to accept new patients registrations which would means these potentially would need to be assigned which it is hoped to be avoided.

7.58 Any increase in the local population has an impact on provision of health care and the CCG would seek to apply this S106 contribution to meet the extra demands placed upon primary and community health service and to meet the needs of this population. The existing and general practices are under considerable pressure and it not possible simply to absorb an additional influx of population. In addition many

Page 2157 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

of the surgery premises are not suitable for extension and new premises may need to be found.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS The applicant’s supporting comments can be summarised as follows; The site is located within an urban location, it is not located within the Green Belt or an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is classified as being within Flood Zone 1. The eastern edge of the site falls within the most southerly point of the Broadwater Down/Frant Road character area of the Royal Tunbridge Wells CA. There are no listed buildings on or adjacent to the site, however, beyond the adjacent row of dwellings to the west, there is a scheduled ancient monument known as The Moat. The site consists of a former care home and separate detached two storey house. The site is screened from Frant Road and neighbouring properties by a number of mature trees and hedgerows along the perimeter of the site with dense foliage providing a high level of screening. The site is brownfield as such redevelopment would accord with NPPF Core Policies. The scheme would be Georgian in style, in keeping with the character of surrounding properties and the wider Tunbridge Wells Area. The part 2.5 and part 3 storey central block has been positioned centrally on the site in order to minimise the potential for overlooking, with only the central part of the building achieving 3 storey height before reducing to 2.5 storey’s at the wings. Gardens are to be shared amenity space, and will be maintained by a management company in order that they are maintained to a continually high standard (with the exception of the area around the two storey residential lodge). The entrance and the area that falls within the CA will be retained in its current form, with the proposals addressing the building line that is present along Frant Road and being of a similar height and scale to adjoining properties. This will ensure the setting of the Conservation Area is maintained and unharmed. The site will retain its existing access arrangements off Frant Road. 34 parking space are to be provided that would exceed the minimum standards set out in the KCC parking standards guidance. According to policy TP9 25 cycle parking spaces are required and these would be provided and split between two shelters on the site. The change from a Care Home (C2) to housing (C3) would not negatively impact upon the provision of C2 use within TW Borough. The previous use as a care home had ceased due to a lack of viability and the building has remained dormant for over 12 months. The building fabric is very dated and requires very significant investment and over the modest size of the care home (38 beds) is not a viable size for a modern care home operation. Utilisation of the site as C3 accommodation specifically aimed at the downsizing market would ensure that there is no net loss of accommodation for the ageing population and would represent a positive contribution towards meeting a local housing need identified in the 2015 SHMA. The development seeks to meet a specific need in the provision of housing in Tunbridge Wells that has been identified not only colloquially but also quantifiably by way of the SHMA. The provision of two bedroom units through this scheme meets an identified current and future need that is supporting policy and shown to be present in the SHMA. Policy H2 is considered out of date with current housing needs and does not consider the downsizing market. The Housing White Paper February 2017 recognises that the downsizing needs of the existing population have been overlooked.

Page 2258 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

An Arboricultural Survey has been conducted and identifies high quality trees on the eastern, southern and northern boundaries, and states that there is scope for the development of the site whilst retaining the high quality trees. The scheme has been developed in accordance with the tree report and will retain the identified high quality trees. Ecological Surveys recommend mitigation that has been incorporated into the scheme design. A Transport Statement ascertained that the proposed development will generate a very modest volume of trip generation in peak hours, equivalent to approx. one vehicular trip every 5 minutes, and less over the course of the day, traffic impact is not considered a material consideration in the proposals. A Flood and Risk Statement and Surface Water Drainage Strategy found the site is low risk and can be safely developed without increasing flood risk elsewhere. The drainage report recommends that the site follow a drainage regime of the existing site and discharge into the public sewer, and that sufficient space for SuDs had been included in the master plan – this approach has been adopted.

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 50 – Site location Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 55 Rev D – Proposed site layout FD 16 - 1430 - P- 150 Rev A Plots 1-4 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 151 Rev A Plots 1-4 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 152 Rev A Plots 1-4 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 155 Rev A Plots 1-4 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 156 Rev A Plots 1-4 Rear Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 157 Rev A Plots 1-4 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 160 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 161 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 162 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 165 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 166 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Rear Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 167 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 170 Plots 13-24 Ground and first Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 171 Plots 13-24 Second floor and roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 175 Plots 13-24 Front and right flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 176 Plots 13-24 Rear and left flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 180 Plot 25 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 185 Plot 25 Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 190 Plot 26 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 195 REV B Plot 26 Elevations

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 700 Rev A - Proposed site sections (1) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 701 Rev A - Proposed site sections (2) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 702 Rev A Proposed site sections (3)

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 60 Existing care home elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 60 Existing care Photos FD 16 - 1430 - P- 61 Existing care Ground floor plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 62 Existing care first floor plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 65 Existing care Existing lodge

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 200 Existing site sections (1) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 201 Existing site sections (2)

Page 2359 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 202 Existing site sections (3)

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 51 Existing Site layout FD 16 - 1430 - P- 52 Removals Plan

DAT/9.0 Site survey BEE20873 01C Tree Reference Plan BEE20873 03A Tree Protection Plan BEE20873 11D Landscape proposals 8161058/6505A Swept Path Analysis

Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement (with written Statement). Tree Report Planning Statement Design and Access Statement P4 Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement Soft Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan Soft Landscape Specification Flood risk Statement Foul Water Drainage and Utilities Assessment Transport Statement Energy Statement Sustainability Statement Heritage Statement Phase 1 Geo- Environmental Assessment Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 18.04.2017 Statement of Community Involvement Viability statements

10.0 APPRAISAL

Principle of Development 10.01 The site is located within the LBD of Tunbridge Wells, Policy H5 of the 2006 Local Plan makes it clear that infill and redevelopment for residential development would be acceptable, providing that the comprehensive development of the site would not be prejudiced (which is not the case here). However, policy H5 could be argued to be out of date as the Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply. Notwithstanding this, new development is encouraged within the LBD and larger towns, to ensure a managed and sustainable delivery of housing. The re-development of this brownfield site would accord with the spatial strategy set out in the 2010 Core Strategy.

Housing land Supply 10.02 The appeal decision at Land at Common Road, Sissinghurst was issued 21/03/16, where it was concluded that in relation to the objectively assessed need (at that time) that applying “the Council’s preferred backlog, buffer and claimed deliverable supply against the SHMA figure of 648 per year results in a supply of only 2.5 years of housing land”. Recent changes in the NPPF and NPPG demonstrate a housing supply of 4.46 years with 20% buffer.

10.03 Para.11 of the 2018 NPPF states that where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out of date, permission should be granted unless:

Page 2460 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

i. The application of policies in this Framework (listed in footnote 6) that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or ii. Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework when taken as a whole.

10.04 Footnote 7 of para 11 states that this includes, for applications involving the provision of housing, situations where the LPA cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites (with the appropriate buffer). This is relevant in this case. Whilst the site is located within the urban boundary, the policies in relation to the supply of housing are considered to be out of date and therefore the relevant consideration in this case is whether or not the proposal would represent a sustainable form of development, having regard to local planning policies and the NPPF. In this case, point i, sets out that the presumption will not apply where assets of importance provides a clear reason for refusal, the application site has potential to impact upon a heritage assets, through the archaeological potential of the site and the proximity to the Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area.

10.05 The issue of sustainability is multi faceted, incorporating a) social, b) economic and c) environmental considerations, as set out in paragraph 8 of the NPPF. It is often necessary to weigh certain attributes against each other in order to arrive at a balanced position.

Locational sustainability 10.06 The site is located at the edge but within the LBD of the main urban area. New development is encouraged within the LBD and larger towns, to ensure a managed and sustainable delivery of housing. Tunbridge Wells is a Tier one settlement, as identified in the Core Strategy, with all the amenities and facilities associated with that status. It is recognised that there would be an incline for future residents to walk to the site, however, there is a bus stop in close proximity to the proposed development, on the Frant Road and on the western side of the road.

10.07 As the site is Previously Developed Land (PDL), which is encouraged for redevelopment in the NPPF, this would be a benefit, weighing in favour of the proposal. The 2010 Local Plan recognises the need to make best use of land and buildings within the LBD, but also, as a result of the coverage of AONB and MGB in the Borough, the Core Strategy sets a target of 65% of new dwellings to be located on previously developed sites.

Housing and economic considerations 10.08 In this case the site is considered to be in a sustainable position in relation to the strategy for the location of development throughout the Borough and would accord with the aims of the NPPF to provide for a range of housing and would boost the supply of housing, and would contribute to the social element of sustainable development. The loss of the care home, whilst a negative in terms of the economic arm of sustainable development, would boost the supply of housing, specifically aimed at a higher age group in this case.

10.09 Paragraphs 59 and 61 of the NPPF make it clear that local planning authorities should assess, and reflect in planning policy, the needs of groups with specific housing requirements such as older people and people with disabilities.

10.10 The proposal seeks to provide housing for a specific need, (that is more in keeping with the character of a C3 residential use). Whilst 38 beds would be lost in

Page 2561 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

redeveloping the care home, the building has stood vacant for some 12 months at the time the application was submitted. The Planning Statement sets out that the building fabric is dated and requires very significant investment. The modest size of the care home is not considered to be a viable size for a modern care home operation. It is considered that 60 beds is generally acknowledged as a minimum scale for a viable care home operation.

10.11 At present, records indicate that since 2012, some 442 beds/extra care units (net) (with an additional 68 beds with a resolution to permit, at Cornford Court) have been permitted. This accounts for a range of care needs, from support on site in self contained accommodation, to traditional bed spaces in care homes. Significant progress has been made towards meeting the indicative number set out in the SHMA (796 bedspaces over the plan period of 2013-33), over the first 6 years and the proposal seeks to address the older persons market. The 2017 SHMA update recognises the role of new models such as extra care housing and comments that an increase in the number may not be required, although there may be an additional need for some specialist groups. The loss of the C2 bedspaces is considered acceptable in the balance of meeting identified needs and the 26 units would count towards meeting the housing shortage.

Affordable Housing 10.12 In terms of affordable housing, the viability of developing this site has been considered at length with the applicant and the Council’s appointed Assessor, Dixon Searle, to reach a point of understanding the development costs and profits of developing this site. This will be dealt with in more detail in the following paragraphs, however, the scheme proposes to make contributions to off site affordable housing and although it is less than the requirement of the policy it does weigh slightly in favour of the scheme.

Whether the NPPF policy on designated heritage assets indicates that development should be restricted and other heritage considerations. 10.13 Paragraphs 189 – 196 of the NPPF refer to matters in relation to heritage assets. The heritage assets of concern in this case are the conservation area that lies to the east of the site and affects the tree line on Frant Road, and the Moat located to the south west of Barnetts. Whilst the Conservation Officer has commented that the massing and height of the apartment block may affect the character of the site, mostly being two storey in height, it is also concluded that the site lies outside the Conservation Area boundary and development as a whole is unlikely to have a detrimental impact upon its setting. The submitted Heritage Statement acknowledges the site lies adjacent to the extreme southern edge of the Conservation area, and that the main importance of this part of the CA is imbued in the details of street furniture along Frant Road and views travelling north towards the Pantiles. Attention is drawn to the fact that the development will comprise remodelling of an existing modern development, consequently the impact on the CA is likely to be neutral.

10.14 The application is supported by a Heritage Statement that comments on The Moat – a Scheduled Monument, four listed buildings in the wider area and the conservation area. The listed buildings do not have direct intervisibility with any of the assets and does not lie immediately within their setting.

10.15 In terms of the Scheduled Monument – The Moat – does it have substantial historic associations with the site. The Heritage Statement comment s the post 1960’s suburban development that surrounds the moated site reduces its setting to the immediate bounds of its former moated surround and is now experienced as an area

Page 2662 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

of woodland within a fenced enclosure surrounded by modern residential development.

10.16 The application has been reviewed by KCC Archaeology who comment that the site of the application lies close to a medieval moated complex which was expanded in the post medieval period. Remains associated with this high status residence may be revealed in the development site and it is recommended that a condition is placed on any forthcoming consent to secure a watching brief to be undertaken by an archaeologist so excavation can be observed. It is recommended that this condition be applied and is set out in section 11 of this report.

10.17 The impact on the scheduled Monument can be addressed through condition. In terms of the impact on the Conservation Area, it can be concluded that the harm would be on the very low end of less than substantial and that para. 196 of the NPPF applies. In such cases, the NPPF Para.196 enables the public benefits to be weighed against the harm. In this case, the Conservation Officer confirms whilst there may be a harmful element to the character of the area, in terms of the conservation area, the development “is unlikely to have a detrimental impact upon its setting”. Para. 190 of the NPPF makes reference to the need to minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation. S .72 of the Planning (listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 asked that proposals preserve or enhance the special character and appearance of the CA.

10.18 The Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area Appraisal sets out that Frant Road differs from Broadwater Down in its function as a main route into the town centre, which inevitably generates a different character. It is acknowledged that there is a mixed character, lacking the quiet Arcadian seclusion of Broadwater Down. It is stated that the primary influence on this difference in character is the busyness of Frant Road as a main route into Tunbridge Wells. Changes to the occupation of the buildings, such as offices and institutional activities taking advantage of the main road locations, has resulted in opening up of boundaries, with the loss of walls and mature garden planting. The buildings have suffered alterations, with some at risk of redevelopment as their original aesthetic appeal has been undermined. The Appraisal states that it is important that such buildings are restored to enhance the conservation area and not replaced by modern substitutes. In this case, the building proposed is modern and not of architectural merit. The proposal would retain the trees fronting onto Frant Road and would retain the existing access. The characteristic green frontage would be retained, which is referred to in the Appraisal as “the essential ingredient of the special character of Broadwater Down”. In view of the above, the proposal, particularly the apartment building, would at least preserve the special character.

10.19 The proposal, when balanced against public benefit, would provide both housing and contributions to off site affordable housing, contributing towards the housing shortage as set out in previous sections of this report, the proposal would also provide housing in accordance with the spatial strategy for housing delivery, whilst using a brownfield site. It is not therefore considered, that the NPPF prohibits development of this site for residential development.

Conclusion in respect to principle of development 10.20 Overall, the proposal comprises sustainable development. The site is strategically positioned in a sustainable location, on PDL land. The scheme would contribute towards the housing need (and need for affordable housing) and with the development located within the LBD. Whilst concern has been raised regarding the massing and height of the proposal, the Conservation Officer has confirmed the

Page 2763 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

development as a whole is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the setting of the conservation area. Having regard to the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the requirements of paragraph 11 of the NPPF, planning permission should therefore be granted unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted, which will be addressed below. The development of the site is therefore considered acceptable in principle. The following sections of the report assess whether the proposal accords with other elements of policy in the NPPF and the Development Plan.

Impact on Visual Amenity and Conservation Area (incorporating design and layout). 10.21 In respect of the visual impact of the scheme, the proposal is to be well set back into the site. The proposal comprises 8 units that would relate to the southern boundary. These would be two storey in height and would be traditional form, in 2 terraces of four units. Whilst chimneys are proposed, the materials schedule could cover the details of the finish of the chimneys, to be of brick rather than plastic GRP that would not respect the historical references. It is considered that this can be addressed through condition. A further four units, in the form of a terrace, set out north to south, in line with the building line set out in Frant Road, is also proposed, that would be of a traditional appearance, with hipped rooves and in the form of a terrace. This terrace would respect the building line set out in Frant road. In addition, the two storey heights of these terraces would respect the predominant character of two storey development in the surrounding area.

10.22 To the north of the site, a detached dwelling is proposed, along with a flat over garage (FOG). These again would stand at two storeys. These dwellings would be located closer to the boundary with the conservation area that is located just within the boundary of the site to the east. To the centre of the site, some 62m set back from the road, it is proposed to erect a three storey building that would comprise 12 apartments. The design makes the use of hips to the roof to reduce the scale of the building.

10.23 The Conservation Officer has reviewed the application and is generally satisfied with the design ethos chosen and the general layout of the site. Some reservations are expressed regarding the massing and height of the proposed three storey block that may dominate the site. However, whilst the Conservation Officer also concludes that this element would cause some harm to the character of the area, which is mostly two storey, it is acknowledged that the site lies outside the conservation area boundary and the development as a whole is unlikely to have a detrimental impact upon its setting. Therefore the level of h arm against the “significance” of the heritage asset could be considered on the low end of the scale of less than substantial’, and in accordance with paragraph 196 of the NPPF, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the scheme.

10.24 The apartment building is to be located within the site and set away from the shared boundaries. Two storey development is positioned to the front of Frant Road and to the south where the development relates closely to existing two storey development, to the south the neighbouring units are located on slightly higher land. The apartment building would not directly relate to the conservation area, the development would be stepped up and away from the edges of the site, making a transition in height of the buildings within the site and surrounding area. Within the wider area, there are 2 ½ -3 storey buildings, not located within the CA, but in the vicinity of it.

Page 2864 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

10.25 On the side flanks, the apartment building would appear as a two storey building with rooflights in the roof. Given the orientation of the building, the design, position within the site and the space that would surround it, it is not considered the proposals would appear unduly out of scale. .Units 1-4 would be set down from the ridge of 70 Frant Road, and the tallest element of the proposal, the apartment block, would be set on the lower part of the site, further north. Land levels are proposed to be conditioned, as set out in the recommendation. On balance it is considered that the height of the proposed building cannot be objected to given the context of the heights and pattern of development in the surrounding area. The site is quite enclosed by mature landscaping, and Waterfield to the south is quite inward looking. The design approach is considered to be appropriate for this location.

10.27 The scheme would equate to 37 dwellings per hectare. The scheme and layout makes provision for a range of dwelling types and units. Paragraph 117 of the NPPF makes it clear that planning policies should “promote effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other use s”, planning policies and decisions should give substantial weight to the value of using suitable brownfield land with settlements and other identified needs. Paragr aph 123 of the NPPF sets out that “Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential for each site”. The proposed development would be at a density that would allow an appropriate buffer to protected and retained trees. The hard and soft landscaping scheme indicates an appropriate balance and the grounds are to be maintained on a communal basis.

10.28 The main approach to the site would be from Frant Road. There are trees along the existing frontage and it is proposed to retain these, and thereby maintaining the existing appearance of the frontage, set within the Conservation Area. The design of the access has been slightly amended, taking the southern side of the access slightly closer to the retained trees to the south of the entrance. It is proposed to condition the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and the Method statement, along with the attached TPP, that will protect the front landscaping. At present there are close boarded fences enclosing the site to the north and north east, with boundary wall to the south. A condition seeking boundary details is set out within the recommendation.

10.29 The design ethos is generally accepted and it is not considered that the design would be poor or harmful to local distinctiveness. Conditions would control the materials, hard and soft landscaping and boundary treatments. The scheme would replace a modern building that is of a functional appearance, without architectural merit. The visual impact of the redevelopment scheme is considered to be acceptable.

Dwelling Mix and amenity of future occupiers 10.30 The scheme would provide 12 two bed bedroom plus study, dwellings, in the form of two storey terrace dwellings. An additional 12 two bed, plus study, units would be provided within the apartment building. A four bed, plus study, unit would be provided in the form of a detached two storey dwellings and a 2 bed flat would be provided above the car port. The proposal would result in 25 two bed dwellings, and 1 four bed dwelling. Whilst there is not a spread of dwelling sizes through the scheme in terms of the number of bedrooms, the proposal would deliver a range of units, from terrace, a flat over garage, one detached lodge and 2 bed apartments. The applicant is a specialist in the retirement market. The units are aimed at downsizing and would be built with features that are directed more towards this market, with the inclusion of wider doors and panic buttons built in. The buildings

Page 2965 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

would be located within shared amenity space that would be managed by a management company in order to ensure a continually high standard.

10.31 The unit sizes are generous, but this accords with the applicants principle of creating homes with plenty of living space and is part of the design philosophy if the applicant. The applicant specifically designs schemes for the down sizing elderly. Core Policy CP6 sets out that size and type of housing should meet current and future needs. The 2018 Housing Need Survey found the majority of older people want to stay in their own homes (63%) with help and support. Around a quarter would consider buying on the open market. “The evidence suggests a need to continue to diversify the range of older persons housing provision. Additionally, providing a wider range of older persons accommodation has the potential to free up larger family accommodation. The majority of older people are opting for independence for as long as possible ”. The proposal would assist in meeting this need. The 2015 Strategic Housing Market Survey comments that the strongest need will be in two and three bed dwellings, which the proposal would accord with.

10.32 Survey data reveal that just over half of older people responding stated they would like to downsize (51%) and 55.6% said they expected to downsize in the next 5 years. Bungalows were the main type of accommodation sought – followed by flats. However the report also acknowledges the need to maximise densities. Paragraph 122 of the NPPF sets out that planning decisions should support development that makes efficient use of the land, taking into account identified need for different types of housing, market conditions and viability, scope to promote sustainable travel modes, and promoting regeneration. In this case the proposal seeks to address a specific market, for which there is a need. The proposed age restriction is controlled within the applicant leases, to over 55 years of age. Whilst there are aspects of the development that relate to C2 use, the scheme would appear more of a C3 Residential use class. The 2018 Housing needs survey concludes there is a lack of choice within the market and this proposal would add to the range of dwelling types and the matter of bedspaces is not considered to warrant refusal in its own right.

S106 Contributions and developer contributions 10.33 Legislation requires that planning obligations (including Legal Agreements) should only be sought where they meet all of the following tests:

- Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; - Directly related to the development and; - Fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the development.

10.34 The requirement for developments to provide or contribute towards the services for which they create a need is set out in Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy and requirements relating to various types of contributions, including education, recreation, transport etc. are referred to in various Core Strategy and Local Plan policies.

10.35 The applicant has agreed to enter into a S106 Agreement for the following developer contributions amounting to £84,848, allowing for:

- Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub £8,787.25 - NHS contribution £ 19,260 - Adult and Youth recreation £ 56,800.75 A commuted sum is offered for the surplus of the agreed viability of;

Page 3066 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

- Commuted sum for Affordable housing £583,500

10.36 The proposal is for age related development, and it is unlikely that children would occupy the site. Whilst the development is more akin to a C3 development, the scheme is designed for older residents, as a retirement living community. It is not therefore considered that the request for education sums, as requested by KCC Education, is reasonable. However, KCC have made a request for a Cultural Hub contribution, that residents are likely to generate demand for the services of, and therefore this sum is considered reasonable. Similarly, the NHS have made a request, the services of which are considered to directly relate to the demand generated by the development. The above sums are considered reasonable and relate to the development.

10.37 Viability has been discussed at length with the applicant and the Borough Council’s independent assessors. The applicant has submitted a viability assessment that has been reviewed, with various iterations, to arrive at an agreed surplus. A number of points have been reviewed, with no significant issues of contention remaining. The approach taken has been accepted and many of the assumptions. The surplus available for affordable housing would be £583,500, with £84,848 for the other contributions set out above. Given the priorities for affordable housing, these sums are considered reasonable, with a slight anomaly of the loss of one bedspace, the adult and youth contribution would be some £719 under the maximum sum that could be requested.

10.38 The applicants stance is that the dwelling houses and apartments have been designed for sale privately and the floor spaces are large, that would affect the proposition of RP’s taking the units on due to affordability. The scheme has large communal garden areas, communal services and a caretaker on site, which results in increased associated service charges. This then affects affordability. Service charges, on average, are £3,000 per annum for similar Beechcroft developments.

10.39 The applicant had assumed their position based on vacant building credit applying. TWBC do not have a policy covering that addresses the parameters of Vacant Building Credit or a formula in terms of applying an off site contribution and therefore the Development Plan is silent on these matters. The NPPF, in paragraph 63 sets out that to support the re-use of brownfield land, where vacant buildings are being re-used or re-developed, any affordable housing contribution due should be reduced by a proportionate amount. Footnote 28 specifies any affordable housing contribution should be reduced by an equivalent amount to the existing gross floorspace. This does not apply to vacant buildings that have been abandoned, in this case the site has been vacant since April 2016. The site has been marketed and it is commented by the applicant that the care home is no longer a viable proposition and would not provide an appropriate standard of care home, in relation to modern standards.

10.40 Notwithstanding the application of vacant building credit, viability of the scheme has been assessed at length and the final sums are the agreed surplus. A similar application for age restricted apartments was approved at the former Council Offices in Cranbrook – that saw the approval of an off site payment in lieu of affordable housing. The applicant also makes reference to a number of other sites where an off site affordable housing contribution was secured, these include 17/01191 Pinewood Court Southborough, 16/504331, Union House Eridge Road, 14/503223 Strawberry Hill House Broadwater Down. Due to viability no affordable housing was

Page 3167 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

provided at the Former Bus depot St Johns Road (17/00731) or the Mount Bishops Down Road (06/00658).

10.41 Whilst the applicant has made a final offer regarding the surplus, as an off site sum, an alternative offer of two units has been made on site. The advice of the Housing Manager is that, by virtue of the ownership of the garage sites that are due to be developed, the Town and Country Housing Group could utilise the sum to assist in the provision of affordable housing units on their garage sites in the Borough. The sum has now been increased since these earlier comments and it was noted that the amount was sufficient was due to the fact some sites are already in the ownership of Town and Country Housing Group and therefore the land purchase cost would not be applicable, which assists in making best use of the sum. The sum would have the potential to deliver more units of affordable housing than the alternative offer of two units on the site.

10.42 The Housing Register and Development Manager ’s comments that the contribution to meeting housing needs – potentially offering a subsidy of 55-60 thousand for 9 social rented homes than the two on site units. It is also confirmed that the service charges would not be affordable for an RP or a tenant. It is therefore considered that the commuted sum would provide a more meaningful contribution.

10.43 Therefore, subject to a S106 to secure the affordable housing, and developer contributions, the above developer contributions are considered acceptable.

Impact on residential amenity 10.44 In terms of the impact on neighbouring amenity, units 1-4 would follow the building line of Frant Road. The block would situated to the north of 70 Frant Road and in line with the front building line. It is not considered that this block would result dominance or loss of light to 70 Frant Road. There would be no first floor windows on the south side flank of the proposed unit number 4, although there would be a garden room (terrace) to the rear of the dwelling. At present the managers dwelling is located to the north of this neighbour, set slightly further back. Number 70 has a single storey side extension that abuts the application site, with two roof lights. There is also a first floor side flank window. However, no windows are proposed in the terrace to the south, facing this neighbour and to the south side of the proposed terrace a 1.8m high privacy screen is to be erected. This, along with the position of the block slightly forward of 70 Frant Road, and the set in of the terrace by 3m from the south flank, is considered to address any concerns regarding the potential for overlooking to the south eastern side.

10.45 To the south western side of the southern boundary, the dwellings at Waterfield abut the site, including gardens and the side flank wall of 5 Waterfield. Within this corner of the side there are protected trees, where the buffer to these trees has been increased to ensure an improved relationship between the trees and future occupiers of the development and increase separation. There would be some 24.5m separation between the rear of Plot 12 and 5 Waterfield and 22m between the proposed terrace and side flank of 5 Waterfield. The separation distances between 6 & 7 Waterfield and the rear of units 5-12 proposed, would be in excess of these separation distances, but being back to back rather than side on. These relationships are considered to be acceptable.

10.46 The other relationship on the southern boundary to consider is the relationship between Plot 5 and 70 Frant Road. At the closest point, there would be 22m between the terrace and this neighbour, but at an oblique angle. There would be a depth of some 19m between the terrace on plot 5 and the southern boundary, given the

Page 3268 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

distance and slightly oblique angle, it is not considered that there would be an unacceptable level of overlooking. The privacy screens can be secured through condition. It is also of noted that there are intervening protected trees that would be retained on this southern boundary that would also serve to reduce the impact on neighbouring amenity. It is also of note that 6 Waterfield stands on higher ground than at the application site. It is not considered that the proposal would result in an unacceptable impact on neighbouring amenity to the south side.

10.47 To the north, there would be a separation distance of some 25.5m from 64 Frant Road. No windows are proposed on the northern flank of 25 other than roof lights and on 26 – one obscure window is proposed at first floor level, which could be secured through condition to be installed and retained as obscure glazing. However the separation distance would be significant. It is not considered that the proposal would result in a loss of light or privacy at the distances proposed.

10.48 In terms of the apartment building, the main relationship to consider is the relationship of proposed building to dwellings to the west. To the north, there would be a separation of some 21.5m to the northern boundary. 62 and 64 Frant Road are set forward of the proposed apartment building. To the east and west, the flank walls would have two windows a ground and two at first floor level, to be obscure glazed and would not therefore result in any overlooking. These would serve bathrooms and secondary windows to the dining area and would not therefore result in a loss of amenity for future occupiers. The rooflights could result in overlooking at second floor level, if not controlled by condition. A condition to control the glass and openable sections of the window is included in recommendation below.

10.49 The proposed apartment building would be situated some 21m to the west of 64 Frant Road and some 20m from the rear of 18 Waterfields. Given these separation distances it is not considered that the proposal would lead to a loss of light to the eastern or western neighbouring properties.

10.50 It is not considered that the proposal would harm neighbouring amenity in terms of loss of light and loss of privacy. With the separation distances proposed, it is not considered that the proposal would dominate neighbouring properties and gardens.

Highways, Access and Parking 10.51 In term of parking and access, the proposal would seek to retain the access in the existing position, but to improve access onto Frant Road, with slight amendments to the alignment of the road to enable access for the 11.4m refuse vehicle to access the site. The layout has been amended to allow this larger refuse vehicle to enter, leave and turn on site. The plans as originally submitted would have been unacceptable as the internal road layout would not accommodate this size of refuse vehicle. Frant Road is an A road, (A267), and is identified in the local plan as a primary distributor route. This road carries a significant volume of traffic. The site is in close proximity to the junction with Forest Road where there is a high level of turning movements and the right turn lane extends towards the access to the site and there are also bus stops in close proximity.

10.52 The highway authority commented that they would expect a development of this scale, in this sensitive location on the network to accommodate all vehicles which are likely to serve the site and this includes the refuse vehicle. The highway authority works closely with the Borough Council to improve flows on the arterial routes into the town, including for sustainable modes, and they considered that the development must take responsibility to ensure that it does not overspill activity to the highway and create future hazards. The applicant has, as a result of these comments, revised

Page 3369 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

the scheme to include an improved layout that demonstrates that the access and turning facilities could accommodate an 11.4m refuse vehicle, clear of the highway. KCC Highways have reviewed this information and comment that the amended layout would overcome the previous concerns. The proposal is considered to accord with Policy TP5 of the 2006 Local Plan.

10.53 The development would generate a requirement for 28 parking spaces at the edge of centre, with 2 spaces for the four bed lodge and 1 space for each unit according the to the IGN Note 3 standard. Thirty four parking spaces are shown to be provided. Whilst it is noted that parking services raise concern regarding pressure for further on street parking, the site is located within the main urban area, with a bus stop outside. Given the edge of centre location and the proximity to services and public transport, along with compliance with IGN note 3 – the level of parking is considered acceptable and would provide some visitor spaces.

10.54 In view of the above, the access and level of parking are considered acceptable.

Impact on Trees, Ecology & Landscape 10.55 There are a number of protected trees on the site, to the east through the Conservation Area status and to the south by way of a Tree Preservation Order. To the north there are a number of unprotected trees. Initially the Tree Officer raised concerns regarding future pressure on the trees, given the proximity of some of the buildings to the trees, particularly to the south side and to the east. As a result the applicant revised the layout, that sees the southern buildings located some 1.5m-2.5m further into the site than originally submitted, away from the boundary trees. The tree officer still has some concern but does not consider that this would amount to a sustainable objection and does not raise an objection to the proposal.

10.56 The scheme proposes to retain the majority of the trees on the site. The only trees that would be lost would be to the north and north west boundary that would result in the loss of two silver birch trees to the north east of the site, one beech, to the north, (T32, 32, & 33), a silver birch to the east (T30) and a Hawthorn (T29) to the middle of the western boundary. All category A and B trees are to be retained, all trees to be removed are in the lower categories, C and U. One category C tree is to be removed, which is a Hawthorn and is proposed for removal due to the tree being compromised by being over-run with ivy growth. The removal of the U category trees is considered to be good arboricultural practice.

10.57 The Tree Officer is satisfied with the comprehensive Arboricultural Impact Assessment with good Tree Protection Plan and Method Statement. A refusal cannot be sustained in respect of the future pressure on trees and it is noted that the grounds will be communally maintained and, due to the target market, the intended function of the gardens will be mainly a visual one rather than active use or cultivation – as part of the lease tenants will not be able to alter the landscaping without landlords approval. The applicant also comments that purchasers will have every opportunity to see the units and the trees prior to purchase and make a judgement.

10.58 Whilst the trees would be close to the dwellings on the southern boundary, they would be outside the Root protection area of these trees, the new building line would also be further away from the trees than the existing two storey care home building and be located on the flatter part of the site, not needing to be cut into the land levels. The grounds and landscaping would be managed communally and the Tree officer is not objecting subject to conditions related to secure the submitted AMS and TPP and that a system of arboricultural supervision be carried out in accordance with the

Page 3470 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

recommendations of the AMS. Therefore, on balance, and with conditions, the impact on trees and landscaping is considered to be acceptable an in accordance with policies EN5 and EN13 of the 2006 Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan.

10.59 In terms of Ecology, the application is accompanied by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, which concluded that the habitats that will be directly affected by the proposed works i.e. hard standing, amenity grassland, miscellaneous planting and scrub/ruderal vegetation are of low ecological value and represent common/ widespread types that are not of conservation concern. However, due to the potential for bats and reptiles being identified further survey work was required to inform the need for mitigation measures. In respect of bats a precautionary approach has been taken, to avoid the risks of impacts to commuting/foraging bats and breeding birds. Recommendations have also been made for ecological enhancement measures.

10.60 A Protected Species Survey Report has been submitted following recommendations in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. Relatively low numbers of common pipistrelle were consistently recorded emerging from/re-entering roosting locations beneath hanging tiles on the southern and north/western aspects of the building. No reptiles were recorded. Therefore mitigation measures are proposed, a mitigation licence would be required from Natural England. Schwegler bat boxes would be installed on suitably sized broadleaved trees within the site to give alternative roosting opportunities whilst works take place. Careful removal of tiles would need to take place under direct supervision of the Natural England bat licence holder and the new buildings would need to incorporate “built in “ bat roost features.

10.61 The NPPF seeks to ensure “net” biodiversity gain. Core policy 4 seeks to ensure the opportunities and locations for biodiversity enhancements will be identified and pursued. This is an urban site, on the edge of the town. There is some use of the site by bats. The Landscape & Biodiversity Officer has reviewed the application and comments on the ecology matters confirm that the reports have been prepared by suitable professionals and as such the findings are accepted. The L & B Officer considers that there should be no reason why a licence would not be granted in this case and comments that he is satisfied with the ecological surveys in respect of the time of year that they were completed and the conditions at the time of the surveys. The report recommends mitigation, in the form of a scheme of bat boxes, incorporated into the building which can be secured through condition. As mitigation measures are also required at the demolition stage, it would be appropriate to seek a detailed scheme of mitigation and enhancement for biodiversity as part of a single demolition condition, to cover bird and bat boxes for the buildings and some mitigation during demolition.

10.62 Whilst the landscaping scheme, hard and soft, are indicated and are generally acceptable, there are some concerns with respect to the tree species, however, such details can be secured through standard landscape conditions.

10.63 In terms of trees, ecology and landscape matters, it is not considered that there are any matters that could not be addressed through suitable landscape, tree protection and ecology conditions and the scheme would be policy compliant and acceptable regarding these matters.

Other Matters; Habitats Regulation Assessment 10.64 Wealden raise no objections to the proposed scheme but comments that when the Council determine the application as the ‘competent authority’ , the principal issues of

Page 3571 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

concern would be the air quality on sensitive roads over the Ashdown Forest (SAC) and the additional recreational pressures to the Ashdown Forest Special Protection Area (SPA). The effects of all plans and projects, approved and proposed, are to be taken into account. Subject to TWBC as competent authority (under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010) giving this proposal appropriate consideration, no objections are raised.

10.65 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, also known as the Habitats Regulations, requires the competent authority (which in the context of planning decision making is the local planning authority) to consider whether it can exclude the possibility of the ‘likely significant effects’ on a European site wil l arise from a plan or project (which includes planning applications). A planning permission may be granted and/or a Local Plan adopted only if likely significant effects can be excluded at the ‘screening’ stage or if an appropriate assessment concludes t hat the plan or project will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site.

10.66 The ‘in combination’ effects with other plans and projects must be considered.

10.67 Two elements need consideration, the first being the recreational element. The revised practice note sets out that financial contributions will be sought to the SAMM strategy to mitigate the effects of increased recreational pressure within 7km of the Ashdown Forest SPA, however para 2.3 iii sets out that beyond the 7km zone, SAMM contributions and/or appropriate assessment will not generally be required but may be sought where justified on a case-by case basis. In this case the site is located between 9 and 10km and therefore outside the zone to make a request for a financial contribution and it is a brownfield site, with an existing care home on the site. Consequently, the scale of development and its proximity to the 7km zone, would not lead to significant concerns regarding visitor pressure.

10.68 The other element that must be considered is the Air Quality element and the potential harm caused by exhaust emissions on Ashdown Forest SAC . AECOM’s assumptions as to growth in Tunbridge Wells were based on the Council’s Objectively Assessed Housing Need together with guidance provided to it by the Council on the appropriate broad distribution of development across the Borough, including existing permissions and completions.

10.69 The AECOM model took a precautionary approach and provides the Council with a high degree of confidence that it can rely on the results since a) air quality in 2033 is forecast to be significantly better than in 2017 notwithstanding the precautionary assumptions made about both growth and improvements in vehicle emissions factors, b) no significant in combination retardation of vegetation improvement at the closest and most affected areas of heathland is expected and c) the contribution of Tunbridge Wells Local Plan to the 'in combination' scenario for those nearest areas of heathland is negligible, the modelling does not provide any basis to conclude that there will be an adverse effect on the integrity of the Ashdown Forest SAC or SPA as a result of planned growth in Tunbridge Wells Borough to 2033.

10.70 For the reasons above, it is considered that this development would not trigger the need for mitigation for visitor pressure in respect of the SPA or give rise to any issues in respect of air quality and the SAC. This view is supported by the L & B Officer.

Drainage

10.71 The application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment that sets out that a surface water drainage strategy is proposed based on the principles of SuDs surface water

Page 3672 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

management train outlined in the document produced by CIRIA C753 ‘The SuDs Manual (2015). Ground conditions indicate that infiltration will not be possible at this site, there is no suitable local watercourse for discharge. It is proposed that the site will discharge to public surface water sewer, following the drainage regime of the existing previously developed site. The proposed discharge rate from the site is 2 l/s, the estimate present 1 in 1 year run-off rate, providing no increase in run-off rate for any storm condition and significant betterment in more severe storms. The report sets out that sufficient space for SuDs has been provided within the masterplan. No objections have been raised by the water authorities. KCC Lead Flood Authority comment that the drainage strategy, utilising permeable pavement with discharge into the public sewer in Frant Road, is anticipated to be compatible for infiltrating drainage measures. The feasibility of infiltration on the site should be fully investigated prior to undertaking detailed design and should be utilised fully before discharging to the sewer in Frant Road. Subject to conditions, it is considered that a suitable drainage scheme can be secured at conditions stage.

Conclusion

10.72 The site is located at the edge of the tier one settlement in the spatial strategy for Tunbridge Wells. It is located on a main route into the town centre and located on public transport routes. The site would be sustainable and in close proximity to services and public transport. The scheme would contribute to the acute housing need and provide choice and variety and would provide a suitable level of affordable housing, and developer contributions that directly relate to the need generated on the site. In the balance of issues, with the clear need for new housing development, it is not considered that there are any other material considerations that would indicate the application should be refused. Approval is therefore recommended, subject to conditions. The applicant has been requested to comment and agree pre-commencement conditions and Members will receive an update at the Committee meeting.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION

A – Delegated powers to GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Head of Legal Partnership by 06.02.19 (unless a later date is agreed by the Head of Planning Services) to secure the following:

(i) Developer Contributions as follows:

And subject to the following conditions:

1/ The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Page 3773 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Reason: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2/ The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 55 Rev D – Proposed site layout FD 16 - 1430 - P- 150 Rev A Plots 1-4 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 151 Rev A Plots 1-4 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 152 Rev A Plots 1-4 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 155 Rev A Plots 1-4 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 156 Rev A Plots 1-4 Rear Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 157 Rev A Plots 1-4 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 160 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 161 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 162 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 165 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 166 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Rear Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 167 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 170 Plots 13-24 Ground and first Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 171 Plots 13-24 Second floor and roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 175 Plots 13-24 Front and right flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 176 Plots 13-24 Rear and left flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 180 Plot 25 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 185 Plot 25 Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 190 Plot 26 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 195 REV B Plot 26 Elevations

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 700 Rev A - Proposed site sections (1) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 701 Rev A - Proposed site sections (2) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 702 Rev A Proposed site sections (3)

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 200 Existing site sections (1) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 201 Existing site sections (2) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 202 Existing site sections (3)

FD 16 - 1430 - P- 51 Existing Site layout FD 16 - 1430 - P- 52 Removals Plan

DAT/9.0 Site survey BEE20873 01C Tree Reference Plan BEE20873 03A Tree Protection Plan 8161058/6505A Swept Path Analysis Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement (with written Statement). Tree Report

Page 3874 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

a) Details and drawings relating to fenestration profiles, colour, and to include window recess and reveals,

b) The detailed design of any balcony structures, and shared entrance doorways to flats to include materials, lighting, door, colour and canopy design;

Page 3975 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

c) Details (including section drawings) relating to materials to be used in the construction of all walls, fences or other means of enclosure, and;

d) Details for the storage and screening of refuse.

e) Details of cycle storage

f) Details of external lighting.

Reason: To ensure the built quality of the development.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development.

Reason: To avoid pollution of the surrounding area. This is pre-commencement to ensure that suitable drainage is designed at early stage to prevent flood risk.

Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal and to ensure ongoing efficacy of the drainage provisions. This is

Page 4076 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

pre-commencement to ensure that suitable drainage is designed at early stage to prevent flood risk.

Reason: To protect the vulnerable groundwater resources and ensure compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

a) Details of any sampling and remediation works conducted and quality assurance certificates to show that the works have been carried out in full in accordance with the approved methodology.

c) If no contamination has been discovered during the build then evidence (e.g. photos or letters from site manager) to show that no contamination was discovered should be included.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to preserve and enhance biodiversity.

Page 4177 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained and to ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

Reason: To protect and enhance existing species and habitats on the site in the future.

Reason: In order to protect the occupiers of the dwellings from undue disturbance by noise.

Page 4278 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

preclude vehicular access to the reserved parking spaces.

Reason: Development without provision of adequate accommodation for the parking of vehicles is likely to lead to parking inconvenient to other road users.

19/ The access and parking area hereby approved, shall be surfaced with in a bound material with adequate drainage within the site to ensure no surface water drains onto the public highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

21/ No gates or barriers shall be erected across the access onto Frant Road. .

Reason : In the interests of highway safety.

Reason: In order to realise a sustainable pattern of development in the area.

23/ Prior to the erection of the building(s) hereby approved, written and illustrative details of the number, type and location of electric vehicle charge points, designed in accordance with the Council’s guidance note on ‘Provision of Electric Vehicle Charging Points for New Development’ shall submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The charging points shall be installed prior to the first occupation/use of the buildings hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All charging systems shall be maintained and kept in good working order as specified by the manufacturer.

Where charging facilities are shared, any provision of infrastructure shall also include arrangements for the future operation and maintenance of the facility. Faults shall be identified and rectified in accordance with manufacturers requirements and failures of electric vehicle charging systems shall be rectified within 5 working days to guarantee electric vehicle charging stations remain available for use at all times.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development that meets the needs of current and future generations.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which meets the needs of current and future generations.

Page 4379 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Reason: In the interests of water conservation.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development, which meets the needs of current and future generations.

27/ Prior to occupation of the development, Low Nox boilers, shall be installed within each dwelling and shall thereafter be maintained.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which meets the needs of current and future generations.

28/ No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a watching brief to be undertaken by an archaeologist approved by the Local Planning Authority so that the excavation is observed and items of interest and finds are recorded. The watching brief shall be in accordance with a written programme and specification which has previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded.

Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the locality.

Reason: To safeguard against overlooking and loss of privacy in the interests of amenity of occupiers of neighbouring properties.

Page 4480 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

Reason: To protect the residential amenities of adjacent dwellings

Reason: In the interest of protecting character and amenities.

33/ No unit of accommodation shall be occupied at any time other than by a person aged 55 or older, together with their spouse, partner or companion as appropriate, except where a person aged at least 55 years is predeceased having resided within the development as a spouse, partner or companion, that person may continue to reside within the development.

Reason: The application was assessed on this basis, and accordingly mitigation for impact on education and children’s playspace was not considered necessary.

INFORMATIVES

1/ Your attention is drawn to the Mid Kent Environmental Code of Development Practice, the terms of which should be met in carrying out the development.

2/ This development is the subject of an Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3/ A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development, please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire SO21 2SW (Tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk

4/ Kent County Council recommends that all developers work with a telecommunication partner or subcontractor in the early stages of planning for any new development to make sure that Next Generation Access Broadband is a fundamental part of the project. Please liaise with a telecom provider to decide the appropriate solution for this development and the availability of the nearest connection point to high speed broadband. For advice please [email protected]

5/The applicant, agents, or successors in title, are encouraged to undertake discussion with external bodies such as Kent Police Crime Prevention Design Advisors (CPDAs) to ensure that a comprehensive approach is taken to Crime Prevention and Community Safety. CPDA Team are; Kent Police Headquarters, CPDA Team, Sutton Road, Maidstone ME15 9BZ.

6/ It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure, before the development hereby approved is commenced, that all necessary highway approvals and consents where required are obtained and that the limits of highway boundary are clearly established in order to avoid any enforcement action being taken by the Highway Authority.

7/ Across the county there are pieces of land next to private homes and gardens that do not look like roads or pavements but are actually part of the road. This is called ‘highway land’. Some of this land is owned by The Kent County Council (KCC) whilst some are owned by third party owners. Irrespective of the ownership, this land may

Page 4581 AgendaAppendix A Item 7(A) Planning Committee Report 13 December 2018

have ‘highway rights’ over the topsoil. Information about how to clarify the highway boundary can be found at http://www.kent.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/what-we-look-after/highway-land

8/ The applicant must also ensure that the details shown on the approved plans agree in every aspect with those approved under such legislation and common law. It is therefore important for the applicant to contact KCC Highways and Transportation to progress this aspect of the works prior to commencement on site.

9/ The applicant is advised that works to the highway require separate consent of the highway authority prior to the commencement of works on site. The works will require a S278/38 agreement and you are advised to contact the Agreements Engineer [email protected]

(B) If the applicant fails to enter into such an agreement by 06.02.2019 the Head of Planning Services shall be authorised to REFUSE permission for the following reasons (unless a later date is agreed by the head of planning services):

(1) The proposal would not provide affordable housing and would therefore conflict with Core Policy 6 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010.

(4) The proposal would fail to provide for health care and would therefore conflict with Core Policy 1 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010.

Case Officer: Marie Bolton

Page 4682 Appendix B 2

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 17/01608/FULL - AVANTE CARE & SUPPORT, BARNETTS, 68 FRANT R OAD, ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, KENT TN2 5LR

PLA123/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 17/01608/FUL L and this was summarised at the meeting by Mrs Bolton, Principal Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated as foll ows: i. The Upper Medway Drainage Board had confirmed that the proposal was not in their area and they had no comment. ii. There was a proposed change to the wording of Condition 33 regarding the age of occupants on site. iii. In relation to Condition 31 an amendmen t was proposed relating to the inclusion of an element of obscure glazing. iv. There were corrections to the plan numbers listed including 8161058/6205 Rev A in respect of the swept path plan.

Registered Speakers - There were 3 speakers who had registered to speak in accordance with the Council’s Constitution (Planning Committee procedure rules) as listed below:

Public objectors Ms C Fisher, a Borough resident had registered to speak but was not in attendance at the relevant time. Mrs D Bettridge, a neighbour.

Public supporter Mr G Dixon from Savills, agent to the applicant.

Committee Member Debate: Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask any questions of clarification and it was noted that a number of matters had delayed bringing the application to Committee including discussions over viability and changes to the layout of the site access. It was noted that further discussions had also taken place with a view to locating possible sites for the alternative affordable housing. In response to the continued concerns of the neighbour about loss of privacy, Mrs Bolton and Mr Hockney indicated that further enhancements could be considered to the landscaping and boundary treatment by means of an informative suggesting liaison between the neighbour and the developer prior to finalisation of the provisions of condition 14. Members supported this solution and positive comment was also made over the design and that the proposal would provide much needed downsize accommodation.

Decision/voting - On the b asis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered, a motion was proposed by Councillor Dr Hall, seconded by Councillor Mrs Thomas and a vote was taken to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation and with amended conditions as updated.

RESOLVED - That application 17/01608/FULL be approved subject to the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and subject to the plans conditions a nd informatives as set out in the agenda report and the additional and amended

Page 83 Appendix B 3 wordings as set out below:

Amended Condition 2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: FD 16 - 1430 - P- 55 Rev D– Proposed site layout FD 16 - 1430 - P- 150 Rev A Plots 1-4 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 151 Rev A Plots 1-4 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 152 Rev A Plots 1-4 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 155 Rev A Plots 1-4 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 156 Rev A Plots 1-4 Rear Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 157 Rev A Plots 1-4 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 160 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Ground Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 161 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 First Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 162 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 165 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Front Elevation FD 16 - 1430 - P- 166 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Rear Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 167 Rev A Plots 5-8 & 9-12 Flank Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 170 Plots 13-24 Ground and first Floor Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 171 Plots 13-24 Second floor and roof Plan FD 16 - 1430 - P- 175 Plots 13-24 Front and right flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 176 Plots 13-24 Rear and left flank elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 180 Plot 25 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 185 Plot 25 Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 190 Plot 26 Plans FD 16 - 1430 - P- 195 REV B Plot 26 Elevations FD 16 - 1430 - P- 700 Rev A - Proposed site sections (1) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 701 Rev A - Proposed site sections (2) FD 16 - 1430 - P- 702 Rev A Proposed site sections (3) BEE20873 01C Tree Reference Plan BEE20873 03A Tree Protection Plan 8161058/6205A Swept Path Analysis Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement (with written Statement). Tree Report

Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved.

Amended Condition 14 Notwithstanding the details submitted, no development shall take place until a landscape scheme designed in accordance with the principles of the Council's landscape character guidance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, to include hard and soft landscaping. The scheme shall show all existing trees, hedges and blocks of landscaping on, and immediately adjacent to, the site and indicate whether they are to be retained or re moved. It shall detail measures for protection of species to be retained, provide details of on site replacement planting to mitigate any loss of amenity and biodiversity value together with the location of any habitat piles and include a planting specifi cation, a programme of implementation and a 5 year management plan. The submitted scheme shall demonstrate an enhanced boundary screening to the south east, where the site abuts 70 Frant Road, and shall provide additional screening in the form of heavy standard trees and ever green planting. The approved scheme shall

Page 84 Appendix B 4

be implemented in full.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

Amended Condition 31 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) 2015 (or any Order revoking and re -enacting that Order), no windows, or similar openings shall be inserted in the west elevation of plot 12, southern elevation of plot 4, or the north elevations of plots 25 and 26, a t first floor level, other than as hereby approved. Any windows shown to be fitted with obscure glass on the plans hereby approved, shall be installed with Pilkington level 3 or higher, and shall thereafter be retained as such.

Reason: To protect the r esidential amenities of adjacent dwellings

Amended Condition 33 No unit of accommodation shall be occupied at any time other than: - By a person aged 55 or older; A spouse, partner or companion as appropriate of such a person and living as a single hous ehold; A spouse, partner or companion who was living as a single household with such a person who has since died.

Reason: The application was assessed on this basis, and accordingly mitigation for impact on education and children’s playspace was not co nsidered necessary.

Additional Informative The applicant is advised to discuss the proposed landscaping scheme with the occupier of 70 Frant Road, to progress a mutually suitable scheme to enhance the boundary of the site with this neighbour.

APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - 18/02571/FULL - TURNDEN, HARTLEY ROAD, CRANBROOK, KENT TN17 3QX

PLA124/18 Planning Report and Presentation - The Head of Planning Services submitted a report in respect of application 18/02571/FULL and this was summarised at the meeting by Mr Hazelgrove, Senior Planning Officer, and illustrated by means of a visual presentation.

Updates and Additional Representations - Since publication of the agenda report, the presenting officer updated as follows: There wer e 2 omissions in paragraph 11.0 (A) of the agenda report: The list of matters to be secured by the S.106 agreement should have included £138,000.00 towards Youth and Adult Recreation and/or community uses The list of matters included reference to “The imp lementation of a

Page 85 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 18/03527/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Insert 4 x PVC-u white sash windows into existing box frames ADDRESS Flat 3 23 Lime Hill Road Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent TN1 1LJ RECOMMENDATION – Refuse (See Section 11.0 for full recommendation) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL The proposal, by reason of the design and materials, would be an inappropriate form of development and harmful to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would be contrary with The National Planning Policy Framework 2019, Core Policies 4, 5 and 9 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, Policies EN1, and EN5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006. INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL There are not considered to be any financial benefits which are material or not material to the application REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Called in to Planning Committee by Cllr Scott due to the impact of the development upon the Conservation Area and whether the design, appearance and materials used in the proposal are appropriate and high quality for the Conservation Area location. WARD Culverden PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Miss Angela Holland N/A AGENT N/A DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 19/04/19 19/04/19 21/03/19 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): 17/00988/FULL Replace 4 windows (1 Kitchen, 3 Living room) Refused 02/06/17

MAIN REPORT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The site is within the Limits to Built Development of Tunbridge Wells, and Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area. Lime Hill Road is to the front (north) of the site, no. 21 and 25 Lime Hill Road are to the east and west respectively. The area is characterised by terraced properties, most of which appear to have been subdivided in to flats.

1.02 The host dwelling is a late 19th Century mid terrace property which has been subdivided into flats. The property has brick walls, and timber framed sash windows in each of the flats in this property.

1.03 The application flat is on the top floor to the northern side of the building, overlooking Lime Hill Road. It currently has four timber sliding sash windows, two of which have a single vertical glazing bar.

Page 87 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 Insert 4 x PVC-u white sash windows into existing box frames on the front elevation of the building.

2.02 The proposed windows would be double glazed. The existing windows are single glazed sash timber framed windows.

2.03 Further information has been provided as part of this application since the previous refusal (ref. 17/00988/FULL). The proposal does not otherwise differ from that application.

2.04 The table below shows the size of the 4 windows to be replaced and that the size has not changed from the previously refused application. Although not shown, the windows do not differ in size from the existing. One of the windows is above the door and the other 3 form part of a bay window.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Window 1 (above door) Refused under 17/00988/FULL Proposed Change (+/-) Max height (approx.) 1.295m 1.295m n/a Max width (approx.) 0.908m 0.908m n/a Window 2 (bay) Refused under 17/00988/FULL Proposed Change (+/-) Max height (approx.) 1.285m 1.285m n/a Max width (approx.) 0.623m 0.623m n/a Window 3 (bay) Refused under 17/00988/FULL Proposed Change (+/-) Max height (approx.) 1.295m 1.295m n/a Max width (approx.) 1.072m 1.072m n/a Window 4 (bay) Refused under 17/00988/FULL Proposed Change (+/-) Max height (approx.) 1.285m 1.285m n/a Max width (approx.) 0.623m 0.623m n/a

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

 Limits to built development (LBD) INSIDE  Conservation Area - Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990)  Local Plan 2006 Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential) - TP6  Public Access Land Tunbridge Wells Common  Wind Turbine Development Consultation Area Biggin Hill Airport

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): 2019 National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG): 2014

Development Plan: Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010: Core Policy 4: Environment Core Policy 5: Sustainable Design and Construction Core Policy 9: Development in Royal Tunbridge Wells

Page 88 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006: Policy EN1: Development Control Criteria Policy EN5: Conservation Areas

Supplementary Planning Documents: Alterations and Extensions SPD 2006

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 One site notice was displayed to the front of the site on 21 March 2019. The application was also advertised in the local newspaper which expired on 19 April 2019.

6.02 No representations have been received.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

7.01 Conservation & Urban Design Officer (29/3/19) - This application is a resubmission of a previously refused application for the same proposals. The previous comments still apply as there have been no policy changes since the refused application. The conclusion remains the same - the application is not supported as harm would be caused to the significance of the conservation area with the loss of the historic windows in an area where these have been incrementally lost and character eroded as a consequence.

7.02 Officer Comment - Conservation & Urban Design Officer’s comments on the previous application are below for ease of reference:

7.03 23 Lime Hill Road is a late 19th century terraced house with full height projecting canted bay, now converted to flats, with the original timber sliding sash windows. It sits within the Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area. This application proposes the replacement of the moving parts of the sash windows just to flat three (four in total, two with vertical glazing bars), on the second floor, to uPVC sashes.

7.04 The Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area appraisal notes the 'three storey brick terraces of ca. 1900, [which] provide a strong street character' on Lime Hill Road. Windows are a very important part of the historic and architectural character of buildings, and therefore assist in the building contributing positively towards the character and appearance of the conservation area. On a practical note, there is no information about the construction of the windows, but it is assumed that they will be a standard double glazing depth of 4mm glass/16mm air gap/4mm glass, which is much heavier and deeper than the existing single glazed, finely detailed windows. It would not, therefore, be possible to insert them into the existing box frame which was constructed to match the depth of the existing.

7.05 In regards to impact on the conservation area, uPVC is a modern material that would attempt to replicate something that it is not, and therefore result in a lower quality appearance. It is noted the intention to improve thermal efficiency, and suggest that Historic England have helpful and comprehensive guidance on the great improvements to thermal efficiency that can be made without going to the expense of replacing the window, such as overhauling and draft proofing, secondary glazing, and even the use of heavy curtains. The guidance also explains that these windows can usually last another 100 years if repaired, due to the use of a superior quality of heartwood softwood that is less easy to obtain now. The lifespan, therefore, is likely to be much longer than uPVC windows. The guidance can be found on their website

Page 89 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

https://www.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/traditional-windowscar e-repair-upgrading/. The first 5 pages are helpful as an explanation, and practical advice follows. Page 5 notes that 'The different appearance and character of PVC-u windows compared to historic windows is highly likely to make them unsuitable for older buildings, particularly those that are listed or in conservation areas.' The 'your home' web pages under the advice section include several different practical guidance notes on other measures to save energy in historic buildings. Whilst not a planning consideration, the applicant may find it helpful to know that the web pages on their site regarding conservation areas, as well as sections regarding sash windows, confirm that research through estate agents has shown that replacement PVC-u windows and doors were considered the biggest threat to property values in conservation areas. Of those surveyed, 82% agreed that original features added financial value to homes.

7.06 Conclusion: Replacing the original timber sliding sash windows with a modern facsimile using a different material which is unable to replicate the original features would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area, in accordance with s. 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, and would cause harm to its significance, in accordance with paragraph 134 of the NPPF [now paragraphs 195 and 196 of the NPPF]. There are other alternatives to improving energy efficiency which would not cause harm.

7.07 Royal Tunbridge Wells Civic Society (8/4/19) The proposal is to replace the traditional timber sashes in one flat with uPVC in a `heritage` design. The other flats in the same building and, with one exception, the other buildings in this terrace retain 100% the original timber sashes. The exception is one flat in the adjacent building which has been fitted with a grossly incongruous design in uPVC. Please refuse consent for any further disruption to the uniformity of the terrace for the sake of a short-life upgrade.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS

 While the materials are u-PVC they are greatly superior to the vast majority of other windows in the street that have been replaced with u-PVC.  The look and style of the proposed windows are indistinguishable from the original wooden frames when viewed from the street.  The windows better perform their function, enhance the building, are more environmentally friendly and cost efficient than any other type of replacement.  A high percent of windows in the street (approximately 1/3rd) are now u-PVC of varying quality. Hence the impact of the applicant’s windows will have no detrimental impact.  The character of the street encompasses both PVC and wooden windows. It is clearly wrong to assume additional PVC windows are out of character.  Previous permission at 21 Lime Hill Road accepted this form of replacement.

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

 Application Form  Site Location Plan  Heritage, Design and Access Statement  4 supporting photographs showing existing windows with annotated measurements

Page 90 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

10.0 APPRAISAL

10.01 The only alterations to the flat are the replacement of the existing windows. The key issues to consider in this report are the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the visual amenity, character and appearance of the Conservation Area as well as effects on residential amenity.

10.02 The application follows a previously refused scheme, 17/00988/FULL, for the same proposal. This application was refused on the following grounds:

“The proposal, by reason of the design and materials, would be an inappropriate form of development and harmful to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would be contrary with The National Planning Policy Framework 2012, Core Policies 4, 5 and 9 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, Policies EN1, and EN5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.”

10.03 Since the previous application was determined, the only change to policy has been the publication of the new NPPF 2019.

Principle of Development 10.04 The site lies within the LBD of Royal Tunbridge Wells, where there is no objection to the principle of development, subject to the proposal meeting all relevant planning policies and material considerations.

Visual Impact and Impact on the Conservation Area (CA) 10.05 Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 Policy EN1 requires the design of a proposal to respect the context of its site. Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 Policy 4 (1) requires the Borough’s urban landscapes to be conserved and enhanced. Part 12 of the NPPF addresses good design, which is a key aspect of sustainable development (as stated in paragraph 124). Paragraph 127, inter alia, requires that developments respond to local character and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, whilst not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation; also that they are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

10.06 Paragraph 185 of the NPPF states that Local Planning Authorities should take account of the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Paragraphs 195 and 196 of the NPPF require a balance of public benefits to be applied should new development be considered substantive in harm, or less-than-substantive, to the significance of the heritage asset. Paragraph 200 states:

10.07 “Local Planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development within CAs and World Heritage Sites, and within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance. Proposals that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset should be treated favourably.”

10.08 Impact on the CA is also considered under Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 policy EN5; then more broadly under policy EN1 and Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 Policy 4, which seeks to conserve and enhance the Borough’s urban environments (including CAs) at criteria (1) and (5).

10.09 As the windows to be replaced are on the front elevation of the top floor they would be visible from the street scene and consequently would impact on the visual amenity. It is

Page 91 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

acknowledged these windows are not as prominent as if they were on the ground floor. However, the replacement of the original timber framed windows with PVC-u windows would not preserve or enhance the elements which make a positive contribution to the Conservation Area, contrary to paragraph 200 of the NPPF, and Policy EN5 criteria (4) of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006, which specifically mentions use of materials that would preserve or enhance the character of that part of the Conservation Area in which the proposal would be situated.

10.10 In addition, as stated in the Conservation & Urban Design Officer’s comments above “harm would be caused to the significance of the Conservation Area with the loss of the historic windows in an area where these have been incrementally lost and character eroded as a consequence.” This loss of a feature important to the character of that part of the conservation area in which the proposal would be situated in is contrary to criteria (6) of Policy EN5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

10.11 As required by paragraph 196 of the NPPF: “Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. The Conservation & Urban Design Officer’s comments also addressed this by providing Historic England guidance which included alternatives to improve energy efficiency which would not cause harm.

10.12 It is acknowledged from the Planning Policy in Conservation Area document, provided as part of the application, that there are a number of properties in Lime Hill Road, which have PVC-u windows, including on the adjacent property, (no. 21 Lime Hill Road). However, since permission was given for those windows, Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 has been adopted, policy 4 of which gives greater protection to Conservation Areas at criteria (1) and (5). In addition it is also considered that the change of window materials would” disrupt the uniformity” of the building (23 Lime Hill Road), as stated in the Tunbridge Wells Civic Society’s comments, which does not enhance the public realm, and it is noted from the Conservation & Urban Design Officer’s previous comments the proposal would “result in a lower quality appearance”, which is contrary to policy 5 criteria (7) of Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010.

10.12 On balance, this proposal is considered to be harmful to the Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area, which would not be outweighed by the public benefit, contrary to paragraph 196 of the NPPF. The proposal is also considered contrary paragraph 200 of the NPPF, Policies 4 and 5 of Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, and Policies EN1 and EN5 of Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

Residential Amenity 10.13 Due to the nature of the proposed development, there would be no adverse impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing, dominance or loss of light or outlook. The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of residential amenity.

Other Matters 10.14 There would be no impact on the Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential) - TP6, Public Access Land or Wind Turbine Development Consultation Area Biggin Hill Airport.

10.15 There would be no other planning considerations that would be of relevance to the application.

Page 92 Agenda Item 8(B) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Conclusion 10.17 On balance, this proposal is considered to be harmful to the Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area, which would not be outweighed by the public benefit, contrary to paragraph 196 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF). The proposal is also considered contrary paragraph 200 of the NPPF, Core Policies 4 and 5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, and Policies EN1 and EN5 of Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION – Refuse planning permission for the following reason:

1. The proposal, by reason of the design and materials, would be an inappropriate form of development and harmful to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The harm caused to the Conservation Area would not be outweighed by the public benefit and therefore the proposal is contrary to paragraph 196 of The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF). The proposal is also considered contrary to paragraph 200 of the NPPF, Core Policies 4 and 5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, and Policies EN1 and EN5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

Case Officer: Ellouisa McGuckin

NB For full details of all papers submitted with this application please refer to the relevant Public Access pages on the council’s website.

Page 93 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 18/03839/OUT APPLICATION PROPOSAL Outline planning application for the erection of up to 9 dwellings with access considered. ADDRESS Land North Of Santer House Red Oak Hawkhurst Cranbrook Kent RECOMMENDATION GRANT planning permission subject to conditions (please refer to section 11.0 of the report for full recommendation) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION  In the absence of a five year supply of housing, the housing supply policies (including those related to the Limits to Built Development (LBD) are “out-of-date”. Paragraph 11 and Footnote 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that where relevant policies are out-of-date that permission for sustainable development should be granted unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted (and all other material considerations are satisfied);  The proposal would result in the delivery of sustainable development and therefore, in accordance with Paragraph 11 of the NPPF, permission should be granted, subject to all other material considerations being satisfied. The proposal is considered to accord with the Development Plan and Local Policy in respect of these material considerations;  The number of residential units and the mix of unit sizes are considered to be appropriate to this site; - The proposal would not adversely affect the appearance of the street scene or character of the area. - The proposal would not cause significant harm to the residential amenities of neighbouring properties. - It is considered that the proposal would not result in a significant increase in on street parking pressures that would impact on highways safety.  The traffic movements generated by the development can be accommodated without detriment to highway safety and the proposal includes adequate car parking provision;  The site is partially within the LBD and is not proposed for an ‘isolated’ rural location;  The proposal would be moderately well located to local facilities and services primary and lies within walking distance to a bus route.  Other issues raised have been assessed and there are not any which would warrant refusal of the application or which cannot be satisfactorily controlled by condition or legal agreement. INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL The following are considered to be material to the application: Contributions (to be secured through Section 106 legal agreement/unilateral undertaking): N/A Net increase in numbers of jobs: N/A Estimated average annual workplace salary spend in Borough through net increase in numbers of jobs: N/A The following are not considered to be material to the application: Estimated annual council tax benefit for Borough: £1608.84 Estimated annual council tax benefit total: £16240.77

Page 95 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Annual New Homes Bonus (for first 4 years): £9000.00 Estimated annual business rates benefits for Borough: N/A REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Tunbridge Wells Borough Council is the freehold landowner WARD Hawkhurst & PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Tunbridge Wells Sandhurst Hawkhurst Parish Council Borough Council AGENT Hazel Mccormack Young DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 15/02/19 08/02/19 15/01/19 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): 76/00214 Outline - 4 houses. (Rear of) Withdrawn

MAIN REPORT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The site is located at the north end of Red Oak in the Hawkhurst Parish of the Borough and comprises self sown trees and scrub vegetation. There are mature trees and hedges along the boundaries of the site and two large oak trees on the other side of Heansill Lane to the west which overhang the site. The south boundary of the site is marked by a chain link fence. The site slopes steeply down towards the north and rear of the site with a fall of approximately 6m where it meets a Public Right of Way (WC196). Beyond the PROW lies Lodge Cottage, a Grade II listed building. The site is devoid of any buildings and none of the trees on or around the site are protected by virtue of a TPO.

1.02 To the immediate south of the site lies an area of hardstanding, formerly occupied by a garage block, and now used as parking area and turning space. To the immediate east of this hardstanding lies a grassed surface area which falls within the application site. This strip of land is located within the LBD boundary of Hawkhurst The Moor whereas to the north of this strip and the adjacent parking area, where the majority of the application site lies, falls outside of the defined LBD boundary. The entire of the site also falls within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

1.03 To the south of the strip of land which falls within the LBD lies Santer House, a two-storey red brick built flat block comprising of 10 units, which fronts towards the south and the rear amenity space adjoins the application site. To the south of the parking area and siting of the former garage block lies Gunther House, also a red brick two storey building, which is occupied by 4 units. Further to the south lies predominantly two storey semi detached properties and maisonettes which front onto the road. Red Oak is relatively straight cul de sac located to the north of Horns Road, approximately 120m length where the application is located at the north end of the road.

1.04 To the west of the site lies an undeveloped area of mature woodland, to the east lies an undeveloped parcel of agricultural land and to the south east lies predominantly detached properties located along Heansill Lane. Approximately 50m to the north west of the site lies an area of designated Ancient Woodland. Approximately 130m

Page 96 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

to the south east lies the Hawkhurst – The Moor Conservation Area and beyond this boundary lies an Area of Potential Archaeological Importance and a number of listed buildings. A Badger sett is also present on the site.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 The application has been submitted in outline form and is for the erection of up to 9 dwellings on the site with all matters reserved for future consideration other than access.

2.02 An indicative site layout has been submitted illustrating a possible layout of the site for nine units. This shows large amounts of the trees and scrubland removed from the site and a rectangular shape apartment block located towards the north of the site and fronting tot the south comprising three x 2-bed flats and three x 1-bed flats and a terrace row located towards the east of the plot fronting towards the west comprising three x 3-bed houses. The apartment block is indicated to appear of two storey from Red Oak but be of three storeys with a lower level built into the sloping land. The terrace row is indicated to comprise of two storeys with a habitable roof space.

2.03 The site is shown to be accessed via the south from Red Oak. 14 parking spaces are shown to be proposed on the site along with new silver birch trees to the south of the site, a retaining wall to the east to form parking bays and 1.5m high timber fencing marking the boundaries of the gardens of the houses and shared amenity space of the apartment block. A bin and bike store is shown to the front of the apartment building towards the west of the site.

2.04 The parking spaces to the south of the site on the footings of the former garage block are not shown to be affected by the indicative plans provided. These spaces also fall outside of the application site and therefore would remain available.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-)

Site Area 0.194ha 0.194ha - No. of storeys - 3* +3 Max width - Apartment Block: 19.2m* - (including side balconies) Terrace Houses: 18.4m* Max depth - Apartment Block: 10.5m* - Terrace Houses: 10.3m* No. of residential units - Up to 9 +9 No. of bedrooms - 18* +18 Parking spaces - 14* +14 *Based upon the indicative plans provided.

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

 Agricultural Land Classification Grade 3 (This information is taken from the MAFF 1998 national survey series at 1:250 000 scale derived from the Provisional 1” to one mile ALC maps and is intended for strategic uses. These maps are not sufficiently

Page 97 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

accurate for use in assessment of individual fields or sites and any enlargement could be misleading. The maps show Grades 1-5, but grade 3 is not subdivided)  Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty AONB (statutory protection in order to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of their landscapes - National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act of 1949 & Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000)  Tunbridge Wells Asset Register Land Registry Data - TWBC Ownership  Outside the Limits to Built Development (LBD) – north parts of the site  Inside the Limits to built development (LBD) – strip of land to the south of the site  Neighbourhood Development Plan Hawkhurst  Public Right of Way - WC196, to the north of the site  Grade II Listed Building - Lodge Cottage, to the north of the site (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990)  Hawkhurst The Moor Conservation Area (approximately 130m to the south east) (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990)

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

Development Plan: Site Allocations Local Plan Adopted 2016 Policy AL/STR 1: Limits to Built Development

Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 Core Policy 1: Delivery of Development Core Policy 3: Transport Infrastructure Core Policy 4: Environment Core Policy 5: Sustainable Design and Construction Core Policy 6: Housing Provision Core Policy 13: Hawkhurst Core Policy 14: Development in Villages and Rural Areas

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 Policy LBD1: Development outside the Limits to Built Development Policy EN1: Development Control Criteria Policy EN5: Conservation Areas Policy EN13: Tree and Woodland Protection Policy EN16: Protection of Groundwater and other watercourses Policy EN18: Flood Risk Policy EN25: Development affecting the rural landscape Policy TP4: Access to Road Network Policy TP5: Vehicle Parking Standards Policy TP9: Cycle Parking

Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan Policy HD1(a) preference to be given to small scale sites, preference for redevelopment over greenfield sites. Policy HD1 (b) – exceptions – larger scale development will only be accepted if it can be demonstrated to be exceptional circumstances as prescribed by the NPPF. Policy HD2 – Future housing mix.

Page 98 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Policy HD3 – Modern living, variety in designs, accessible homes, suitable for the elderly and disabled, in particular bungalows will be encouraged, to meet lifetime homes. Policy HD4 – Design Quality – design, form and detail should be principally informed by the traditional form, layout, character and style of the Parish’s vernacular architecture. Policy AM1 – Highgate Hill Junction

Supplementary Planning Documents: Landscape Character Area Assessment 2018: Hawkhurst Wooded Farmland Hawkhurst The Moor Conservation Area Appraisal Renewable Energy SPD

Other documents: Kent Design Guide Review: Interim Guidance Note 3 (Residential parking); High Weald AONB Management Plan 2014-2019 Historic England guidance note, GPA3 ‘Settings and Views ’

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 Site notices were displayed on the 15th January 2019 at three locations surrounding the site.

6.02 7 responses to the proposal have been received raising the following (summarised) concerns and objections:

- Increased parking pressure along the narrow road. - Highway safety issues. - Existing parking congestion issues. - Insufficient parking for residents at present time. - Impact upon badger sett. - Nuisance and disturbance caused during construction phase. - Impact upon wildlife and ecology. - Emergency service vehicle access. - Refuse vehicle access. - Strain on GP surgery. - Residents will need to travel by car to reach shops and services.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

Hawkhurst Parish Council 7.01 (12/02/19) Disappointed to note that despite this application having been submitted by TWBC for land owned by TWBC, the opportunity has not been taken to build social housing, which is much needed in Hawkhurst.

7.02 This application complies with Hawkhursts NDP to the extent that the proposed development is for less than 10 houses, on a greenfield site contiguous with edge of existing developed parts of the parish (HD1a). However, this site is not within walking distance of local shops and facilities and does not appear to have addressed paragraph 7.15 of the NDP, which requires development on or near the edge of the built-up area to encourage public access to the countryside beyond. The proposal is for an extension to the present cul-de-sac, with the block of flats effectively being the end point.

Page 99 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

7.03 The proposed housing mix is in line with the requirement for smaller properties identified in HD2, and is fully compliant in terms of inclusive access as per HD3.

7.04 As an outline planning application, it is appreciates that designs are only indicative, but welcome the proposal to comply with HD4 by including vertical elements such as projecting bays/dormers. It is noted the absence of chimneys, another requirement of HD4, which would be expected to be addressed at a later stage, were this outline application to be given approval.

7.05 Share residents concerns about parking. The proposed 14 spaces for parking for the new development is inadequate considering the location of this site - occupants will be reliant on cars to access local shops, schools etc. The current parking provision in this area is inadequate. Red Oak is already congested with cars parked along the road, blocking pavements etc. This situation would be exacerbated by additional development unless proper consideration is given to ensuring appropriate parking for both current and future residents.

7.06 Raise concerns by the proposal to close/destroy an active badger sett as part of this development. Paragraph 170 of the NPPF requires planning decisions to contribute to and enhance the local environment. According to paragraph 172 the conservation and enhancement of wildlife is an important consideration in the AONB. The requirement to destroy a well-used badger sett cannot be considered to conserving and certainly not enhancing our local wildlife. From the badger survey, it would appear that the badger sett is located in a fairly contained area of the development site. Therefore, surely it would be possible to limit development on the site to an area that would not impact on the badger sett?

7.07 Note the Conservation Officers concerns that the applicant has not given sufficient consideration to the impact on the historic environment.

7.08 Opposed to this development, however, appreciate there are positive aspects to this application, namely a proposal for a limited number of dwellings of the size needed in the village.

Kent Police 7.09 (24/01/19) This application falls under our normal response threshold of 10 units. However, it is noted the reference to Paragraph 127 (f) of the NPPF and would recommend the development utilise the Secured By Design (SBD) initiative should this planning application be approved and would welcome the opportunity to work with the applicant to achieve SBD accreditation.

Southern Water 7.10 (28/01/19) The exact position of the public foul sewers must be determined on site by the applicant before the layout of the proposed development is finalised.

7.11 Please note: -No development or new tree planting should be located within 3 metres either side of the external edge of the public sewer. -No new soakaways should be located within 5m of a public sewer. -All existing infrastructure should be protected during the course of construction works.

7.12 Should any sewer be found during construction works, an investigation of the sewer will be required to ascertain its condition, the number of properties served, and potential means of access before any further works commence on site.

Page 100 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

7.13 Southern Water requires a formal application for a connection to the foul sewer to be made by the applicant or developer.

KCC Development Contributions 7.14 (08/01/19) We note the 9 proposed units amount to less than 1000sqm, and therefore being just 9 units are below the threshold for seeking contributions.

KCC Flood and Water Management 7.15 (10/01/19) The application under the above reference number therefore falls outside the definition of major development and also falls outside of KCC’s remit as statutory consultee.

KCC Highways & Transportation 7.16 (12/02/19) With respect to Hawkhurst Crossroads junction, the application is not supported by a TS and has made no assessment of the impact on the crossroads junction in the am and pm peaks. However given the scale of the development this application will have a minor impact on the junction.

7.17 The question of the cumulative impact of several small scale developments on the junction over the next few years has again been considered by KCC Highways. However, this is difficult to address until sites are allocated in the new Local Plan. TWBC are continuing work on the Local Plan Review, and growth options to deliver the required level of housing, business and retail space are being considered. KCC officers have stated in comments to date that congestion at the junction is a concern, and could be detrimental to plans for future development without mitigation measures being implemented. Opportunities may come forward with future development sites that relieve the junction

7.18 Once the LP review is complete and KCC Highways have commented on the proposed growth in the area along with any mitigation that may be proposed, KCC Highways will be better placed to consider whether the cumulative impact of development in the area is ‘severe’ in line with NPPF (2018) paragraph 109.

7.19 Following extensive assessments, no mitigation scheme has been identified to date to improve the capacity of the junction. Paragraph 110 of the NPPF (2018) asks for development that facilitates access to high quality public services. The highway and planning authorities are seeking investment from developers into well-considered sustainable measures which facilitate and encourage walking, cycling and travelling by public transport in order to reduce car-borne trips.

7.20 Therefore future development in Hawkhurst that generates additional trips is requested to contribute £1,000 per dwelling towards public transport services and a request is made in connection with this proposed development.

7.21 The proposal refers to the provision of 14 parking spaces but it would appear that spaces 11-14 possibly result in the loss of existing parking in the courtyard which is available for existing residents. As the provision of 10 spaces for the 9 units would represent a shortfall with respect to IGN 3, it is recommended that these arrangements are clarified at this stage.

7.22 Early consultation with your Refuse Dept. is recommended to ensure appropriate arrangements can be achieved.

Page 101 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Environmental Protection 7.23 (17/01/19) No objections.

TWBC Conservation Officer 7.24 (29/03/19) The Conservation Officer is satisfied with the analysis and conclusions in the heritage statement and can agree with these in assisting in making the planning judgement regarding benefits and the low level of less than substantial harm caused, which could be mitigated by an appropriate landscaping condition as well as use of roofing materials as suggested in the statement.

7.25 (25/01/19) The requirements of paragraph 189 have not been met with this application, particularly in regards to the setting of the listed Lodge Cottage, which relies solely on intervisibility and not other aspects of setting that may affect the cottage. Harm will be caused, and it would be expected for this to be acknowledged in the application, particularly as it is in outline form and it is important to identify what the principle of development may mean for the setting of the heritage assets that may be affected.

TWBC Tree Officer 7.26 (03/05/19, verbal comments) No objection to the layout shown.

TWBC Landscape and Biodiversity Officer 7.27 (03/05/19, verbal comments) The badger survey has been prepared by a suitable professional to a recognised methodology. The findings and recommendations are accepted and it is acknowledged that licences would be required from Natural England. The scrubland is not of particular value other than some of the boundary planting which is proposed to be retained. The proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the AONB and therefore raise no objection.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS

8.01 Although the site is just outside the limits of built development (LBD) the proposals provide a logical extension to Red Oak.

8.02 With the two and a half storey houses that step down the sloping site and the 3-storey flat with one storey cut into the slope, the massing and density is sympathetic and comparable to the surrounding residential properties in Red Oak.

8.03 By retaining the majority of the boundary trees and vegetation, the development is screened from long views and also from the listed Lodge Cottage therefore limiting its impact on its setting in the landscape.

8.04 The proposal will tidy up a piece of unmanaged land that has no real use.

8.05 The proposal will contribute 9 new high-quality dwellings to the popular village of Hawkhurst in a sustainable location where there is a great need for new housing.

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

M929 - Site Survey 1694-001-P2 – Location Plan 1694-0020-P1 – Topographical Survey Plan 1694-010-P4 – Proposed Site Plan 1694-012-P1 – Proposed Flat Floor Plans 1694-014-P1 – Proposed House Type Floor Plans

Page 102 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Overview Sketch Proposed North – South Section Through Site Badger Survey Dormouse Survey Report Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Habitat Suitability Assessment Tree Report Design and Access Statement Heritage Statement

10.0 APPRAISAL

Principle of Development 10.01 The majority of the site is located within the countryside, outside the Limits to Built Development (LDB), in an area that would normally be an area of restraint to development. The site is also located within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The adopted development plan policies seek to direct new residential development to the most sustainable locations within the LBD.

Housing Land supply situation 10.02 The appeal decision at Land at Common Road, Sissinghurst on 21/03/16 included some conclusions (in respect of housing land supply) that are highly pertinent to this application. In particular, the conclusion that in relation to the objectively assessed need (at that point in time) that applying “the Council’s preferred backlog, buffer and claimed deliverable supply against the SHMA figure of 648 per year results in a supply of only 2.5 years of housing land” (Officer emphasis).

10.03 Since this date work on the Council’s new Local Plan has been progressed with an anticipated submission date of December 2020. Recent updates to Planning Policy Guidance and the NPPF (2019) have changed the way that local authorities must calculate their housing targets.

10.04 NPPF Para 73 requires the Council to identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirement set out in adopted strategic policies, or against their local housing need where the strategic policies are more than five years old. In addition there must be an additional buffer of between 5% and 20%, depending on the particular circumstances of the LPA.

10.05 The NPPF requires, based on the housing delivery test, that currently a 5% buffer be included in TWBC’s five year supply calculations.

10.06 Every year a position is established regarding the five year supply, based on the position in April of that year. This requires detailed monitoring work. This detailed work has been undertaken and has determined that the Council currently have 4.69 year housing supply at 1st April 2019.

10.07 In view of the above, the spatial strategy for the delivery of housing in TWBC (such as Core Strategy policies 1 and 6) are considered to be out of date, it is necessary to consider whether the development is sustainable in the context of the NPPF, whether there are any adverse impacts that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when considering the Framework when taken as a whole and whether specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted.

Page 103 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

10.08 Where a Local Planning Authority cannot demonstrate a five year housing supply, Paragraph 11 (d) of the NPPF is engaged. This states that where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, permission should be granted unless:

“i. the application of policies in this Framework (listed in footnote 6) that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or

ii. any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.”

10.09 Footnote 7 to the NPPF states that this includes (for applications involving the provision of housing) situations where the LPA cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites with the appropriate buffer, as set out in paragraph 73. Footnote 6 states these polices include ‘irreplaceable habitats’ which para 175 states includes Ancient Woodland; it includes AONBs and heritage assets as well.

10.10 Para 172 of the NPPF advises that ‘great weight’ should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in AONBs, as they have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. This does not create a blanket presumption against new housing in the AONB, but does require detailed consideration of the impacts of new development in such locations.

10.11 Whilst the use of the LBD as a restraint on new housing development in itself cannot be used, the sub-text to Policy LBD1 in the Local Plan sets out that the LBD’s purpose is to direct development to built up areas to ensure sustainable development patterns, and the site’s distance outside the nominal boundaries of such an area.

10.12 Therefore the relevant test is whether or not the proposal would represent a sustainable form of development, having regard to local planning policies and the NPPF, and particularly whether specific NPPF policies within Paragraph 11 and Footnote 7 indicate this development should be restricted. Para 8 of the NPPF explains that there are three dimensions to sustainable development:

“an economic role – contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

a social role – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

an environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.”

10.13 It can be seen that sustainability is thus a multi-faceted and broad-based concept. It is often necessary to weigh certain attributes against each other in order to arrive at a balanced position. The following paragraphs of this report assess the proposal against the three roles as defined by the NPPF.

Page 104 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

10.14 The NPPF at Paragraph 79 provides policies on “isolated” new houses in the countryside. Given the location of other dwellings in the vicinity of the site and the relative proximity to Hawkhurst, the site is not considered to be “isolated” and therefore NPPF Paragraph 79 is not applicable.

10.15 The key matters for consideration in this application are therefore considered to be whether the proposal comprises sustainable development and if the development would cause significant visual harm which would outweigh its contribution to the housing land supply.

10.16 It will be necessary to consider a number of other matters to reach conclusions on the above. These are the design and layout of the development, highway and parking considerations, heritage impact, residential amenity, ecology and drainage.

Location of the site (social and environmental dimension of sustainable development) 10.17 The sub-text to Policy LBD1 in the Local Plan (para 3.39) sets out that the LBD’s purpose is to direct development to built up areas to ensure sustainable development patterns and to prevent encroachment into the countryside. The application site lies partially within and immediately adjacent to the LBD, with the LBD boundary located to the south of the proposed development and includes the road of Red Oak and the existing parking area adjacent to the site. It is not considered that the site is ‘isolated’ in the countryside, in the meaning of the NPPF as a result of the surrounding built form along Red Oak.

10.18 Footways are located along Red Oak and the southern side of Horns Road. The proposed development would be in close proximity to some limited facilities and to the A21 to the west. The site is also in close proximity to a tier two rural settlement, Hawkhurst with all the facilities on offer there. In addition there are some facilities within The Moor, and Hawkhurst is 1km to the north east. However, Angley secondary school, Cranbrook, is located some 8km away.

10.19 The Sissinghurst appeal identified the extent of the significant shortfall in housing supply and confirmed that the Borough could not demonstrate a five year supply in the context of the NPPF. The contribution to the housing supply carried weight in favour of that proposal. The Inspector acknowledged that Sissinghurst is a tier three settlement in the Core Strategy that is low down on the Council’s priorities for development and that the landscape and visual impact would be such that the “harm would be reasonably substantial” but also gave weight to the site’s location on the “edge of the existing village, within fairly close proximity to these services/facilities”. The Inspector also acknowledged pedestrian and cycle links to other settlements are limited. However, overall, and in particular, the contribution to the supply of housing, carried very considerable weight in favour of the proposals. Overall the appeal proposals at Common Road, Sissinghurst, were considered to be sustainable.

10.20 The site the subject of this application lies in close proximity to Hawkhurst, a second tier settlement (small rural town). It is also served with a footway, which has not been the case in some other examples that have received permission since the Sissinghurst appeal. The site would be accessible to a tier one settlements (Tunbridge Wells and Southborough) through the proximity of the site to the A21 to the west (accessed within a short drive from the site), although it is recognised that this would be by using the private car. However, facilities and opportunities arise from the proximity of these main settlements.

Page 105 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

10.21 As part of the evidence gathering for the Local Plan Review, the Borough has prepared a Settlement Role and Functions Study 2017. Whilst this is part of the evidence base, it highlights the NPPG advice that:

"all settlements can play a role in delivering sustainable development in rural areas – and so blanket policies restricting housing development in some settlements and preventing other settlements from expanding should be avoided unless their use can be supported by robust evidence."

10.22 The Settlements Role and Function Study indicates that The Moor and Hawkhurst scores more highly than Sissinghurst in respect of the facilities on offer. It is noted in the study that “All the other settlements (in the group), apart from Sissinghurst, have at least one shop in addition to the post office and convenience store”. Services and facilities are accessible from the application site. A part time post office is located with the recreation grounds to the east, there is a church and public house within The Moor and (other facilities). Bus stops are located along Horns Road in close proximity to the site can be reached in less than 5 minutes and approximately 8 minutes to the doctors and playground, 13 to the local off licence and 7 minutes to the closest public house on foot.

10.23 The application site falls part within the LBD, however, there is a difference in that the main village centre, with the facilities that it has to offer, is some distance, on foot, with a significant uphill stretch from The Moor into Hawkhurst. This makes the prospect of walking to the primary school and retail facilities, in particular, less likely.

10.24 However, given the sites location partly within and immediately adjacent to an LBD boundary and connectivity and distance to services and public transport links the application site is considered, on balance, to be sustainably located.

10.25 Whilst part 1 of Policy HD1 of the Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan states that priority will be given to previously developed land over greenfield sites part 2 of the policy supports small scale developments within walking distance of shops and amenities and part 3 of the policy states that greenfield housing should be contiguous with the edge of the existing developed parts of the Parish of approximately 5-10 dwellings, which is considered to be the case in this instance.

Use of Previously Developed Land (PDL) 10.26 Annexe 2 of the NPPF defines ‘previously developed land’. This is, inter alia, defined as land which has previously been occupied by permanent or fixed surfaced infrastructure. Scrublands are excluded from this definition. The site does not amount to PDL.

Housing considerations (social and economic role) 10.27 As set out above, the Council cannot demonstrate a five year land supply. The proposed development would contribute towards the supply.

10.28 In addition, the scheme would result in additional population to support local services (through spending), which is also considered to be a moderate contribution in the balance of considerations, along with the impact on employment during the construction phase.

10.29 Future occupiers would make a contribution to the social vitality of Hawkhurst, as they are likely to use the settlement for some services. As economic benefits for the construction of the proposed units would be short-term, these are limited and would

Page 106 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

carry little weight. There would be some contribution to the economic vitality of Hawkhurst however, from the use of shops, services etc. by the new residents.

Impact on landscape and heritage assets (environmental and social role) 10.30 This is assessed in detail below, however, in summary, the site falls within a designated landscape, the High Weald AONB, and Paragraph 11 of the NPPF, footnote 6 – comments that development should be restricted. This would weigh against the scheme.

10.31 The site lies some 130m, to the north west of The Moor Conservation Area and to the immediate south of the Grade II listed building of Lodge Cottage. This is a reasonable separation distance, and here is development intervening between the historic core of The Moor and the application site.

10.32 The Conservation Officer concludes that “less than substantial harm would be caused to the setting of the Conservation Area (Hawkhurst – The Moor) and the listed building to the north of the site. The proposal would result in a change in character on the site, and any harm identified should be weighed against the benefits of the proposal.

10.33 In terms of landscape impact, and the impact on the AONB, this will be addressed in greater detail below. However, the site comprises of predominantly scrubland that is not considered to significantly contribute to the character of the sites locality. It is also noted that replacement planting is proposed towards the boundaries of the site which would mitigate the loss of planting caused by the proposed built form.

Impact on ecology (environmental role) 10.34 A badger sett is located on the site. It is noted however that badgers are not a European Protected species and so are not covered by the Habitat regulations. The main issue with regard to badgers is welfare.

10.35 A badger survey has been submitted with the application and has been prepared by a suitable professional to a recognised methodology. The Council’s Landscape and Biodiversity Officer has reviewed the application and largely agrees with the recommendations and mitigation methods set out within this document. This matter can be dealt with via conditions and consent would also be required from Natural England for some of these proposed works.

10.36 Whilst there remains an absence of an overarching assessment of net gain and a clear narrative on mitigation requirements, this can also be addressed through conditions and at reserved matters stages. The Council’s Landscape and Biodiversity Officer has also raised no objection to the proposed removal of existing landscaping or the application as a whole.

Summary of whether the proposal comprises sustainable development 10.37 Overall, the proposal is considered to comprise sustainable development. Having regard to the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the requirements of Paragraph 11 of the NPPF, planning permission should therefore be granted unless any other material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance it is considered that the provision of up to nine additional dwellings, located within a sustainable location, would contribute to the Borough’s housing need, creating social and economic benefits. As such it is considered that the proposal as part of a finely balanced decision meets the overarching aims of the NPPF to achieve sustainable development. The following sections of the report assess whether the proposal accords with other elements of policy in the NPPF and the Development Plan.

Page 107 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Overall, the proposal is considered to comprise sustainable development and there is no objection in principle to the proposal.

Heritage considerations including impact on listed buildings and The Moor Conservation Area 10.38 Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and case law makes it clear that, amongst other things, when a development will harm a heritage asset of its setting, the decision-maker must give that harm considerable importance and weight; with reference to S.72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 makes it clear that the decision-maker is only asked to preserve the special character and appearance of the Conservation Area and not enhance it. It is necessary to consider therefore the level of harm caused to the CA and listed buildings, the impact on the AONB is addressed in other sections of this report.

10.39 NPPF section 192 states that in determining planning applications, ‘local planning authorities should take account of ….’the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness’. Distinctiveness includes the local pattern of street blocks and plots, building forms, details and materials, style and vernacular, landform and gardens and wildlife and habitat. Distinctiveness is about an area’s function, history and culture and its potential need for change, not just the built environment. Paragraph 194 highlights that any harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset should require clear and convincing justification. Paragraph 196 sets out that where a development proposal would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of an asset the harm should be balanced against the public benefit.

10.40 The means of access will be via the existing Red Oak access, with no impact therefore on the approach to the Conservation Area, given the sites set back from the main road of Horns Road. The scale of development proposed in this instance is relatively minor, but nevertheless there would be some small amount of harm to the rural setting of the cottages, which were previously isolated. A 1950s development stops before the cross roads and this allows some appreciation of the buildings in their original setting. Landscaping would assist with this, but masking with green boundaries alone will not hide the impact of additional development on land which was previously undeveloped.

10.41 The area is the oldest centre of development here, with a particularly rural character and organic growth to it, in slight contrast to the Hawkhurst - High Gate and All Saints Conservation Area. The Red Oak development, though well established, as a cul de sac development of a fairly regular layout, relates more to the modern development to the west of the Conservation Area and therefore the level of harm is considered to be very minor. However, there is a small amount of impact on the setting of the Conservation Area by continuing a harmful form of development (continuing the 'dead end' with little legibility or reference to the historic grain of the Conservation Area).

10.42 The Council’s Conservation Officer concludes that the development would be at the lower end of less than substantial harm which could be mitigated by an appropriate landscaping condition as well as use of roofing materials as suggested in the statements provided.

10.43 Given the identified housing need, and contribution towards the supply, this contribution needs to be balanced against the “less than substantial harm” caused to

Page 108 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

the conservation area and grade II listed building. On balance, it is considered that there is a public benefit to be weighed against the level of harm in this instance.

Impact on the AONB 10.44 Adopted Development Plan Policy (including Core policies 4 and 14) requires the conservation and enhancement of the AONB and rural landscape. As set out above, the site is sensitive due to its position within the AONB and being on the edge of a historic settlement, a settlement that demonstrates key components of the AONB. The NPPF confirms that a policy of restraint applies within the AONB. However, it is important to establish the character of the site and the surrounding area, that is currently one of developed land, partially within and adjacent to a small settlement.

10.45 The High Weald AONB Management Plan details that the AONB as a whole is “characterised by dispersed historic settlement, ancient routeways, an abundance of woodland, wooded heaths and shaws, and small irregularly shaped fields. These are draped over a deeply incised and ridged landform of clays and sandstones with numerous gill/ghyll streams, and are closely related to socio-economic characteristics that have roots extending deep into history”.

10.46 Paragraph 172 of the NPPF confirms that the revised NPPF gives great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in….Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues”.

10.47 The site falls within Local Landscape Character Area 11 Hawkhurst Wooded Farmland. This is identified as a peaceful, managed, farmed landscape of pasture and open arable land on the gentle open slopes… fields are bounded by thick shaws with some deep intersecting ghylls. Key characteristics include small scale pasture landscape with a peaceful rural ambience opening out into larger rolling arable slopes to the valleys, with accessible settled landscape crossed by numerous roads and rural lanes. Hawkhurst is located on the broad, high plateau on the main ridgeline between the Rother Valley and the Hexden Channel.

10.48 Objectives include “Control of further development proposals which could adversely affect the balance of settled/farmed landscape and tip the scales away from a rural quality to a more urban character”, avoid any form of large-scale development, as there is no precedent for this within the area, avoid deterioration of the currently high quality built environment and vernacular heritage. The LBO comments that the site is consistent with the character area within which it sits, and large scale development would be a particular concern, would run counter to the local objectives and has not demonstrated it would preserve and enhance landscape character.

10.49 From discussions with the Council’s Landscape and Biodiversity Officer and Tree Officer the site is not considered to significantly contribute to the character of the area and the scrubland and vegetation proposed to be removed is not of significance. Additional planting is proposed across the site which would soften the visual impact of the proposed development. The proposal, on balance, is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the character or appearance of the wider landscape or AONB.

Design and Layout 10.50 In design terms the proposal falls to be considered against the relevant policies and guidance at local and national level. Local Plan Policy EN1 requires the design of a proposal to respect the context of its site and that the proposal would not result in the

Page 109 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

loss of significant buildings, related spaces, trees, shrubs, hedges, or other features important to the character of the built up area. Local Plan Policy EN25 seeks to ensure that proposals will have a minimum impact upon the landscape character of the locality and would not result in an unsympathetic change to the rural landscape or character of the area.

10.51 Part 12 of the NPPF addresses good design, which is a key aspect of sustainable development (para 124). Para 127, inter alia, requires that developments respond to local character and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, whilst not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation; also that they are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping. Importantly, para 130 of the NPPF states that where the design of a development accords with clear expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development.

10.52 Policy LP1 of the Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan states that proposals should not have an unacceptable adverse visual impact on the landscape setting of the village or views of the key landmarks. Policy LP2 seeks for the conservation and enhancement of the AONB.

10.53 The scheme proposes up to 9 residential units. The indicative layout shows a three storey apartment block towards the north of the site and a terrace row of three houses towards the east with parking to the front of the buildings. The design of the buildings would be determined under the reserved matters application. However, the indicative layout does not appear cramped or result in an overly developed site and the designs of the building would be considered to respect the sites locality. Policy HD2 of the Neighbourhood Plan seeks to ensure a future housing mix and indicates that there is a need for smaller units in Hawkhurst, which this proposal would contribute towards. The development would be relatively well screened from surrounding public vantage points by boundary trees and landscaping and existing properties. The general design and layout is considered to be acceptable and be in keeping with the general character of the area. The proposal would be considered to reflect settlement pattern within the wider setting. As indicated by the Parish Council the detailed elements of the design and its reference from the village would be appraised at reserved matters stage.

10.54 It is also considered that a new building, built to modern day building standards and requirements is likely to be of an energy efficiency level and therefore considered to meet the requirements of Policy HD3.

Trees 10.55 The site is an attractive location, and provides a buffer between the housing and the more rural Heansill Lane. The trees on the site appear to be self sown specimen and from discussions with the Council’s Tree Officer are of mediocre quality as individuals, although have a better combined group value. The individual trees would not warrant a TPO.

10.56 The trees considered to be of most value are the mature ones outside of the application site and on the opposite side of Heansill Lane. The RPAs of these trees would not extend into the site. On the plan, it appears that the canopy of one of these trees, a large Oak, extends quite close to unit 3. When visiting the site it was noted that one of the lower branches of the tree has been snapped off, presumably by a high sided vehicle, and that the main branch above this as a decay pocket resulting from branch loss. The decay pocket will weaken the structure of the branch, making its reduction a sensible management measure, which would lessen the impact of the

Page 110 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

existing overhang. For this reason and from discussions with the Council’s Tree Officer the layout shown is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the trees of most value surrounding the site. The proposed tree planting and any tree protection measures would be dealt with in the landscaping reserved matter.

Residential Amenity 10.57 The proposed development is considered to have the most impact upon Lodge Cottage to the north of the site and Santer House and Gunther House both to the south of the site. The assessment below is based on the indicative plans and how these would affect the nearby residents. However, there would be a further full assessment of residential amenity against any future detailed scheme as part of a reserved matters application.

Lodge Cottage 10.58 The layout is not reserved and from the plans provided Lodge Cottage would have a separation distance of approximately 18m from the apartment block shown towards the north of the site. By virtue of this separation distance and boundary trees and planting to be retained the proposal is not considered to be harmful to the residential amenity of Lodge Cottage.

Santer House 10.59 This apartment block is situated on a slightly higher land level to that of the application site and would be set away from the south side elevation of the proposed terrace row by approximately 23m. By virtue of this separation distance and the land levels the proposed development is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon this property and would not cause an unacceptable loss of light, outlook or privacy.

Gunther House 10.60 This building would again be sited on a slightly higher land level than the application site and would be situated approximately 30m away. By virtue of this separation distance and the land levels the proposed development is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon this property and would not cause an unacceptable loss of light, outlook or privacy.

Future Occupiers of Proposed Units 10.61 The proposed units as shown on the indicative layout are not considered to be unduly shaded or overlooked by surrounding development and the private amenity spaces are not considered to be cramped or restricted in size. The existing trees to be retained are not considered to adversely restrict light flow or outlook to the new dwellings. The proposed units are considered to have acceptable living conditions.

Highway Safety and Parking Access 10.62 The proposed development is proposed to be accessed via Red Oak and through the former garage site. This access is considered to be adequate. Whilst it is acknowledged that the development would increase vehicle movements along Red Oak It is not considered that this application could be refused on the grounds of inadequate or unsuitable vehicular access. It is also noted that the access to the adjacent parking spaces, in the footprint of the former garage block, are to be maintained as existing and unaffected by the proposed development. It is also noted that KCC Highways have not raised concerns to the access arrangements in regards to highway and pedestrian safety.

Page 111 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Parking provision for occupiers of the proposed development 10.63 With regards to parking provision for the proposed residential units, the proposal provides 14 parking spaces for the proposed 9 units. The site, as discussed, is also considered to be in a sustainable location and in relatively close proximity to local services. The proposal is considered to accord with KCC parking standards. Therefore, the level of parking provided for the new dwellings is considered to be acceptable for the site’s locality.

Loss of existing parking, and provision of parking for non-occupiers of the proposed development 10.64 A number of objections have been received in regards to the loss of parking in the area and increased parking pressure that would be caused.

10.65 A review of the planning history has indicated that there would appear to be no planning conditions requiring that the surface car parking spaces, be maintained for parking use in association with any residencies within the surrounding area.

10.66 With this in mind, there are no planning controls which could prevent the owners of the site from either physically closing the car parking area, or from introducing car parking controls on the site.

10.67 However, before considering the implications of the above, Officers have assessed whether the loss of surface parking would have a material impact on increasing parking pressure in the surrounding highways, and whether this would have an impact on highway safety. Inspectors have traditionally only given weight to concerns regarding highway safety and any impact on convenience of residents is not considered to be a matter that would warrant refusal of this application.

10.68 From visiting the site it is understood that residents are able to park in the former garage site and along the road of Red Oak without any restrictions or need for a permit. The parking spaces in the location of the former garage block are to be retained as existing and to be unaffected by the proposal. It is understood that currently vehicles park in what is a turning head for the former garage site. This is not a defined parking area or space. The land subject to this application is not a car park. Any parking that takes place on the edge of the site has not been authorised and has occurred by default. Therefore no existing lawful parking spaces are to be lost by the development and the proposed development “consumes its own smoke” by providing sufficient car parking for the proposed residential unit.

10.69 Nonetheless it is considered the loss of the 2/3 vehicles that are understood to currently park in this turning head and which would be displaced could be accommodated in the area and surrounding roads. Their displacement would not result in a highway safety concerns. As stated before, Inspectors have traditionally only given weight to concerns regarding highway safety and any impact on convenience of residents is not considered to be a matter that would warrant refusal of this application.

Contributions 10.70 It is noted that KCC Highways have requested a contribution of £1,000 per dwelling towards public transport services, and improved bus infrastructure adjacent to the site. This is in order to improve the flow of traffic through the A229/A268 junction. However, the NPPG states that contributions should not be sought from developments of 10-units or less. Given that this proposal is for a residential development of up to 9 dwellings, the proposal does not meet the criteria to justify the contribution requested from KCC Highways.

Page 112 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

Emergency Vehicle and Refuse Access 10.71 Concern has been raised regarding the access of emergency vehicles and refuse collection vehicles along Red Oak following the displacement of vehicles from the site. No change to the existing access point onto Red Oak is proposed, and as addressed above it is considered that the displaced cars can be accommodated in the area which would not have a detrimental impact upon access for emergency vehicles and refuse vehicles.

Summary 10.72 Taking the above into account, it is not considered that there would be grounds to refuse this application in relation to the loss of the garaging and parking area or harm to highway safety. The proposals therefore comply with Local Plan Policy TP4.

Flood Risk & Drainage 10.73 In terms of flood risk, the site falls outside of any designated flood zone and the Environment Agency flood maps indicate there is no risk of flooding from any source at this location.

Other Matters 10.74 Concern has also been raised regarding the impact upon local GP practise. The proposal is below the threshold for financial contributions towards providing additional capacity.

10.75 Objections have been raised regarding disruption during the construction phase, but given its temporary nature little weight can be given to this matter. It is considered that due to the relatively small scale of the development a construction management plan is not required. There are greater powers to deal with statutory nuisance from construction sites through Environmental Health Legislation.

Conclusion 10.76 Based on the above, the residential development proposed is considered to be acceptable in principle and would constitute sustainable development. The indicative scale, massing and design of the proposed units is considered to be acceptable and in keeping with the surrounding area. The siting and scale of the proposed dwelling in relation to the neighbouring properties is not considered to be detrimental to residential amenity. It is considered that there is sufficient parking provision to serve the new dwellings and the existing surrounding properties and that the proposal would not be detrimental to highway safety. Issues relating to tree protection and landscaping can be adequately controlled through conditions. It is therefore recommended that this application be approved subject to the conditions set out below. All pre-commencement conditions have been agreed by the applicant which is confirmed in an email.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION – GRANT Subject to the following conditions

1. Approval of the details of the layout, scale, landscaping and appearance (hereafter called "the Reserved Matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before development commences and the development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure Order) 2015 and Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Page 113 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

2. Application for approval of the Reserved Matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun later than the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the Reserved Matters to be approved.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015 and Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

1694-010-P4 – Proposed Site Plan

Insofar as the details shown relate to the access only to the development.

Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved

4. Written details and photographic samples including source/ manufacturer, of bricks, tiles and cladding materials to be used externally shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before construction of any above ground works hereby approved is commenced and the development shall be carried out using the approved external materials.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. This condition is necessary to ensure that details of materials have been provided and approved prior to the building work commencing.

5. Details submitted pursuant to Condition (1) shall show detailed plans and information regarding the following aspects of the proposed development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

a) Materials to be used for final surfacing of the parking area;

b) The storage and screening of refuse and recycling areas;

c) The alignment, height and materials to be used in the construction of all walls, fences or other means of enclosure;

d) Details of the existing and proposed ground levels detailing any changes to levels and including finished ground floor slab levels and any retaining structures and areas of cut and fill. Such matters to be demonstrated through long-sections showing how the site relates to surrounding development.

e) Details of external lighting

f) Scheme of ecological and biodiversity enhancements

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the build quality of the development and in the interests of visual amenity.

Page 114 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

6. The details submitted in pursuance of Condition 1 shall include details of existing trees on site and adjacent to the site boundaries and the approved development shall be carried out in such a manner as to avoid damage to any existing trees to be retained, including their root systems, and other planting to be retained by observing the following:

a) All trees to be preserved shall be marked on site and protected during any operation on site by temporary fencing in accordance with BS 5837:2012. Such tree protection measures shall remain throughout the period of construction; b) No fires shall be lit within the spread of branches or upwind of the trees and other vegetation; c) No materials or equipment shall be stored within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Area of the trees and other vegetation; d) No roots over 50mm diameter shall be cut, and no buildings, roads or other engineering operations shall be constructed or carried out within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Areas of the trees and other vegetation; e) Ground levels within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Areas (whichever the greater) of the trees and other vegetation shall not be raised or lowered in relation to the existing ground level, except as may be otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. f) No trenches for underground services shall be commenced within the Root Protection Areas of trees which are identified as being retained in the approved plans, or within 5m of hedgerows shown to be retained without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Such trenching as might be approved shall be carried out to National Joint Utilities Group recommendations.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality.

7. No equipment, machinery or materials shall be brought onto the site prior to the erection of approved barriers and/or ground protection except to carry out pre commencement operations approved in writing by the local planning authority. These measures shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed, nor fires lit, within any of the protected areas. No alterations shall be made to the siting of barriers and/or ground protection, nor ground levels changed, nor excavations made within these areas without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority;

Reason: These details are required to be implemented prior to the commencement of the development in order to safeguard existing trees to be retained and to ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development.

8. No development shall take place until: an ecological management plan has be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The ecological management plan shall include the following:

a) Description and evaluation of features to be managed. b) Aims and objectives of management. c) Prescriptions for management actions. d) Preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of rolled forward over a five year period). e) Details of the body or organisation responsible for implementation of the plan. f) Ongoing monitoring and remedial measurements.

Page 115 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

This shall supplement the details contained in the Badger Survey submitted. The approved plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the development makes adequate provision for the maintenance of ecological interests. These details are required before the development commences to ensure that ecological interests are adequately safeguarded.

9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (England) 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development shall be carried out within Classes A, B, C, D, E or F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of that Order (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) without prior planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of protecting amenity and the character of the countryside.

10. No development shall take place until:

i) the details required by Condition 1 shall demonstrate that requirements for surface water drainage can be accommodated within the proposed development layout.

ii) Development shall not begin until a detailed sustainable surface water drainage scheme for the site has been submitted to (and approved in writing by) the local planning authority. The detailed drainage scheme shall demonstrate that the surface water generated by this development (for all rainfall durations and intensities up to and including the climate change adjusted critical 100 year storm) can be accommodated and disposed of without increase to flood risk on or off-site.

The drainage scheme shall also demonstrate (with reference to published guidance):

a) that silt and pollutants resulting from the site use can be adequately managed to ensure there is no pollution risk to receiving waters.

b) appropriate operational, maintenance and access requirements for each drainage feature or SuDS component are adequately considered, including any proposed arrangements for future adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker.

The drainage scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the development is served by satisfactory arrangements for the disposal of surface water and to ensure that the development does not exacerbate the risk of on/off site flooding. These details and accompanying calculations are required prior to the commencement of the development as they form an intrinsic part of the proposal, the approval of which cannot be disaggregated from the carrying out of the rest of the development.

11. Occupation of the development is to be implemented to align with the delivery by Southern Water of any sewerage network reinforcement required to ensure that adequate waste water network capacity is available to adequately drain the

Page 116 Agenda Item 8(C) Planning Committee Report 12th June 2019

development.

Reason: In order to ensure that sufficient capacity within the waste water system is created to service the development prior to the occupation of dwellings on the site.

INFORMATIVES

1. As the development involves demolition and / or construction, I would recommend that the applicant is familiar with the Mid Kent Environmental Code of Development Practice. Broad compliance with this document is expected.

2. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure, before the development hereby approved is commenced, that all necessary highway approvals and consents where required are obtained and that the limits of highway boundary are clearly established in order to avoid any enforcement action being taken by the Highway Authority. Across the county there are pieces of land next to private homes and gardens that do not look like roads or pavements but are actually part of the road. This is called ‘highway land’. Some of this land is owned by The Kent County Council (KCC) whilst some are owned by third party owners. Irrespective of the ownership, this land may have ‘highway rights’ over the topsoil. Information about how to clarify the highway boundary can be found at https://www.kent.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/what-we-look-after/highway-land/highway-b oundary-enquiries

3. A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development, please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire SO21 2SW (Tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk. Please read our New Connections Services Charging Arrangements documents which has now been published and is available to read on our website via the following link https://beta.southernwater.co.uk/infrastructure-charges.

Case Officer: James Moysey

Page 117 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 19/00365/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Demolition of existing buildings, erection of 35 no. apartments and associated works including access and landscaping. ADDRESS Land Opposite 46 Quarry Road Quarry Road Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent TN1 2YB RECOMMENDATION to GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement and subject to conditions (please refer to Section 11.0 of the report for full recommendation) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - The site is located within the Limits to Built Development and is previously developed land (PDL). The site is allocated for housing under Policy AL/RTW14 of the Site Allocations Local Plan 2006. The loss of the existing employment land use and the construction of residential development on this site have already been accepted in principle. - The proposal would result in the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with development plan policies. - The scale, location and design of the development would respect the context of the site and preserve the visual amenity of the street scene. - There would not be any significant adverse impact upon occupants of neighbouring properties. - The traffic movements generated by the development can be accommodated without detriment to highway safety and suitable measures (through a developer contribution) have been proposed to address the highway impact of the proposals. - The proposed parking layout would make adequate independent parking provision for each resulting property and would facilitate safe access to the highway. - Other environmental impacts have been assessed and there are not any which are potentially significant and which cannot be controlled by conditions. - Other issues raised have been assessed and there are not any which would warrant refusal of the application or which cannot be satisfactorily controlled by condition or legal agreement.

Page 119 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL The following are considered to be material to the application: Contributions (to be secured through Section 106 legal agreement): £150,000 towards the provision of off-site affordable housing within the Borough. £27,783 towards the expansion of The Skinners School (secondary education). £12,302.15 towards the Adult Education element of the Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub. £1,391.25 towards additional equipment for Tunbridge Wells Youth Centre. £5,000 towards a possible residents permit scheme in the locality. £1,575 towards the Car Club. £20,000 towards the design and implementation of measures to improve cycling/walking infrastructure in the locality. £3,500 towards management of the Hilbert Woods Local Nature Reserve. £69,743 towards refurbishment and upgrading of the football changing rooms at Hilbert Oast. £23,472 towards refurbishment, reconfiguration or extension of Grosvenor & St James Medical Centre, Clanricarde Medical Centre and/or Abbey Court Medical Centre. TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS: £314,766.40 Net increase in numbers of jobs: Decrease but closed for over a year and nos. unknown Estimated average annual workplace salary spend in Borough through net increase in numbers of jobs: See above The following are not considered to be material to the application: Estimated annual council tax benefit for TWBC: £6,257 Estimated annual council tax benefit total: £63,159 Annual New Homes Bonus (for first 4 years): £35,000 Estimated annual business rates benefits for Borough: - £18,000

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Significant major application of over 20 dwellings and recommended for approval. WARD St James PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Decimus Property (Grosvenor) Ltd N/A AGENT Neal Thompson DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 21/05/19 22/03/19 26/02/19 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): 97/01608/FUL Retrospective – Retention of building for storage Approved 08/01/98 92/01011/FUL Erection of temporary storage building Approved 06/11/92 74/00792 Provision of access road and drainage Approved 09/05/75 74/00490 Reserved Matters – Proposed sweet factory and Approved 19/11/74

Page 120 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

bakery

Medway Depot:

09/01312/FULMJ Demolish existing buildings and provide 8 Approved 27/08/09 residential blocks containing a total of 150 residential units. Proposal includes associated high quality landscaping, car parking, cycle parking and the provision of a public cycle and pedestrian route 08/02371/FULMJ Demolish existing buildings and provide 8 Approved 23/12/08 residential blocks containing a total of 150 residential units to include the provision of 39% affordable housing, including landscaping, car parking, cycle parking, and the provision of a public cycle and pedestrian route.

MAIN REPORT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The site is located to the west of Quarry Road and lies in close proximity to Grosvenor Bridge. It has an existing vehicular access from Medway Road. The southern part of the site is largely dominated by hardstanding. There are two existing buildings on site comprising just over 800m2 of B2 industrial floorspace. The larger building was formerly used as a chocolate factory for Charbonnel et Walker, the smaller building was ancillary to this use. The site has been empty for over a year following the relocation of the chocolate factory to Dorchester.

1.02 The surrounding area is predominately residential, with two-storey dwellings located to the south and east along Quarry Road. To the north of the site (on the opposite side of Grosvenor Bridge) is Bridge Court, which is a large, six storey apartment building (with additional underground parking). Another six storey apartment building (Kensington House) is located to the west of the site on lower level land. There is a car dealership to the north-east (adjacent to the junction with St James Road and Quarry Road).

1.03 The 21st Century cycle route is located to the west of the site and provides links to Tunbridge Wells town centre and the North Farm industrial estate. It also provides access to Hilbert & Grosvenor Recreation Ground. There is an area of green space to the north, adjacent to Grosvenor Bridge, which provides amenity space for the residents of Kensington House.

1.04 There are a number of trees along the eastern and western boundaries of the site and also adjacent to the vehicular access. There is a telecommunications mast to the west of the vehicular access and an electrical sub-station adjacent to the north-east corner of the site.

2.0 PROPOSAL

Page 121 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

2.01 The proposal seeks to demolish the existing buildings and construct a new five storey building to provide 35 apartments (comprising of 8 nos. one bed units and 27 nos. two bed units). The upper floors would be set back from Quarry Road. The part of the building closest to Quarry Road would be two storeys high.

2.02 The proposal would use the existing vehicular access. It would provide 35 car parking spaces, one drop-off space, four motorcycle spaces and 40 cycle spaces (including three visitor cycle spaces). The parking would be located at lower ground floor level, with the majority situated underneath the built form. Residents/visitors would be able to access the apartments through the central core (stairs and lift) located within the car park. The main pedestrian access to the building would be off Quarry Road. A path is proposed through the site, linking the vehicle drop-off/delivery bay to the pedestrian access.

2.03 The proposed building would have a contemporary design approach. It would be predominantly of brick construction with powder coated aluminium doors and windows. A lightweight rainscreen cladding is proposed to the top floor, which would be set back behind the main façade. Sedum roofs are proposed for the terraces. Lightweight glass balustrades are proposed for the balconies.

2.04 The proposal seeks to retain some of the existing trees along the southern and western boundaries. Twelve of the existing lower grade trees and one group of trees would be removed as part of the proposal. New tree planting is proposed as part of this scheme.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-)

Site Area 0.18ha 0.18ha No change No. of storeys 2 5 +3 Max height (excluding lift shaft) 9.4m 18.4m +9m No. of residential units 0 35 +35 No. of bed spaces 0 97 +97 No. of affordable units 0 £150,000 +£150,000 towards off-site provision Car parking spaces (inc. disabled) 17 (inc. 2 HGV 36 (inc. one +19 spaces) drop off space) Cycle spaces 0 40 +40 Motor cycle spaces 0 4 +4

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

- Ashdown Forest 15 Km Habitat Regulation Assessment Zone - Inside the Limits to Built Development - Local Development Framework Site - Local Nature Reserve Hilbert Woods, Tunbridge Wells - Local Plan 2006 Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential) - Potentially Contaminated Land - Public Access Land Hilbert Woods, Tunbridge Wells - Section 106 Agreement Medway Depot, Grosvenor Bridge, Tunbridge Wells

Page 122 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

National Planning Policy Framework 2019 National Planning Practice Guidance

Development Plan: Site Allocations Local Plan Adopted 2016 Policy AL/RTW14: Land at Medway Road

Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 Core Policy 1: Delivery of development Core Policy 3: Transport infrastructure Core Policy 4: Environment Core Policy 5: Sustainable design and construction Core Policy 6: Housing provision Core Policy 7: Employment provision Core Policy 8: Retail, leisure and community provision Core Policy 9: Development in Royal Tunbridge Wells

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 Policy EN1: Development control criteria Policy EN10: Archaeological sites Policy EN15: Statutory local nature reserves and other non-statutory nature conservation sites Policy EN18: Flood risk Policy H2: Small and intermediate sized dwellings Policy H5: Residential development within the Limits to Built Development Policy R2: Recreation open space in development of more than 15 bedspaces Policy CS4: Development contributions to school provision in development of more than 15 bedspaces Policy TP3: Multi-modal access for large-scale residential developments Policy TP4: Access to road network Policy TP5: Vehicle parking standards Policy TP6: Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential) Vehicle Parking Standards Policy TP9: Cycle Parking Policy TP18: Cycle Route Network in Royal Tunbridge Wells

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD): Recreation and Open Space SPD 2006 Affordable Housing SPD 2007 Contaminated Land SPD 2006 Renewable Energy SPD 2007 Noise and Vibration SPD 2014

Other documents: Kent Design Guide Review: Interim Guidance Note 3 (Residential parking)

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 Four site notices were put up around the site on 26th February 2019. The application was also advertised in a local newspaper on 1st March 2019.

6.02 One private representation received objecting to the development:

Page 123 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

- Parking already a problem in Kensington Court. Most flats have more than one car and up to three. - Insufficient parking proposed, will result in overflow parking into neighbours’ car park. No visitor spaces. - Building is very tall and close to the boundary. - Concerned boundaries will almost overhang car park. - Concern construction vehicles may block Medway Road.

6.03 Two neutral responses from private representatives:

- No objection in principle. Site well suited to residential development. - Significant parking issues in vicinity. Insufficient parking proposed. Locally recommended levels recommend one space per apartment plus 0.2 visitor spaces per property. - The area has a lot of empty cycle storage spaces. The level of cycle parking is out of proportion with demand. Recommend this is used for vehicular parking. - If spaces are allocated, visitors will be forced to park elsewhere. Residential Parking Standards recommend non-allocated parking. Unclear whether this approach is to be followed. Allocated parking in the development adjacent to Grosvenor Bridge has resulted in an underutilised car park and overflow parking. - The site is allocated for approximately 20 dwellings. Over intensive development. - The building is quite tall. Concern about loss of daylight to properties on Quarry Road in the evening. Appreciate one side of the building has been designed in a stepped manner in an attempt to minimise this. - Insufficient consultation. - UKPN comments regarding noise/vibrations should be taken into account. - A large radio mast will be installed on the corner of Quarry Road opposite the Mitsubishi Garage. Impacts on health of future residents need to be taken into consideration. - Concern that Medway Road will be blocked during construction works. Construction workers should not use neighbours’ car park. Deliveries should be off-loaded within the site.

6.04 One letter received supporting the application:

- Support application. - Only concern is there will be one parking space per flat. - Would object to residents being eligible for permits on local streets as it is already difficult to find parking in the area.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

West Kent Clinical Commissioning Group 7.01 (13/3/19): The proposal would have a direct impact on general practice services, which would require mitigation through the payment of an appropriate financial contribution. The proposal would generate approximately 65 new patient registrations. The practices in this area are already under pressure and only have a small amount of capacity to accommodate growth. £23,472 is required towards the refurbishment, reconfiguration or extension at Grosvenor & St James Medical Centre, Clanricarde Medical Centre and/or Abbey Court Medical Centre.

Page 124 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Southern Water 7.02 (14/03/19): Initial investigations indicate that Southern Water can provide foul sewage disposal to service the proposed development.

7.03 The application makes reference to drainage using Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). SUDS rely upon facilities which are adoptable by sewerage undertakers. The applicant needs to ensure arrangements exist for the long-term maintenance of the SUDS facilitates. Good management would avoid flooding from the proposed surface water system, which may result in the inundation of the foul sewerage system. Recommend further details are required by condition.

7.04 It is the responsibility of the developer to make suitable provision for the disposal of surface water. Discharge to sewer shall only occur where necessary and adequate capacity exists. This would require prior approval of Southern Water. Recommend condition and informative.

7.05 The detailed design for the proposed basement should take into account the possibility of surcharging of the public sewers. Recommend informative.

UK Power Networks 7.06 (03/05/19): No objection [Officer note: following the submission of additional information].

7.07 (27/02/19 & 24/04/19): Transformers emit a low level hum, which can cause annoyance to nearby properties. This noise is mainly airborne and more noticeable during the summer when people sleep with their windows open. A problem can occur when footings of the building are too close to substation structures. Vibration from the transformer can be transmitted through the ground into the walls of adjacent buildings. Recommend the distance between the building and substation is over seven metres. Footings of new buildings should be separate from the substation structure. Buildings should be designed so that rooms of high occupancy e.g. bedrooms and living rooms do no overlook or have windows opening out over the substation. Object to the proposal.

KCC Highways and Transportation 7.08 (15/05/19) The Highway Authority recommend that the building is orientated so servicing and drop off would naturally take place from Medway Road. Such activity cannot be tolerated from Quarry Road, where any stopping vehicle would obstruct the carriageway or mount the footway in an attempt not to do so.

7.09 The developer has proposed deliveries to be taken via the car park, but it is considered that pressure for gates is likely to arise once the units are occupied and alternative arrangements for deliveries would therefore be required. The developer has also proposed bollards on Quarry Road which would help to discourage drivers from stopping here and coupled with alternative access arrangements (probably with a pedestrian route from Medway Road into the flats), would on balance go some way to address Highway Authority concerns. Recommend conditions regarding details of proposed arrangements for drop off and delivery, a Grampian condition for off-site highway works to include bollards on Quarry Road and a Construction Management Plan.

7.10 (02/05/19): This is a sensitive part of the network, where drop off and delivery activity cannot be tolerated from Quarry Road. The Highway Authority requires a robust solution which is self-enforcing and convenient for drivers to access the site from Medway Road. Not persuaded that drivers would drive into the car park, as this

Page 125 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

would add significantly to the drop off time and would raise security issues in the longer term if the car park is accessible to all. Prefer deliveries to fall naturally from Medway Road through good design across the site, rather than a cumbersome add- on solution. Improved arrangements are necessary.

7.11 (02/04/19): Quarry Road is a busy and important local distributor road. With the current arrangements deliveries and drops-offs would take place from Quarry Road. This would be close to the bend and junction with St James’ Road and where existing on-street parking bays opposite are well used and therefore any vehicle delivery/drop-off to the site would cause an obstruction. Alternative arrangements are required before the Highway Authority can support the proposal.

7.12 The proposal would result in an increase in trips during peak hours and across the day. No objections to the principle of the development, subject to revisions to the site layout. This should be designed to ensure that drop-offs and deliveries can be accommodated from Medway Road, rather than Quarry Road. The site offers sustainable choices for travel.

7.13 Other recent residential development in this area has access, including pedestrian access taken from minor roads, rather than the main road.

7.14 The area suffers parking stress. The provision of additional visitor spaces would help to ensure that the development does not add to these pressures. Details of the vehicles used for swept path analysis is required. Recommend conditions to secure measures for electric vehicle charging, car club provision and cycle parking.

KCC Economic Development 7.15 (08/03/19): The proposal would have an additional impact on the delivery of community services, which would require mitigation through the payment of an appropriate financial contribution:

- Primary Education – currently no requirement. - Secondary Education - £27,783.00 towards The Skinners School expansion. - Community Learning – £12,302.15 towards the adult education element of the Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub. - Youth Service - £1,391.15 towards additional equipment for the Tunbridge Wells Youth Centre.

7.16 Next Generation Access Broadband should be included in the project.

KCC Archaeological Officer 7.17 (19/03/19): The site lies close to the Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells Railway Line. There is a Corporation Yard identifiable on site on the 2nd Edition Ordnance Survey map, which dates it to the late 19th Century. Remains associated with the local railway heritage may be exposed during groundworks. Recommend condition.

KCC Flood and Water Management 7.18 (15/03/19): Generally happy with the principles proposed for dealing with surface water, namely infiltration to ground with attenuation tanks. Recommend a number of advisories and conditions regarding detailed design of the drainage system and ground investigation.

Page 126 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Kent Police 7.19 (14/03/19 & 23/04/19): Design should help create an accessible and safe environment while minimising crime and disorder and fear of crime. Recommend the following issues are addressed including: - Development layout and permeability. - Perimeter, boundary and divisional treatments. The use of railing fencing is noted, this needs to provide adequate defensible space to protect any ground floor windows in the interests of privacy and security. - Under croft parking areas can attract crime and anti-social behaviour. All vehicle and pedestrian entrances/exits should be gated and full audio visual access control measures should be installed. -. Bollard lighting is purely for wayfinding and can be easily obstructed. It does not project sufficient light at the ridge height making it difficult to recognise facial feature and as a result causes an increase in the fear of crime. It should be avoided. - Full audio visual access systems should be installed and along with recordable CCTV with a minimum of 31 day retention. No trades button should be installed. - Doorsets and windows should be certified to PAS24:2016. - Security compartmentalisation will be required on all levels as the proposed development contains over 25 residential units. This can be achieved by access control measures for any stair/lift cores or at each individual floor level. - Mail delivery will need to be carefully considered.

7.20 Recommend condition regarding crime prevention and safety.

Mid Kent Environmental Services 7.21 (01/03/19): No objections subject to conditions. The acoustic report submitted with the application identifies that the site is subject to road noise, but not at particularly high levels. The acoustic report recommends minimum sound reduction requirements for the envelope (wall, window/patio doors and ventilators) for bedrooms and living areas.

7.22 The site is potentially contaminated land. A contaminated land condition is therefore required. Before demolition the building should be checked for the presence of asbestos and any found should only be removed by a licensed contractor.

7.23 The site is outside the Air Quality Management Area, although would require air quality monitoring during the construction phase. Due to the scale of this proposal, a calculation of pollutant emissions costs from the vehicular traffic generated by the development should be carried out, utilising the most recent DEFRA Emissions Factor Toolkit and the latest DEFRA IGCB Air Quality Damage Costs for the pollutants considered, to calculate the resultant damage cost. The calculation should include:

- Identifying the additional vehicular trip rates generated by the proposal (from the Transport Assessment); - The emissions calculated for the pollutants of concern (NOx and PM10) [from the Emissions Factor Toolkit]; - The air quality damage costs calculation for the specific pollutant emissions (from DEFRA IGCB); - The result should be totalled for a five year period to enable mitigation implementation.

The calculation is summarised below: Road Transport Emission Increase = Summation [Estimated trip rate for 5 years X Emission rate per 10 km per vehicle type X Damage Costs]

Page 127 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

7.24 The pollution damage costs will determine the level of mitigation/compensation required to negate the impacts of the development on local air quality. Recommend condition quantifying what measures or offsetting schemes are to be included in the development which will reduce the transport related air pollution of the development during construction and when in occupation.

7.25 (03/06/19 verbal): Environmental Health Officer happy with the measures proposed to mitigate air pollution e.g. walking/cycling contribution, contribution towards the car club, provision of cycle parking and electric vehicle charging points.

TWBC Parking Services 7.26 (26/02/19): No objections. However, on-street parking in the area is well used. There have been complaints about obtrusive parking in Medway Close (albeit not recently). Recommend on-site parking is proposed at the maximum level permitted under current standards. Recommend contribution of £5,000 towards the possible implementation of a residents’ permit scheme in the area.

TWBC Housing Register and Development Manager 7.27 (03/06/19) The viability assessment has been independently verified, therefore prepared to accept an off-site contribution for affordable housing for this proposal. It is very difficult for our Registered Provider partners to provide and manage affordable housing on site where accommodation is in one block due to mixing of tenures and the service charges that are applicable in a block of this size. Where there is only one block, the Council are usually only able to obtain one or two shared ownership units on site which will not assist households on the Housing Register in need of social rented housing. Therefore recommend that the sum available for affordable housing is accepted and used by a Registered Provider or equivalent body to provide social rented housing elsewhere in the Borough. The sum should be secured via a Section 106 Agreement and secured by the Council at the commencement of development.

TWBC Sustainability Manager 7.28 (09/05/19): The development does not lie within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), but is within the vicinity of the A26 AQMA and close to the town centre. Encouraging residents to use sustainable travel modes is essential to improve local air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ease local congestion/parking pressures. The proposal provides funding towards the Car Club and supports cycling infrastructure in the locality.

7.29 Recommend a condition requiring the developer to provide information on sustainable travel on initial occupation of the units. The travel packs shall provide details on the local car club, including joining/membership information and the opportunity for free membership and £20 driving credit per household on a first come first served basis, whilst funding lasts. Recommend condition regarding electric vehicle charging, including providing ducting to all parking spaces in line with the Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Guidance Document.

TWBC Economic Development 7.30 (15/05/19) Improvements to cycling and walking infrastructure are required in the locality. Recommend funding is secured towards the design and implementation of such measures in the vicinity, in particular Grosvenor Bridge, Quarry Road, Camden Road and roads immediately to the east and west of these.

Page 128 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

TWBC Landscape and Biodiversity Officer (verbal) 7.31 (15/05/19): The existing site has a low potential for biodiversity. The loss of poor quality trees and the redevelopment, including new tree planting, sedum roofs and birds/bat boxes would result in a net gain in biodiversity.

TWBC Urban Design Officer 7.32 (03/04/19): Generally supportive of the development. Good use of the land and reflects the urban grain. The design is of a good standard. Prefer the portico to be reduced in size to better reflect the scale of the surrounding properties on Quarry Road. However, the portico makes the entrance very legible.

Royal Tunbridge Wells Civic Society 7.33 (18/03/19) Section 106 contributions have been negotiated to the value of £172,000; however, no contribution is offered for affordable housing. Details in the Viability Appraisal do not permit a complete picture, but it is noted that the land acquisition amounted to £1.9 million against an existing use value of £870,000 and thus the developer has paid about £1 million as ‘hope value’ and the profit calculation is based on this. The construction cost quoted similarly represents about £230,000 per flat, which seems unduly high in the absence of special factors. Do not consider the case for nil contribution towards affordable housing has been made.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS

8.01 The proposal seeks to provide 35 residential units on a previously developed site within the Limits of Built Development of Royal Tunbridge Wells. The Site Allocations DPD allocates the site for residential development under Policy AL/RTW14 for residential use. The Council have therefore accepted the loss of the former commercial use. The proposed level of housing optimises the potential of the site.

8.02 The proposed development significantly enhances the existing setting, character and appearance of the site. The height, mass and scale of the apartment block reflect other flatted buildings to the north and west. A formal pedestrian entrance off Quarry Road provides an active frontage to the apartment block and enhances the wider public realm.

8.03 A key component of the layout is that the existing green open space along the southern edge of Grosvenor Bridge has been retained, which preserves the green setting of the highway.

8.04 The apartment block has been sensitively designed to preserve adjacent amenity ensuring that there would be no loss of privacy, light or outlook. The loss of the existing use would also improve adjoining amenity.

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

9.01 The following plans and documents have been taken into consideration during the determination of this application:

Planning Statement dated February 2019 Design and Access Statement Financial Viability Statement dated January 2019 Acoustic Planning Assessment dated 17 January 2019 Development Appraisal by Quod dated 7 February 2019 Technical Note 1: Substation Noise by Sharps Redmore dated 8 April 2019 Letter from agent dated 18 April 2019

Page 129 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Response to Viability Review by Quod dated 15 April 2019 Sustainability & Energy Statement dated 30 January 2019 Ecological Appraisal dated January 2019 Tree Survey and Arboricultural Integration Report dated 16 November 2018 Transport Statement dated February 2019 Transport Addendum received 18 April 2019 Email from agent dated 26 April 2019 re highways matters Geo-Environmental and Geo-technical Preliminary Risk Assessment dated February 2019 Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy by GTA Civils dated January 2019

Drawing numbers: 18_25_100: Location Plan 18_25_101/D: Proposed Site Plan 18_25_102/D: Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan 18_25_103/B: Proposed Upper Ground Floor Plan 18_25_104/A: Proposed First Floor Plan 18_25_105/A: Proposed Second Floor Plan 18_25_106/A: Proposed Third Floor Plan 18_25_107/B: Proposed Fourth Floor Plan 18_25_108/C: Proposed Roof Plan 18_25_109/B: North Elevation 18_25_110/A: West Elevation 18_25_111/C: South Elevation 18_25_112/B: East Elevation 18_25_113/B: Street Elevation from Grosvenor Bridge 18_25_114/B: Site Sections 18_36_115/B: Site Plan – Indicating Existing Buildings R1638/2: Site Survey 18_25_50/C: Existing Plans & Elevations 18_25_51/A: Existing Plans & Elevations 18_25_52: Existing Shed 3 x Computer Generated Images of new building 7746/101/A: Vehicle Tracking

10.0 APPRAISAL

Principle of Development 10.01 The site lies within the Limits to Built Development for Tunbridge Wells, in a predominantly residential area. It is a sustainable location, within walking distance of Tunbridge Wells town centre and in close proximity to the 21st Century Cycle Route. The site is previously developed land and was last used as a chocolate factory. This use ceased over a year ago and the site remains vacant. The existing buildings are in a poor condition and unlikely to be suitable for an alternative economic use. The site is allocated for residential development (approximately 20 units) within the Council’s Site Allocation Local Plan under Policy AL/RTW14. The loss of the existing employment use and redevelopment of the site for residential have been deemed acceptable through the Site Allocations Local Plan. Coupled with the fact that the site is located within a sustainable location (within the Limits to Built Development) and is previously developed land, there is no objection to the principle of the development. The principle of the development complies with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1, 6 and 7 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, Policy H5 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 and Policy AL/RTW14 of the Site Allocations Local Plan 2016.

Page 130 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

10.02 The Local Planning Authority is currently unable to demonstrate a five year housing land supply in accordance with the Objectively Assessed Need figure. The latest position indicates that the Council has a 4.69 year housing supply (as at 1st April 2019). This is based on the most recent supply calculations in accordance with the 2019 NPPF and inclusive of a 5% buffer.

10.03 The proposed development would provide much needed housing for the Borough in a sustainable, town centre location. The proposed number of units exceeds the estimated yield set out in Policy AL/RTW14 by around 15 units, however, the scale of the development would be in keeping with other apartment blocks in the nearby vicinity. A full assessment of the impact of the proposal on visual amenity is set out below. There is no objection to the density of the development proposed, which is considered to make effective use of the land in this sustainable location, which has been allocated for housing.

Visual Impact 10.04 The existing buildings and large area of hardstanding appear industrial in character and detract from the visual amenity of the locality. Demolition of these buildings and the construction of a new building with associated landscaping have the potential to enhance the street scene and public realm.

10.05 The proposed building would have a contemporary design approach. It would be predominantly of brick construction with powder coated aluminium doors and windows. Lightweight rainscreen cladding is proposed to the top floor, which would be set back behind the main façade. This helps to minimise the visual impact of the top floor. Sedum roofs and planters are proposed on the building to help to green and soften it. Lightweight glass balustrades are proposed for the balconies, some of which are projecting from the building, which help to articulate the facades and provide visual interest to the elevations. Full details of external materials can be secured by condition.

10.06 The overall height, mass and scale of the proposed building reflect that of other apartment buildings to the north and west of the site and reflect the existing urban grain. The upper floors are recessed in order to reduce the prominence of the highest part of the building. The building would step down from five storeys to two storeys at the entrance to respond to the scale of the existing two-storey development along Quarry Road. Vehicular access would remain as existing from Medway Road, with pedestrian access from Quarry Road. The Council’s Urban Design Officer has raised some concern about the size of the portico in relation to the surrounding properties; however, it is considered that the portico is a positive design feature; and the Urban Design Officer acknowledges that it would provide a legible entrance that would announce the building and provide an active frontage and therefore no amendments have been sought to this part of the proposal.

10.07 The proposed building would be set back from Grosvenor Bridge (behind an area of green space to the north of the site), thereby retaining the green setting and green buffer along the Grosvenor Bridge that provides an entrance to Hilbert and Grosvenor Recreation Ground. The building line would respect adjacent development along Quarry Road and Grosvenor Bridge.

10.08 The proposal maximises the development potential of the site, whilst providing sufficient space for meaningful soft landscaping around the southern, western and eastern boundaries. The proposed building would be larger and higher than the existing built form and would come closer to the site boundaries. It would therefore

Page 131 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

have a greater visual impact on the public realm. However, the building has been well designed and the building’s form, with the recessed top floors and set backs, help to minimise its overall mass. It is considered that the proposed building and associated landscaping would enhance the visual amenity of the locality.

Highway Safety and Parking 10.09 The proposed development would utilise the existing vehicular access from Medway Road. There are 35 car parking spaces and an additional drop-off/delivery space proposed, along with four motorcycle spaces. The site is located within a sustainable location, close to the town centre and within the Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential). Policy TP6 of the Local Plan states that within the Central Access Zone a maximum of one parking space per new build residential unit shall be provided. This proposal would provide one space per unit, which would be the maximum number of parking spaces for the development as set out by Policy TP6 of the Local Plan.

10.10 Concerns have been raised by private representatives that there is insufficient parking to service the development and this would lead to overflow parking off-site in an area that already suffers from parking stress. However, with the parking level proposed at the maximum level set out in policy there is no evidence to conclude a refusal on these grounds would be justified. A drop-off/delivery space is also proposed in order to provide an area for deliveries to park. A contribution of £5,000 has been sought by the Council’s Parking Service towards a possible residents’ permit scheme in the locality, which can be secured by Section 106 agreement.

10.11 The site offers future residents a number of sustainable transport modes. It is within walking distance of the town centre services/facilities and has good access to public transport (including trains and buses). It is also located in close proximity to the 21st Century Cycle Route, which provides access to Tunbridge Wells town centre and High Brooms. The proposal provides 37 secure cycle spaces and three visitor cycle spaces. There is a car club vehicle sited on the opposite side of Quarry Road. The applicant proposes a financial contribution (£1,575) to incentivise first occupants to use the car club service. A contribution of £20,000 is also proposed for the design (with the remainder of the funds going towards implementation) of measures to improve cycling/walking infrastructure in the immediate vicinity. The financial contributions would incentivise future residents to use sustainable modes of transport, whilst meeting other policy objectives, including improving air quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and supporting healthy lifestyles.

10.12 The Transport Statement submitted with the application states that the “redevelopment of the site from the previous chocolate factory to residential apartments will result in:

- 8 additional two way trips in the morning peak hour; - 9 additional two-way trips in the evening peak hour; - 67 additional two-way trips over the course of the day”.

The applicant’s Transport Consultant concludes that the “trip generations listed above are very low and no further assessment of the highway network is required”. The Transport Statement concludes that the proposal would not result in a significant detrimental impact to the highway network. Para 109 of the NPPF states that “development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highways safety or the residual cumulative impacts on the highway network would be severe”. The Highways Officer has no

Page 132 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

objection to the principle or density of residential development on this site; however, has raised concerns about the location of the pedestrian access, which will be discussed in more detail below. The existing access into the site and the access to Medway Road have acceptable levels of visibility. In highways terms, there would be a benefit in removing the existing use, which has the potential to be more regularly serviced by large vehicles, which could cause obstructions to the local highway network. Although there would be an increase in vehicle trips during peak hours and throughout the day, it is considered that the increase in vehicular trips compared to the existing use is low and would not result in a detrimental impact to the highway network.

10.13 The Highways Officer has raised concerns about having a pedestrian access from Quarry Road, on the grounds that if any drop-offs/deliveries were to be undertaken in this location they would obstruct the highway. From a design perspective, it is important to have a pedestrian access from Quarry Road as this helps to provide an active frontage and enhances the public realm. In order to address these concerns, the applicant has submitted amended plans, which provide a drop-off/delivery bay adjacent to the vehicular access, with a path through the site leading to the main pedestrian access. There are double yellow lines along the western side of Quarry Road, which should deter people from parking in this location. The applicant also proposes to install bollards at the edge of the pavement on Quarry Road to prevent delivery drivers pulling up onto the pavement. There are some parking spaces on the opposite side of Quarry Road, which delivery vehicles could use if available. Signage would be provided to ensure that delivery drivers are directed to the drop-off area in Medway Road and the apartment block would be given a postcode from Medway Road, rather than Quarry Road. This would ensure that delivery vehicles are directed to the drop-off area when using satellite navigation systems. Delivery drivers would be able to access the central lift core through the parking area, which would provide convenient access to the apartment building. The provision of the bollards, delivery bay and signage help to address the Highways Officers concerns and minimise the chance of vehicles obstructing the highway. These measures can be secured by condition.

10.14 It is important to note that the terraced properties on the opposite side of the road have nowhere for deliveries to the park other than the on street spaces and there would appear to be no significant problem with deliveries parking on double yellow lines as a result.

10.15 The site is in a central location within Tunbridge Wells, which would offer future residents many sustainable modes of travel. The development seeks to provide the maximum number of parking spaces on site, in accordance with Policy TP6 of the Local Plan. The provision of cycle parking and the financial contributions towards the car club and improvements to cycling/walking infrastructure in the locality would encourage future residents to use sustainable methods of travel and would reduce the need for car ownership. Although the Highways Officer has raised concerns about having a pedestrian access from Quarry Road, this is considered important in design terms and the measures proposed by the applicant (including an additional drop-off/delivery bay with path to the pedestrian access, signage, access to the central lift core and bollards along Quarry Road) should deter drivers sufficiently from parking on the double yellow lines and obstructing the highway. No objection is therefore raised to the development on highway safety or parking grounds.

Page 133 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Residential Amenity 10.16 The removal of the employment/industrial use would benefit the residential amenity of adjoining properties in terms of noise/disturbance from the existing authorised use and associated vehicular movements of HGVs.

10.17 The proposed apartment block is set back from Grosvenor Bridge, behind and area of green open space. Given the separation distance of approximately 40 metres, it is considered that the proposed development would not be harmful to the residential amenity of Bridge Court (sited to the north) when assessed against Policy EN1 of the Local Plan.

10.18 The proposed building has been designed so that the part of the building closest to Quarry Road appears two-storeys in height. The additional floors are set back to minimise their impact on residential and visual amenity. However, there would be a number of windows and balconies facing the properties on Quarry Road. The proposed development would result in additional overlooking to these properties when compared to the existing situation; however, given that the main part of the building would be sited approximately 18 metres from these properties; the separation by the road; proposed landscaping; and, the fact that this site is located within a town centre location where a level of mutual overlooking is expected, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unduly harmful level of overlooking to the residential amenities of these properties to warrant refusal on this ground.

10.19 The properties on the opposite of Quarry Road are sited to the east of the site. Given the design, siting and orientation of the proposed building, it is not considered that it would result in a detrimental loss of daylight/sunlight or appear unduly overbearing to the properties along Quarry Road.

10.20 To the west of the site is Kensington House, which is sited on lower level land than the application site. Kensington House has a car park and pedestrian route in front of the property. The proposal is likely to result in some overshadowing to the front of this property, in particular the car parking area at the beginning of the day. However, the proposed building would be sited approximately 25 metres away from the front of Kensington House and it is therefore considered that any loss of light to the apartments within Kensington House would not be significant enough to warrant a refusal on this ground.

10.21 The proposed development would be larger and higher than the existing buildings and would be more noticeable from Kensington House and the public realm. The existing silver birch trees along the western boundary would be retained and a 1.8m high close boarded fence is proposed along this boundary. It is not considered that the proposal would appear unduly overbearing to result in a refusal on this ground.

10.22 A number of windows and balconies are proposed on the western elevation. The proposed development would cause some overlooking to Kensington House; however, given the distance of 25m; separation by the car park; proposed landscaping; and, the fact that this site is located within a town centre location where a level of mutual overlooking is expected, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unduly harmful level of overlooking to the residential amenities of these properties to warrant refusal on this ground.

10.23 Although there is limited outdoor amenity space provided on site, the majority of apartments would benefit from external private amenity space by way of a balcony or terrace. The site is also within close proximity to Hilbert and Grosvenor Recreation

Page 134 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Ground and Local Wildlife Site, where future residents have easy access to green open space. The development has been designed to avoid mutual overlooking between the proposed apartments.

10.24 The proposed development would be sited in close proximity to an electrical substation. UK Power Networks initially objected to the development on the grounds that noise/vibration from the sub-station may be harmful to residential amenity, especially during the summer months when residents may sleep with their windows open. In order to address these concerns, an assessment of the sub-station noise has been carried out by a firm of acoustic consultants. The assessment states that the substation noise was not subjectively noticeable during the noise survey and that even with windows open at night, the level of noise would be “barely perceptible if at all”. The assessment concludes that the sub-station would have a “low/negligible impact” and would therefore not require any alterations to the scheme. As a result of this additional information, UK Power Networks have withdrawn their objection to the development. The location of the development to the electrical sub-station would not be unduly harmful to the residential amenity of future residents in terms of noise and vibrations.

10.25 The site experiences some road traffic noise. However, the applicant’s acoustic consultant states that this level of noise is not considered to be particularly high. The Acoustic Assessment recommends measures to minimise sound reduction requirements for bedrooms and living areas, which can be required by condition.

Affordable Housing 10.26 Core Policy 6 of the Core Strategy requires that sites that are capable of delivering 10 dwellings or more will be required to provide 35% affordable housing on site. However, it goes on to state that where it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Borough Council that site specific factors would render the development non- viable in terms of cost, a negotiated level of affordable housing can be agreed.

10.27 A Financial Viability Appraisal has been submitted with the application which concludes that there is no surplus towards affordable housing. However, following negotiations, the applicant has offered £150,000 towards the provision of off-site affordable housing in the Borough. The viability appraisal has been reviewed by an independent consultant, who has concluded that the site is on the margins of viability and the offer for off-site affordable housing is acceptable and a positive outcome. This is acceptable to Officers and also the Council’s Housing Officer.

Ecology 10.28 An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey has been submitted with the application, which concludes that there would be no adverse impact on statutory or non-statutory sites. The majority of the site is considered to be of limited ecological interest. Ecological enhancement measures (such as bat boxes) are proposed, which can be secured by condition. The proposal also proposes green roofs and raised planters, which would enhance biodiversity in order to provide a net gain in biodiversity and soften the building.

10.29 The site is located in close proximity to Hilbert Woods Local Nature Reserve, which is publically accessible. The proposed development would increase the number of visitors to the Local Nature Reserve. As a result of increasing visitor pressure, a financial contribution of £3,500 towards management of the Local Nature Reserve has been sought to mitigate this impact.

Page 135 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Trees 10.30 A Tree Survey has been submitted with the application. Twelve individual trees and one group of trees are proposed to be removed, which are category C and U trees. The Tree Officer has considered the proposal and raised no objection to the loss of these trees, which are not considered to be good specimens. In this case, a well designed landscaping scheme (including new tree planting) has the potential to enhance the visual amenity of the locality and provide more appropriate tree specimens.

10.31 The proposal retains the better quality trees and includes new tree planting, which would enhance the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area. Details of hard and soft landscaping can be required by condition. Tree protection measures have been submitted, which can be secured by condition.

Renewable Energy 10.32 An Energy Statement has been submitted as part of the application. The proposal seeks to enhance fabric insulation standards above that required by Building Regulations. It also proposes to install a photovoltaic array of 7.2kW on the roof. The proposed renewable energy would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the site by over 10%, which meets the requirements of the Council’s Renewable Energy Supplementary Planning Document. The provision of renewable energy on site can be secured by condition.

Recreation Open Space 10.33 Policy R2 of the Local Plan refers to the provision of recreation open space in new residential developments. It states that on residential developments of up to 150 bedspaces, or on sites where playspace cannot be provided on site it is likely that a financial contribution will be required towards the provision of children’s playspace in the locality. At present, given the condition of the play area at Hilbert & Grosvenor Recreation Ground, the Council’s Parks team have confirmed that no contribution is required towards children’s play space.

10.34 A financial contribution of £69,743 has been offered towards adult and youth recreation open space, which is proposed to be secured by Section 106 agreement. This money would be used towards the refurbishment and upgrading of the football changing rooms at Hilbert Oast. The proposed development meets the need for recreation open space in the locality in accordance with Policy R2 of the Local Plan.

Archaeology 10.35 The site lies close to the Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells Railway Line. There is a Corporation Yard identifiable on site on the second edition Ordnance Survey map, which dates it to the late 19th Century. The KCC Archaeology Officer considers that remains associated with the local railway heritage may be exposed during groundworks. As recommended by the KCC Archaeological Officer, a condition is proposed regarding archaeological investigation.

Flood Risk & Drainage 10.36 A Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy have been submitted with the application that confirms the site is of low risk of flooding. Surface water is proposed to be discharged to ground via porous paving, trench soakaway and cellular tank. The tank acts as an overflow structure as the soakaway has to be sized for the 10 years storm event. The site contains two existing buildings and a large area of impermeable hardstanding. The Drainage Strategy concludes that the development would not increase the flood risk, either on this site or to neighbouring properties.

Page 136 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

KCC Flood and Water Management confirm they are generally happy with the principles proposed for dealing with surface water and recommend conditions regarding the detailed design of the drainage system.

Other material considerations 10.37 The proposal would have an additional impact on the delivery of community services, which would require mitigation through the payment of an appropriate financial contribution. The following contributions have been sought towards secondary education, adult education, youth services and healthcare:

- £27,783 towards expansion of The Skinners School (secondary education). - £12,302.15 towards the adult education element of the Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub. - £1,391.25 towards additional equipment for Tunbridge Wells Youth Centre. - £23,472 towards refurbishment, reconfiguration or extension of Grosvenor & St James Medical Centre, Clanricarde Medical Centre and/or Abbey Court Medical Centre.

10.38 The site is previously developed land, with a history of industrial use since approximately 1898. A Geo-Environmental and Geotechnical Preliminary Risk Assessment has been submitted with the application that states that “the surrounding area has also had an extensive history of industrial land use including railway sidings, tanks, garages and workshops, a corporation yard (relating to coal) and backfilled reservoirs”. The Risk Assessment concludes that the risk to the proposed development is “moderate”, with ground gas risk identified as being “high”. The Risk Assessment recommends that further targeted ground investigation is carried out for the site to gain a better understanding of the potential for contamination, the localised ground gas regime and flow direction of the underlying groundwater. The Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the proposal and recommends a contaminated land condition.

10.39 The site lies outside of the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA); however, it is within the vicinity of the A26 AQMA and close to the town centre. The applicant has offered £20,000 towards improving cycling/walking infrastructure in the locality; £1,575 towards the Car Club; cycle parking provision; and electric vehicle charging point. The Sustainability Manager and Environmental Health Officer have confirmed these measures are acceptable to help mitigate air pollution in the locality and these measures can be secured by condition. A Construction and Demolition Environmental Management Plan can also be secured by condition to minimise air pollution during construction/demolition works.

10.40 Concerns have been raised by private representatives about the proximity of the proposed apartments to telecoms masts, on health grounds. The telecoms masts are already located in a residential area and would have been required to meet the International Commission Non-Ionising Radiation Protection guidelines for public exposure. No objection is therefore raised to the development on this ground.

10.41 An integrated refuse store is located in the south-west corner of the site adjacent to the vehicular access, which would provide easy access for refuse vehicles.

10.42 Concerns have been raised by private representatives that construction vehicles may obstruct Medway Road. A Construction Environmental Management Plan can be required by condition, which would include details of parking during construction/demolition works.

Page 137 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

10.43 The proposed residential units have been designed to meet National Space Standard Requirements.

Conclusion 10.44 The proposal seeks to provide 35 residential units on a previously developed site, which is allocated for residential development in the Site Allocations Local Plan 2016, within the Limits of Built Development of Tunbridge Wells. The principle of residential development on this site and the loss of the existing employment use have already been accepted through its allocation. The proposal makes effective use of land in a sustainable location. The height, mass and scale of the proposed building reflect that of other apartment blocks in the locality. The proposed building and landscaping would enhance the visual amenity of the locality. The proposal would not result in significant harm to residential amenity of neighbouring properties. The proposal would not be harmful to highway safety and would provide the maximum number of car parking spaces on site as set out in Policy TP6 of the Local Plan. The proposed development includes significant planning gain in respect to the funding towards community facilities/services, including off-site affordable housing, education, sustainability, healthcare and recreation open space. Overall, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in the balance of issues discussed within this report and there are not considered to be any other material considerations which would indicate a refusal of planning permission.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION –

A) GRANT SUBJECT TO THE COMPLETION OF A LEGAL AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 106 OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (AS AMENDED) IN A FORM TO BE AGREED BY THE HEAD OF LEGAL PARTNERSHIP MID KENT LEGAL SERVICES BY 12 JULY 2019 (UNLESS A LATER DATE BE AGREED BY THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES) TO SECURE THE FOLLOWING:

- £150,000 towards the provision of off-site affordable housing within the Borough. - £27,783 towards expansion of The Skinners School (secondary education). - £12,302.15 towards the Adult Education element of the Tunbridge Wells Cultural Hub. - £1,391.25 towards additional equipment for Tunbridge Wells Youth Centre. - £5,000 towards a possible residents permit scheme. - £1,575 towards the Car Club. - £20,000 towards the design and implementation of measures to improve cycling/walking in the locality. - £3,500 towards management of the Hilbert Woods Local Nature Reserve. - £69,743 towards refurbishment and upgrading of the football changing rooms at Hilbert Oast. - £23,472 towards refurbishment, reconfiguration or extension of Grosvenor & St James Medical Centre, Clanricarde Medical Centre and/or Abbey Court Medical Centre. TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS: £314,766.40 and payment of the Council’s legal fees

Page 138 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

and subject to the following conditions:

1) The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2) The permission shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

- 18_25_101/D: Proposed Site Plan - 18_25_102/D: Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan - 18_25_103/B: Proposed Upper Ground Floor Plan - 18_25_104/A: Proposed First Floor Plan - 18_25_105/B: Proposed Second Floor Plan - 18_25_106/A: Proposed Third Floor Plan - 18_25_107/B: Proposed Fourth Floor Plan - 18_25_108/C: Proposed Roof Plan - 18_25_109/B: North Elevation - 18_25_110/A: West Elevation - 18_25_111/C: South Elevation - 18_25_112/B: East Elevation - 18_25_113/B: Street Elevation from Grosvenor Bridge - 18_25_114/B: Site Sections

Reason: To clarify which plans are approved.

3) Prior to the commencement of the development, a Construction and Demolition Environmental Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction/demolition of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction and Demolition Environmental Management Plan and BS:5228 Noise Vibration and Control on Construction and Open Sites and the Control of Dust from Construction Sites (BRE DTi Feb 2003) unless previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The Plan shall include:

- Measures to minimise the production of dust on the site. - Measures to minimise the noise (including vibration) generated by the construction and demolition process. - Details of areas for materials storage. - Details of parking during construction. - Management of traffic visiting the site, including parking provision for site operatives including an undertaking that HGVs must not reverse into or out of the site unless under the supervision of a banksmen. - Measures to prevent the transfer of mud and extraneous material onto the public highway.

Reason: This information is required prior to the commencement of the development, in order to protect the amenity of local residents and in the interests of highway safety.

Page 139 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

4) The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority:

1) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

2) A site investigation, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

3) A remediation method statement (RMS) based on the site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (2). This should give full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. The RMS should also include a verification plan to detail the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the RMS are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

4) A Closure Report is submitted upon completion of the works. The closure report shall include full verification details as set out in 3. This should include details of any post remediation sampling and analysis, together with documentation certifying quantities and source/destination of any material brought onto or taken from the site. Any material brought onto the site shall be certified clean.

Any changes to these components require the express consent of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall thereafter be implemented as approved.

Reason: This information is required prior to the commencement of the development, to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

5) Prior to the commencement of demolition/construction works, a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage scheme shall be based upon the Flood Risk Assessment & Drainage Strategy undertaken by GTA Civils, dated January 2019 and shall demonstrate that the surface water generated by this development (for all rainfall durations and intensities up to and including the climate change adjusted critical 100 year storm) can be accommodated and disposed of within the curtilage of the site without increase to flood risk on or off-site.

The drainage scheme shall also demonstrate (with reference to published guidance): • that silt and pollutants resulting from the site use can be adequately managed to ensure there is no pollution risk to receiving waters. • appropriate operational, maintenance and access requirements for each drainage feature or SuDS component are adequately considered, including any proposed arrangements for future adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker.

The drainage scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Page 140 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

6) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a Verification Report pertaining to the surface water drainage system, carried out by a suitably qualified professional, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Report shall demonstrate the suitable modelled operation of the drainage system such that flood risk is appropriately managed, as approved by the Lead Local Flood Authority. The Report shall contain information and evidence (including photographs) of earthworks; details and locations of inlets, outlets and control structures; extent of planting; details of materials utilised in construction including subsoil, topsoil, aggregate and membrane liners; full as built drawings; topographical survey of ‘as constructed’ features; and an operation and maintenance manual for the drainage scheme as constructed.

Reason: To ensure that flood risks from development to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those risks to controlled waters, property and ecological systems.

7) Where infiltration is to be used to manage the surface water from the development hereby permitted, it will only be allowed within those parts of the site where information is submitted to demonstrate to the Local Planning Authority’s satisfaction that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters and/or ground stability. The development shall only then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect vulnerable groundwater resources.

8) Construction of the development shall not commence until details of the proposed means of foul drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. The drainage system shall be completed in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of development hereby approved.

Reason: This information is required prior to the commencement of the development in order to avoid unacceptable additional use of existing drainage infrastructure and to avoid pollution of the surrounding area.

9) Prior to the commencement of the development, the applicant, or their agent, or successors in title will secure and implement:

(i) archaeological field evaluation works in accordance with a specification and written timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; and,

(ii) further archaeological investigation, recording and reporting, determined by the results of the evaluation, in accordance with a specification and timetable which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 141 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Reason: This information is required prior to the commencement of development in order to ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded.

10) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, details of off-site highway works including bollards on Quarry Road and details of proposed arrangements for drop off and delivery to the residential units, including details of signage and routes into the building for residents, delivery personnel and goods shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out prior to the first occupation of the development and thereafter retained.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

11) The approved development shall be carried out in such a manner as to avoid damage to the existing trees, including their root systems, and other planting to be retained by observing the following:

a) All trees to be preserved shall be marked on site and protected during any operation on site by temporary fencing in accordance with BS 5837:2012, and in accordance with the approved Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Integration Report, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Such tree protection measures shall remain throughout the period of construction; b) No fires shall be lit within the spread of branches or upwind of the trees and other vegetation; c) No materials or equipment shall be stored within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Areas of the trees or other vegetation; d) No roots over 50mm diameter shall be cut, and no buildings, roads or other engineering operations shall be constructed or carried out within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Areas of the trees and other vegetation; e) Ground levels within the spread of the branches or Root Protection Areas (whichever the greater) of the trees and other vegetation shall not be raised or lowered in relation to the existing ground level, except as may be otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. f) No trenches for underground services shall be commenced within the Root Protection Areas of trees which are identified as being retained in the approved plans, or within 5m of hedgerows shown to be retained without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Such trenching as might be approved shall be carried out to National Joint Utilities Group recommendations.

Reason: To protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality.

12) Notwithstanding the details hereby approved and prior to the commencement of above ground works, written details and samples of external materials to be used within the development (to include the proposed material for within the window openings in the car park), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out using the approved external materials unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority..

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

13) Notwithstanding the details hereby approved and prior to the first occupation of development, details of hard and soft landscaping and a programme for carrying out

Page 142 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

the works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted scheme shall include details of hard landscape works, including hard surfacing materials and details of soft landscape works, including planting plans, written specifications and schedules of plants/trees, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate. The details shall also include details of the raised planters (including species) and further details of the green roofs, including species and depth of substrate.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and biodiversity.

14) The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out within the first planting season following completion of the development. Any trees or other plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority give prior written consent to any variation.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

15) Notwithstanding the details hereby approved, prior to the first occupation of the development, details of boundary treatments (including walls, fences and railings and any railings/means of enclosure required for the access ramp) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include a plan indicating the position, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The approved boundary treatments shall be completed prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, and thereafter retained.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

16) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a scheme for the enhancement of biodiversity on site, including a timetable for the implementation of the works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall have regard to the enhancement of biodiversity generally. It shall be implemented in accordance with the approved proposals within it and shall be carried out in perpetuity unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To preserve and enhance biodiversity on the site.

17) The area shown on the approved site layout plan as vehicle parking and turning space, shall be paved and drained in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the first occupation of the development and thereafter retained for the use of the occupiers of, and visitors to the premises. No permanent development, whether or not permitted by Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Orders), shall be carried out on that area of land or in such a position as to preclude its use.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to ensure adequate parking provision on site.

18) Prior to the commencement of above ground works, details of the provision of electric vehicle charging points within the development, including a timescale for their provision, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Ducting shall be provided to all parking spaces in line with the Council’s

Page 143 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Guidance Document. The charging points shall be provided in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of sustainable development.

19) The approved bicycle storage shall be completed prior to first occupation of the development and thereafter retained.

Reason: To ensure the provision and retention of adequate off-street cycle parking facilities in the interests of promoting sustainable transport modes.

20) The photovoltaic panels (as shown on drawing number 18_25_108/C) shall be installed and fully operational, prior to the first occupation of the building, and thereafter retained.

Reason: In the interests of sustainable development.

21) Prior to the commencement of above ground works, written and illustrative details for energy and water conservation within the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development, which meets the needs of current and future generations.

22) The developer shall provide information on sustainable travel to the first occupants of each apartment hereby approved. The travel packs shall provide details on the local car club, including joining/membership information and the opportunity for free membership and £20 driving credit per household on a first come first served basis, whilst funding lasts. It shall also include details of cycle routes and local bus services.

Reason: To promote sustainable modes of transport and reduce car use on site.

23) Prior to the commencement of above ground works, a scheme to demonstrate that the internal noise levels within the residential units will conform to the "good" design range identified by BS: 8233 2014 ‘Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings’, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details prior to occupation of the premises and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to protect the occupiers of the dwellings from undue disturbance by noise.

24) Before first occupation of the development hereby approved, the refuse storage facilities and screening shall be completed in accordance with the approved detalis and thereafter retained.

Reason: To facilitate the collection of refuse, preserve visual amenity and to reduce the occurrence of pests.

INFORMATIVES:

(1) A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development, please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House,

Page 144 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire SO21 2SW (Tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk The applicant is advised to read Southern Water’s New Connections Services Charging Arrangements document, which is available to view on the following link: https://beta.southernwater.co.uk/infrastructre-charges

(2) Detailed design of the proposed drainage system should take into account the possibility of surcharging within the public sewerage system in order to protect the development from potential flooding.

(3) It is recommended that the developer works with a telecommunication partner or subcontractor to make sure that Next Generation Access Broadband forms an integral part of the project. For advice on how to proceed with providing access to superfast broadband please contact [email protected]

(4) It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure, before the development is commenced that all necessary highway approvals and consents where required are obtained and that the limits of the highway boundary are clearly established in order to avoid any enforcement action being taken by the Highway Authority.

Across the county there are pieces of land next to private homes and gardens that do not look like roads or pavements but are actually part of the road. This is called ‘highway land’. Some of this land is owned by Kent County Council whilst some are owned by third party owners. Irrespective of the ownership, this land may have ‘highway rights’ over the topsoil. Information about how to clarify the highway boundary can be found at: https://www.kent.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/what-we-look- after/highway-land/highway-boundary-enquiries The applicant must also ensure that the details shown on the approved plans agree in every aspect with those approved under such legislation and common law. It is therefore important for the applicant to contact KCC Highways and Transportation to progress this aspect of the works prior to commencement on site.

(B) If the applicant fails to enter into such agreement by 12 July 2019, the Head of Planning Services shall be authorised to REFUSE PERMISSION for the following reasons (unless a later date be agreed by the Head of Planning Services):

(1) The proposal fails to make provision for affordable housing and would therefore conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1, 6 and 9 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 and the Council’s Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document.

(2) The proposal fails to make provision for recreation open space and would therefore fail to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1 and 8 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010, Policy R2 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 and the Council’s Recreation Open Space Supplementary Planning Document.

(3) The proposal fails to make provision for community services/facilities, such as secondary schools, adult education, youth services and healthcare and would therefore fail to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1 and 8 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 and Policy CS4 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

Page 145 Agenda Item 8(D) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

(4) As a result of the additional residents, the proposed development would put additional pressure on a nearby Local Wildlife Site. The proposal fails to mitigate the impact of this harm and therefore conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1, 4 and 9 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010 and Policy EN15 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

(5) The area currently suffers from parking stress. The increase in dwellings in this location if not mitigated appropriately could exacerbate this situation. Insufficient mitigation in the form of funding towards a possible residents permit scheme and sustainable transport measures have been proposed to address this impact. The proposal therefore fails to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance, Core Policies 1, 3, 5 and 9 of the Tunbridge Wells Core Strategy 2010 and Policy TP3 of the Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006.

Case Officer: Antonia James

Page 146 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

REPORT SUMMARY

REFERENCE NO - 19/00994/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Change of use comprising A3 (cafe) and D1 and D2 (community educational/recreational classes), with ancillary retail display and sale of artisan/craft goods ADDRESS Bowling Pavilion & Green Calverley Grounds Mount Pleasant Avenue Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent, TN1 1QY RECOMMENDATION GRANT planning permission subject to conditions (please refer to section 11.0 of the report for full recommendation) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - In principle the proposal is acceptable - The proposed use would not result in any significantly harmful visual impact on the surrounding area - There would not be any significant adverse impact upon the residential amenities of occupants of neighbouring properties INFORMATION ABOUT FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL There are no financial benefits that are considered to be material or non-material to this application. REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE The site is owned by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council WARD Park PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Tunbridge Wells Borough Council N/A AGENT Mr Christopher Sampson MRTPI DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 13/06/19 24/05/19 26/04/19 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites): 16/07288/LAWPRO Proposal: Lawful Development Certificate Approved 24/01/17 (Proposed) - Calverley community wall comprising a series of panels attached to existing stone retaining wall.

MAIN REPORT

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The building is a former bowls pavilion located within the south east corner of Calverley Grounds. A newly created children’s play area is situated to the front of the building and ground which was formerly part of the bowling green. Ground levels are relatively flat around the site and a path runs across the front and to one side. Railings adjoin the rear parts of the building, separating it from the park footpath which runs behind the building. There is extensive tree screening to the south east

Page 147 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

boundary of the park which is in close proximity to the foot path to the rear of the building.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 The proposal is for the change of use of the building to a mix of uses being A3 (cafe) and D1 and D2 (community educational/recreational classes), with ancillary retail display and sale of artisan/craft goods.

2.02 No exterior alterations would be required except for the provision of roller shutters which would be fitted to all windows and external doors.

2.03 The interior space would be reallocated to provide a café serving and preparation area and kitchen, indoor seating for approx. 22 people, a retail section to one side, and the provision of a disabled wc. To the front of the building, outdoor seating would be provided for approx. 8 people.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-) Site Area Approx 52 sqm Approx 52 sqm - Floor area 35 sqm 35 sqm - Number of jobs 0 4 part time +4 part time Car parking spaces (inc. disabled) 0 0 0 Disabled car spaces 0 0 0 Hours of opening Mon – Fri 08.00 – 19.00 Sat 08.00 – 19.00 Sun/Bank Hol 08.00 – 19.00

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

 Potential Archaeological Importance - Various Sites  Area of Special Advert Control Area Of Special Advert Control  Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area (statutory duty to preserve or enhance the significance of heritage assets under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990)  English Heritage Historic Parks & Gardens: Calverley Park & Grounds  Inside Limits to built development (LBD)  Local Plan 2006 Arcadian Area - EN24  Local Plan 2006 Tunbridge Wells Central Access Zone (Residential) - TP6  Site Allocations 2016 Area of Important Open Space - EN21

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

Development Plan: Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2010: Core Policy 4: Environment Core Policy 7: Employment provision

Page 148 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

Core Policy 8: Retail, Leisure and Community Facilities Provision Core Policy 9: Development in Royal Tunbridge Wells

Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006: Policy EN1: Development Control Criteria Policy EN5: Development within, or affecting the character of, a Conservation Area Policy EN11:Historic Parks and Gardens Policy EN21:Areas of Important Local Space Policy EN24: Arcadian Areas

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 7 site notices were displayed at the building and at the entrances to the park and the application was advertised in a local paper on 03.05.19.

6.02 No letters of representation have been received.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

7.01 Conservation Officer (14.05.19) The pavilion dates from the early 20th century when the park was converted into public use. It is now a grade II Registered Park and Garden, located within the Tunbridge Wells Conservation Area. The building contributes positively towards the historic and architectural character of both. Support is given to the conversion of the building to bring it back into economical use, in accordance with paragraph 192 of the NPPF.

7.02 Planning Policy (16.05.19) The site is located within the Limits to Built Development in an Area of Important Open Space, Recreation Open Space and Calverley Park Conservation Area. Calverley Park and Grounds are also designated as a grade II Historic Park and Garden.

7.03 The building in question is a former bowing pavilion (disused for some years), which has been recently renovated. It is located to the immediate east of the recently implemented children’s play area located on the former bowing green, at the south eastern end of Calverley Grounds.

7.04 No external alterations are proposed to the building and the proposed change of use would bring a disused building back into economic use, which would be both ancillary and complimentary to the existing park and recreational facilities. The proposal would therefore be in line with NPPF (2019) advice in terms of bringing back the building into economic use and meeting community and health/well being objectives.

7.05 Historical England (30.04.19) Do not wish to comment.

7.06 Environmental Protection (09.05.19) No objection.

8.0 APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING COMMENTS

- Proposal accords with various national and local planning policies and can be accommodated without making any physical changes to the building;

Page 149 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

- Building has been disused for approx. 10 years and proposal would secure the productive re-use of the existing building; - Adjacent area has been re-designed as a children’s play park; - Building has been recently renovated by TWBC and is ready for occupation; - Network of paths provide access to the building, including by service vehicles; - Proposed use would be for the benefit of the community and would provide an additional amenity for visitors to the Grounds/Park; - Flexible permission is sought in order to enable the use to adapt as the needs/operating model of the prospective tenant(s) change; - Internal fittings will be movable so as to allow the most effective use of the space; - Café use will be principal income generator with focus on quality and nutritional value, to include hot and cold drinks and good quality food; - Any food heating will be by use of a microwave, sandwich toaster etc – there is no provision for a commercial oven/hob and extractor; - A small number of chairs and tables would be positioned outside the front of the building; - Small scale, ancillary retail displays would be provided for use by local artisans and small independent businesses; - Hours of use will mean the building would only be used in the day time/early evening, therefore, there would be no issue of material noise/disturbance; - Conditions can be employed to control use of building

9.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

Application form Site location plan Block plan Proposed floor plan Existing floor plan Supporting letter including Heritage Statement

10.0 APPRAISAL

Principle of Development 10.01 The NPPF states that plans and decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development and approve development proposals that accord with an up-to-date development plan without delay. Overarching objectives for achieving sustainable development include social and environmental objectives, to provide accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being, and contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment

10.02 Paragraph 118(d) promotes and supports the development of under-utilised land and buildings, and paragraph 121(b) supports proposals for effective use of sites that provide community services, provided this maintains or improves the quality of service provision and access to open space.

10.03 The proposal would secure the viable re-use of an existing, dis-used building and assist in securing the future use and function of Calverley Grounds as a public park. The principle of the proposal is considered to accord with policy and to be acceptable.

Visual Impact 10.04 The former pavilion has been recently renovated, both internally and externally, and consists of a building of half-timber construction and plain tiled roof. It is of modest

Page 150 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

character and proportions and contributes positively to Calverley Grounds. The Conservation Officer considers the building to be a non-designated heritage asset. The proposed change in the use of the building would not necessitate the requirement for external changes apart from the installation of modern security shutters to the doors and windows, and these have been already installed.

10.05 The building is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset and as such, the NPPF promotes the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation (para 192). The proposed use would see a disused building brought back into a viable use which would be compatible with the community facility provided by the park, and would enhance the range of amenities available for users of the park. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the provisions of the NPPF.

10.06 In terms of visual amenity, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, Historic Park, and the Arcadian Area, the proposal is considered to be acceptable.

Residential Amenity 10.07 The subject building is sited within the grounds of Calverley Grounds and is not immediately adjacent to residential properties. The nearest residential property is approx. 27 metres distance. The proposal is not considered to be materially harmful in terms of residential amenity given this distance, and the proposed hours of use, which can be conditioned.

10.08 The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of residential amenity.

Proposed use 10.09 The proposed mixed A3/D1/D2 use would provide an additional community facility within the context of the Historic Park, and would provide opportunity for classes promoting well-being, counselling, exercise and similar activities. The associated café use would sit well alongside these classes and would aim to provide high quality food and drink. The use would not require the fitting of any external extractor paraphernalia, and the installation of commercial ovens/hobs would not form part of the proposal. Fittings are proposed to be movable to allow maximum use of the premises, and a small number of external tables and chairs would be sited close to the frontage of the building. An ancillary retail area would give provision for local artisans/small independent companies to display and sell their goods, adding additional interest to the facility. The proposal would provide some employment provision with the creation of four part time positions.

10.10 The small scale of the existing building would ensure that the use of the building as proposed is constrained, and kept within appropriate parameters. The proposed use would be ancillary and complementary to the wider use and function of the public park as a whole, and would be a positive addition to the facilities already available.

10.11 The park is located within the town centre, and is accessible to local residents via a range of travel options, including, walking and cycling. There are a number of car parks within close proximity, and bus services run adjacent to the main entrance and the railway station is also close by. The use of the pavilion as proposed would therefore be to a building within a sustainable location where car parking facilities are not required.

Conclusion 10.12 Taking the above into account, the proposed use of the building is considered to comply with policy, and would not be harmful in terms of visual and residential

Page 151 Agenda Item 8(E) Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

amenity, and the character and appearance of the Historic Park, Arcadian Area and Conservation Area, and would provide an additional community facility which would enhance the experience of the public Park for users. The proposal is considered to be acceptable.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION – GRANT Subject to the following conditions

(1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this decision.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Proposed block plan - Drg no. 00/000/04 Proposed floor plan - Drg no. 00/000/02

Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved.

(3) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details of external materials specified in the application which shall not be varied without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(4) Except with the consent of the Local Planning Authority use of the premises shall be restricted to a period between the hours of 08.00 and 19.00 on Mondays to Fridays, 08.00 and 19.00 on Saturdays, and 08.00 and 19.00 on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of the residential amenity.

(5) The site shall be used for the purposes of an A3 (cafe) and D1 & D2 (community educational/recreational classes) uses, with ancillary retail display and sale of artisan/craft goods only and for no other purpose whether or not permitted by the Town and Country Planning Development Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order).

Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to regulate and control development of the land in the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the locality.

Case Officer: Hayley Starkey

Page 152 Agenda Item 9 Planning Committee Report 12 June 2019

APPEAL DECISIONS for noting 24/04/2019–20/05/2019

1. 18/02445/FULL Change of use from agricultural to residential for the erection of an outdoor swimming pool

APPEAL: ALLOWED (30/04/2019)

Blackberry Cottage Rogers Rough Road Kilndown Cranbrook

(Delegated)

2. 18/03458/FULL Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 3 dwellings

APPEAL: DISMISSED (03/05/2019)

3 Knowle Close Langton Green

(Delegated)

3. 17/02743/FULL Erection of an oak framed conservatory garden room

APPEAL: DISMISSED (07/05/2019)

Farm buildings near Scriventon House Stockland Green Tunbridge Wells

(Planning Committee)

4. 18/03108/FULL Formation of an access

APPEAL: DISMISSED (09/05/2019)

98 High Brooms Road Southborough

(Delegated)

Page 153 Agenda Item 9

5. 17/00001/CHANGE The material change of use of the Land to a residential use by utilising a barn and interconnected mobile home

APPEAL: QUASHED (22/05/2019)

Land adjoining Meadowsweet Farm, Field Green, Sandhurst, Cranbrook

(Delegated)

6. 18/03310/FULL Change of use from single residential unit to up to 9 person HMO

APPEAL: ALLOWED (20/05/2019)

1 Common View Tunbridge Wells

(Delegated)

7. 18/01291/FULL Proposed farmhouse for occupation associated with the existing agricultural/poultry business and removal of temporary mobile home7

APPEAL: DISMISSED (20/05/19)

Oaklands Farm, Bodiam Road, Sandhurst

(Delegated)

Page 154 Agenda Item 10

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Date of Next Meeting

Procedural Item:

To note that the date of the next scheduled meeting is Wednesday 3 July 2019 at 5pm.

Page 155 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 11

Planning Committee 12 June 2019

Urgent Business

Procedural Item:

To consider any other items which the Chairman decides are urgent, for the reasons to be stated, in accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Page 157 This page is intentionally left blank